← New search

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 →

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.

18 crash reports17 fire reports13 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

26 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Apr 15, 1998
Electrical SystemFire

ELECTRICAL FIRE ORIGINATING UNDER THE HOOD. VEHICLE WAS TOTALED.

NHTSA ODI #534331

Mileage unknown · Nov 4, 1997
Electrical SystemSuspension

BATTERY FAILED.

NHTSA ODI #604783

Mileage unknown · Nov 4, 1997
Electrical System

STARTER FAILED.

NHTSA ODI #604218

Mileage unknown · May 30, 1997
Electrical SystemPower TrainService Brakes, Hydraulic

TRANSMISSION VIBRATES/NOISY.

NHTSA ODI #517672

Mileage unknown · Apr 14, 1997
Electrical SystemFire

DRIVING CAR; ENGINE SUDDENLY DIED; CAR CAUGHT ON FIRE & WAS ENGULFED IN FLAMES; DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR FAILED TO OPEN; FIRE DEPARTMENT ARRIVED & PUT FLAMES OUT; MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE LOOKED AT CAR; INSURANCE COMPANY HAD PRIVATE REPRESENTATIVE LOOK AT CAR; FIRE ORIGINATED UNDER CAR DUE TO LOCATION OF ELECTRICAL WIRES. DRIVER/…

Read full complaint

DRIVING CAR; ENGINE SUDDENLY DIED; CAR CAUGHT ON FIRE & WAS ENGULFED IN FLAMES; DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR FAILED TO OPEN; FIRE DEPARTMENT ARRIVED & PUT FLAMES OUT; MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE LOOKED AT CAR; INSURANCE COMPANY HAD PRIVATE REPRESENTATIVE LOOK AT CAR; FIRE ORIGINATED UNDER CAR DUE TO LOCATION OF ELECTRICAL WIRES. DRIVER/PASSENGERS ESCAPED UNHARMED. *AK

NHTSA ODI #810960

Mileage unknown · Jan 29, 1997
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingEquipment

VEHICLE HAS EXPERIENCED CONTINUED PROBLEMS WITH ENGINE PERFORMANCE THAT ARE NOT ABLE TO BE RECTIFIED, HESITATES, ROUGH IDLE, AND PROBLEMS STARTING.

NHTSA ODI #514331

Official recalls

0

No 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

1

DP03006 · 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.