IGNITION WIRING FAILED
1996 Dodge RAM 1500
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 1996 Dodge RAM 1500 do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 520.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all RAM 1500 years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
84 reports with mileage · 214 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Power Train. Review the 52 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 46 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 35 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Electrical System complaints
26 reportsI RECEIVED NOTIFICATION FROM NHTSA OF A RECALL FOR MY DODGE RAM TRUCK. I HAVE TRIED SINCE JUNE 11, 2015 TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT WITH CROWNE DODGE OF VENTURA, CALIFORNIA AND HAVE RECEIVED NO RESPONSE. I SPENT 30 MINUTES STANDING IN LINE AT THE DEALERSHIP SERVICES ENTRANCE AND NO LIVE PERSON CAME TO INQUIRE ABOUT MY VISIT. I MAD…
Read full complaint
I RECEIVED NOTIFICATION FROM NHTSA OF A RECALL FOR MY DODGE RAM TRUCK. I HAVE TRIED SINCE JUNE 11, 2015 TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT WITH CROWNE DODGE OF VENTURA, CALIFORNIA AND HAVE RECEIVED NO RESPONSE. I SPENT 30 MINUTES STANDING IN LINE AT THE DEALERSHIP SERVICES ENTRANCE AND NO LIVE PERSON CAME TO INQUIRE ABOUT MY VISIT. I MADE AN ONLINE APPOINTMENT WITH CROWNE DODGE AND RECEIVED AN E-MAIL RESPONSE THEY HAD RECEIVED MY APPOINTMENT REQUEST. I FEEL THIS IS JUST ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO ?DODGE? THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A SAFETY RECALL. 1996 DODGE RAM 1500 2WD SLT [XXX] IGNITION SWITCH AND ELECTRICAL WIRING. RECALL INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR UPDATE 9/15/15*CW
WHEN APPLYING THE TURN SIGNAL, THE SIGNAL DOES NOT ILLUMINATE OR IS ERRATIC OR DOES ALTERNATE OF WHAT IS CHOSEN.
I WENT OUT ON FRIDAY THE 6TH OF FEB.2015. I GOT A COFFEE AT WAWA EVERYTHING WAS FINE I LEFT TO GO TO MY BUDDY'S HOUSE TO HANGOUT AND I STARTED DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD N I NOTICED SMOKE COMING OUT THE VENTS WHEN I WAS DRIVING SO I PULLED OVER CUZ I THOUGHT IT WAS THE HEATER CORE CUZ WHEN THEY GO BAD SMOKE COMES OUT OF THEM SO I'M L…
Read full complaint
I WENT OUT ON FRIDAY THE 6TH OF FEB.2015. I GOT A COFFEE AT WAWA EVERYTHING WAS FINE I LEFT TO GO TO MY BUDDY'S HOUSE TO HANGOUT AND I STARTED DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD N I NOTICED SMOKE COMING OUT THE VENTS WHEN I WAS DRIVING SO I PULLED OVER CUZ I THOUGHT IT WAS THE HEATER CORE CUZ WHEN THEY GO BAD SMOKE COMES OUT OF THEM SO I'M LOOKING N LOOKING N ALL OF A SUDDEN THE SMOKE IS GETTING HEAVIER AND DARKER WITHIN 20-25 MINS AFTER CALLING 911 THERE IT HAPPENED MY TRUCK WENT UP IN FLAMES N A TOTAL LOSS. THEN THAT DAY AFTER I GOT HOME N CALMED DOWN I LOOKED IT UP N THE FIRST THING THAT POPPED UP RECALL FOR WIRING HARNESS IN DASHBOARD SHORTS OUT N CAUSES FIRES... I'M LIKE REALLY....*JS
IN THE 1994-2001 MODEL YEAR DODGE RAM 1500, 2500 AND 3500 TRUCKS THERE IS NO RELAY IN THE WIRING CIRCUITRY USE FOR THE HEADLIGHTS. WHEN THE RAM WAS REDESIGNED IN 1994, THE ENGINEERS DID NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO CHANGE THE 40-YEAR OLD DESIGN FOR THE HEADLIGHT SYSTEM; FEELING ONLY THE NEED TO USE A LARGER GAUGE WIRE TO HANDLE THE…
