1995 Ford Crown Victoria
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Ford › Crown Victoria › 1995
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 1995 Ford Crown Victoria. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
12 recalls name the 1995 Ford Crown Victoria. Newest first.
Dorman Products, Inc. (Dorman) is recalling certain model Dorman Steering Shafts, part number 425-359, Solutions Steering Shafts, part number 7-0359, and OE Solutions Steering Shafts, part number 425-359, manufactured April 17, 2014, to September 28, 2015. These aftermarket replacement steering shafts are sold for use in 1995-2002 Ford Crown Victoria…
If the shafts separate during vehicle operation, a loss of steering control would result, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Dorman will notify owners, and dealers will replace the steering shaft, free of charge. The recall began on October 28, 2015. Owners may contact Dorman customer service at 1-800-523-2492, option 5.
Ford IS recalling 225,000 my 1992-2003 econoline, my 1993-1995 taurus sho, my 1992-1998 crown victoria, my 1993 bronco, f-series, my 1995-1997 f-series super duty stripped chassis, my 1992-1998 mercury grand marquis, and my 1992-1995 lincoln town car vehicles. the affected vehicles were previously repaired using a wiring harness that IS not compatible with…
As a result, the fuse IS located in the output circuit rather than in the intended input power feed circuit, and may not offer the intended protection in the event of an electrical short to ground.
Dealers will install a new wiring harness, or replace the mating electrical component. the recall began on february 18, 2008. owners may contact ford at 1-800-392-3673.
On certain pickup trucks, passenger vehicles, sport utility vehicles, and motor homes chassis, the speed control deactivation switch may, under certain conditions, leak internally and then overheat, smoke, or burn.
This could result in an underhood fire.
Dealers will install a fused wiring harness. owners of the passenger cars included in this campaign will be instructed to return their vehicles to their dealers to have the speed control deactivation switch disconnected as an interim repair. as soon as repair parts are available (expected october 2007), owners will be instructed to return to the dealers for installation of a fused wiring harness. the recall began on august 13, 2007, and mailing completed by september 19, 2007. owners may contact ford at 1-888-222-2751.
In order to enhance police office safety, model year 1992-2003 crown victoria police interceptor (cvpi) vehicles will be equipped with shields designed to help protect the fuel tank in high-speed rear-impact crashes. ford also will be offering an optional trunk package designed to improve the safe transport of sharp-edged, heavy equipment in these vehicles.
Some high-speed rear-impact crashes have resulted in fuel tank punctures and fires in cvpi vehicles.
Ford has advised us that shield kits have been available since late october and will be installed on police interceptor vehicles at no cost. the optional trank package will be available by the end of 2002. ford has established a new web site at www.cvpi.com to answer additional questions about the safe use of cpvi vehicles.
Vehicle description: certain 1996-1999 ford crown victoria police, fleet, natural gas, and 1996-1999 lincoln town car limousine vehicles that were produced with a lower control arm ball joint containing a one piece bearing; and 1990-1996 ford crown victoria police, fleet, and ngv vehicles and 1990-1996 lincoln town car limousine vehicles that have been…
If this occurs while the vehicle IS moving, reduced steering control could occur, increasing the risk of a crash.
Dealers will replace the lower control arm ball joints (2).
This IS not a safety recall in accordance with federal regulation 573. however, it IS deemed a safety improvement campaign by the agency. ford IS initiating an owner notification program for owners of certain 1995-1997 crown victoria model vehicles with police, taxi, and commercial fleet packages and town car vehicles with the livery package. these…
This could lead to brake fluid loss for the rear brakes and, potentially, increased stopping distances.
Dealers will inspect the brake lines for wear, install two new tube bundle clips, and check the brake lines for proper clearances. if the brake lines are worn, the damaged section of the brake line will be replaced.
Vehicle description: police and taxi vehicles. the hood latch striker can wear or become detached from the hood.
Either of these conditions can result in the hood opening without warning while the vehicle IS being operated impairing the driver's visibility.
