2001 Ford Expedition
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Ford › Expedition › 2001
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2001 Ford Expedition. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
10 recalls name the 2001 Ford Expedition. Newest first.
Certain maxzone headlight assemblies, depo brand, p/nos. 331-1129L-asn and 331-1129r-asn, sold for use as aftermarket equipment for the above listed passenger vehicles. these headlamps fail to conform to the photometric requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 108, lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment.
Decreased lighting visibility may result in a vehicle crash.
Maxzone will notify owners and offer reimbursement for any noncompliant headlights. the recall began on july 28, 2006. owners may contact maxzone at 909-822-3288.
Certain aai motorsports combination lamps sold as replacement lamps for use on the above list passenger vehicles. combination lamps not equipped with amber side reflectors fail to conform with the requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 108, "lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment."
Lack of amber side reflectors in the lamps will decrease lighting visibility to other drivers and may possibly result in a vehicle crash
Aai motorsports will notify owners and replace the lamps free of charge. the recall began on august 1, 2006. owners may contact aai motorsports at 909-923-9188.
Certain aftermarket fuel filters sold under the purolator brand name, p/n f65277, shipped from january 16 through june 2, 2006, for use on the above listed passenger vehicles. due to incorrect design, the quick connectors may not fully seat with the tube interface, even though the person making the connection may believe that the quick connector IS fully…
Failure of this connection could lead to fuel spillage and, in the presence of an ignition source, a fire could occur.
Ufi will notify owners and replace the filters free of charge. the recall began on august 4, 2006. owners may contact ufi filters USA at 800-230-5876.
On certain pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles equipped with speed control, the speed control deactivation switch may overheat, smoke, or burn.
A fire at the switch could occur.
By letter dated september 12, 2005, owners were instructed to return their vehicles to their dealers to have the speed control deactivation switch disconnected. owners who have had their speed control deactivated are being notified that parts will be available and advised to make an appointment to reconnect the speed control beginning in february 2006. owners who did not have their speed control deactivated are being notified to have their system remedied beginning in february 2006. owners are urged to avail themselves of the free disconnect service as soon as possible because of the significant risk of fire. Owners may contact ford at 1-800-392-3673. (note: also see recalls 05v017 and 06v286)
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.
Vehicle description: passenger cars, sport utility vehicles, and light and medium duty pickup trucks. a switch located in the plastic cover of the wiper motor gear case could malfunction and overheat, potentially resulting in loss of intermittent wiper function, loss of wiper park function, complete loss of wiper function, or ignition of the plastic…
Loss of visibility while driving increases the risk of a crash.
Dealers will inspect the date code on the wiper motor. motors built with the suspect time frame will have the wiper motor gear case cover replaced. owner notification began august 20, 2001. 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 ford at 1-866-436-7332.
Vehicle description: passenger and sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and minivans. equipped with seat belts supplied by trw. it IS possible that the driver's and/or front passenger's outboard seat belt buckle may not fully latch. ford crown victoria built at st. Thomas assembly plant from 4/17/00 - 5/29/01 mercury grand marquis built at st.…
In the event of a crash, the restraint system may not provide adequate occupant protection, increasing the risk of personal injury to the seat occupant.
Dealers will inspect the front outboard seat belt buckles and if the buckle fails the inspection process, it will be replaced. owner notification began july 25, 2001. 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 ford at 1-866-436-7332.
This IS not a safety recall in accordance with the safety act. however, it IS deemed a safety improvement campaign by the agency. equipment description: ford IS replacing all firestone wilderness at 15, 16, and 17 inch tires mounted on ford trucks and suvs. ford reports tread separation can occur due to a combination of the sensitivity of the tire…
Should the tread separate at highway speeds, a vehicle crash could occur, possibly resulting in personal injury or death.
The replacement/reimbursement program for this campaign expired on march 31, 2002. however, customers can contact ford at 1-877-917-3673 or go on-line to www.ford.com for possible assistance.
Vehicle description: passenger and sport utility vehicles. the inflator canister in the driver air bag module may have an inadequate weld near the igniter.
In the event of a vehicle crash, the driver air bag may not deploy as intended, potentially resulting in reduced occupant protection, or a burn injury.
Dealers will install a driver air bag module. owner notification began march 19, 2001. 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 ford at 1-800-392-3673.
Vehicle description: certain sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and passenger vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of fmvss 225, "child restraint anchorage systems." the affected expedition/navigator owner guides do not identify the locations of seating positions equipped with tether anchorages, and do not provide instructions for securing…
In the event of a crash, the child seat may not be properly attached increasing the risk of injury to the child.
