2002 Ford Excursion
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Ford › Excursion › 2002
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2002 Ford Excursion. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
5 recalls name the 2002 Ford Excursion. Newest first.
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…
Non-functioning lights could increase the risk of a crash.
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.
Ford IS recalling model years 1995-2003 windstar, 2000-2003 excursion diesel, 1993-1997 and 1999-2003 F-250 sd through F-550 sd diesel, 1992-2003 E-150 through E-550, 1995-2002 explorer, 1997 and 2002 mercury mountaineer, 1995-1997 and 2001-2003 ranger, and 1994 F53 vehicles equipped with the texas instruments speed control deactivation switch (scds). the…
A vehicle fire could occur with or without the engine running.
Ford will notify owners that dealers will install a fused wiring harness in line with the scds. on 1999-2003 windstar vehicles with a leaking scds, dealers will also inspect the ABS control module connector and repair as necessary. repairs will be completed free of charge. the safety recall began on october 27, 2009. owners may contact ford at 1-888-222-2751.
Certain federal-mogul replacement wheel hub assemblies with the brand names: national, carquest p/nos. 515020, 515021, 515025, 515053, 515054, 515059, and 515060, shipped between january 23, 2006, and december 20, 2007, sold for light duty and medium duty trucks. the inboard retention nut used to maintain hub bearing assembly can loosen resulting in an ABS…
Wheel separation can result in a vehicle crash.
Federal-mogul will notify customers and will replace the hub assembly free of charge. the recall began on february 7, 2008. owners can contact federal-mogul toll-free at 877-489-6659.
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.
On certain trucks equipped with speed control, gasoline or natural gas engines, the speed control deactivation switch may overheat.
Overheating could result in smoke or burn and an underhood fire.
Dealers will install a fused wiring harness into the speed control system free of charge. the recall began on august 7, 2006. owners may contact ford at 1-866-436-7332. (note: also see recalls 05v017 and 05v388)
As I was driving the transfer case and drive shaft dropped out of truck. Broken bolts and no warning.
Large patches of paint topcoat peeling from vehicle roof, absolutely no evidence of primer having bonded/ adhering to separated topcoat, peeled paint IS identical on both sides, obviously primer intended to integrate topcoat with substrate was faulty and not acceptable.
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion. The contact stated that each time she drove the vehicle, it stalled without warning. After the failures, all the warning indicators illuminated on the instrument panel. The contact coasted the vehicle over to the side of the road and waited a minute or more to restart the vehicle. Sometimes, it took up to four attempts before the vehicle would restart. When the vehicle was restarted, it hesitated to move. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where it was diagnosed, but the technician could not find a failure code. The vehicle was not taken to a dealer and was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failures and informed the contact that the vin was not included in nhtsa campaign number: 07v553000 (engine and engine cooling). No further assistance was offered. The approximate failure mileage was 210,000.
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion equipped with toyo open country r/t tires (na), size: lt285/75/r16. While driving 65 mph, the rear passenger tire experienced tread separation. Prior to the failure, the rear driver's tire was replaced by allen tire (located at 1725 superior ave, costa mesa, ca 92627, (949) 646-5236) due to a bulge in the tire. The contact stated that there was damage to the vehicle. The set of tires were a replacement set. The tire was included in nhtsa campaign number: 14t014000 (tires). The manufacturer was contacted. The approximate vehicle failure mileage was 170,000 and the tire failure mileage was 75,000.
Had a b f goodrich lt315/75r16d all terrain ko, dot: bfauhx111211, front left tire explode without any warning, was driving north on highway 65, about 16 miles south of branson, mo. I was traveling around 65 mph in the right hand lane on a clear dry day with minimal traffic. the tires were purchased on 4-23-11, sam's club #6361, vehicle had 91,461 miles. the incident happened on 5-8-18, the vehicle had 136,896 miles. (45,435 miles). when the tire exploded it severed the front left brake line resulting in the loss of control of the vehicle, causing major damage to the vehicle, resulting in the vehicle being totaled.
