IllustrationCV JOINT FAILED.
1986 Ford Tempo
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 1986 Ford Tempo do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 30.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Tempo 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
Limited mileage data: 2 of 31 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.
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.
- Electrical System. Review the 15 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 4 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 3 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
2 crash reports11 fire reports0 injury reports
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
4 reportsREAR BRAKE ADJUSTER FAILURE, CAUSING PARTIAL LOSS OF BRAKING ABILITY. *DH
HYDRAULIC BRAKES; WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES, VEHICLE PULLS TO THE LEFT. PLEASE DESCRIBE. *AK
ALL TIRES REPLACED. *SD
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
10PE96005 · Rear Brk Adjuster Failure
Opened Jan 19, 1996 · Closed May 28, 1996
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic
1984 - 1991 FORD TEMPO/MERCURY TOPAZ
DP96002 · Rear Brake System Failure
Opened Jan 11, 1996 · Closed Jan 19, 1996
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic
There is no summary currently available
EA91052 · Seat Belt Separation
Opened Nov 27, 1991 · Closed Nov 24, 1992
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seat Belts
There is no summary currently available
PE91098 · Safety Belt Cut At Webbing
Opened Jul 12, 1991 · Closed Nov 27, 1991
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seat Belts:front:webbing
There is no summary currently available
PE91025 · Fuel Pump Failure
Opened Dec 17, 1990 · Closed Apr 10, 1991
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
There is no summary currently available
EA89037 · Speed Cntrl Malfunction
Opened Sep 6, 1989 · Closed Nov 30, 1990
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Equipment
===
PE89118 · Speed Control Malfunction
Opened Apr 19, 1989 · Closed Sep 6, 1989
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Equipment
===
PE88034 · Halfshaft Failure
Opened Mar 18, 1988 · Closed Sep 19, 1988
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train
SUMMARY:THE SUBJECT VEHICLES MAY BE EQUIPPED WITH EITHER A 2.3 LITER4 CYLINDER ENGINE OR A 2.0 LITER DIESEL ENGINE.THE TRANSAXLE MAY BEEITHER A 5 SPEED MANUAL OR A 3 SPEED AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION.THEHALFSHAFT ASSEMBLIES ARE IDENTICAL FOR AUTOMATIC AND MANUAL USE, BUT THERIGHT INTERCONNECTING SHAFT ON A DIESEL EQUIPPED VEHICLE DOES NOT HAVE ATORSIONAL DAMPER.THE 1987 MODEL VEHICLES (GAS OR DIESEL) DO NOT USE THETORSIONAL DAMPER.THE RIGHT SIDE INTERCONNECTING SHAFT IS LONGER THANTHE LEFT SIDE SHAFT (25 INCHES VERSUS 12 INCHES).MOST OF THE REPORTED FAILURES INVOLVE THE RIGHT HALFSHAFT ASSEMBLY.FAILURE OF THE HALFSHAFT APPEARS TO RESULT IN A LOSS OF DRIVE WITHOUT ANYLOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL. #===
PE87028 · Stalling
Opened May 1, 1987 · Closed Jan 21, 1988
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System
NO SAFETY DEFECT TREND HAS BEEN DETECTED.===
EA86010 · Seatback Failure
Opened Mar 26, 1986 · Closed Jul 28, 1989
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM MANUFACTURER:FORD BELIEVES THAT THE AL-LEGED DEFECT ONLY OCCURS IN A SMALL NUMBER OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ANDRECALLED ABOUT 195,732 1984 TEMPO/TOPAZ VEHICLES IN JUNE 1986.ANALYSIS: VEHICLES POTENTIALLY INVOLVED INCLUDE TEMPO/TOPAZ, ESCORT/LYNX/EXP, MUSTANG/CAPRI, LTD/MARQUIS, AND THUNDERBIRD/COUGAR.FORD SOLD ABOUT 110,000 REPLACEMENT MIO BOLTS, MAINLY FOR 1983 AND 1984MODELS. LOW CLAMPING FORCE APPEARS TO BE A LARGE PART OF THE PROBLEM.FORD INCREASED THE TORQUE REQUIREMENTS AND REQUIRED THE USE OF A MANUALTORQUE TOOL IN MARCH AND SEPTEMBER 1985 PRODUCTION CHANGES. 1987 MODELSWILL BE PRODUCED WITH A LONGER M10 BOLT AND A NUT TO INCREASE AND MAIN-TAIN CLAMPING FORCE. BOLTS WERE FORMERLY SELF TAPPING. REPORTS LISTEDABOVE SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT THE BOLT BROKE. NONE REFER SIMPLY TOSEAT BACK COLLAPSE ALONE.STATUS:FORD REPLY TO ODI IR DATED 2/2/87.FORD RECALLED 195,7321984 TEMPO/TOPAZ VEHICLES IN JUNE 1986 (86V-082). ANALYZING REPONSE,MONITORING CANADIAN PROGRESS. RESPONSE TO 4/6/87 LETTER TO FORDRECEIVED 7/15/87. WILL PROBABLY CLOSE AFTER CANADA COMPLETES THEIRACTIONS.===