Recall Alert: 2015-2016 Ford Transit

2015 Ford Transit recall
By Tom Torbjornsen

Vehicles Affected: Approximately 2,000 model-year 2015-16 Ford Transit vans equipped with 3.2-liter diesel engines

The Problem: The fuel injection pump could malfunction, which may cause the engine to not start or stall without warning while driving and without the ability to restart, increasing the risk of a crash. Ford is not aware of any accidents or injuries associated with this issue.

The Fix: Dealers will inspect the fuel system for metallic contamination. If none is present, dealers will replace the fuel injection pump and associated parts for free. If metallic contamination is present, dealers will replace the fuel injection pump, fuel injectors and fuel filter, and will clean and flush the fuel system for free.

What Owners Should Do: The recall has already begun. Owners can Ford at 800-392-3673, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's vehicle-safety hotline at 888-327-4236 or go to for more info.

Need to Find a Dealer for Service? Go to Service & Repair to find your local dealer.

Manufacturer image



Awesome van and kudos to Ford for staying on top of any issues.


Once again, Ford is steeping up and keeping us safe! Thank you!

Good job, Ford!

Small batch, caught by manufacturer, voluntarily handled, no injuries, no death... no real story.

I have to wonder if this 3.2L diesel shares the same bosch pump as other engines. The Bosch CP4 pump is shared between the GM 6.6L and Ford 6.7L along with other engines. Then I wonder if Ford is doing this recall or if Bosch is part of this campaign.

It just goes to show you that diesel is not the most reliable. Gas trucks are better for most people.

----------------------- WHERE'S THE ECOBOOST? -------------------

It is good to see diesel tech receiving the recognition it deserves. It is very economical, torqy, with enough power to propel the Transit and vans.

............................ Ford on the other hand had only one engine in Wards List of 10 Best Engines, and needs to get this diesel into the F150.

Here is a comment from Wards on why the 2.7 EcoBoost or the endearing term I give it now the "EcoThirst" was not considered.

The Wards comment and link;

"But there’s a big problem: The observed fuel economy is not that good. The EPA says this engine should get 26 mpg (9 L/100 km) on the highway with 2-wheel drive and 23 mpg (10.2 L/100 km) on the highway with 4-wheel drive. Our 4x4 supercab never got close to that, even under a light foot.

Several editors drove the truck for 253 miles (407 km), and the trip computer displayed a low of 17.6 mpg (13.3 L/100 km) and a high of 19 mpg (12.3 L/100 km).

We checked consumption old-school (253 miles divided by 16.16 gallons [61 L] to refill the tank) and came up with an even more disappointing figure: 15.6 mpg (15 L/100 km)."

Diesel is the future of all vehicles!

If one looks at Wards 10 Best engines list it really highlights how Ford is dropping the ball with its engine technology and how best to design and develop a worthwhile pickup truck engine or any engine for that matter.

It took what is essentially an aftermarket organisation to produce a better Frod engine to make the list. The flat plane engine looks nice. But it ain't no pickup engine.

You can now see why Ford needs the three litre Lion V6, the hybrid for it's F-150. So, Ford is required to rely on an old engine, like the 3.2 diesel. Which would of been a better option for the aluminium F-150.

Ford is way behind here with the EcoThirst engines.

The aluminium F-150 has shown when design and engineering is that little bit out over many areas the product (pickup) can produce a very ordinary outcome. Don't get me wrong, the aluminium pickup is competitive, but it should of been a scorcher.

Ford's lacklustre aluminium F-150 has been just an average pickup that is too expensive for what you get. Ford is relying on the Ford name to sell the pickup, like Toyota does with its pickups in the US and globally.

But, like Toyota, Ford's actual market share is shrinking. This shrinking has me thinking that it will be easier for other manufacturers to take more market share from Ford.

This is also shown when an older chassis like the Ram can outperform the aluminium F-150 on several occassions.

Or, better still, a midsizer, which many on PUTC denegrate out performs the aluminium F-150 in some reviews as well.

I wonder how many diesel Colorados will be bought in lieu of a 2.7 EcoBoost for business. It seems many like the little diesel Colorado for it's exceptional work capacity and FE, along with a refined vehicle as good as a full size in many repects. Something we've been accustomed to here in the global world.