Was driving on highway and vehicle all of a sudden lost power kept pressing the gas pedal and it wouldn't go as felt like you wanted to turn off it would stall we have checked everything in the truck engine everything and everything seems good transmission does not have any metal shavings I did notice that for some reason the electrical panel have melted it was all completely melted and they believe that the transmission IS also melted and stuck together I'm not sure because we still haven't I mean transmission has no signs that something wrong with it I think this IS very thing I think this IS very dangerous for a vehicle to just stop in the middle of the freeway and imagine if they would have been traffic thank god that there wasn't that nobody was right behind me cuz the truck just stopped and it was not going
While backing the vehicle I felt a pop and then there was no steering control. I looked under the vehicle and found that the tie rod connection to the pitman arm had snapped.
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion equipped with sunfull mont-pro ht781 tires, size: lt265/75/16. While driving 65 mph, the vehicle vibrated abnormally. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic to be diagnosed. The contact was informed that the rear passenger side tire tread separated, which caused a bubble in the tire. Within less than a thousand miles later, the front driver's tire also experienced the failure. The retail facility where the tires were sold and installed was not contacted. The tire manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The vin was unknown. The approximate vehicle failure mileage was 166,000 and the tire failure mileage was approximately 4,999.
I have a 2002 ford excursions and 2 time spark plug ejection from the motor.
I started my truck after sitting for 36 hours and what sounded like bad exhaust leak ..after being checked out by mechanic found that a spark plug and coil has been spit out of motor ..i had them repace spark plug and coil on top which repaired the problem ..today I was driving to town 10 miles and after stoppi g to get gas the noise started again !
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion. The contact stated that the vehicle blew the number six spark plug out of the engine. The spark was replaced but the failure recurred. The vehicle was not taken to the dealer or an independent mechanic for inspection. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the issue. The approximate failure mileage was 110,000.
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion. The contact stated that while driving 70 mph, she applied the brakes to disengage the cruise control and the vehicle continued to accelerate independently. The contact was able to get the vehicle to stop after several minutes. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The vehicle had not been repaired. The failure and current mileage was 176,000.
On 6/5/2013, I was driving on freeway at approx. 70Mph and tread separated from rt. Rear tire causing vehicle to swerve into adjacent lane. Damage to quarter panel and running board. This IS the second tire failure in the past 45 days.the tires are bfgoodrich 265/75r/16 commercial ta load range e. The four new tires were installed on 2/28/2011 and have approx. 14,300 miles of wear at time of failure. The other tire (left front) failed on 4/19/2013. Because of strong front end vibration, I inspected the front tires. I found that it was out of round due to belt separation. The dealer replaced this tire also. *tr
Accelerating from a stop, a spark plug ejected from the cylinder head. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion. The contact stated that while traveling 55 mph and applying the brakes, there was an abnormal noise heard from the braking system. The brake pedal became stuck and the vehicle would not slow down. The contact continued to pump the brakes and was able to coast to a stop. The contact later parked the vehicle and noticed that a fire had started from under the vehicle. the contact was able to extinguish the fire however, the transmission and central computer was destroyed. The vehicle was towed to a dealer where the transmission computer module, transmission and the brake booster was replaced. The dealer advised that the brake booster leaked onto the transmission and the front drive shaft, causing the vehicle to catch on fire. The contact stated that the vehicle was taken to the dealer three weeks prior to fire and there was no indication of a potential failure. the failure mileage was unknown. The current mileage was 190,000.
