Bulletins
| Bulletin | Bulletin date | Replacement Bulletin | Item no. | Summary | Added |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SERVICE BRAKES, AIR | |||||
| 0710 | 11/28/2007 | 0710 | 10023294 | Certain 2005 through 2007 fwd and awd ford five hundred, freestyle and mercury montego vehicles - rear brake wear. also have an owner's letter. *nj updated 1/25/08. *nj | 11/08/2007 |
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - FOUNDATION COMPONENTS - DIFFERENTIAL PROPORTIONAL VALVE | |||||
| 08-4-11 | 03/01/2008 | 10024829 | Traction control lamp on--no dtc's present, or dtc p1889 in differential electronic module (dem). *nj | 05/30/2008 | |
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - FOUNDATION COMPONENTS - DISC - PADS | |||||
| 0759 | 10021463 | Rear brake drag, noise, dust, and/or premature pad wear. *kb | 04/27/2007 | ||
Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| SERVICE BRAKES | |||
| 12/07/2010 | |||
| Tl-the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. the contact stated that while driving approximately 50 mph and having to brake abruptly, there was a hesitation in braking response. the vehicle was taken to the dealer for diagnosis where they advised him that they were unable to diagnose the failure. the vehicle was repaired and three sets of rear brake pads were installed on the vehicle. in addition, the low beam headlights started to dim. the contact inspected the vehicle himself and noticed that the pig tail socket had shortened. the pig tail socket was replaced. the failure mileage was unknown. the current mileage was approximately 125,000. the vin was unavailable. kmj | |||
| 12/07/2010 | |||
| Tl-the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. the contact stated that while driving approximately 50 mph and having to brake abruptly, the brakes seemed to engage fast enough. the vehicle was taken to the dealer for diagnosis. they advised him that they were unable to diagnose any failure. the vehicle was repaired for three sets of rear brake pads. in addition, the low beam headlights had started to dim. the contact inspected the vehicle his self and noticed that the pig tail socket had a short. the vehicle was repaired for the pig tail socket. the failure mileage was unknown. the current mileage was approximately 125,000. the vin was unavailable. tb | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, ELECTRIC | |||
| 01/11/2009 | 27158 | 1 | |
| On jan 8, 2009, i had traveled approximately 1050 miles from oklahoma to ohio. while in ohio, 6 inches of snow had fallen, and the roads were slick with snow and ice. in preparing for my return trip on jan 11, the traction control and abs warning lights came on, and there was a significant change in control and braking in the vehicle. upon driving further, the transmission warning light came on, and the vehicle went into reverse with a huge bang sound and vibration. the vehicle's cvt transmission would not change gears in drive when the transmission light was illuminated. upon turning the vehicle off, and back on, all lights would go off, and come back on within 5 minutes. after the 6th restart, the check engine light came on as well. the transmission light, after a few restarts, did not come back on. however, the abs, traction control and check engine lights stayed on for approximately 650 miles. after that time, all lights went out, but the rpms went from 2000 to 3500 on their own while the vehicle was in cruise control on a flat road. that corrected itself about 100 miles later. upon taking the vehicle to a dealer on my return, they told me that since no lights were on, and the vehicle was now acting normally, they could not duplicate the problem. my factory warranty expires in 14 days, and i am not sure if i'll be able to duplicate the problem to the dealer by that time. the service department blamed the malfunction on the cold weather and the snow, but the awd vehicle with traction control was, to my knowledge, manufactured to deal with snow and cold weather. one does not need awd, traction control or abs during dry, warm days. *tr | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC | |||
| 08/20/2011 | |||
| The instrument cluster checks normal on most start-ups, but unpredictably all systems light up showing failure of abs, air bags, traction control, electrical systems, see a mechanic, cruise control and speedometer quits working. the warning lights may stay lit for 2 to 200 miles. and no speedometer. auto zone and my mechanic are baffled and frustrated after checking battery charging circuit connections and grounds. its obviously not safe driving without knowing your speed or if there is a major hazard looming-----like fire. | |||
| 04/01/2009 | 73000 | ||
