Bulletins
| Bulletin | Bulletin date | Replacement Bulletin | Item no. | Summary | Added |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE - DELIVERY - HOSES, LINES/PIPING, AND FITTINGS | |||||
| 15532 | 01/01/2002 | 630018 | Information on vehicles exhibitng fuel line damage due to pinching/squeezing of the fuel return line. *tt | 04/11/2002 | |
| FUEL SYSTEM, OTHER | |||||
| 0398 | 05/12/2003 | 10002780 | Malfunction indicator lamp (mil) illumination with diagnostic trouble codes p0442, p0455, p0456, p0457, p1442 or check fuel cap lamp illuminated with diagnostic trouble code p0457. *tt | 09/17/2003 | |
Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| FUEL SYSTEM, DIESEL - STORAGE - TANK ASSEMBLY | |||
| 05/28/2003 | 1 | ||
| While driving fuel tank started leaking. dealer notified. please provide additional information.*ak | |||
| FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE | |||
| 06/12/2011 | 100000 | ||
| Tl- the contact owns a 2002 ford ranger. the contact stated the fuel lines on the vehicle dried rotted and broke. the contact smelt gasoline and took the vehicle to the dealer and had to have all the fuel lines replaced. the vin was unknown. the failure mileage and current mileages were 100,000. | |||
| 03/12/2011 | 85238 | ||
| 2002 ford ranger xlt, 4.0l, diificult fueling truck, gasoline just spirts back out of the refueling nozzle even on the slowest gas pump setting, reading several other complaints of the same problem, this is also an environmental issue due to all the excess gasoline running out of the nozzle. the venting system is defective. | |||
| FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE - DELIVERY | |||
| 07/28/2002 | 1 | 06/01/2002 | |
| No summary listed for above vehicle. *ak | |||
| 11/05/2001 | 1 | 09/01/2001 | |
| After filling gas tank, vehicle was driven approximately nine miles and went from a full tank to less than a half tank of gas. vehicle was covered in gasoline. vehicle was towed to nearest dealership for repair. after review of nhtsa web site identified that this is not an isolated incident. concerns were raised with repairing dealership as well as selling dealership. requested failure analysis of failed part to determine root cause of failure, informed that dealerships do not have personnel trained to do this. informed dealerships that i do not feel vehicle is safe and would like them to take the vehicle back due to it only being 35 days old and 1700 miles, told them that i would consider the purchase of a different ford vehicle. was informed that ford does not have a buy back program and any negotiation would have to be dont with regional ford rep. waited until 12/11 to her from rep and she was in a meeting and told me she would call me back. after not hearing from rep for over a week i began to leave her voice mail and still did not get a return call. continued to call customer relations line and dealership and still did not hear anything on my concern. finally heard from ford rep on 12/15 and was offered and esp 5 yrs 75k miles, informed rep this was unacceptable due to the length of my time that was wasted on this issue. rep informed me that there is not a problem with the fuel line on the ranger, i informed rep that there are other documented cases of this on the nhtsa web site. ford rep became defensive and ended up hanging up on me. while waiting to hear from this rep i requested a dsb application and it took three requests to finally get one, this took from 12/21 until 01/16 to recieve, never recieved a phone call from dealership after requesting dsb app as informed by customer line that i would. currently in process of submitting dsp app. problem unresolved pending results of dsb. *ak | |||
| FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE - FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM | |||
| 01/05/2003 | 16000 | 3 | 12/27/2003 |
| This vehicle is unsafe at high speeds. recently i bought a used 2002 ford ranger xlt, w/ 4.0 liter engine, and i noted the 125 mph speedometer. last evening an 18 wheeler cut into my lane and i quickly accelerated hitting about 90 mph on the interstate to avoid being crushed. however just as i was clearing the front end of the semi the engine began to faulter and the vehicle began to slow. pressing on the accelerator didn't increase vehicle speed or engine rpm. i was scared out of my wits. i called the dealership that night and they agreed to look at the vehicle. which they later deferred on (basically they knew of the defect). after talking to several service department reps at the dealership i was told the fuel ejectors are designed to cut out at high speeds. i pressed further and talked to other dealerships to find out the vehicle has been deteremined unsafe at high speeds by ford, so this safety feature was incorporated in the vehicle. i got little positive responses when i asked why a)the speedomoter went to 125 mph (noting that oler vehichles manufactured in the mid to late 1980's only had 85 mph speedometers) b)why am i paying several thousand dolars for a 4.0 liter engine and c) why is this unsafe condition not disclosed anywhere or at any time during my purchase? i asked if fatty foods are bad for me would i pay full price for a 2 lb. steak and only be served a 6 oz. one? he had no response. *ak | |||
