Was driving and the traction control light came on car started shaking, pulled over got out to look and the car was on fire. Fire started in the right rear of the trunk Where the backup camera wire harness is located. It has not been inspected. Car is currently at an impound lot but is available for inspection.
2017 Ford Mustang
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Mustang years
Owner complaints for the 2017 Ford Mustang are substantially higher than the model-year median of 81.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Mustang 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
144 reports with mileage · 121 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.
- Back Over Prevention. Review the 64 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 39 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 34 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
265 reportsThe contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while the dealer was replacing the tires, the dealer informed the contact that the lug nuts were swollen and needed to be replaced. The dealer was able to replace the tires; however, the lug nuts were not replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notifie…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while the dealer was replacing the tires, the dealer informed the contact that the lug nuts were swollen and needed to be replaced. The dealer was able to replace the tires; however, the lug nuts were not replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and a case was filed. The manufacturer informed the contact that goodwill assistance could not be provided and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline to report the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 30,000.
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that upon starting the vehicle, the check engine warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to Auto Zone, where the contact was informed that there was misfire in the engine. The vehicle was then taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed that there was coolant …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that upon starting the vehicle, the check engine warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to Auto Zone, where the contact was informed that there was misfire in the engine. The vehicle was then taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed that there was coolant intrusion into cylinder #2. The dealer recommended that the long block be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline for information on NHTSA Campaign Number: 16V779000 (Engine and Engine Cooling). The failure mileage was approximately 81,000.
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while the vehicle was stationary, the headliner became loosened. There were no warning lights illuminated. The manufacturer was informed that the headliner was detaching in the vehicle. The manufacturer informed the contact that the vehicle needed to be taken to a dealer t…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while the vehicle was stationary, the headliner became loosened. There were no warning lights illuminated. The manufacturer was informed that the headliner was detaching in the vehicle. The manufacturer informed the contact that the vehicle needed to be taken to a dealer to be diagnosed and the manufacturer opened a case. The vehicle was taken to a dealer where it was determined that the door glass and headliner retainer needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 23,000.
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that the brake fluid was depleting abnormally. The contact was adding brake fluid constantly. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact stated that the failure was like NHTSA Campaign Number: 23V162000 (Service Brakes, Hydraulic). The contact called the local d…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that the brake fluid was depleting abnormally. The contact was adding brake fluid constantly. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact stated that the failure was like NHTSA Campaign Number: 23V162000 (Service Brakes, Hydraulic). The contact called the local dealer, but the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was contacted and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline for assistance. The failure mileage was approximately 90,000.
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that while in reverse, the back over prevention system failed to display an image on the screen. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, who diagnosed a failure with the decklid wiring harness. The vehicle was not repaired. After investigat…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that while in reverse, the back over prevention system failed to display an image on the screen. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, who diagnosed a failure with the decklid wiring harness. The vehicle was not repaired. After investigating the failure, the contact related the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 22V082000 (Back Over Prevention); the VIN was included, but the vehicle had already been repaired under the recall. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 30,000.
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that while the vehicle was stationary, the gear shifter was shifted into reverse, and the rearview camera displayed a black screen with a message. There were no warning lights illuminated and a message was displayed that the rear camera was not available. The contact took …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that while the vehicle was stationary, the gear shifter was shifted into reverse, and the rearview camera displayed a black screen with a message. There were no warning lights illuminated and a message was displayed that the rear camera was not available. The contact took the vehicle to the dealer for an unknown recall for the wiring harness. The vehicle was repaired; however, the failure with the rearview camera persisted. The contact took the vehicle to an independent mechanic who diagnosed the vehicle with rearview camera failure. The vehicle was then taken to a dealer where it was diagnosed with rearview camera failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and offered the contact to get the vehicle diagnosed at the manufacturer’s cost. The local dealer was contacted; however, the vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 15,000.
The rear backup camera does not work. The rear backup camera by Ford has been recalled for other vehicles but not for the Mustang. Your agency fined Ford millions of dollars for not recalling the rear backup camera. So Ford recalled the rear backup camera only on certain vehicles not on all vehicles with the same camera. What ar…
Read full complaint
The rear backup camera does not work. The rear backup camera by Ford has been recalled for other vehicles but not for the Mustang. Your agency fined Ford millions of dollars for not recalling the rear backup camera. So Ford recalled the rear backup camera only on certain vehicles not on all vehicles with the same camera. What are you going to do about it? Ford continues to say there's nothing wrong with the rear camera in their vehicles even though you have more complaints for the rear camera than other complaints in other vehicles than the few that they recalled to make it seem like they were doing the right thing. Ford should recall all cameras affected.