The spark plug blew out of the cylinder head (cyl #3), damaging the thread, the spark plug, the spark plug boot and the ignition coil. this IS the second time this has occurred in this vehicle in the last two years. The first was approximately 2 years ago and that was the plug in cylinder #5. The same damage occurred. *tr
Engine performance suddenly became erratic and very rough running. Immediately turned around and went home/ had towed to ford dealer. Dealership ran $250 diagnostic test but came back clean. I was directed to change engine oil as air might have gotten into the fuel injection lubing system along with changing the fuel filter. On performance of fuel filter replacement, technician directed my attention to what appeared to be small pieces of metal trapped in and on top of filter element. Mechanic said this IS very common problem with metal the result of delamination of the inner lining of the fuel tank in ford diesels. Internet research reveals many many complaints to both ford and nhtsa over this issue. This creates a very dangerous situation due to loss of power steering, brakes, and trailer brakes which could easily result in loss of lives. I have complained to ford and my complaint has been duly noted and registered. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion. The vehicle was included in the recall under nhtsa campaign ID number: 07v553000 (engine and engine cooling:engine:diesel) and was repaired. After the repair while driving approximately 65 mph, the vehicle began to decelerate independently. The vehicle was taken to the dealer for diagnostic testing where the technician performed repairs to the vehicle but the contact was unaware of the exact repairs. The failure continued. The vehicle was not further repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 100,000.
#4 spark plug blew out of engine head, threads destroyed. ford dealer service department told me this IS a known defect in the ford 5.4 triton engine head and that ford IS doing nothing about it. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion. The contact was driving 45 mph when the vehicle stalled without warning. The vehicle was restarted after the failure and taken to a private mechanic. The mechanic confirmed that the camshaft sensor needed to be replaced. The manufacturer was contacted and the vehicle was repaired. The failure mileage was 62,550 and the current mileage was 62,600. updated 02/22/12*lj updated 03/01/12
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford excursion. While driving approximately 65 mph, the vehicle began to decelerate while the contact was depressing the accelerator pedal. The contact released the accelerator but was able to regain acceleration once depressed again. The failure recurred intermittently at various speeds traveled. The vehicle was taken to the dealer twice for diagnostic testing. The technicians were able to duplicate the failure but could not diagnose the cause of the failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 160,000.
While driving on I-84 east bound, between the dalles and pendleton oregon, our 2002 ford excursion experienced a tire tread separation on the right rear. we experienced a recurring popping sound just prior to the tread separation. we were pulling a light trailer. tread separated but tire remained inflated. I was able to see the tread leave the tire in my right mirror as it happened. we were traveling up hill at the time so speed was approximately 63mph. dry roads and 93 degrees. *tr
Was starting from a stop to make a left turn when driver heard a loud pop. There was a sudden loss of power and some smoke. The vehicle was towed and diagnosed. The #3 plug on the right bank has blown completely out and damaged the coil pack. A phone call to the dealer yielded no help other than we can have it towed there to be repaired, as it likely needs a new head. Some internet research and talking to other ford owners definitely suggest that this IS a design problem with the alum heads blowing out spark plugs, and the #3 r plug seems to be common. This could cause fuel/vapors to be exhausted and sprayed on a hot manifold and cause a fire. It sounds like there may have already been some fires attributed to this problem. This sound like a case where the dealer/ford refuses to admit that it IS a problem and fix it for owners. Before there are serious injuries from a crash or a fire, ford should be compelled to fix this issue. Its unlikely that ford will answer the call without pressure from nhtsa. There seem to be far too many of the same type of problems with this 5.4L motor for it to be a coincidence.
The problem with the vehicle IS that it IS not properly insured. the limousine operator dba amor limousine service) works in ohio and kentucky. the operator does not carry the required $5 million auto liability coverage. the operator does not properly file with dot for his public livery business.
2002 ford triton 6.8L V10 engine in an excursion vehicle ejected an original (unchanged, factory torqued) spark plug with great force and damage in the engine compartment. coil was immediately damaged as spark plug ricocheted around the engine compartment followed by the smell of gasoline vapors and loud noise from the engine compression being directly vented from the vacated spark plug hole. the five threads of the triton spark plug hole were damaged by the force of the ejection. this should not happen with the ford engine to the customers safety given this was an original plug (at 85,000 miles). the weather at the time of the spark plug ejection was -4F, and the spark plug ejected as the vehicle was beginning to accelerate from a standstill. ford has a major and costly defect with their triton engines they sold to customers (engine replacement IS estimated at $4000) and the government should enforce ford to recall and repair all spark plug holes in these aluminum engines spanning years 2000 to 2004 given they only used 5 threads in each spark plug hole, which IS insufficient for an aluminum block. how IS it that this widely known issue IS not getting the federal government's attention given this IS a demonstrated major defect and a safety issue (could have had a fire in the engine compartment if a spark from the ejected spark plug occurred). *tr
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.