Read full complaint
IN THE 1994-2001 MODEL YEAR DODGE RAM 1500, 2500 AND 3500 TRUCKS THERE IS NO RELAY IN THE WIRING CIRCUITRY USE FOR THE HEADLIGHTS. WHEN THE RAM WAS REDESIGNED IN 1994, THE ENGINEERS DID NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO CHANGE THE 40-YEAR OLD DESIGN FOR THE HEADLIGHT SYSTEM; FEELING ONLY THE NEED TO USE A LARGER GAUGE WIRE TO HANDLE THE EXCESSIVE HEAT OF THE HALOGEN BULBS. UNFORTUNATELY, NEITHER THE WIRES NOR THE SWITCH OR INTERNAL RHEOSTAT (FOR THE INSTRUMENT PANEL LIGHTING) COULD HANDLE THIS LOAD AND THE FOLLOWING NEAR TRAGIC EVEN HAS BEEN AN ALL TOO COMMON OCCURRENCE. A RECALL (OR AT THE VERY LEAST A TSB HAS BEEN ISSUED FOR THE 3500 MODEL DODGE RAMS, WHICH ARE COMPRISED OF THE EXACT SAME SWITCH AND WIRING, BUT NOTHING HAS BEEN NOTED ABOUT THE 1500 OR 2500 MODELS. I CANNOT UNDERSTAND THIS, AND THIS IS THE VERY REASON I FEEL COMPELLED TO BE WRITING THIS COMPLAINT IN THE FIRST PLACE. ONE NIGHT I WAS DRIVING ALONG THE FREEWAY AT ABOUT 55-MPH WHEN THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH, RELAY AND CONNECTED WIRING ALL BECAME OVERHEATED, CAUSING THEM TO MELT. BECOMING FRANTIC, I WAS ABLE TO QUICKLY WIGGLE THE DIMMER SWITCH (COMBINATION/TURN SIGNAL SWITCH), THEN THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH UNTIL I GOT THEM TO COME BACK ON. DURING THAT EPISODE I HAD THEM GO OUT ON ME ABOUT 4 TIMES THAT I RECALL. CURRENTLY THE VEHICLE REMAINS UNFIXED AND IS NOT DRIVABLE AT NIGHT. BEING A MECHANIC, MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS TO CHECK THE RELAYS AND FUSES TO SEE IF THEY WERE BLOWN OR BAD. TO MY DISMAY, I COULD NOT FIND ANY RELAYS! THIS WAS HOW I DISCOVERED, THROUGH SOME ONLINE RESEARCH, ABOUT THE RECURRING PROBLEM WITH THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH- HOW I WAS NOT ALONE IN THIS SITUATION AND THE REST OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PARAGRAPH. I WILL GLADLY BE AVAILABLE FOR PHONE CALLS, QUESTIONS, AND TO TAKE PICTURES OF THE PARTS IN QUESTION. *TR
1996 DODGE RAM 1500 CAUGHT FIRE IN THE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT. *KB THE CAUSE OF FIRE WAS DETERMINED TO BE ELECTRICAL UNDER THE DASHBOARD. OHIO TRAFFIC CRASH REPORT. *JB
TURN SIGNALS FAILED, CHECKED FUSE, REPLACED FLASHER RELAY, REPLACED MULTI-FUNCTION TURN/DIMMER/WIPER SWITCH AND CHECKED ALL BULBS AND STILL NO TURN SIGNALS. HAZARD FLASHERS WORKING CORRECTLY. PROBLEM STILL EXIST. *TR
THE DASHBOARD IN THE DODGE RAMWAS CRACKED AND CAVED IN. THIS CREATED A SAFETY ISSUE AS IT EXPOSED ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS TO DAMAGE.*AK
DT: CONSUMER STATES HE OWNS A 1996 DODGE RAM 1500 PICK UP TRUCK. WHILE HAULING A TRAILER, THE WIRES FROM THE TRAILER BECAME CAUGHT BETWEEN THE TRAILER AND THE TRAILER HITCH OF THE VEHICLE. THIS CAUSED THE WIRING HARNESS SYSTEM TO BURN OUT. THIS CAUSED THE FUEL GAUGE TO FAIL, IT SHORTED OUT THE FUSE TO THE FUEL PUMP CAUSING …
Read full complaint
