CONSUMER COMPLAINT REGARDING 2003 RANGER SUDDENLY GOING AT FULL SPEED AND CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. *TS THE FIRST TIME THIS OCCURRED THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM, THEREFORE NOTHING WAS FIXED. COMPLAINANT WRITING ON BEHALF OF CONSUMER. *NM
2003 Ford Ranger
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2003 Ford Ranger do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 144.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Ranger 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
185 reports with mileage · 58 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.
- Structure. Review the 43 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 40 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 29 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
243 reportsDT: THE CONSUMER STATED THAT HIS 2003 FORD RANGER CAUGHT ON FIRE ON 9-30-05. THE VEHICLE STARTED SMOKING WHILE IN MOTION. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER. THE FIRE WAS VIEWED COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS CALLED. THE TRUCK WAS DECLARED A TOTAL LOSS. THE CONSUMER FELT THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS UNABLE T…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONSUMER STATED THAT HIS 2003 FORD RANGER CAUGHT ON FIRE ON 9-30-05. THE VEHICLE STARTED SMOKING WHILE IN MOTION. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER. THE FIRE WAS VIEWED COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS CALLED. THE TRUCK WAS DECLARED A TOTAL LOSS. THE CONSUMER FELT THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE. THE CONSUMER EXPERIENCED NO PRIOR PROBLEMS WITH THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. THE CONSUMER CONTACTED HIS INSURANCE COMPANY. THE TRUCK WAS TOWED TO A JUNK YARD IN ILLINOIS. PICTURES WERE TAKEN OF THE ENGINE AND THE VEHICLE ITSELF. THE CONSUMER PLANNED TO NOTIFY THE MANUFACTURER ABOUT THE FIRE. *AK (11/22/05) A POPPING NOISE WAS COMING FROM THE ENGINE AND IT BEGUN TO LOSE POWER. THE CONSUMER POPPED THE HOOD AND SAW FIRE COMING OUT OF THE ENGINE. BY THE TIME THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ARRIVED, THE ENGINE WAS ENGULFED IN FLAMES. *SC
THE IDLE CONTROL VALVE FAILED IN OPEN POSITION. THIS CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO IDLE AT 4000 RPM. DRIVING ABILITY WAS SEVERELY IMPAIRED AT THIS HIGH IDLE. SPEED CONTROL WHILE APPLYING THE BRAKE WAS DIFFICULT. *NM
DT: THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD RANGER. WHILE DRIVING VEHICLE STALLED. THE DEALERSHIP HAD THE VEHICLE 6 TIMES, BUT COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE STARTED JERKING THEN IT DIED, AND AFTER WAITING APPROXIMATELY 1 HOUR THE VEHICLE STARTED BACK UP. THE DEALERSHIP WANTED TO TRADE THE VE…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD RANGER. WHILE DRIVING VEHICLE STALLED. THE DEALERSHIP HAD THE VEHICLE 6 TIMES, BUT COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE STARTED JERKING THEN IT DIED, AND AFTER WAITING APPROXIMATELY 1 HOUR THE VEHICLE STARTED BACK UP. THE DEALERSHIP WANTED TO TRADE THE VEHICLE WITH THE CONTACT. BUT THE MANUFACTURER WANTED THE DEALERSHIP TO FIND THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM BEFORE THEY WOULD AUTHORIZE THE TRANSACTION. THE CONSUMER CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER. *AK
CRUISE CONTROL ON MY 2003 FORD RANGER 4X4 APPEARED TO DISENGAGE WHEN I SHIFTED THE TRUCK INTO NEUTRAL GOING DOWN A STEEP HILL. WHEN MY VEHICLE SLOWED, I SHIFTED FROM NEUTRAL BACK INTO DRIVE AND THE ENGINE RACED TO REDLINE(REV LIMITER) AS THE CRUISE WAS TRYING TO IMMEDIATELY INCREASE THE SPEED WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE TRANSMISSIO…