Ford needs to keep the prices low on the F-150 to sell them.

Ford is between a rock and a hard place with it's F Series. It took a big gamble, it has invested massive resources, ie, money into the vehicle, and they must sell them cheap to move them, just to compete with much older platforms as is illustrated in some reviews and in real life with some of the incentives. Fords needed to move the pieces of aluminium off the lots, so to speak and yet so early in it product life cycle. This must embarass some of the Ford execs.

Even this Wards Best 10 is showing the true colours of the aluminium Ford, or better still Ford's reliance on a poor decision.

I wonder in five years if Ford sells in Ram numbers? The US pickup market is transforming. New pickups will be out in five years.

I'd bet a new and far better Tundra will happen.

Nissan is serious with the Titan, designing the new Titan to fulfill the needs of 85% of the pickup segment. The old Titan on managed to fulfill the needs for a 35% market segment.

The new midsizers will take sales away from fullsize trucks as the consumer realises they can tow more than the average 5 000lb trailer comfortably.

Yes Ford you have done well .......................... not.

Yup, Ford initially sold the aluminium F-150 on big FE promises. The problem is Ford just can't design and engine. Even the aluminium change only has given Ford a 1mpg gain.

The heavier Ram with this VM out tows the 2.7 EcoThirst and returns at least 10mpg better. Even with a 50c difference between diesel and gas the VM Ram will still pay for itself.

What an embarrassment for Frod.

Do this van have to door spring issue that allow the doors to open unexpectedly? If so, this van should become a top safety pick. LOL! .............FORD!.......GMSRGREAT rolls his eyes.

Chrysler recalls Town & Country, Dodge Grand Caravan, Dodge Journey and RAM ProMaster vehicles
The transmission pump may seize causing a loss of hydraulic pressure
08/19/2016 | ConsumerAffairs | Dodge and Chrysler Recalls


By James Limbach

A Washington, D.C., reporter for more than 30 years, Jim Limbach covers the federal agencies for ConsumerAffairs. Previously, he was a reporter and news anchor for Associated Press Broadcast Services, where he covered business and consumer news as well as space shots and other major spot news events. Read Full Bio→
Email James Limbach Phone: 866-773-0221

Photo source: Chrysler
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling 26,299 model year 2015-2016 Chrysler Town & Country, Dodge Grand Caravan vehicles manufactured July 31, 2015, to April 18, 2016; 2016 Dodge Journey vehicles manufactured August 17, 2015, to January 29, 2016; and 2016 RAM ProMaster vehicles manufactured August 15, 2016, to April 15, 2016.

The transmission pump may seize causing a loss of hydraulic pressure.

If the transmission loses hydraulic pressure, the vehicle may lose motive power, increasing the risk of a crash.

This could of occurred to any manufacturer. The pump manufacturer probably supplies other manufacturers.

They sure bumped this article to second place fast, trying to cover the fact ford builds junk.

They sure bumped this article to second place fast, trying to cover the fact ford builds junk.

Posted by: Opinion | Aug 25, 2016 2:53:18 PM

Those pumps are built by Bosch. They supply high pressure pumps to just about every diesel manufacture in the world. Ford, GM, VW, Fiat, etc. I am willing to bet the failure is not just in this engine. I bet it is other similar spec engines.

Typical Ford Garbage.

Those kinds of vans look cool something different from the pack.

Nice to see FORD Cooperate.

Wow some people can't admit Ford have real,problem whit this vans recall after recall and they have the nerve to said Ford keep people safe wow,,just admitted they have problem whit this van ,,

From Ward's:

Several editors drove the truck for 253 miles (407 km), and the trip computer displayed a low of 17.6 mpg (13.3 L/100 km) and a high of 19 mpg (12.3 L/100 km).

You realize this statement makes no sense right? The L/100 and MPG numbers are all mixed up, this is an old article that should have been corrected by now. Calls in to question their attention to detail on their calculations. I have personally driven 2.7 trucks and done far better than their published numbers, and I know many others that have as well.

The comments to this entry are closed.