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. the contact stated the brake pedal needed to be depressed to the floor in order to stop the vehicle. the vehicle was taken to an authorized dealer where they attempted unsuccessfully to diagnose the failure twenty times. the manufacturer was made aware of the failure. the vehicle was not repaired. the current mileage was 85,600 and the failure mileage was 73,000. | |||
| 04/01/2009 | 73000 | ||
| Tl- the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. the contact noticed that when applying pressure to the brakes, he would have to press them down to the floor before the vehicle would become idled. the dealer made twenty attempts to duplicate the failure. the manufacturer was notified and made aware of the failure. no repairs were performed. the current mileages were 85,600 and the failure mileages were 73,000. bw | |||
| 10/10/2010 | 14000 | ||
| Tl-the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. while driving in reverse at an unknown speed the contact applied the brakes but the vehicle did not stop until it crashed. the contact stated that the vehicle experienced an increased stopping distance. a police report was filed but no injuries were reported. the failure was not diagnosed. approximately four months later while driving at an unknown speed the contact applied the brakes and again experienced an increased stopping distance. the vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where the contact was told that the rear brake pads needed to be replaced. the vehicle was repaired. the failure mileage was 14,000 and the current mileage was 16,000. sm. | |||
| 01/11/2011 | 23927 | ||
| 1, purchased may 2006 2, july 2007 letter from ford extending warranty on rear brakes. 3,may 2008 ford replaced rear brakes under recall # 07n10n. 23,927 miles on car. 4, rear brakes replaced 50,085 miles 5, the brakes replaced under recall were the same poor quality as they replaced. 6, dealer offered no help. 7, ford said that all they will do. 8,i feel they should replace the brakes with better brakes that the poor quality they used on the recall. | |||
| 07/15/2010 | 1 | ||
| 2006 ford five hundred. consumer writes regarding premature pad and rotor wear *tgw the consumer stated she heard a grinding noise and/or dragging noise coming from the rear wheels. the left and right wheels needed new brakes and rotors. the consumer stated an extended warranty had been issued for the brakes in 2007, because ford knew there was a problem. also, the blower motor behind the glove box had to be replaced and the rear window defroster was defective and had to be replaced as well. the gasket between the crank shaft support housing was replaced. *jb | |||
| 03/20/2010 | 31796 | ||
| Rear brakes prematurely wear down to less than 2mm of pad reamining after 11k miles | |||
| 02/10/2010 | 80000 | 1 | |
| Traveling south on i-26 across the tn/nc border through sam's gap on a snowy day led me to drive very slow and come to a stop at the truck information area at the top of the hill. when i saw a large transfer truck pull out onto the road and proceed down the hill i felt it was safe to follow. this truck was moving a lot faster than i was and i was covering the brake and tapping it occasionally down the steep incline, but there was ice on the road and when i tapped the brakes the car began to spin and hit the concrete median on all 4 corners of the vehicle with pretty strong force. the seat belt correctly locked down on the driver side, but the air bag did not deploy properly. the air bag light was illuminated and i could smell like something was burning. i assumed this was the compound used in the air bag. when the police arrived, i was given a citation for driving too fast for the conditions and another because the insurance recently lapsed. the tow truck driver took the car to the bottom of the hill (driving too fast for the conditions by the way) and declared the car drivable since there were no fluids leaking and the car would still crank. the fuel system had to be reset, because it correctly shut off due to the impact. the seatbelt was locked down completely and would not release. since there was no snow beyond the sam's gap area, i decided to drive home and park the car because i did not have money for a hotel or for additional towing and the person at the nc welcome center said we were experiencing blizzard conditions. so rather than freeze to death or ask someone else to put themselves in danger to come get me i drove him with the airbag / seatbelt lights alarming. the body shop person i spoke with said that i needed to determine what is wrong with the restraint/airbag system before they can work on it because of the risk of the system deploying without warning. *tr | |||
| 10/26/2009 | 1 | ||
| I have a 2006 ford 500 the dealer replaced my rear brakes at 14,000 miles n/c. at 28,000 i paid for both rear & front brakes rotors and calipers, at 52,000 miles rear & front pads i was just told at 76,000 i need the works again. *tr | |||
| 09/09/2009 | 29632 | 1 | |