Read full complaint
CRUISE CONTROL ON MY 2003 FORD RANGER 4X4 APPEARED TO DISENGAGE WHEN I SHIFTED THE TRUCK INTO NEUTRAL GOING DOWN A STEEP HILL. WHEN MY VEHICLE SLOWED, I SHIFTED FROM NEUTRAL BACK INTO DRIVE AND THE ENGINE RACED TO REDLINE(REV LIMITER) AS THE CRUISE WAS TRYING TO IMMEDIATELY INCREASE THE SPEED WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE TRANSMISSION TO ENGAGE FULLY. I SHIFTED BACK INTO NEUTRAL AND THEN I NOTICED THAT I HAD THE CRUISE CONTROL ON. I CUT CRUISE CONTROL OFF, THEN SHIFTED BACK INTO DRIVE AND EVERYTHING WORKED CORRECTLY. IF CRUISE CONTROL IS SUPPOSED TO DISENGAGE WHEN SHIFTED TO NEUTRAL, IT REALLY SHOULD DISENGAGE NOT RACE TO REDLINE WHEN SHIFTED BACK INTO DRIVE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE AFFECT WOULD BE IF AN ENGINE AT 6000 RPMS SUDDENLY ENGAGES THE TRANSMISSION AT 65 MPH. I'D RATHER HAVE THE ENGINE RACE WHEN I FIRST PUT THE SHIFTER IN NEUTRAL THAN WHEN I SHIFTED BACK INTO DRIVE! *NM
I HAVE A 2003 FORD RANGER REGULAR CAB 2 WHEEL DRIVE TRUCK. ON 5 OCCASIONS THE EMERGENCY FUEL SHUTOFF SWITCH LOCATED INSIDE THE CAB ON THE PASSENGER SIDE FIRE WALL HAS BEEN DISLODGE BY THE PASSENGER GETTING THERE FOOT ON THE CONNECTOR AND DISCONNECTING THE POWER PLUG FROM THE SWITCH THIS CAUSES THE TRUCK TO STALL IMMEDIATELY. I H…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2003 FORD RANGER REGULAR CAB 2 WHEEL DRIVE TRUCK. ON 5 OCCASIONS THE EMERGENCY FUEL SHUTOFF SWITCH LOCATED INSIDE THE CAB ON THE PASSENGER SIDE FIRE WALL HAS BEEN DISLODGE BY THE PASSENGER GETTING THERE FOOT ON THE CONNECTOR AND DISCONNECTING THE POWER PLUG FROM THE SWITCH THIS CAUSES THE TRUCK TO STALL IMMEDIATELY. I HAVE ONLY OWNED THIS TRUCK FOR APPROX 90 DAYS. IF THIS HAPPENS AT THE WRONG TIME THIS COULD GET SOMEONE HURT OR KILLED.
DT: CONSUMER'S VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A COLLISION ON JUNE 9, 2005. . THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED BEFORE THE IMPACT. THE CONSUMER SAW SOMETHING FLASH IN HER FACE, WHICH WAS THE CENTER OF THE STEERING WHEEL, AND THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER, AND THEY SAID THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH …
Read full complaint
DT: CONSUMER'S VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A COLLISION ON JUNE 9, 2005. . THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED BEFORE THE IMPACT. THE CONSUMER SAW SOMETHING FLASH IN HER FACE, WHICH WAS THE CENTER OF THE STEERING WHEEL, AND THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER, AND THEY SAID THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE SRS, AND THEY FOUND A FAULTY SENSOR # 450047 IN THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. IT HAS BEEN FIXED SINCE THIS ACCIDENT. *AK *JB
IN MAY 2005, I FOUND THAT I HAD A NAIL IN ON OF MY WRANGLER GOODYEAR TIRES AND I TOOK THE TRUCK TO GOODYEAR. WHEN THEY REMOVED THE TIRE THEY FOUND A CRACK NEAR THE BEAD. THE TIRE ONLY HAD 20,000 MILES ON IT. THEY CLAIMED THIS WAS THE FAULT OF FORD MOTOR COMPANY FOR IMPROPER MOUNTING OF TIRE. THEY CLAIMED THIS WAS COMMON. MY TIRE…
Read full complaint
IN MAY 2005, I FOUND THAT I HAD A NAIL IN ON OF MY WRANGLER GOODYEAR TIRES AND I TOOK THE TRUCK TO GOODYEAR. WHEN THEY REMOVED THE TIRE THEY FOUND A CRACK NEAR THE BEAD. THE TIRE ONLY HAD 20,000 MILES ON IT. THEY CLAIMED THIS WAS THE FAULT OF FORD MOTOR COMPANY FOR IMPROPER MOUNTING OF TIRE. THEY CLAIMED THIS WAS COMMON. MY TIRE WAS REPLACED IMMEDIATELY WITH AN ADJUSTED FOR WEAR. I CONTACTED GOODYEAR AND FORD AND BOTH BLAMED THIS PROBLEM ON THE OTHER. BOTH COMPANIES SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEIR DECEPTIVE PRACTICES. IT IS GOOD THAT I HAD A NAIL IN MY TIRE OR I COULD HAVE BEEN INJURED WITH A BLOWOUT.