DT: CONSUMER STATES HE OWNS A 1996 DODGE RAM 1500 PICK UP TRUCK. WHILE HAULING A TRAILER, THE WIRES FROM THE TRAILER BECAME CAUGHT BETWEEN THE TRAILER AND THE TRAILER HITCH OF THE VEHICLE. THIS CAUSED THE WIRING HARNESS SYSTEM TO BURN OUT. THIS CAUSED THE FUEL GAUGE TO FAIL, IT SHORTED OUT THE FUSE TO THE FUEL PUMP CAUSING THE ENGINE TO STALL. THE CONSUMER HAS CONTACTED THE SERVICE DEALER. HE STATED THIS WAS A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE VEHICLE. THE SERVICE DEALER STATED THE WIRING HARNESS CAME WITH A 40 AMP FUSE. THE CONSUMER ASKED FOR A 30 AMP FUSE TO BE INSTALLED BUT THE SERVICE DEALER WOULD NOT INSTALL THIS TYPE OF FUSE. THE CONSUMER CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER; THEY SAID THEY WOULD CONSIDER REFUNDING THE CONSUMERS MONEY FOR REPAIRING THE VEHICLE. A NEW HARNESS HAS BEEN INSTALLED IN THE VEHICLE. THERE WAS A RECALL ISSUED FOR THE WIRING HARNESS, THE RECALL SERVICE WAS PERFORMED AUGUST 2, 1999. *JB
I HAVE THIS TRUCK FOR 2 YEARS AND IN THAT 2 YEARS I HAVE MANY COMPLICATIONS WITH THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH MELTING AND BURNING THE WIRES IN THE DASH. I HAVE HAD THE SWITCH REPLACED TWICE AND IT CONTINUES TO BURN OUT AND MELT. I AM SO SCARED THE TRUCK IS GOING TO CATCH ON FIRE ONE DAY THAT RA…
Read full complaint
I HAVE THIS TRUCK FOR 2 YEARS AND IN THAT 2 YEARS I HAVE MANY COMPLICATIONS WITH THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH MELTING AND BURNING THE WIRES IN THE DASH. I HAVE HAD THE SWITCH REPLACED TWICE AND IT CONTINUES TO BURN OUT AND MELT. I AM SO SCARED THE TRUCK IS GOING TO CATCH ON FIRE ONE DAY THAT RARELEY DRIVE THE TRUCK. I STILL HAVE THE OLD PARTS THAT WERE REPLACED BUT DONT FEEL IT IS THE SWITCH CAUSING ALL THE PROBLEMS. I FEEL IT IS THE WHOLE WIRING SYSTEM. I READ THE CUSTOM REPORTS ON MYCARSTATS.COM IT SEEMS THE 1996 DODGE DAKOTA HAD THE SAME PROBLEMS. THERE WERE EVEN REPORTS OF THE TRUCK CATCHING ON FIRE. IF THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN REPORTED ON MANY DIFFERNET OCCAIONS; WHY HAVENT THEY RECALLED IT??? I WOULD APPRECIATE A RESPONSE AND HOPEFULLY DODGE TAKING CARE OF THIS PROBLEM FREE OF CHARGE. PLEASE HELP!!! MRFIXITUP@BELLSOUTH.NET
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
1DP03006 · Seat Back Failure
Opened Sep 23, 2003 · Closed Apr 8, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats; Seats:front Assembly:recliner
ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 30 INCIDENTS WHERE IT IS ALLEGED THE SEAT BACK COLLAPSED IN A REAR IMPACT CRASH.THESE INCIDENTS ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO 23 INJURIES AND TWO DEATHS.THE DATA PRESENTED TO ODI SHOW THAT THE SEAT BACK STRENGTH OF THE FRONT SEATS COMPLY WITH FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 207. SEATING SYSTEM.ACCORDING TO DAIMLERCHRYLSER THE FRONT SEATS WERE DESIGNED TO COLLAPSE REARWARD IN REAR IMPACT CRASHES AS PART OF THE ENERGY ABSORPTIONCAPABILITIES OF THE SEATING SYSTEM TO REDUCE THE CHANCE OF SERIOUS INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT.RATES OF OCCURANCE WERE COMPARED TO PEER VEHICLES, AND IT WAS SHOWN THAT THE PERFORMACE OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE WAS COMPARABLE TO THOSE VEHICLES.IN VIEW OF THE FORGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION REMEDY OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AS DEFINED BY THE PETITIONER AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THERFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE THE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.FOR FURTHER DETAILS, REFER TO ODI'S RESPONSE TO THE PETITION PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER VOL.69, NO. 60 , DATED MARCH 29, 2004.