My 2017 ford mustang gt has 27,000 mile on it. I was driving home from work and just went through a traffic circle and I was in 1gear when I went to shift I could not shift. The clutch blew apart while driving normal and it is the factory clutch. Pictures of the equipment involved are available and show no sign of wear or abuse…
Read full complaint
My 2017 ford mustang gt has 27,000 mile on it. I was driving home from work and just went through a traffic circle and I was in 1gear when I went to shift I could not shift. The clutch blew apart while driving normal and it is the factory clutch. Pictures of the equipment involved are available and show no sign of wear or abuse just that it separated. This could have been a major is had I been on a major highway when it happened
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, there was white smoke coming from under the hood. No warning light was illuminated. Upon further investigation, the contact related the failure to TSB: 19-2260; however, the vehicle was not included. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaire…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, there was white smoke coming from under the hood. No warning light was illuminated. Upon further investigation, the contact related the failure to TSB: 19-2260; however, the vehicle was not included. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 25,000.
Official recalls
625V614000 · Seat Belts:pretensioner
Sep 12, 2025
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Mustang vehicles. Water and road salt may corrode the front seat belt anchor pretensioner cables.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A corroded cable can break, preventing the seat belt from properly restraining an occupant, and increasing the risk of injury during a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace both front seat belt anchor pretensioner assemblies, as necessary. In addition, dealers will remove sections of the carpet and underlayment that contact the cables. Dealers will also inspect the A-pillar sealing patches, and as necessary, install A-pillar body plugs, and/or inspect and replace the front outboard seat bolts. Repairs will be performed free of charge. Interim letters, notifying owners of the safety risk, were mailed October 20, 2025. Additional letters will be sent once the final remedy is available, anticipated December 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S92. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall became searchable on NHTSA.gov September 17, 2025.
25V572000 · Back Over Prevention: Sensing System: Camera
Sep 3, 2025
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2019 Lincoln MKC, Mustang, F-350 SD, F-250 SD, F-450 SD, 2015-2017 Lincoln Navigator, Expedition, 2015-2018 Edge, Transit Connect, 2016-2019 F-550 SD, Transit, 2017-2019 Econoline, and 2019 Ranger vehicles. The rearview camera may display a distorted, inverted, or blank image when the vehicle is in reverse.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A rearview camera that displays an inverted, distorted, or blank image can reduce the driver’s view behind the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the rearview camera as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed January 13, 2026. Ford owners will receive letters in phases, beginning January 2026 and June 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S89. This recall expands previous NHTSA recall number 25V270. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall will be searchable on NHTSA.gov beginning September 8, 2025.
22V082000 · Back Over Prevention: Sensing System: Camera
Feb 16, 2022
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Mustang vehicles. The rearview camera wiring may be loose or damaged, which can result in a blank or distorted image.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A rearview camera that displays a blank or distorted image can reduce the driver's rear view, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and repair the decklid wiring harness and/or replace the rearview camera, as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed December 23, 2022 and June 26, 2023. Remedy parts are expected to become available in the 4th Quarter of 2022. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 22S06.
17V529000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
Aug 28, 2017
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2017 F-150 and Mustang vehicles. The air bag inflator within the passenger frontal air bag module may rupture in the event of a crash.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: An inflator rupture may result in metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants resulting in serious injury or death.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the passenger frontal air bag module, free of charge. The recall began October 11, 2017. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 17S26.
17V168000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Mar 13, 2017
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2017 Ford Mustang vehicles. The return spring for the driver side interior door handle may come loose, allowing the driver's door to unlatch in a side impact crash. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 206, "Door Locks and Door Retention Components."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the door unlatches in a crash it can increase the risk of injury.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver-side interior door handle and repair the return spring, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began April 14, 2017. Owners may contact Ford at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for the recall is 17C04.
16V779000 · Engine And Engine Cooling:cooling System:hoses/lines/piping/fittings
Oct 26, 2016
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2015-2017 Mustang vehicles manufactured February 24, 2015, to August 30, 2016. A hose may separate from the engine oil cooler tube assembly causing an oil leak.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A sudden loss of engine oil may cause engine failure, increasing the risk of a crash. Additionally, an oil leak, in the presence of an ignition source, increases the risk of a fire.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the engine oil cooler tube assembly, free of charge. The recall began on March 23, 2017. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 16S40.
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
1EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Illustration