I HAVE HAD TO TAKE THIS VEHICLE INTO THE DEALERSHIP FOR BRAKING PROBLEMS 7 TIMES NOW. THERE HAS BEEN A CONSTANT VIBRATION UPON BRAKING. THE VIBRATION HAS BECOME SO BAD AT TIMES, IT IS DIFFICULT TO HOLD THE STEERING WHEEL. THE VIBRATION IS BEING CAUSED BY WARPED ROTORS. THE ROTORS HAVE BEEN TURNED AND REPLACED AT LEAST 2 TIME…
Read full complaint
I HAVE HAD TO TAKE THIS VEHICLE INTO THE DEALERSHIP FOR BRAKING PROBLEMS 7 TIMES NOW. THERE HAS BEEN A CONSTANT VIBRATION UPON BRAKING. THE VIBRATION HAS BECOME SO BAD AT TIMES, IT IS DIFFICULT TO HOLD THE STEERING WHEEL. THE VIBRATION IS BEING CAUSED BY WARPED ROTORS. THE ROTORS HAVE BEEN TURNED AND REPLACED AT LEAST 2 TIMES EACH. I AM NOW ON MY THIRD SET OF ROTORS. THE LAST TIME I BROUGHT THE TRUCK BACK FROM DEALERSHIP, IT WAS OBVIOUS THE CALIPER WAS STICKING. FORD EVEN HAD AN ENGINEER LOOK AT THE TRUCK. THE ENGINEER LOOKED AT THE TRUCK 100 MILES BEFORE THE CALIPER WAS STICKING. HE COULDN'T COME UP WITH ANY REASON FOR THE WARPAGE. ON TAKING MY TRUCK BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP THIS PAST TIME, THE BRAKE PEDAL STARTED GOING TO THE FLOOR AND WAS MAKING A WHOOSHING SOUND UPON DEPRESSING THE PEDAL. I WAS AFRAID IT WOULDN'T STOP. I AM NOW AFRAID OF DRIVING THIS TRUCK BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH THE BRAKES NEXT.
ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, WHILE STOPPED IN TRAFFIC, THE VEHICLE HAS ACCELERATED OUT OF CONTROL, ALMOST CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. THIS HAS HAPPENED WITH AT LEAST 4 DIFFERENT DRIVERS. HAVE HAD THE TRUCK LOOKED AT BY 2 DIFFERENT DEALERSHIPS.
Official recalls
109V399000 · Vehicle Speed Control
Oct 13, 2009
FORD IS RECALLING MODEL YEARS 1995-2003 WINDSTAR, 2000-2003 EXCURSION DIESEL, 1993-1997 AND 1999-2003 F-250 SD THROUGH F-550 SD DIESEL, 1992-2003 E-150 THROUGH E-550, 1995-2002 EXPLORER, 1997 AND 2002 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER, 1995-1997 AND 2001-2003 RANGER, AND 1994 F53 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS). THE SCDS MAY LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A VEHICLE FIRE COULD OCCUR WITH OR WITHOUT THE ENGINE RUNNING.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS THAT DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS IN LINE WITH THE SCDS. ON 1999-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH A LEAKING SCDS, DEALERS WILL ALSO INSPECT THE ABS CONTROL MODULE CONNECTOR AND REPAIR AS NECESSARY. REPAIRS WILL BE COMPLETED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON OCTOBER 27, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
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
1PE05066 · Brake Lights Inoperative
Opened Dec 5, 2005 · Closed Mar 24, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB) #05-6-19 ISSUED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND SERVICE BULLETIN #09-008/5 ISSUED BY MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE CENTER HIGH MOUNTED STOP LIGHT (CHMSL) WIRING HARNESS CHAFFING. THE TSB'S AFFECTED THE FORD SUPER CAB AND MAZDA CAB PLUS VEHICLES ONLY.SERVICE TECHNICIANS CONTACTED THE FORD HOTLINE BECAUSE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHNICIANS TO DIAGNOSE AND LOCATE THE CAUSE OF THE INOPERATIVE BRAKE LIGHTS.FORD AND MAZDA ISSUED THE TSB'S TO AID TECHNICIANS IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND REPAIR OF THE WIRE CHAFE CONDITION.OF ALL WARRANTY CLAIMS SUBMITTED TO FORD FOR BRAKE LAMP FAILURE, FORD IDENTIFIED ONLY 120 THAT WERE RELATED TO WIRE CHAFE NEAR THE CHMSL, AND MOST (115 OF THE 120) WERE REPORTED FOR THE SUPER CAB CHMSL. ODI'S REVIEW OF FORD'S WARRANTY CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT DATA REVEALS A DECLINING TREND FOR THE SUPER CAB AND THAT TREND CLOSELY PARALLELS THE TREND FOR THE STANDARD CAB AS WELL.