Owners will be provided with owner guide inserts revised to provide the required information, and instructions for affixing these inserts to their owner guides. customers will also be advised that if they prefer, their dealer will affix the inserts to their owner guides.
THe component was the speed control deactivation switch Manufacturer Recall Number 05S28 NHTSA Recall Number05V017000 Recall Status Recall Incomplete. It is unknown if the part is available for inspection but the vehicle is. The fire occurred while driving and left me stranded on the side of the road with five dogs, 2 hours away from home with no way of getting back. I had to find a hotel that allowed pets which was expensive and have been in said hotel starting August 25 through today, September 2. We are paid until tomorrow and I have exhausted all funds and resources. We will be without food, shelter, or teransportation. Yes the problemhas been confirmed by Santa Monica Lincoln Ford Dealership. The mechanic liason is Art Albrandt and can be reached at [XXX]. The vehicle has not been inspected by anyone other than the mechanics at thew Ford Dealership No there was no warning prior to the incident. The vehicle was running just fine. ZThe vehicle caught fire en route to Los Angeles frim San Bernardino County. AAA came and towed the vehicle to a friend's house because it was very late, and towed to the dealership the following morning. I found the nearest pet friendly hotel because I had no way to transport my animals any distance. I waited two days before being told that a part that was needed was discontinuerd, and they would have to find it at a pick a part over the weekend. At this point I had exhaiusted all of my financial resources and had to borrow funds to keep us housed. That following monday I was toild that the problem, specifically the part, that was related to the recall had been fixed however the vehicle still did not run and because it was so old they did not have the equipment to further diagnose it and referred us to a nearby mechanic who could help us. So far we have been referred to 4 mechanics and none are willing to even look at it. I filed a complaint with Ford, case number [XXX]. I explained that the recg INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FO
Air Bags did not deploy Impact directly to drivers side of vehicle the other car was going 55 MPH caused me the driver to hit my head on the window hard. I was informed the air bags should have deployed by officer on site.
Front brake hose metal crimp completely rusted causing brake hose separation and failure. Design has rubber boot over crimp which actually retains moisture over many years. Boot may be intended to reduce stress at joint of metal to hose but actually enhanced failure mode. Drivers side came apart after minor bump during service, have photos of passenger side still intact but clearly fragile.
Driver seatbelt- Randomly releases from buckle when driving. Happened about 3-4 times already.
On the second row seat, passenger side door will not open using the door handle with the child safety switch in lock or unlock position. It will open from the outside handle. This is a safety concern. In case accident happen or fire in the vehicle occurs, the second and third row passengers can not get out of the vehicle fast enough for their safety. This has not work for over a year now.
Vehical burst into flames seems on passenger side under the hood...Had been parked all day. No one around or injured. Vehical is a total loss.
I gave a friend a ride to Wal mart in my 2001 Expedition to buy some power steering fluid, luckily I parked over by the automotive section. I turned it off and waited in vehicle till he returned, about 7 or 8 minutes. I started the engine, grabbed the brake and dropped it in reverse when engine revved sending us backwards completely out of control with both feet on the brakes, spinning rear wheels and I turned ignition key off as quick as possible but violently slammed into a truck semitrailer only, parked alongside Wal mart tire shop. Completely totalled out the entire rear passenger liftback, taillights, tailgate, rear hatch window, left rear luever window, left tailpipe, tow hitch package and rear bumper. With only min. coverage, I'm now w/o a vehicle after completely replacing entire front and rear suspension, steering and tires plus alignment less than 6 months prior, with 275000 miles. Thank you very much Ford Motor Co. This was NOT an issue of driver error !.. I WILL find a way to legally hold you responsible for my loss, making FORD liable for repairing or replacing my vehicle ! This happened on Aug 29th, 2022 approx. 4pm at Wal mart property, in Ukiah, CA. 95482
Vehicle caught on fire due to an incorrectly installed head light due to a cracked plug assembly. Vehicle was in a fast-food drive through when the smoke and subsequent flames were seen. Due to age of the vehicle the task of changing the light bulb was farmed out to local oil change shop. While changing the placing the new bulb into the plug assembly the thin plastic broke keeping the bulb from seating properly. Tested okay on reassembly but once night came the light was on for only 15 minutes and ignited the inner head lamp assembly and subsequently more of the engine compartment. fortunately, the fast-food restaurant came out with an extinguisher and put out the fire. Thankfully, no one was hurt however, had the fire occurred on the highway, in a parking lot unattended, or in the homes garage, the outcome would have been far worse.