| I own a 2006 ford five hundred which i purchased used with approx. 12000 miles. prior to the purchase ford recalled it and put new brake pads and rotors on the rear. it now has 29000 miles on it and the rear pads are worn out and ford says the rotors need replacing. the brakes drag in the rear. ford says they are not responsible. i have researched on line and found a large number of complaints identical to mine. this is a manufacturer design problem and a safety hazard since there are reports of the brakes wearing completely into the rotor and locking causing accidents. the owner has no clue since they wear out so fast. ford should be held accountable for their design flaw before there are deaths caused by this flaw. *tr | |||
| 05/07/2009 | 22000 | 1 | |
| I have had to have the rear brakes changed twice since owning my 2006 ford 500 since it was new. i have 45,000 miles on the vehicle. front brakes are still 75% good. i believe ford has a design flaw and should have a national recall. *tr | |||
| 06/08/2007 | 26822 | 1 | |
| In june 2007, my wife took our 2006 ford five hundred (sel) to the local dealer for an oil change. she was informed at the time that she needed to have the rear brake pads replaced. the car had only 26,800 miles on it. i was in disbelief and told her not to allow the work. i took the car to an auto service center that i trusted the next day. sure enough, the pads needed to be replaced. i had them do the work. i then complained to the local dealer that this wear rate was unacceptable and cars normally go significantly longer before needing rear pad replacement. i received a letter from them stating that the brake wear on your vehicle is considered to be within normal parameters . i knew this was not true. in july, i received a letter from ford motor co. stating that they were extending the warranty on the rear pads to 36,000. i received a refund from the dealer. just recently at 68,584 miles, we had to have the pads replaced once again. i don't think this is acceptable wear for these pads. it cost us $227.01 to have them replaced. my wife uses this car for business, so it looks like we'll need to plan on replacing these pads every year. interestingly, the front pads have not worn out yet. the second problem we have had is with the tie rod end links which needed to be replaced at 53,671 miles. i have never had to perform this replacement on any other vehicle i've owned, many have gone well over 100,000 miles. i believe there is a design problem with the car in this respect. *tr | |||
| 04/01/2008 | 1 | ||
| There was a recall on the brakes/rotors on this vehicle. i have had them replaced 2 years straight and now this is the third year and the same problem is developing. the first replacement was paid for by ford. a year later, crown ford informed me that i would have to pay, but reduced the cost by only charging me for parts, which was over $300.00+. upon getting a front-end alignment, i was told by firestone that the rear rotors will soon need to be replaced. there is a problem here with this car and brakes and i feel i am being mislead. my ford 2006 was purchased in december 2005. *tr | |||
| 02/09/2009 | 29000 | ||
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. the contact heard a grinding noise coming from the vehicle. a mechanic stated that the brake pads were grinding into the rotors. the contact believes the brakes are defective because of the low mileage on the vehicle. the vehicle will be repaired at his expense. the dealer stated that the vehicle was out of warranty and no recall was available. the contact feels that a recall should be issued. he discovered several other consumers who were experiencing failures with the brake pads and rotors with such low mileages on their vehicles. the failure mileage was 29,000 and current mileage was 30,544. | |||
| 05/05/2008 | 23000 | 3 | 09/21/2006 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. ever since the vehicle was purchased brand new in 2006, the contact has been experiencing brake failure. in addition, while driving 55 mph, the vehicle decelerates unexpectedly. the vehicle was taken to the dealer a total of six times and they replaced the throttle and changed the brakes each time. the vehicle failed completely and was towed to her residence. the failure mileage was 23,000 and current mileage was 45,922. updated 3/3/09 *cn the air bag illuminated when a passenger sat in the seat. the shifter was hard to move. the front motor mount was broken. updated 03/04/09. *jb | |||
| 10/20/2008 | 1 | ||
| 2006 ford five hundred, car has 40,000 miles and i have replaced the rear brake pads twice so far, also the rotors have been turned and in need of being changed as of right now. many other people are having the same problems with this vehicle. *tr | |||
| 10/11/2008 | 37000 | 1 | |