Dealers will install an improved hood latch striker (vehicles with 1992 model hoods) or revised striker plate attaching fasteners (vehicles with 1993-1997 model hoods).
The pitman arms were not fully lubricated at the assembly plant. The "ball joint" at the outer end of the pitman arm can become contaminated and corrode.
Such corrosion can result in abnormal wear of the joint, resulting in separation of the joint. Loss of steering control can occur increasing the risk of a vehicle accident.
Dealers will inspect the vehicles and if the joint IS found to have significant wear, the arm will be replaced. Those pitman arms not replaced will have the "ball joint" fully greased.
The rivets holding the rear outboard belt d-rings were not heat treated properly causing the heads of the rivets to fracture under load and fail to hold the d-rings to the straps. This does not conform to the requirements of fmvss no. 210, "seat belt assembly anchorages."
Consequence of non-compliance: this condition can reduce the restraining capabilities of the safety belt in the event of an accident.
Dealers will install a reinforcement plate on the rear outboard seat belt assembly anchorages involved in this campaign.
These vehicles were built with the non-cycling power window circuit breaker and the cycling headlamp circuit breaker interchanged.
In the event of a short or overload in the headlampcircuit, both headlamps can go out without warning, rather than flashing as intended with the cycling circuit breaker. This could lead to reduced night time driver visibility, increasing the potential for a vehicle accident.
Dealers will inspect these vehicles, remove the circuit breaker and reinstall the breaker in the correct locations.
The seal material between the fuel filler pipe and fuel tank may not have been fully cured during the molding process which could allow for fuel leakage.
Fuel leakage could result in a vehicle fire if an ignition source were present.
Dealers will replace the fuel filler pipe-to-fuel tank seal with a new seal of different material.
The passenger side air bag has an inflator body that cracked during forming of the curl that retains the igniter plug in the end of the inflator. Also the igniter end cap can separate from the inflator.
The passenger side air bag may not inflate properly resulting in reduced occupant protection in a vehicle accident. If the igniter end cap separates in a frontal collision, hot gases can be released and ignite flammable material or cause burn injuries.
Dealers will remove and replace the passenger side air bag module.
Steering shaft IS bad, excessive rust to the u joint IS causing vary stiff steering and steering wheel lock up in turns
Steering wheel IS loose, feels like it could come. Air bag light IS on, cruise controlnot working correctly. All these things are safety related and should be fixed. I think steering wheel should be repaired free of charge, since it's a major problem.
TL* the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that while driving 45 mph, the vehicle suddenly accelerated to 85 mph. The contact applied the brakes but the vehicle did not respond. The contact had to shut the vehicle off while in drive in order to stop the vehicle. The contact referenced nhtsa campaign I.D. Number 08v051000 (vehicle speed control) and called the dealer, who stated that the vin was not included in the recall. The contact did not have a diagnostic test performed on the vehicle. The failure mileage was 181,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that while driving 65 mph with the cruise control activated, the cruise control failed. In addition, the horn failed. The vehicle was not repaired or diagnosed. The manufacturer was notified of the incident. The vehicle was previously repaired under nhtsa campaign number: 08v051000 (vehicle speed control). The vehicle was not further repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 215,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that while exiting a residential drive way, the driver's side front suspension ball joint fractured and separated from the vehicle. The manufacturer advised the contact that the vehicle was not included in nhtsa campaign ID number: 98v322000 (suspension). The vehicle was not repaired. The failure and current mileage was 192,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that while driving approximately 5 mph, the driver side front fell to the ground and the tire buckled inward. The vehicle was towed to an independent mechanic where they advised him that the ball joint had come out from the socket and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was contacted and they offered no assistance. The failure mileage was approximately 93,000.
I have a 1995 ford crown victoria with 83,000 miles on it. The control arm dropped and hit the road, causing loss of steering. Lucky for us we were going slow turning into a place of business, if we were going fast it could have been bad news. This car started a squeak on the front a little while ago, I guess it had something to do with it. I have noticed alot of 90'S and some 2000's model fords have this same squeak. I contacted ford, and they said there was no recall on my model, I told them there should be. *tr
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that while driving 25 mph and attempting to decelerate, the brakes failed. The vehicle was put into neutral in order to stop the vehicle. The failure occurred on an intermittent basis. The vehicle was inspected by a dealer who informed the contact that the brake line was corroded. The brake line was repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 118,000.