My vehicle year,make,and model has multiple manufacturer recalls pertaining to my specific vehicles vin number. I have 0 unrepaired recalls that have not been assessed and has had zero components replaced under recalls for specific components. Each and every recalled components associated with my vehicles year, make, and model pertaining to my vehicles vin number are a safety risk at fault and any problems create unsafe conditions for operation of vehicle on the road. My assessment of my vehicles safety risk IS high due to the 0 unrepaired recalls my vehicle has not been replaced with new components to avoid these safety risks from component failure.
Going to michigan from tennessee, driving on the expressway what's my ford expedition trident motor V8 heard a popping sound and almost got in an accident and found out once again the sparkplug blew out of the motor again with my family in the vehiclee it's a 2001 and I think your company should pay for the repairs.
TL* the contact owned a 2001 ford expedition. The contact stated that while his vehicle was parked in his apartment complex, his vehicle suddenly caught fire without warning. The contact stated that he had heard a loud boom from inside which prompted him to check on his vehicle. The contact immediately called 911 as the fire spread to other vehicles in the parking lot. The fire department was able to extinguish, a total of four vehicles were completely burned to the ground. The fire marshals were also called and a report was filed. All vehicles involved in the fire remained at the apartment complex parking lot. No injuries were reported as a result of the fire. The manufacturer nor the dealer had been notified of the failure. Upon investigation, the contact discovered that his vehicle had been placed under recall for nhtsa recall number: 05v017000 (vehicle speed control) but was unaware that there was ever a recall. The failure mileage was approximately 110,000.
Fyi my 2001 ford expedition IS experiencing the same soft brake problem that warranted them to issue recall #19s54. I have changed the brakes and the problem persists . Ford needs to include the 2001 expeditions in this recall. It IS very dangerous to stop this heavy vehicle with a soft brake pedal pushed all the way down !
TL* the contact owns a 2001 ford expedition. While driving, the front driver's and passenger side seat belts would unlatch on its own without warning. The manufacturer was not contacted. The contact called ramp motors (4869 nesconset hwy, port jefferson station, ny 11776, 631-473-1550) and was informed that the vehicle was not included in nhtsa campaign number: 01v227001(seat belts). The vehicle had not been repaired. The failure mileage was 140,000.
Fuses blowing as soon as put in box. Smoke coming from cruise control switch
TL* the contact owned a 2001 ford expedition. While driving approximately 25 mph, the vehicle came to a stop. The brake pedal was depressed, but the vehicle failed to stop. As a result, the contact crashed into the rear of another vehicle. The contact sustained a back injury, which did not require medical attention. A police report was not filed. The vehicle was towed to an independent mechanic, but was not diagnosed or repaired. The vehicle was destroyed. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 170,000.
#1 spark plug blew out of block head. Ejected fuel while engine running.
TL* the contact owns a 2001 ford expedition. The contact stated that the seat belt randomly unlatched from the buckle everyday. The warning indicator chime and the actual indicator illuminated. The contact stated that the failure occurred for approximately thirty days. The vehicle had not been diagnosed by the dealer or an independent mechanic. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The contact researched online and found nhtsa campaign number: 01v227001 (seat belts), but the vin was not included. The vehicle was not repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 150,000.
Windshield leaking - causing electrical box to short out and therefore everything electrial malfunction - items come on going down the road while you are driving - dangerous
The horn doesn't work at all even when locking with the keyless fob. Cruise control doesn't seem to work at all. I can engage the e-brake and the light won't turn on in my dash. None of the controls on my steering wheel work at all.
TL* the contact owns a 2001 ford expedition. After starting the vehicle, the contact smelled a burning odor under the hood. The contact looked under the hood and noticed that the engine compartment was on fire. The contact extinguished the fire. A fire report was not filed and there were no injuries. The vehicle was not diagnosed nor repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The contact was informed that the vehicle was included in nhtsa campaign number: 05v017000 (vehicle speed control) after the fire, but the dealer denied the repair. The failure mileage was unknown.
The check suspension light IS on and I noticed every expedition in this year range has suspension problems and the wireing sometimes the radio will go off and the lights on dash and speedometer lights will shut off.
