This data is from the NHTSA — the US gov't agency tasked with vehicle safety. Complaints are spread across multiple & redundant categories, & are not organized by problem.
So how do you find out what problems are occurring? For this NHTSA complaint data, the only way is to read through the comments below. Any duplicates or errors? It's not us.
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.
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. Updated 06/06/11 updated 09/19/11
The contact owns a 2006 Ford Five hundred. The contact was driving in reverse at an unknown speed. As the contact applied the brakes, the vehicle would not respond and hit a shopping cart, which in turn the cart hit another vehicle. 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 experienced an increase in stopping distance. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where the contact was told that the rear brake pads would need to be replaced as the pads and rotors had worn out. The vehicle was repaired. The failure mileage was 15,000 and the current mileage was 16,000. Updated 05/24/11 updated 08/10/11
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.
2006 Ford Five hundred. Consumer writes regarding premature pad and rotor wear 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.
- East Hartford, CT, USA
Search CarComplaints.com for these popular complaint phrases...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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+. 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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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 updated 12/17/08.
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.
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?
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
A D V E R T I S E M E N T S
- Springfield, IL, USA