1995 crown victoria had a blow out on the expressway at 55 mph at about midnight after picking up our grandson from the airport don't know for sure if ball joint broke first or tire did my husband managed to get the car to the side of the road without hitting any thing. This happened may 24TH 2009 the other ball joint just broke today august 16 2010 car was going about 5MPH when it happened today. What are the odds this was just a coincidences or this was a defect in manufacturing someone could have been killed. We were lucky. *Tr
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. The contact was driving approximately between 60 to 70 mph and engaged the cruise control; however, the cruise control would not operate. The failure occurred after the vehicle was repaired under the nhtsa campaign ID number 08v051000, vehicle speed control cruise control. The vehicle was taken to an authorized dealer where they refused to correct the failure. The contact stated that the cruise control was functional before the recall remedy repair was performed on the vehicle. The failure mileage was 51,717. updated 09/28/10 *bf the consumer also stated the air bag light illuminated after the cruise control was inspected. Updated 10/01/10
First related symptom: few years ago brake lines rusted under the hood. original remedy: I have painted them to protect them from further rust. current issue: 12/26/2008 brake light switched on during drive to work. 12/26/2008 brake pedal got soft on the way back to home. 12/27/2008 I have checked the brake fluid. it was low. I have bought and add more fluid (car was not moved this day). while fluid was added I started the engine and in park gear I have pumped the brake pedal. it remained soft. fluid got low again... there was a fluid on the pavement between rear axle and the fuel tank in the middle of the car. speed of break deterioration and speed at which car IS loosing fluid might lead to an accident. this IS definitely a safety issue. vehicle: crown victoria 1995, with ABS and traction assist. break lines have corroded several years ago, now first has developed large leak. I will have to repair the car in the next few days, this IS first time I will repair the lines. the vehicle has 130K miles. I have never seen other vehicle with such brake line corrosion. *Tr
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. the contact was experiencing steering failure. he stated that the ball joints were loose on the vehicle and should be tighter. the vin was excluded from nhtsa campaign ID number 96v135000 (steering:linkages). the failure and current mileages were less than 140,000.
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. while pulling out of the driveway at an unknown speed, the brake line exploded. the manufacturer stated that his vin was not included in nhtsa campaign ID number 98i001000 (service brakes, hydraulic:foundation components:hoses, lines/piping, and fittings). the vehicle has not been repaired. the failure and current mileages were 125,000.
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. in august of 2007, the contact received a recall notice for the vehicle speed control. since that time, she has been informed every month thereafter that the parts would be available the following month. in january of 2008, she was informed that the parts would be available in february. there had been no failure to date. the purchase date, recall number, and powertrain were unknown. the current mileage was 163,000. updated 02-19-08 *bf updated 02/19/08 *tr
Front driver ball joint design designed for failure, under normal use lower ball joint rapidly deteriorates and causes an unsafe environment for vehicle. steering becomes erratic and steering wheel feels loose. *tr
July 2006 my crown victoria caught on fire due to a brake switch and cruise control wiring problem I notified ford motor company to see if there was any recall or problem with such happenings they told me no. august 2007- I received a recall notice for my crown victoria that this problem does exist= I almost lost my car to this fire I had it repaired at my mechanic in july they same day the fire happened I had it flatbedded to his garage. In september 2007- I brought the recall letter and the bill to mantilla ford to see about a reimbursement for this problem just like the recall letter told me to do with all the appropriate bills etc. I was told by the service department at mantilla that they would give it to their regional manager and he will call me.. On october 26, 2007 I called mantilla because I heard nothing they said he would call me today well now october 30, 2007 I have heard nothing at all. I only want this problem resolved and reimbursement for a repair per the recall which I think I am entitled to. But I am having no satisfaction at all--can you help me don't understand why this problem happened to me in july and then in august I get a recall for the problem I just went through which was scary and costly I hope this IS the right place to complain if not pls contact me or email me either way. *tr