June 2007 while driving to mexico for family vacation, a spark plug blew out of the engine in gila bend arizona where the temperatures were close to 110 degrees. I had our dog with us so we could not go into any air conditioned buildings due to having a dog. My 8 and 10 year old boys along with my elderly mother were forced to sit outside and wait for hours until help arrived. It blew while driving on the highway. may 2015 same thing happened but this time we were heading to a family reunion camping trip and had to cancel as our vehicle would not get us there. it blew while driving on the highway. 141000 miles on the vehicle. oct 2015, the third spark plug blew while my son was driving 25mph to school. he had to miss school that day as he had no way to get there. 187000 miles on the vehicle. this must be a defect that ford corp will not recognize as their fault but IS common that it must be! 197000 miles on the vehicle.
Side air bag in driver seat deployed while vehicle was started and in park without any collision or impact of any type. vehicle was stationary and had been running less than 30-45 seconds and driver was reaching for seat belt when air bag exploded with enough force to cause a hand laceration and torn collateral ligament.
While my two year old daughter and I were sitting in the vehicle (vehicle was off) a passerby knocked on the window informing me that my car was on fire. I exited the vehicle and found flames coming from under hood and below the car. Come to find out there was a recall on the vehicle for a faulty speed control switch known to catch fire and even though I had recently had the car in for service at a ford dealership, it was not addressed or taken care of before this fire. Totally negligent! We could have burned up in the car without any warning.
Rear upper and lower control arms completely rusted out, resulting a dangerous driving situation. I have vehicle serviced regularly at a ford dealer and was never informed of such a hazard. while driving, heard a loud noise and felt a bad jerk, rear-end just fell down. had severe medical issues as result. ford needs to alert consumers of this problem and implement a recall, before a fatal occurs.
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
Consumers alleged that when it rained or snowed, water leaked into the vehicle around the windshield.moisture flowing through the seal that surrounds the front windshield follows a path through the seal into the generic electronic module (gem) and fuse box, and may cause the electrical components in the vehicle to malfunction.overall, the number of reports alleging wiper failures and lighting failures IS relatively small.in reviewing a large sample of the 1503 complaints for windshield leaks, odi's analysis reveals that 0.04% of the total vehicle population reported improper windshield wiper operation and 0.01% of the total vehicle populationreported lighting failures.the warranty claims reveal that approximately 0.10% of the population has been serviced for wiper malfunctions and 0.08% for lighting malfunctions as a result of windshield leaking. Odi's analysis of the field performance statistics and available technical information has not established that a defect trend exists in the malfunction, failure or intermittent operation of the front windshield wipers or headlights.see the attached summary report.
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.
Odi has received 39 reports alleging that water leaks around the windshield causing electrical failures, including but not limited to the windshield wipers and the headlamps.ford reports that water entering the vehicle can wet the power distribution box (pdb) and the generic electronic module (gem).these components control various electrical systems in the vehicle.this investigation has been upgraded to an engineering analysis, ea05015, to allow further investigation of the issue and to assess the nature of the potential safety consequence.
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.
During the initial recall campaign in 2001, the subject vehicles were inspected by ford dealerships using a test tool that would detect a defective front seat outboard seat belt buckle assembly.approximately one million vehicles passed the inspection test for one or both front buckles.subsequent to the recall service action, odi received 15 consumer reports alleging that a passed inspection buckle subsequently failed to latch or inadvertently unlatched during use.in addition, ford has identified 543 owner and field reports alleging buckle failure subsequent to passing the inspection test.ford tested and examined over 100 warranty-returned buckles and found that 44% of the buckles had no problem or a condition not related to the recall inspection (non-latch related buckle damage or foreign contamination).warranty claims were highest during the 18-month period after the start of the recall (july 2001) and have been declining during the past 24 months.over the past 12 months, ford has received approximately 12 warranty claims per month out of a vehicle population of about one million.complaints counts are also decreasing.during the past seven months, odi has received only two complaints. A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.accordingly, this investigation IS closed.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by nhtsa that a safety-related defect does not exist.the agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Under recall campaign (01v227), ford recalled approximately 1.3 million vehicles to inspect and if necessary replace the front driver and/or passenger seat belt buckle.approximately 1.1 million owners responded by taking their vehicles to a dealer for inspection of the buckle using a specialized buckle test tool.ford reported that 829,927 vehicles had both buckles pass the tool test and another 167,336 vehicles had one buckle pass.odi and ford received complaints alleging seat belt buckle failure shortly after passing the original recall inspection service.complainants alleged that the buckle failed by either not latching or false-latching (partial engagement of the latch to the latch plate).a false-latched buckle may release with minor movement or impact against the buckle housing including inadvertent release while the vehicle IS in motion.odi IS upgrading this recall query to an engineering analysis (ea05-004) to further analyze the field performance of those vehicles that ford dealers passed (one or both buckles) using ford's inspection test (997,263 vehicles).
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.