| At 37,000 miles (mostly freeway miles) i was getting a loud grinding sound from my rear brakes. discovered that the rear pads were totally worn away and the rotors were ruined. the mechanic said it looked as if the calipers were not opening properly, causing a continual drag of the pads against the rotors. the front pads and rotors also needed replacing as they were worn beyond the point of being resurfaced. total bill = $1,200! i later found out ford had known about a problem with the brake pads, but i did not receive any notice from them. *tr | |||
| 07/05/2008 | 40000 | 1 | |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. while driving between 10-15 mph, the vehicle would make a scraping sound. the vehicle was taken in for routine service and rear brake failure was discovered. the pads and rotors had to be replaced. tsb number 10021463 (service brakes, hydraulic) was referenced. the contact was informed that his vehicle was out of warranty. the failure mileage was 40,000. updated 12-15-08 *bf updated 12/17/08. *jb | |||
| 06/01/2008 | 23324 | 1 | |
| I took my ford 500 in for the rear brake recall,they replaced the pads ,but the rotors were within limits,so they turned them down. now when it comes time for normal brake replacement,i will probably have to replace the rotors on my own. in other words, ford only gave me a set of pads,which sure is a cheap way out. *tr | |||
| 05/18/2008 | 5500 | 1 | |
| The new car rear brakes have excessive wear on the rotors and when wet the brake pads expand causing the car to jerk excessively when brakes are applied. this condition is extremely excessive at very very slow speeds. when pulling out of a parking spot hours after a rain the excessive brakes can even cause neck pain. my concern is that even though i know ford will replace these brake pads as promised: i am very concerned that the rotors that have very excessive wear will be tuned and not replaced. it appears to the naked eye that a quarter of an inch has been worn off of the rotors, and the car only has 12500 miles on it. ford is aware of the brake problem, but is waiting for the excessive wear to replace the pads. what should i do? *tr | |||
| 05/08/2007 | 26800 | 1 | 09/01/2006 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. the contact stated that the vehicle's rear brake discs locked up and began to grind. the discs were replaced, but the contact stated that there were no previous signs of possible brake failure. a local repair shop repaired two rotors. the mechanic stated that it is a common failure for this type of vehicle. ford acknowledges the failure but will not issue a recall or provide restitution. the engine size was unknown. the current and failure mileages were 26,800. updated 06/15/07 *tr | |||
| 12/05/2005 | 119 | 2 | 12/05/2005 |
| Brakes drag causing the car to jerk, grasp when stopping. *jb | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - ANTILOCK | |||
| 12/12/2006 | 3000 | 0 | 06/29/2006 |
| I bought my 2006 ford 500 in june of 2006. i had a problem with the rear brakes getting very dusty (on rims), so i went to the ford dealership and asked about this problem. at the time the answer was, those are the brakes which the manufacturer installed and there is nothing we can do about it. so, i had to accept this answer and go on about my business. at 12000 miles (december 2006) i took the car in for an oil change. when they were driving my car in for the oil change they noticed a squeeling noise coming from the rear wheels. i guess they checked the rear wheels and found excessive wear on the rear brakes. anyhow, now they have changed and repaired the brakes. i was told when i picked up the car that there was an service bulletin on the brake problem. | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - FOUNDATION COMPONENTS - DISC - PADS | |||
| 06/20/2006 | 1 | 100 | 06/15/2006 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. according to the dealer, the brake pads rub the rotors and heat the pads and rotors during stopping. the contact noticed the failure while driving 30 mph. the vehicle was taken to the dealer once and they acknowledged the failure and extended the warranty. the current mileage was 5,800 and failure mileage was 1. | |||
| 07/01/2007 | 30000 | 90 | 10/02/2006 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. the contact heard a grinding noise coming from the rear of the vehicle when he shifted into reverse. the rear brakes would also continuously grind. the dealer stated that the rear brakes and rotors caused the failure. as of october 24, 2007, the dealer had not repaired the vehicle updated 11/14/07 | |||
| 06/30/2007 | 37249 | 1 | 04/28/2006 |
| Had to replace rear left and right brake disc pad and rotors @ 37,249 miles. *tr. received 12/27/07 64200. updated 12/12/07 | |||
| 08/15/2007 | 38000 | 1 | 05/20/2006 |
