2001 Ford F-450 SD
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Ford › F-450 SD › 2001
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2001 Ford F-450 SD. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
9 recalls name the 2001 Ford F-450 SD. Newest first.
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.
Certain cequent 90 degree 7-WAY right angle adaptors sold by distributors in tow packages for aftermarket sales to tow 5TH wheel rv travel trailers. due to incorrect wiring of the harness, the trailer lights may not operate properly.
If the trailer lights are not working properly, a vehicle crash can occur.
All of the defective tow packages are still at the distributor level and have not been sold to any consumers.
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)
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.
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: trucks equipped with commercial truck tires that have steel cords in the tire sidewall. the valve stems may have been torn or damaged during assembly and could leak causing sidewall damage.
If not maintained, could result in a sidewall zipper failure. a zipper failure during inflation of a damaged tire could result in injury to someone near the tire.
Dealers will inspect the valve stems for leakage, and will replace both the valve stem and the tire if leakage IS present. owner notification began march 28, 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 would quit pulling. Had to pull to shoulder and shut off. After fifteen or twenty minutes, it would start and run fairly normal for a few miles and then do the same thing over again. This went on until I got to my destination which was a couple hundred miles. *Tr
2001 ford F450 diesel fuel tank liner failed and resulted in fuel delivery while towing. This caused 10 mph speed on the interstate while pulling a horse trailer. Just spent $1800.00 for new tank and was told that it would happen again. this problem should have been resolved with the new tank and not just installing another one that will fail also. *Tr
Jan 23, 2007-the truck was taken to the shop due to missing while driving and stalling out. diagnostics were done, changed the fuel filter and replace cam shaft sensor. feb. 12, 2007 - same issues missing in engine and stalled out. Taken to auto repair shop . Cleaned all cables and charged batteries. march 2, 2007 - missing in engine and stalls out. diagnostics time 60 or 65 no power . replace air filter and unstick turbo july 9, 2007- missing in engine and stalling out. taken to shop. diagnostics done. replaced wire assembly and gasket. sept. 12, 2007 - still missing replaced fuel filter whining in shop for state inspection. sept. 24, 2007 - engine missing , while in shop to replace transmission added can of carb cleaner nov. 21, 2008 - missing, stalled on road, would not start towed to the shop , diagnostics done. repair shop did research and found out about problems with fuel tanks peeling and slivering inside which would get in injectors and cause missing and stalling of engine. diagnostics were done. Removed and drained fuel tank, replaced fuel tank added carb cleaner, replaced fuel filter, cleaned fuel pick up filter and lines . *Tr
F450 stake body dump truck started hesitating at all speeds. found out that the diesel fuel gas tanks are delaminating on the inside and clogging the fuel system. this repair costs $2,400. a big truck driving down the road that IS running fine and then all of a suddenly starts to hesitate IS extremely dangerous. ford trucks seem to be the only ones having this problem. I feel ford should be required to recall these trucks and fix the problem for safety purposes. *tr
Our 2001 F-450 diesel truck has lost power. we had the fuel filter changed and had to have the sending unit cleaned out due to sediment in the bottom of the tank from the take peeling. it IS doing it again and I heard of a lot of these diesel trucks having the same problem. this truck only has 90,000 miles on it. I would like reimbursement for this new tank I have to buy which IS $500.00. *Tr
No problems 2 left business ,went 2 blocks fire started 3 5500 dollars in parts, 35 hours in labor time, have detailed receipts of parts replaced. *Jb
My wife put our truck in gear and it took off with her. luckily I had just moved from the back of the vehicle. the clutch did not release the transmission. I had to reach in and shut truck off. *nm
Failure in lining of fuel tank in f series trucks with diesel engines. Lining falls apart sucking into fuel system causing rapid loss of speed and power. I have been having the fuel tank, and assorted fuel components replaced 4 times total that I am aware of. Possibly more as I am only responsible for 2 f series trucks. other mgrs are responsible for more.
