1996 Ford F-250
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Ford › F-250 › 1996
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 1996 Ford F-250. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
5 recalls name the 1996 Ford F-250. Newest first.
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)
Certain ck motorsports combination headlights, clear corner, bumper, and side marker lights sold as replacement lamps for use on the passenger vehicles listed above. some combination lamps that are not equipped with amber side reflectors fail to conform to federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 108, lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment.
Without the amber reflectors, the vehicle will be poorly illuminated, possibly resulting in a vehicle crash without warning.
Ck motorsport will notify owners and replace the noncompliant lamps free of charge. the recall began on july 1, 2006. owners may contact ck motorsport at 1-909-610-7211.
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)
The certification labels on the involved vehicles has incorrect rear tire inflation pressure designations. this does not comply with fmvss no. 120, "tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars."
Incorrect inflation pressures could cause premature wear of the rear tires. .
Owners will be provided with correct certification labels and instructions for installing these labels. dealers can install this label if the owner so desires.
The crossmember frame gussets were installed with undersized threaded fasteners following a breakdown of the production rivet gun that IS generally used. this gusset IS the attachment point for the rear strap of the mid-ship fuel tank.
The subject fasteners can separate causing in the rear strap of the affected fuel tank to become disconnected. a loose or disconnected rear strap allows the fuel tank to possibly contact the road surface increasing the risk of a vehicle fire.
Dealers will replace the crossmember gusset fasteners with the specified alternative fasteners (bolts).
Cruise control switch began smoking, disconnected it and took it to Awesome Ford of Chehalis, WA for recall service sometime in June or July. Service tech found that brake fluid had wicked its way up electrical harness into cruise control servo, necessitating replacement in order to complete recall service. FoMoCo has been unable/unwilling to replace cruise control servo and is instead requiring that I pull one from a wrecking yard in order to complete recall service.
A malfunctioning check valve within the fuel pump assembly causes a portion of the unused fuel from one tank to be returned to the second tank. When this occurs, the capacity of the second tank can be exceeded, causing fuel spillage. About 5 gallons of fuel spilled out of fill tube.
Fuel running out fount tank in driveway with selector on rear tank
Excess fuel from rear tank IS returned to front tank causing fuel overfill and fuel leak.
Front fuel tank stopped working. Vehicle runs using rear fuel tank. If I take off the front tank fuel cap, gas pours out sometimes sprays ( about 8 ounces or so) . Front fuel tank seems to become pressurized. This can happen every time you drive it ( if you remove the front cap). In my opinion this IS a definite safety hazard that needs to be addressed. I did some searches on the internet and this problem IS quite common. Big fire hazard.
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F-250 equipped with uniroyal laredo tires, size: 265/75r16 (na). While making a right turn at approximately 50 mph, the front passenger side tire ruptured. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where it was confirmed that the tread separated and the tire needed to be replaced. The tire was replaced. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate vehicle failure mileage was 185,000 and the tire failure mileage was 15,000. The dot number was unavailable.
Fuel spills from rear tank when fueling front tank. Engine sputters and quits while running due to fuel pressure failure..
This IS not a complaint but to let everyone know what I have found to be part of the problem on the steering not returning after a turn. The steering column bearing in the top of the column IS bad. I have had to replace at least 20 of these for this complaint and fixed the problem. The locking of the steering when breaking IS a hydroboost problem not a steering problem. Ford need to research this and correct it before there IS a death because of it. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F250. The contact stated the vehicle was off and the key was out of the ignition when the vehicle caught on fire. The fire department was called to extinguish the fire who stated that the fire started under the hood from a wire. The vehicle was destroyed. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was unavailable.
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F-250. the contact stated that while driving approximately 70 mph, the drivers seat reclined independently. The contact was a licensed mechanic who stated that the bolts that hold the seat upright were broken. The manufacturer was not notified of the defect. the approximate failure mileage was 110,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F-250. The contact stated that he was replacing the glow plugs when the vehicle suddenly caught on fire. The contact was able to extinguish the fire. The manufacturer was contacted and the contact referenced nhtsa campaign number: 06v286000 (vehicle speed control). The contact later received a call from the manufacturer's legal team, who advised that the fire was not related to the recall. The contact stated that the manufacturer never inspected the vehicle to make that determination. The vehicle was repaired. the failure mileage was 200,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F-250. The contact stated that the vehicle was sitting in a residential drive way when it caught on fire. The fire department extinguished the fire and determined that the speed control deactivation switch was the culprit. The vehicle was destroyed. The contact spoke with the manufacturer in regard to nhtsa campaign ID number: 06v286000 (vehicle speed control), but was told that the vehicle was not included in the recall. The failure and the current mileages were 150,000. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F-250. The contact stated that the cross member, which held the rear of the fuel tank was corroded. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The contact referenced nhtsa campaign ID number: 96v146000 (structure) that but was advised by the manufacturer that the vin was not included in the recall. The vehicle was not repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 96,000. *tr
Two out of four kumho tires have failed with a third one on advisement in poor condition. one tire separated in highway traffic at highway velocity. extensive damage to vehicle, body and fuel system. verbally and in writing I asked for an investigation into this matter with no action being taken. I have maintenance logs, receipts, pictures, estimates and all email correspondences for your review. *tr on september 10, 2010, upon a visual inspection, the consumer noticed the right rear tire was getting ready to separate. So, he replaced it with only 15, 979 miles on the vehicle. on september 25, 2012, the left rear tire separated at highway speed with 22,642.6 miles on the tire, the approximate tread was 7/32. Updated ivoq 11/19/12
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F-250 diesel. The contact stated that while driving, an odor of burning plastic burning was emitted into the vehicle. The vehicle was taken to a local mechanic who diagnosed that the cruise control burned a hole in the brake fluid reservoir. As a result, the cruise control lines and the brake fluid needed to be replaced. In addition, the brakes were not responding properly. The vehicle was then taken to the dealer who diagnosed that the brake booster needed to be replaced. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was 183,628 and the current mileage was 186,000.
