2004 Ford F-250 problems

What is wrong

Ford is recalling certain model year 2011 ranger trucks built from january 25, 2011, through april 25, 2011 at the twin cities assembly plant, and service parts distributed to dealers for certain 2004 through 2011 model year ranger trucks, 2002 through 2005 model year excursion vehicles, and 2002 through 2007 model year f-250, f-350, f-450, and f-550 trucks for failing to comply with the requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 108, "lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment." the multi-function switch was shipped with a subcomponent (slider) that may experience deformation. A multi-function switch with a deformed slider may malfunction causing the turn signal, tail lights, hazard warning signal flashers and/or brake lights not to activate.

Risk

Non-functioning lights could increase the risk of a crash.

Remedy

Dealers will replace the switches free of charge. The safety recall began on august 15, 2011. Owners may contact ford motor company customer relationship center at 1‑866‑436‑7332.

Recall number 11V352000 · Recall details

What is wrong

Certain lariat and king ranch model pickup trucks fail to comply with the requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 120, "tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars." some trucks were inadvertently equipped with an incorrect load range tire. This would result in incorrect tire load ratings for the stated vehicle axle gross axle weight rating. Also, the tire may be inflated above the dot listed inflation pressure.

Risk

If a tire was operated in an over-loaded or over-inflated condition, the tire may rupture resulting in a rapid air loss, which can cause a crash without warning.

Remedy

Dealers will inspect and, if necessary, replace any incorrect load range tires. Additionally, if any tire required replacement, it is recommended that the wheel lug nut torque be checked within 500 miles after any tire replacement. Owner notification began on may 21, 2004. Owners should contact. Ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673.

Recall number 04V229000 · Recall details

On september 6, 2005, odi received a petition requesting that the agency investigate allegations of engine spark plug ejection in certain model year 1997 through 2004 ford vehicles with triton v-8 and v-10 engines.odi received a total of 474 non-duplicative complaints on the subject vehicles where the complainant, or the dealer repairing the vehicle, reported that a spark plug detached from the cylinder and/or ejected from the engine.as of december 8, 2005, odi is not aware of any allegations where the alleged defect resulted in a loss of vehicle control, a crash, an injury, or a fatality in any of the 10,319,810 subject vehicles.in addition, odi is aware of only two incidents where the vehicle stalled without restart.information contained in the odi consumer complaints and obtained from 72 telephone interviews with complainants showed the following:(1) 99% of the complaints were on my 1997 to 2002 subject vehicles.(2) most the complainants reported hearing a loud pop while driving or upon starting up the vehicle followed by a loud, repetitive clicking or popping sound.(3) many of the complainants reported that the popping sound was accompanied by some loss of vehicle power; however, in 99% of the incidents reported, the vehicle did not stall.in the very few incidents where the vehicle did stall, most vehicles could be restarted.(4) only a small percentage of the complainants cited that they smelled gas or a slight burning smell when the incident occurred.(5) in all but a very few incidents, vehicle damage was limited to the engine.in one incident, the complaint reported that the fuel rail was damaged and replaced after one of the spark plugs ejected from the engine; however, the complainant reported that the damage did not result in any type of fuel leak or fire.in another incident, the only incident where a fire was alleged, the complainant reported that no fluid leak was observed, but that a fire resulted after the spark plug had ejected from the engine and he had restarted the vehicle and driven to another location.none of the complainants reported any damage to the vehicle hood.(6) only two complainants reported that they observed what appeared to be some drops of fuel coming from the cylinder where the spark plug had failed or on the spark plug itself; however, each of these complainants reported that there was no smoke or flames as a result of his incident.as the petitioner noted, and odi?s analysis showed, it is possible for a spark plug to detach from the engine cylinder threads in the subject vehicles.however, odi?s analysis of 474 complaints describing such incidents found only a very few alleged any safety-related consequences.none of these showed any evidence of a serious safety consequence.given the large population and relatively long exposure time of the subject vehicles, the complaint analysis indicates that the risk to motor vehicle safety from the alleged defect is very low.in view of the foregoing, it is unlikely that the federal safety agency would issue an order for the notification and remedy of the alleged defect at the conclusion of the investigation requested in the petition.therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize the federal safety agency?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency?s safety mission, the petition is denied.

DP05005

Twenty five of the odi failure reports are duplicative of ford complaints.twenty odi reports do not contain a VIN (and may or may not be duplicative of ford reports).the 14 alleged crashes and 2 alleged injuries were all minor.submitted during preliminary evaluation (pe) 04-070, ford's response to odi's information request (ir) letter contained about 5,000 consumer reports (mors) and 8,700 field reports (cqis).ford reviewed the complaints and categorized them.the manufacturer reports shown above represent a count of unique vehicles that ford categorized as allegedly stalling due to a subject engine component ('a' category, see ford's ir response letter for further detail); some of these vehicles received multiple reports.odi has not yet confirmed ford's categorization of these reports, nor has odi confirmed ford's categorization of the remaining reports (which ford states do not pertain to the alleged defect).ford submitted nearly 19,000 warranty claims, many of which involved claims for a technical service bulletin (tsb 04-13-08) and field service action (fsa 03b05) which ford identified as potential remedies for stalling complaints.odi has not confirmed that either of these are a remedy for engine stalling complaints.several other dealer communications related to engine stall were also submitted as well as over 50 product modifications, 15 of which involve revisions to the software for the electronic engine control unit.further investigation is required and odi is upgrading pe04-070 to an engineering analysis (ea).during the ea, odi will establish and update manufacturer failure report counts, further investigate the frequency and trend of stalling complaints, and determine the scope and safety implication of stalling events.odi will also investigate ford's remedies, their effectiveness, and whether further action is required.

PE04070