Headlight switch overheats and causes a temporary failure of entire vehicle lighting system. This IS a documented problem which has happened to others and needs to be recalled. *tr
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. the vehicle was a fleet. while driving between 5-10 mph, the front end of the vehicle dropped. the vehicle was towed to the dealer and they stated that the driver side lower ball joint separated. the manufacturer stated that the vin was not included in nhtsa campaign ID number 98v322000 (suspension:front:control arm:lower ball joint). the purchase date was unknown. the failure mileage was 140,931 and current mileage was 141,000. updated 11/15/07 *tr
Ford crown victoria rusted oil pan and brake failure. Customer states the brakes failed while backing out of a parking space. The oil pan rusted and was removed and replaced on a maintenance service. *kb updated 12/12/07 *bf when the brakes failed, fluid was dripping from under the left/center body. The dealer informed the consumer the brake line was enclosed in the frame channel and the body would have to be lifted in order to make the repair. *Jb updated 12/12/07 *tr
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. while the vehicle was parked in the carport, the middle of the steering wheel melted from the air bag module inside of the steering wheel. as a result, the air bag IS hanging from the steering wheel and there IS a strong smell present from the air bag melting the steering wheel. the contact received a recall notice for the cruise control, however, the dealer and manufacturer stated that there were no recalls for this defect. the vehicle has not been repaired. the nhtsa campaign ID number and powertrain were unknown. the failure and current mileages were 147,000.
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 ford crown victoria. the vehicle had the same failure as mentioned in recall # 96v135000. in 2003, the vehicle accelerated, but the contact was unable to turn the steering wheel. the contact shut the vehicle off, and had it towed to the personal mechanic. the mechanic stated that the ball joints were corroded and detached from the sockets. in addition, the pitman arms were not lubricated. the manufacturer stated that there were no recalls on the vehicle. on april 8, 2007, the vehicle was involved in a crash. the insurance company checked the vehicle's history and stated that the vehicle was included in a recall. the contact called the manufacturer again, and was still being informed that there was never a recall on the vehicle. the current mileage was 89,200, and failure mileage was 49,200. *ak the consumer states that there are 2 recalls for this specific car which are 98v322000 and the recall for steering listed above. The consumer states that the car was totaled while running into a ditch. Update 05/04/07*tr
The brake fluid in my 1995 ford crown victoria had to be topped off last week. The red brake light came on indicating the fluid was low. After filling the fluid and driving the car, the pedal felt a little on the soft side, but no light. on my way to work today, I was 2 miles from home and went to apply the brakes. I had no brakes whatsoever. The pedal did have some feel to it, but there was absolutely no brakes. Luckily, I veered off the road avoiding a collision with a car, and had to downshift the car to get it to slow down. After getting the car to 5 or so mph, I shifted into reverse to stop the car, then park. The red brake light never came on and I had no warning of the failed brakes. after inspection, I found both brake lines to be rusted out on the drivers side frame rail. All brake lines on the car were inspected and are extremely rusty. The car IS inoperable and has not been repaired as of yet. *Jb
1. I had just backed out of a parking spot, finished turning the car around to face forward and began approaching exit out of parking lot. I estimate speed at the moment of failure was less than five (5) mph. it IS very fortunate that I was not going faster or I could have lost control of the crown vic, been killed, or killed someone else. as I began to approach the exit, I heard a sound of metal dragging on the street. I thought I accidentally ran over a metal shopping cart or someone on a bicycle. this IS the type of metallic, dragging sound I heard. 2. right-front wheel fell off of car while approaching exit. I looked under my car just after the incident occurred, within approximately one or two minutes as it was then disabled in the lot. I observed ball joint had popped out. 3. ford replaced the following parts: arm asy fmc XW1Z 3078 ba, kit-ste fmc F8AZ 3050 aa, joint asy fmcf7az 3049 aa, link fmc* F6AZ 5k484 aa, shield fmc* F5AZ 2k004 a, kit-sho fmc F8AZ 18124 ha, link spo* F6AZ 5k484 aa. I do not personally have any of the old parts that were replaced, perhaps ford does. *nm