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB) #05-6-19 ISSUED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND SERVICE BULLETIN #09-008/5 ISSUED BY MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE CENTER HIGH MOUNTED STOP LIGHT (CHMSL) WIRING HARNESS CHAFFING. THE TSB'S AFFECTED THE FORD SUPER CAB AND MAZDA CAB PLUS VEHICLES ONLY.SERVICE TECHNICIANS CONTACTED THE FORD HOTLINE BECAUSE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHNICIANS TO DIAGNOSE AND LOCATE THE CAUSE OF THE INOPERATIVE BRAKE LIGHTS.FORD AND MAZDA ISSUED THE TSB'S TO AID TECHNICIANS IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND REPAIR OF THE WIRE CHAFE CONDITION.OF ALL WARRANTY CLAIMS SUBMITTED TO FORD FOR BRAKE LAMP FAILURE, FORD IDENTIFIED ONLY 120 THAT WERE RELATED TO WIRE CHAFE NEAR THE CHMSL, AND MOST (115 OF THE 120) WERE REPORTED FOR THE SUPER CAB CHMSL. ODI'S REVIEW OF FORD'S WARRANTY CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT DATA REVEALS A DECLINING TREND FOR THE SUPER CAB AND THAT TREND CLOSELY PARALLELS THE TREND FOR THE STANDARD CAB AS WELL.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting
THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB) #05-6-19 ISSUED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND SERVICE BULLETIN #09-008/5 ISSUED BY MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE CENTER HIGH MOUNTED STOP LIGHT (CHMSL) WIRING HARNESS CHAFFING. THE TSB'S AFFECTED THE FORD SUPER CAB AND MAZDA CAB PLUS VEHICLES ONLY.SERVICE TECHNICIANS CONTACTED THE FORD HOTLINE BECAUSE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHNICIANS TO DIAGNOSE AND LOCATE THE CAUSE OF THE INOPERATIVE BRAKE LIGHTS.FORD AND MAZDA ISSUED THE TSB'S TO AID TECHNICIANS IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND REPAIR OF THE WIRE CHAFE CONDITION.OF ALL WARRANTY CLAIMS SUBMITTED TO FORD FOR BRAKE LAMP FAILURE, FORD IDENTIFIED ONLY 120 THAT WERE RELATED TO WIRE CHAFE NEAR THE CHMSL, AND MOST (115 OF THE 120) WERE REPORTED FOR THE SUPER CAB CHMSL. ODI'S REVIEW OF FORD'S WARRANTY CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT DATA REVEALS A DECLINING TREND FOR THE SUPER CAB AND THAT TREND CLOSELY PARALLELS THE TREND FOR THE STANDARD CAB AS WELL.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB) #05-6-19 ISSUED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND SERVICE BULLETIN #09-008/5 ISSUED BY MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE CENTER HIGH MOUNTED STOP LIGHT (CHMSL) WIRING HARNESS CHAFFING. THE TSB'S AFFECTED THE FORD SUPER CAB AND MAZDA CAB PLUS VEHICLES ONLY.SERVICE TECHNICIANS CONTACTED THE FORD HOTLINE BECAUSE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHNICIANS TO DIAGNOSE AND LOCATE THE CAUSE OF THE INOPERATIVE BRAKE LIGHTS.FORD AND MAZDA ISSUED THE TSB'S TO AID TECHNICIANS IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND REPAIR OF THE WIRE CHAFE CONDITION.OF ALL WARRANTY CLAIMS SUBMITTED TO FORD FOR BRAKE LAMP FAILURE, FORD IDENTIFIED ONLY 120 THAT WERE RELATED TO WIRE CHAFE NEAR THE CHMSL, AND MOST (115 OF THE 120) WERE REPORTED FOR THE SUPER CAB CHMSL. ODI'S REVIEW OF FORD'S WARRANTY CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT DATA REVEALS A DECLINING TREND FOR THE SUPER CAB AND THAT TREND CLOSELY PARALLELS THE TREND FOR THE STANDARD CAB AS WELL.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Illustration