1992 Ford F-250 problems

Filed Jun 13, 2018 · Fuel system · 190,000 miles · CO

The check valve is bad and gas is transferred to the front tank causing it to spill over. Some f250 from that year are under recall. Why is mine not

Filed Sep 23, 2015 · Steering · 153,000 miles · CA

Tl* the contact owns a 1992 ford f-250. While driving approximately 35 MPH, the vehicle started to shake. When the speed decreased to 20 MPH, the vehicle stopped shaking. The failure occurred on multiple occasions. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where the failure was unable to be duplicated. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 153,000. Updated 02/12/16*lj

Filed Aug 14, 2012 · Brakes, Electrical · 91,000 miles · OR

Tl* the contact owns a 1992 ford f250. The contact stated the emergency brake would not engage. In addition, the odometer gauge was inoperable. The dealer was notified who stated that there was a recall for the failure under the federal safety agency campaign id number: 94v169001 (parking brake: conventional) however, the vehicle was not included. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 91,000.

Filed Dec 10, 2009 · Fuel system · 1,000 miles · CA

With my 3 granddaughters in the cab of my ford f250 I stopped at the bicycle shop to drop off 2 bicycles that needed repair, this took less than 5 minutes. When I returned to my truck there was no less than 1/2 galon of fuel on the pavement and fuel was still leaking out of the rear tank filler neck. I quickly took my granddaughters out of the truck to safety and had my truck towed to my mechanic. He called the ford dealer in alhambra ca. And was told of the defective valve, but there was no recall and that it would cost no less than $ 400.00 to correct. I took my truck to that same dealer the following week to have new shocks installed and was told the same thing by the shop manager. This prevents me from filling both tanks or leakage will occur. Another incident occurred when a driver of another vehicle pulled me over to report that his car had fuel all over his new car and took down my information, but went to a nearby car wash, but that I would be responsible if any damage to the finish occurred. This valve problem put my family in potential grave danger and I feel that ford is responsible to correct the problem at their expense. According to the "auto recall car report" ford has extended the warranty for 12 year or 150,000 miles. Is the dot able to help my situation and order ford to correct the fuel crossover and fuel spillage problem?

Filed Sep 26, 2007 · Acceleration · WA

Tl*the contact owns a 1992 ford f250. The contact received a recall notice for the federal safety agency campaign id number 07v336000 (vehicle speed control) on august 27, 2007. He took the vehicle to the dealer and they informed him that the parts would be unavailable until january of 2008. They advised him to deactivate his speed control switch, however, the contact refused. There had been no failure to date. The current mileage was 120,000.

Filed Mar 29, 2007 · Tires · CA

Tire blowout.

Filed Jan 31, 2005 · Acceleration · 68,000 miles · OH · fire

Consumer parked the vehicle, went into the house, and smelled smoke. By the time the consumer could respond the windows blew out because of the fire.

Filed Nov 30, 2004 · Fuel system · UT

Consumer complained about a fuel tank problem. However, there two recalls, recall 011008000 and recall 93v125000 were issued. This vehicle wa snot included. Consumer contacted the ford dealer and the manufacturer.

Filed May 14, 2003 · Fuel system · CO

The federal safety agency# 93-v-125-000 the vehicle experienced the same problem as stated in recall 93 v 125 000, however the dealer refused to fix.

Filed Nov 15, 2002 · Tires · CA

Consumer states while his wife was driving their truck, the tire on the front of the truck blew. He states that the sidewall on the tire exploded. He also states that he or his wife had hit anything prior. Consumer states that the tires was suppose to be good for 50,000 miles instead he just had 20,000 miles on them. He also states that the tire was a uniroyal size lt 235 85 r/16. Ts