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Seats
ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 30 INCIDENTS WHERE IT IS ALLEGED THE SEAT BACK COLLAPSED IN A REAR IMPACT CRASH.THESE INCIDENTS ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO 23 INJURIES AND TWO DEATHS.THE DATA PRESENTED TO ODI SHOW THAT THE SEAT BACK STRENGTH OF THE FRONT SEATS COMPLY WITH FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 207. SEATING SYSTEM.ACCORDING TO DAIMLERCHRYLSER THE FRONT SEATS WERE DESIGNED TO COLLAPSE REARWARD IN REAR IMPACT CRASHES AS PART OF THE ENERGY ABSORPTIONCAPABILITIES OF THE SEATING SYSTEM TO REDUCE THE CHANCE OF SERIOUS INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT.RATES OF OCCURANCE WERE COMPARED TO PEER VEHICLES, AND IT WAS SHOWN THAT THE PERFORMACE OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE WAS COMPARABLE TO THOSE VEHICLES.IN VIEW OF THE FORGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION REMEDY OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AS DEFINED BY THE PETITIONER AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THERFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE THE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.FOR FURTHER DETAILS, REFER TO ODI'S RESPONSE TO THE PETITION PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER VOL.69, NO. 60 , DATED MARCH 29, 2004.
Seats:front Assembly:recliner
ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 30 INCIDENTS WHERE IT IS ALLEGED THE SEAT BACK COLLAPSED IN A REAR IMPACT CRASH.THESE INCIDENTS ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO 23 INJURIES AND TWO DEATHS.THE DATA PRESENTED TO ODI SHOW THAT THE SEAT BACK STRENGTH OF THE FRONT SEATS COMPLY WITH FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 207. SEATING SYSTEM.ACCORDING TO DAIMLERCHRYLSER THE FRONT SEATS WERE DESIGNED TO COLLAPSE REARWARD IN REAR IMPACT CRASHES AS PART OF THE ENERGY ABSORPTIONCAPABILITIES OF THE SEATING SYSTEM TO REDUCE THE CHANCE OF SERIOUS INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT.RATES OF OCCURANCE WERE COMPARED TO PEER VEHICLES, AND IT WAS SHOWN THAT THE PERFORMACE OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE WAS COMPARABLE TO THOSE VEHICLES.IN VIEW OF THE FORGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION REMEDY OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AS DEFINED BY THE PETITIONER AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THERFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE THE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.FOR FURTHER DETAILS, REFER TO ODI'S RESPONSE TO THE PETITION PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER VOL.69, NO. 60 , DATED MARCH 29, 2004.
Illustration