| 10/02/2002 | 06/01/2002 | ||
| My husband and i were driving on the interstate. my husband attempted to overtake a slow moving vehicle. he had to accelerate between 80 and 85 to overtake in fast moving traffic. our vehicle acted like it was starved of fuel and was not responding. this put us in a very dangerous situation as there was other traffic on the road. we contacted our local ford dealership. they test drove the vehicle and stated that they could not find a defect. we expressed our concern that the sudden loss of power puts us in an unsafe overtaking situation. we were invited to take a test drive with a technician. we expressed our concern for the safety of the tecnician and ourselves during a test drive a high speeds. the dealership and ford manufacturing stated there was nothing wrong with the vehicle. finally having faxed our concerns to the dealership on10/14/02, we were offered another test drive with a service technician on 10/15/02. during the test drive at speeds not exceeding 65 miles per hour, the technician explained that the vehicle has a rev limiter which is governor which stops all acceleration at 85 mph. we feel that this inability to go above 85 miles per hour places in a very vulnerable position. the truck will not be able to respond in an emergency or avoidance situation. this places everyones lives at risk. it seems that ford motor company is the only one who has decided how fast their trucks should go and have not taken into consideration the danger that they a placing us in. with regard to the air conditioning unit, we have experienced the following: the unit cycles on and off approx. every 12 seconds. this causes the truck to surge each time the unit comes on as there is a loss of power to the engine. the unit also makes a loud clicking sound as it comes on. the constant surging of the engine makes for a very uncomfortable ride. the ford delearship and ford motor company do not consider this a problem. mr | |||
| 06/17/2002 | 1 | 11/01/2001 | |
| As i was driving on an interstate highway, i attempted to pass another vehicle. the other vehicle sped up; i slowed; he slowed; obviously a game of some kind was being played that i wanted no part of, so i tried to get away and when i hit 85mph, my vehicle ceased to accelerate and began acting like it was starved for gas. i spoke to my dealer and ford motor company and learned that the vehicle has a rev limiter which is apparently a governor that stops all acceleration at 85mph. as far as i have been able to determine, ford is the only vehicle made that has such a limiter and it cannot be removed or altered. when i asked ford why, i was told it was for my own good since speed limits are maximum of 70-75 mph across america . i then asked why the speedometer went to 120 mph and they said the vehicle was designed for it but ford chose to not let drivers exceed 85. i asked why ford felt compelled to hold a driver to 85 when every other manufacturer did not and how safe was it to allow me to go only 10mph over the maximum speed when that also meant i could go 55mph over in an area posted for 30mph. same answer--for my own good. one of the many problems with this is that in rare emergency occasions (such as passing an 18 wheeler and someone ahead pulling out from a side road coming in my direction--there are probably better examples), i may be past the point of being able to slow down or another car may be behind me, and we all get killed because ford decided their cars should go slower than every comparable vehicle on the road. i could understand all cars topping off at 85, but not only one--and not one that has every indication it would go faster in an emergency and ford never telling you anything to the contrary until the emergency occurs. this may be the first, or only, complaint you ever receive about a car going too slow, but it was a real problem and i found it extremely frustrating and dangerous.*ak | |||
| FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE - FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM - FUEL RAIL | |||
| 01/22/2007 | 55400 | 2 | 05/20/2002 |
| Slowing down while coming up to a signal light, as i made the right turn the truck suddenly stalled and the power steering and brakes became hard to handle. the truck however started up right away but had a loss of power for about half a mile to my home. after turning the truck off and starting it up again, the truck ran fine until the other day when it stalled and lost power again. took the truck to the dealer and they said that they could not duplicate the problem. reading all the similar complaints about the ford rangers has me thinking that something is definitely wrong with the ford rangers. *nm | |||