Within 2 weeks time, two tires blew out on my ford F-450 business truck. When I called a tire service to fix them out on the road they told me there was a recall on all these tires because of faulty valve stems. Then I found out it was only for all halliburton company tires only. Ford told me it was a general/continental tire problem.*ak
2001 ford F-450 super duty diesel 7.3L fuel tank liner delaminated from tank walls to clog up fuel lines. *nm
The drivers seat belt disengaged, causing the consumer to drive with the seat belt unlocked. *ak the seat belt was repaired three times and failed three times(ongoing problem), the brake problem was repaired three times and failed three times, the front/rear brakes would not disengage on repeated occasions the problem continued, the front and rear tires would shake and or vibrate which was due to a tire defect per dealer. there were flat spots on the tires. (the tires were sold with the vehicle) continental/general *sc
Engine caught fire while the vehicle was parked with the engine off. *ph *jb
While driving, the tire blew out. upon inspection, tread was gone and there was a huge hole in the sidewall. there was only 6000 miles on this tire. tires were inspected and pressure checked just a few hours prior to this incident. reported it to firestone when I returned home, asking if there was any problem with this type of tire, but all they did was send a tracking number wt20020819-0000000185. they said they would respond in the next several days. that e-mail was sent on 8/19/02, we have not heard from them since. *Jb ***dimsii ivoq entry posted after 12/12/02 cut-over to artemis****770776
Consumer states that the vehicles tires had two blow outs, due to valve stem that are mad of rubber. consumer feels that the valve stems should be up graded. nlm
Consumer has five trucks and each has general/continental 225/70r 19.5 model lmt 400. tire blowouts at sidewall. no accident or injuries yet, but some very close calls.*ak
When shifting to a lower gear clutch assembly became stuck. Took to dealer, and they replaced clutch slave cylinder. *Ak *yh
When trying to push down emergency brake it would not go down. took to dealer, and they replaced clutch assembly. please provide any further information.*ak
Emergency brake cable assembly broke, manual brake clutch assembly failed on 07/29/02. these components failed while consumer was utilizing components for towing.*ak consumer also states the glow plug sensor failed, the air condition sensor failed.*jb
When slamming on brakes, pedal went to the floor. consumer had to use emergency brake to stop.*ak. consumer stated he rear ended the motorist in front of him, the dealer replaced the master cylinder, but the problem still exists.*jb
When slamming on brake pedal it will go to the floor. consumer had to use emergency brakes. As a result there was a 4 car collision. please provide any further information.*ak
Consumer states while traveling at 30 mph, saw black smoke pouring from under vehicle. consumer drove to dealer, dealer stated the air filter and oil should be changed every 3 days because of the dirt roads, this could cause engine to blow up. nlm *tt
While driving 35 mph, pressure was applied to brake pedal to stop vehicle and the brake pedal fell to the floorboard unexpectedly. driver was unable to bring vehicle to a stop before truck traveled approximately 75 yards and rear-ended a stopped car. dealership has examined vehicle and could not determine cause of the problem. please provide any additional / information / documentation.*ak
Turn signal fails to work properly. Had contacted dealership. Please provide further information.*ak
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
In a december 3, 2007 letter, ford advised nhtsa that it will conduct a safety recall to replace the cam position sensor (cps) in approximately 1.2 million subject vehicles to address reports of engine stalling.a new design cps with improved performance and durability will be installed as a remedy.owner notifications will begin in december 2007. The subject vehicles are durable, full-sized, medium duty trucks commonly used for commercial purposes, rescue/emergency response, and commercial or recreational towing.cps failure IS comparable to unexpectedly turning the key off since the signal it produces IS vital to the electronic engine control system.cps signal loss terminates fuel injection resulting in an engine stall.once stalled, the engine may restart right away, or may restart after a delay (typically 5 to 10 minutes), or may not restart at all.in addition to exposing the driver and other motorists to crash risk due to loss of motive power or vehicle disablement, engine stalling also effects the power assisted steering and braking. Through consumer interviews, odi determined that cps failures occurred without any form of warning, at any vehicle speed (50% at highway speeds), and under any driving condition, such as accelerating.consumers reported that about a third of the vehicles failed to restart, with another third reporting delayed restarting.half the vehicles that did restart experienced another stall on the same or a subsequent drive cycle (before cps replacement) re-exposing those consumers to the risks associated with a stalling event.in their voq reports, half of the odi complainants described difficulty controlling the vehicle due to lose of power assist systems, especially those who were towing at the time of the incident. The one alleged injury incident occurred in an intersection when a subject vehicle stalled while turning across oncoming lanes of traffic.although unsubstantiated, the complainant alleged an injury to a child occupant during odi's interview.the other crash allegations mostly involved low speed, loss of control incidents often caused by lack of power assist; no injuries are reported in these incidents, and property damage, if any, was minimal.consumers also reported other incidents with significant safety risks, such as disablement in a lane or on a shoulder of a high-speed roadway or interstate, or extended disablement in remote areas during severe weather conditions. The population above IS ford's estimate of the 1.4 million subject vehicles produced that are currently registered.the ford complaint and warranty counts noted above are current as of ford's last submission dated june 21, 2007; they do not include F-450, F-550, or econoline counts as these products were not formally within scope of the investigation when failure information was requested.warranty data analysis indicates that about half the claims involved a stall while driving event ( ford's assessment) and that poor cps durability was a longstanding concern.ford reported that the new cps design should meet or exceed their 10 year, 150K mile life expectancy design requirement.
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).
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.
This investigation was opened on certain ford pickup trucks and vans to evaluate the effects of a valve stem ejection (with rapid air loss) and a slow leaking valve stem on vehicle handing.during the investigation, odi evaluated over 1,100 complaints and warranty claims, conducted vehicle dynamic testing on a subject vehicle with the failure mode replicated, interviewed owners, and examined complaint vehicles in the field.the results of the test program indicates the effect of a valve stem ejection on these vehicles IS easily controlled. Further, with a population of almost 900,000 vehicles, having two to four years of exposure, odi IS aware of only 3 minor crashes and IS unaware of any injuries.the small number of crashes relative to the large population of vehicles IS consistent with the testing which was performed. Therefore, this investigation IS closed.see the attached report for full technical details.
This ea was opened based on a response received from ford motor company to an information request (ir) submitted during sq00-018.ford stated in an internal service message that it had changed the steering gear sector shafts and pitman arms installed 1999 model year f-series super duty vehicles on march 22, 1999.ford stated that these design changes were implemented to make improvements in vehicle steering and handling, and that virtually all of the reported fractured sector shafts were the result of extraordinary, possibly multiple, impacts.an engineering analysis closing report IS attached.
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.