2002 Ford F-450 SD
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Ford › F-450 SD › 2002
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2002 Ford F-450 SD. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
6 recalls name the 2002 Ford F-450 SD. 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.
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)
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford F-450 sd. The contact stated that the driver and passenger side power windows failed to go up and down. Also, the dome lighting failed to turn on and there was an abnormal clicking noise. The contact called a local dealer (harrisonburg ford, 3155 s main st, harrisonburg, va 22801) and was informed that there were no recalls on the vehicle. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified and referred the contact to nhtsa. The failure mileage was 45,000.
TL* the contact owns a 2002 ford F-450 sd. The contact stated that the fuel tank liner eroded and caused the vehicle to stall. The failure was recurring. the contact was not given a reason for the failure, but the contact stated that he believed that steel was being used to manufacturer the fuel tank and was causing the fuel tank to rust and erode prematurely. the vehicle was not recently repaired. the vin was not available. The failure mileage was 90,000 and the current mileage ws 103,000.
I'm currently in kenya volunteering and don't have my old bill of sale with me but will happily provide it upon my return to the states. I could give an official personal information that they could then use to look up the vin if they wished. I was driving down the road when my truck started running rough and lost all power while towing a heavy 24' trailer. The truck was able to be driven to a mechanic where he told me that the tank had delaminated and clogged the fuel pump. Luckily I was able to get the truck pulled over and off the road and have since sold the vehicle. I have read online of countless other individuals with the tank delamination problem and neither ford mo. Co. Or nhtsa has done anything about this issue... If you were to call rob barber- head of purchasing for the brickman group, I would bet that his company has had 100 trucks affected by this issue that ford refuses to make the recall on and thus not warrant. It's a safety issue because the defect could leave you powerless wherever you may be (railroad tracks or going over the ben franklin bridge). I figured something would be done and didn't report it at the time because I saw lawyers were beginning to get involved but here we still have no concrete solution other than the american people who buy american paying thousands to fix a company of whom they bailed out less than two years ago.
Tl*the contact owns a 2002 ford F450. the contact stated that the material in the fuel tank has detached from the inner structure of the tank. the material was in the fuel injector and caused the vehicle to stall and shuts off intermittently while driving 65 mph. the contact has taken the vehicle to the dealer to replace the fuel tank, fuel pump, fuel sender, fuel filters, and the fuel injectors. the repairs have remedied the failure. the contact stated that the vehicle could have caused a crash to occur when it stalled. The failure mileage was unknown.
I own a 2002 ford F450 that I rely heavily on in my small lawn maintenance business. when that truck doesn't run, I don't earn any money and in fact I am in the red. I have discovered through the briefest of on-line searches though that I am only one of thousands who have run in to the problem I'm having now. my truck recently failed during the workday and the cause was diagnosed as a rusty (some are saying delaminated) fuel tank, which along with several related parts had to be replaced for a total cost of over $4200. in the middle of a recession that's giving small business owners the fight of their lives, I had to lose 2 days of work on top of a huge chunk of cash. and as IS also true with the stories reported by other ford owners, I did not use any bio-diesel fuels in my truck. because my livelihood depends on it, I have made every effort to keep this truck in first rate working condition. this gas tank did not fail because of anything I did or didn't do. I want ford to man up and take responsibility for this faulty part, issue a recall, and reimburse me for the cost of repairs. the work on my truck was done by apple ford on stanford blvd in columbia md on 8/18/09. *Tr updated 09/03/09.*jb
In august of 2007 5 of the 8 ambulances in our municipal fleet began to stall and loose power and not be able to get over 35-40 mph. We found the fuel filters full of silver flakes. After removing the fuel tank we found the lining of the fuel tank flaking off. Even though these units were out of warranty ford paid 50% to replace the tanks, fuel pumps and sending units. today 2 of the same units began to experience the same drivable problem. This time we found rust particles in the fuel filter housing and the filter plugged with these rust particles. After removing the fuel tank we found the bottom half of the fuel tank completely covered with rust. These units never get below a half tank of fuel. We have tested our diesel fuel and the samples have come back from the lab normal. We also replaced the filters on the other 3 units that had tanks replaced last august and found the filters plugged with rust also. We have a total about 40 diesel vehicles in our fleet and these 5 vehicles are the only ones experiencing a problem. We cut open filters in other diesel vehicles in our fleet and found no problems. This presents a safety issue with vehicles that potentially could fail while transporting patients. the affected vehicles are 2002-2003 ford F40 with 7.3 diesel engines. *tr
7.3 diesel fuel line, between hose need steering box and fuel filter at top front of engine, rusted causing a fuel leak, may be fuel return line
When stopping at a light and attempting to accelerate vehicle hesitated for about 4 seconds. *Ak
Front pasenger compartment floorboard heats up to 160+ degrees when in hilly or mountanious area of driving. Pasenger unable to keep feet on floor board due to heat. F450 10 cyl gasoline engine motorhome. Ford dealer states "common complaint for this engine & vehichle" no remedy offered.*ak
When depressing the brakes pedal went all the way to the floor before stopping. the consumer took the vehicle to the dealer for inspection. *ak the booster was replaced, but nothing changed. the consumer tried other vehicles at two different dealers and the vehicle displayed the same problem. as soon as one applied the brakes, they would lock up and there would be no friction to turn the wheels on and the computer would think that the vehicle was stopped. *sc
Having been a driver of limousine coaches for a number of years, I question the safety of the perimiter seating arrangement in this type of vehicle. I feel that in the event of an emergency stop or a crash, numerous injuries could result. this type of vehicle IS used extensivly where alcohol IS a factor and people are relaxed an not too concerned about personal safety. if feel that a forward seating arrangement IS much safer and this type of seating should be made mandatory on all limo coaches.*ak
While driving the vehicle at an undetermined speed the vehicle stalled. the consumer took the vehicle to a mechanic. *nm
Failure of clutch master cylinder and slave cylinder. Repeated problem. Vehicle looses all clutch control, causing uncontrolled movement while attempting to get the engine to stall. Almost crashed into innocent vehicle.*ak
Consumer states that gas tank IS fractured causing fuel to leak large amounts onto the ground. the vehicle shows no warning. dealer IS aware. Please provide more information. mr
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.
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.
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.