Brake line rusted through causing rear brakes to fail. the brake line piping should either be made of stainless steel, or coated with a rust preventative, or shielded in some way so water/snow/road salt can not get between it and the frame of the car, causing it to rust through. this isn't rocket science !!!!!!!! *nm
Dt*: the contact stated while driving the vehicle at 8 mph, the brake light illuminated. The contact depressed the brake pedal. There were no brakes; the vehicle was driven home without any brakes. Upon inspection of the master cylinder the brake fluid was 3/4 empty. the vehicle was inspected further and the problem was the tubing that holds the brake fluid was corroded and cracked, causing the fluid to leak out. the manufacturer was alerted. updated 2/13/2006 - *nm
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
In a letter dated february 25, 2005, ford motor company (ford) notified odi that it would be conducting a customer satisfaction program (ford no. 04B26) to correct a rear brake line chafing concern in approximately 44,000 model year (my) 1997 ford crown victoria and grand marquis non-fleet vehicles equipped with electronic traction control that werebuilt after march 19, 1997.these vehicles have an additional rear brake line and a mastic patch causing reduced clearance from a stiffening rib in the floor pan.odi?s analysis showed higher complaint and warranty rates related to rear brake line failures in this population than in other subject vehicles and peer mid-sized passenger cars that were evaluated during the investigation.vehicles involved in ford?s program will have the rear brake lines inspected for contact with the floor pan stiffing rib.if there IS contact, but no abrasion or leakage, the brake lines will be repositioned.if there IS abrasion or a leak IS evident the brake line will be repaired.if necessary, both of the rear brake lines will be replaced. Though ford does not admit to a safety-defect in the subject components, odi believes that the facts in this investigation show otherwise because the insufficient clearance in the routing of those brake lines may result in leaks in those lines that may result in increased stopping distances.odi IS designating the campaign a safety recall (nhtsa recall no. 05V-086).because of the low rates of brake line failures in the remaining subject vehicles, a safety-related defect has not been identified in those populations and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by nhtsa that no safety-related defect exists in those vehicles.the agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.for additional information, see the attached closing report.
Odi has received 40 complaints alleging rear brake line failure in the subject vehicles, including 8 that have been received this year.an additional 192 reports and 478 warranty claims have been received from ford.a leak in the rear brake line can cause extended stopping distance.a search of odi's complaint database for peer vehicle complaints, using the same brake line failure criteria as for the subject vehicles and the same model years (1995-97), identified only 1 complaint involving general motors caprice/implala/88/98/regal vehicles and only 2 complaints involving chrysler lh-cars.the investigation has been upgraded to an engineering analysis to further evaluate the frequency, scope, and causal factors related to rear brake line failures in the subject vehicle population.
See attached report.
Based on the low rate of fire incidents (2.5 incidents per 100,000 vehicles sold) where failure of the scds IS involved and the age of the vehicles ? 7 to 11 years ? A safety-related defect trend has not been identified and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by nhtsa that no safety-related defect exists.the agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.for additional information, see the attached closing report.
The fars data shows that the risk of fire from impact in all directions in the subject vehicles IS the same as all other sedans.the subject vehicles are not over represented with respect to the risk of fire in real-world high-energy crashes.a further discussion of issues related to post crash fires in the subject vehicles IS set out in the closing report for sq 01-014 and that report IS in the docket for this petition.after reviewing the petition and its supporting materials, as well as information furnished by ford and gm, and information within the agency's possession from previous investigations and other related actions,nhtsa has concluded that futher investigation concerning post-crash fires in the subject vehicles IS not likely to lead to a decision that the vehicles contain a safety defect.
There is no summary currently available
There is no summary currently available
Technical service bulletins and other communications the manufacturer sent dealers about this vehicle. Ask a dealer for the full document by its number.
Bars are owner complaints, dots mark years with recalls. Select a year to open its report.