2020-2022 Ford Explorer Being Recalled Over Rollaway Risk

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Ford is recalling 238,364 Explorer SUVs over a defect that could result in a loss of motive power or possible rollaway risk. The issue stems from an issue with the subframe bushing and a rear axle bolt. Based on documents filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Ford is worried that the rear axle horizontal mounting bolt may fracture under heavy torque loads.


Assuming this takes place, the rear axle housing should eventually move out of position. In a best-case scenario, impacted drivers would notice an egregious amount of vibration. However, the eventual outcome will be a decoupling of the driveshaft. This leaves the back half of the vehicle without power and with a free-hanging component that could impact the pavement and cause even more damage. It also leaves the vehicle vulnerable to rollaways when parked unless the driver has applied the manual parking brake.


Following an investigation, it has been surmised that the bolt was not manufactured to endure the stress of “numerous peak torque events” on the 2020-2022 model year Ford Explorer. So, if you’ve been pinning the throttle at every green light, you’re probably more at risk than someone who has been feathering the gas pedal.


From the NHTSA Safety Recall Report:


A fractured rear axle bolt will allow the rear axle housing to move out of position, resulting in severe noise and vibration. If the rear axle bolt breaks, the driveshaft or halfshafts may become disconnected, resulting in loss of transmission torque to the rear wheels. Transmission torque is necessary to hold the vehicle in park and is also needed for the vehicle to move forward or backward. The loss of the primary park torque will allow the vehicle to roll in park if the parking brake is not applied, increasing the risk of crash and injury.
The joint design is not robust to peak axle input torques and manufacturing variability. The primary contributor is insufficient bearing area for maximum joint loads. This results in bearing area deformation, increasing bending stress on the bolt, which may lead to a fatigue failure.


Ford concluded an internal report pertaining to the chronology of the bushing/bolt defect and subsequent investigation to the NHTSA last month. At the time, there were nearly 400 reports of rear axle bolt failures in the relevant vehicles. However, only a fraction (roughly 5 percent) included any mention of rollaway issues or any loss in power. Most simply noted severe vibrations stemming from the back half of the SUV.


Owners of the affected Explorer models will receive notifications of the recall starting on November 6th. But those disinclined to wait can also use the NHTSA recall website to determine if their SUV is among the 238,364 being recalled. Dealers should be aware of the defect already.


The fix is predictably free and involves sending the vehicle to a Ford or Lincoln service center to have the subframe bushing and rear axle bolt replaced. The dealer will also inspect the rear axle cover for any damage around the bolt-hole location and replace the cover if any unacceptable wear is found.


[Image: Ford Motor Co.]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by  subscribing to our newsletter.

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
5 of 26 comments
  • Jpolicke Jpolicke on Oct 16, 2023

    I'm guessing Ford needed to free up some shelf space in the company library, so they threw out all those TQM books by Deming, Juran, etc.

    • See 2 previous
    • EBFlex EBFlex on Oct 17, 2023

      “Ford, GM, and Chrysler were never disciples of Deming”

      Oh Jeff, yet another easily disproven lie. You should really seek professional help to get this under control. Lying like this is not a healthy behavior.


  • Akear Akear on Oct 18, 2023

    Ford is looking more like 1980 GM every day.

  • KOKing For that money there are some great oceanfront properties that aren't gonna slide downhill after the next massive rain. And the property will likely continue to appreciate the way things are out here. But the company is probably past saving.
  • Add Lightness Let's be real, this $C162,000 truck will only ever be used to it's limits by it's civilian owner in the middle east and then only for a few days until the thrill wears off and it's on to the next halo truck.
  • Ajla If I were allowed to rule with an iron fist and had the capital to build at least 50k units I'd take the car company.
  • Eric I would take the house, sell it at a profit to some poor schmuck and invest the profit in something other than "green technology".
  • Urlik Of course the IIHS moves the goal posts. It’s all about staying relevant.
Next