Tl*the contact owns a 1996 ford F250 diesel. The contact stated the steering column became very loose while driving. the vehicle was not taken to the dealer for diagnostic testing. The failure mileage was 77,600.
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F250 diesel. The contact was entering a residential parking garage when the steering wheel completely fractured from the vehicle. The contact was able to maintain control of the vehicle and engaged the emergency brake to bring it to a stop. The vehicle was towed to a local repair shop where the mechanic diagnosed the failure as a weak steering column which would require replacing. The manufacturer was contacted and offered no assistance. The vehicle was repaired. The failure and current mileage was 263,000.
1996 ford, F250, 7.3 liter diesel: high pressure power steering hose failed at connection to the power steering pump. The failure occurred when backing out of a parking space. The cause of the failure IS due to failure of an internal plastic component that connects the tubing to the connecting nut/fitting. Replaced with a fabricated hydraulic hose that did not have any internal plastic components. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F-250. the contact stated that while the vehicle was parked next to the garage the vehicle ignited into flames. the vehicle burned down the entire garage and did partial fire damage to the house. The contact has not called the manufacturer regarding the fire. The contact notice numerous complaints regarding fires for this year make and model. the contact had the vehicle repaired under a manufacturers recall years prior to the failure for the cruise control where the dealer replaced a wiring harness that could cause a fire. the contact stated someone could have lost their life due to the fire. the failure mileage was 158,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F250. his vehicle caught on fire while he was making repairs to the engine. The fire spread to the wiring harness and burned the high pressure oil line. he had to disconnect the batteries. The ford manufacturer was notified of the failure. Fords legal department sent a letter denying responsibility , because the vehicle was not repaired by a ford dealer. the failure mileage was 210,000.
A malfunctioning check valve within the fuel pump assembly causes a portion of the unused fuel from one tank to be returned to the second tank. When this occurs, the capacity of the second tank can be exceeded, causing fuel spillage. *Tr
Ford F250 1996 brake cylinder leak fire. *Tr
TL* the contact owns a 1996 ford F250. the contact stated that during deceleration, shifting into reverse, or while in idle the vehicle intermittently stalled. The manufacturer was notified in reference to recall# 07v553000, engine and engine cooling, engine, diesel who confirmed that his vin was excluded. No repairs have been made. The vehicle identification number was unavailable. The failure mileage was 360,000 and the current mileage was unknown. updated 10/06/09 *bf updated 10/08/09
I have a 1996 ford F250 7.3 liter diesel truck. it stalls on occasion at low speeds which I feel IS a safety issue. I found out that ford had a recall on 1997 and newer trucks because of the cam position sensor. Everything I could find out about my problem IS the same. the cps unit causes this problem. I feel ford should replace my cps unit as well. *Tr
Tl*the contact owns a 1996 ford F250. the contact stated that the cam position sensor failed without warning and the motor failed as well. the sensor IS located on the lower front end of the motor of the vehicle. the contact stated that the vehicle would shut off without warning while driving various speeds. he called the ford manufacturer and they stated that they have been aware of the issue since 1996, but has done nothing to correct the failure. the failure mileage was 102,000. Update 09/10/08 *cw the cam shaft position sensor was the cause of the engine stalling. Updated 09/16/08 *jb
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
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.
Consumer complaints report that bolts which retain the axle pivot bracket to the frame cross member can loosen or fail, causing the inboard end or the axle to become detached from the vehicle.owners allege that this could result in loss of steering control, however the complaint data shows only one incident where the vehicle left the roadway following axle separation, with no damage to the vehicle.in addition to the 225 consumer complaints, there were 4,315 warranty claims related to the front suspension and members, and 22 vehicles were replaced for goodwill.documents submitted by ford, under request for confidential treatment indicate that the bolts were inadequate for the durability requirements of the vehicle.also, bolts were found to have been inadequately torqued at one or more assembly plants.other factors, such as wax treatment of the frame, contributed to the problem.increased bolt diameter and increased torque apparently corrected the problem.a service bulletin, 96-20-13, was issued to advise dealers of this corrective action.in these documents, ford also reported that a vehicle, equipped for simultaneous catastrophic failure of all pivot bracket fasteners, was evaluated resulting in a slight vehicle pull to one side with no loss of vehicle control.odi has not replicated ford's vehicle testing, however analysis of the design of the front suspension indicates that even if the inboard end of theaxle became disconnected from the frame, the outboard end would remain firmly attached to the leaf spring with two u-bolts.this would retain the wheel in its approximate position, although the wheel alignment would be greatly in error.therefore it IS unlikely that control of the vehicle would be lost.owners reprot many significant noises in the suspension, such as creaking, groaning, clunking, and squeaking, prior to noticing any separation of the axle.this provides warning of the loosening of the bolts to the driver, and should not be ignored.ford has stated that repairs will be covered under the vehicle's bumper warranty.complaints about warranty coverage by a ford dealer should be addressed to ford, or to appropriate state and local agencies.a safety-related defect trend has not been identified at this time 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.
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.