2002 Ford E Series
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Ford › E Series › 2002
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2002 Ford E Series. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
2 recalls name the 2002 Ford E Series. Newest first.
On certain heavy duty trucks equipped with 7.3L diesel engines, the camshaft position sensor located on the engine of the vehicle may function intermittently, possibly resulting in an engine stall.
In the event of an engine stall, a crash could result without warning.
Dealers will inspect the sensor and replace it with an improved camshaft position sensor free of charge. the recall began on december 29, 2007. owners may contact ford at 1-866-436-7332.
Certain pickup truck, van, and MINI van conversions equipped with southern comfort built running boards that contain certain courtesy lights manufactured by american technology components, inc. these units contain a courtesy light or lights that might overheat when the wire harness IS exposed to excessive moisture and road salt.
This overheating condition can cause the running board to melt or cause a fire.
Dealers will replace the wiring harness on these running boards. owner notification began march 7, 2003. owners who take their vehicles to an authorized dealer on an agreed upon service date and do not receive the free remedy within a reasonable time should contact southern comfort at 1-800-745-6096.
2002 ford taurus heater blower. Did not work tried to fix with different parts still didnt work. I can't see where I am going with the windows all steamed up. *Tr
Tl*the contact owns a 2002 ford e-series. the contact stated that the bolts on the fuse box failed and caused the vehicle's wires to become exposed. the dealer has not inspected the vehicle. the engine size and correct vin were unknown. the current and failure mileages were 9,793.
While I doubt this will attract enough attention for ford to address the problem, I too, made the mistake of purchasing a 2002 explorer xlt. the rear differential makes a horrid whining noise between 50-65 mph. from what little research I've done since the problem was diagnosed I'm finding that I'm not the only unfortunate ford owner with the same defect. most of what I'm finding states that even when the problem IS "fixed" that it re-occurs. why IS ford not issuing a recall? *nm
Driving on primary road way when I heard a loud pop. Sounded like an exhaust leak. pull off to side of road, turn off engine to check to see what the problem was.checked exhaust ok. Removed engine cowling, found spark plug ejected itself. spark plug was missing," cop" coil mounting broke, boot burnt. Had vehicle towed to ford dealer after being told it would be covered under warranty. Dealer refused to repair under warranty. Talk to another dealership,an was told this a common problem in the triton engines. No repair has been made. I still have the "cop" coil. *Jb
Defroster and climate control system malfunctioned repeatedly. no defroster, heat, or air conditioning because blower failed to operate. dealer route 23 automall would not or could not fix.*jb
Consumer stated when the brakes were applied, the vehicle would steer to the left.*jb
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
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 nhtsa 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 nhtsa?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency?s safety mission, the petition IS denied.
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.