Ea05-005 IS closed with ford?s actions in recalls 05v-017, 05v-388, and 06v-286, recalling approximately 6.7 million vehicles equipped with texas instruments speed control deactivation switches (scds).the brake systems in these recalled vehicles generate a vacuum that can potentially cause the scds to fail and, in certain switch installation orientations, catch fire.ford IS also including the entire population of 1998 explorers.ford has informed odi that testing to determine the cause of failures in the 1998 explorers will continue after this investigation IS closed.odi believes that the vehicles exhibiting the factors causing scds failure described in this report correlate well with the observed failure rates on these vehicles by model and model year.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by nhtsa that a safety-related defect does not exist in the non-recalled vehicles manufactured with scds that are not included in ford?s recalls.odi will continue to monitor the non-recalled population for incidence of engine compartment fires.the agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.see attached closing report for details.
Failure counts from odi?s analysis are stated above; see the additional problem experience discussion in the summary report.ford data contained duplicative reports for 4 odi complaints and 1 crash.three crashes were allegedly due to intermittent operation of the electronic throttle control (etc) pedal, one crash occurred when an etc disabled vehicle was struck by another motorist, one report contained no detail.the injuries were minor.an issue involving fixed etc pedals was investigated also, however failure reports and populations are not shown above; see summary report for detail.although ford has used etc based throttle control systems for many years, the pap feature was new for my 2002.the subject etc sensor produces two output signals which the engine management system (ems) utilizes TO:1) determine fueling requirements; and 2) perform sensor diagnostics.one signal IS linearly proportional to throttle pedal position; the second IS a digital signal.by design, the detection of a sensor fault results in the engine returning to (or remaining at) the idle state.ford identified a defect in the pap etc sensor which prematurely affected an output signal; the migration of internal sensor lubricant caused a loss of proportional signal.the failure mechanism IS progressive and as the sensor deteriorates, the ems will detect a fault, store a fault code, illuminate a warning lamp, and the engine may remain at/return to idle.in the early stages, normal operation can be regained by pedal re-application.the failure progresses until the engine remains at idle.the engine does not stall, power assisted steering and braking systems are unaffected. Ford corrected the etc sensor defect and conducted field service action (fsa) 03b03 to replace etc pedals, addressing 50% of vehicles.at agency request to improve completion rate, ford extended fsa 03b03 for 6 months.based on odi's analysis of available data, ford's action has appropriately resolved the etc sensor proplem in the subject vehicles.the closing of the investigation does not constitute a finding by nhtsa that a safety-related defect does not exist, and should not be considered as having any precedential value or effect binding the agency in future defect investigations. See the attached summary report for additional information.
The subject vehicles for this investigation include model year 2002 and 2003 excursion and f super duty trucks equipped with 7.3L diesel engines and an optional power adjustable pedal (pap) feature.the subject vehicles utilize an electronic throttle control (etc) system to control engine speed and power.the accelerator pedal position sensor of the etc system was replaced under ford's field service action (fsa) 03b03 (announced in february 2003) due to concerns that it may not operate as designed and as a result, may cause the vehicle to continue to idle or unexpectedly slow when the accelerator IS applied.certain complaint and warranty information related to the vehicles involved in fsa 03b03 has not been provided by ford, as discussed in detail in ford's response letter (dated december 2, 2003) to odi's preliminary evaluation information request.this additional information, which IS required to adequately assess the safety implications of the alleged defect, will be obtained and analyzed during the engineering analysis phase of the investigation.the manufacturer failure report counts will be determined at that time.
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.