| This is in regard to a 2006 ford five hundred with rear brake grinding. i received a notice ( 07n10)from ford motor company july 2007 . it stated that my vehicle may have had direct exposure to moisture for an extended period that may have caused the brake pads to swell and create a slight drag condition. low levels of brake drag could lead to premature brake pad wear. at 36,000 miles the rear brakes began to grind . the rear brake pads and rotors were replaced at no charge . when i brought the auto to the dealer for repairs the service manager told me the front and rear brakes needed to be replaced because it was an all wheel drive vehicle. when the appointment was made to have the repairs completed at the dealer i was insured all the parts were available. to my surprise the dealer did not have all the needed parts to make the repairs. fortunately another dealer in the area had the needed parts. the dealer furnished a loaner car for 5 days . when i picked up the car only the rear brakes were replaced. if the cause of the failure is in fact moisture then why wouldn't all the pads need to be replaced? *tr | |||
| 04/20/2007 | 23000 | 1 | |
| Rear brakes went out at 23,000 miles. needed new rotors and pads. ford makes disposable rotors, in that they can't be turned or resurfaced. they are throw away rotors, and i had to buy all new ones at $100 a piece. why did rear go out before front? why does ford make disposable parts? don't know, but it is a shame and a rip off.*ak | |||
| 01/18/2007 | 3000 | 2 | 11/30/2005 |
| Rear brake pads and rotors too small and wear out before 10,000 miles. at 3,000 miles i informed the dealer that rear wheels were collecting large amounts of brake dust. service advisor found no problems with brakes at that time. ten months later, i was informed by service advisor that the rear brake rotors and pads were designed too small and the pads and rotors were wearing out prematurely. service advisor said they they were replacing rear pads and rotors on numerous ford five hundreds prior to 10,000 miles. service advisor said that ford would pay the cost if vehicle was less than 12 months old. *jb | |||
| 09/15/2006 | 17000 | 1 | 09/15/2006 |
| Dt*: the contact stated the brake rotors and pads wore out quickly. the contact expressed there was too much brake dust in the rear brakes. the service dealer did not find any problem. | |||
| 02/02/2006 | 1600 | 1 | 11/30/2005 |
| Dt*: the contact stated the rear brake pads were disintegrating; this was noticed while washing the vehicle. the dealership and manufacturer determined it was a cosmetic problem. the dealership suggested the contact purchase a plastic shield to keep the dust off of the brake pads. the contact cleaned the dust off of the brake pads and stated it takes 20 minutes on each side. updated 3/3/2006 - the consumer believes that the brakes may not be releasing all the way. *nm | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - FOUNDATION COMPONENTS - DISC - ROTOR | |||
| 06/20/2006 | 1 | 100 | 06/15/2006 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. according to the dealer, the brake pads rub the rotors and heat the pads and rotors during stopping. the contact noticed the failure while driving 30 mph. the vehicle was taken to the dealer once and they acknowledged the failure and extended the warranty. the current mileage was 5,800 and failure mileage was 1. | |||
| 07/01/2007 | 30000 | 90 | 10/02/2006 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2006 ford five hundred. the contact heard a grinding noise coming from the rear of the vehicle when he shifted into reverse. the rear brakes would also continuously grind. the dealer stated that the rear brakes and rotors caused the failure. as of october 24, 2007, the dealer had not repaired the vehicle updated 11/14/07 | |||
| 06/30/2007 | 37249 | 1 | 04/28/2006 |
| Had to replace rear left and right brake disc pad and rotors @ 37,249 miles. *tr. received 12/27/07 64200. updated 12/12/07 | |||
| 04/20/2007 | 23000 | 1 | |
| Rear brakes went out at 23,000 miles. needed new rotors and pads. ford makes disposable rotors, in that they can't be turned or resurfaced. they are throw away rotors, and i had to buy all new ones at $100 a piece. why did rear go out before front? why does ford make disposable parts? don't know, but it is a shame and a rip off.*ak | |||
| 06/06/2007 | 21000 | 1 | 10/29/2005 |
| Within four days of oil/lube and filter the rear brakes and rotors needed to be completely replaced on the 2005 ford 500 with 20,000 miles. it cost $375, not covered under warranty or by dealer. *ak | |||
| 09/15/2006 | 17000 | 1 | 09/15/2006 |
| Dt*: the contact stated the brake rotors and pads wore out quickly. the contact expressed there was too much brake dust in the rear brakes. the service dealer did not find any problem. | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - FOUNDATION COMPONENTS - DRUM - DRUM | |||
| 06/06/2007 | 21000 | 1 | 10/29/2005 |
| Within four days of oil/lube and filter the rear brakes and rotors needed to be completely replaced on the 2005 ford 500 with 20,000 miles. it cost $375, not covered under warranty or by dealer. *ak | |||