Ford CEO Jim Farley has been saddled with the massive task of righting the Ford ship for the past five years. But things aren’t exactly going well, at least when it comes to quality. The company issued the most recalls of any brand in the U.S. in 2022, with 67 recalls, and the highest in 2023, with 54 recalls. Ford dropped to third place in 2024, beaten by Stellantis, but still issued 62 recalls that year. So far in 2025, it’s issued a gargantuan 104 recalls—far more than any other automaker.
Not only does bad quality reflect poorly on brand reputation, but it’s also costly. According to WarrantyWeek, the company spent over $10 billion—around one-fifth of the company’s entire value—in 2023 and 2024 combined fixing cars under warranty.
But according to Farley, those numbers shouldn’t be indicative of Ford’s current products. In a wide-ranging interview, he told the Detroit Free Press the majority of the cars subject to recalls right now were developed before 2020, when he first took charge of the brand. From the interview:
“I can’t do anything about that engineering. It’s in the field. All I can I do is deal with the problems quickly,” Farley said. “Anyone who says, ‘They should make the recalls go away.’ I can’t remake the vehicles that were made seven years ago. That’s not understanding the recall process. The recall process is when you have an issue in the field, dealing with it.”
Farley also mentioned that most of the recalls you see from Ford now are software-based. He cites this as an industry-wide issue rather than just a problem at Ford. Though I rarely side with CEOs, I’m inclined to agree with him here. Tesla recalled 5.1 million cars last year, but a majority of those recalls were to fix software-based issues, like incorrectly sized warning lights and rearview camera faults.
It’s tough to tell right now whether Ford’s current portfolio is any more reliable—the only way we’ll truly know is to wait five years to see how recall numbers and warranty spend play out. But Farley seems pretty confident he and his team have fixed the issues, going as far as to compare his vehicles to, historically, one of the most reliable car brands ever:
“Our durability of our powertrains that we’re testing are fully competitive, we believe, with the likes of Toyota,” Farley said. “Since I’ve been CEO, we’ve improved our quality of our launches. The Expedition and Navigator were our best launches in company history. We lost almost no vehicles and so far, as the vehicles mature in the field for six months now, we’ve had almost no recalls and very little issue with those vehicles. I would say we are making a lot of progress and it does take time.”
Seeing as how the number of recalls has only increased at Ford, it’s tough to rely solely on Farley’s word. But he’s not the only one noticing improvements. The Free Press also spoke to Chris Sutton, a senior vice president of automotive benchmarking at J.D. Power, who said Ford is now above the industry average when it comes to initial quality, which tracks quality after the first three months of ownership via owner surveys.
“What has been most encouraging is in this most recent study of IQS, both the F-150 and SuperDuty won their respective segments and so for Ford that has to be encouraging that they’re on the right track,” Sutton said.
Also, in J.D. Power’s Vehicle Dependability Study, which measures vehicle quality after three years of ownership, Ford is slightly above industry average.
“So both of those metrics would indicate progress in the last five years,” Sutton said.
“Above average” and “just as good as Toyota” are two very different things in my mind. Toyota’s luxury sub-brand Lexus ranked first overall in this year’s Dependability study published in February, while Toyota itself came in fourth (despite screwing up so badly it had to replace 100,000 engines last year). Ford, meanwhile, was all the way down in 13th, behind all four of GM’s brands, as well as Porsche, BMW, and Kia.
Personally, I’ve only ever owned one Ford, and it was trouble-free from the day I bought it to the day I sold it, even after a dozen track days and countless autocross events. But my dad’s Focus wasn’t nearly as pleasant. I’d like nothing more than to see Ford excel when it comes to dependability. Based on its history, I have my doubts. But going by these preliminary numbers, it seems things might actually be heading in the right direction.
Top graphic images: Toyota; Ford; DepositPhotos.com
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
as reliable as grenanded trannys in the taco or blown motors in the bigger motors? Good job ford, they are in the race to the bottom with you.
I got “lucky”(?) that I got one of the first 2022 public Mavericks ever built back in 2021. Started building the week of 9/13/21 and I got a 9/20/21 build, so I knew to expect some issues. By and large it was a great car but there were some early quirks. I also had 5 recalls in the 16 months I owned it, not to mention some peeling paint that had to be redone. I know its the first model year of a brand new car but that seems excessive. Earlier this year I was back in the market and looked at mavericks again because there were a lot of 24’s on the lot. It was actually because they had a stop sale due to a another recall on the backup camera.
Recently, Ranger Raptor’s have peaked my interest. looking up more info on them and right now they are on stop sale because the side impact air bag can tear when it triggers. I was quickly reminded about Ford’s quality issues and I cant imagine the Ranger Raptor was developed before 2020? Maybe the maverick was, I guess.
Keep in mind, out of those 5 and the new additional recall I saw with the maverick, and the raptor recall mentioned, only one I remember being software related. The rest were physical fix issues.
Based on 6 months data, we are as good as Toyota!
The EU version:
”Yes, yes, there were some problems in the past, but here are our new gen Puma and Kuga, with recently introduced timing chain designs and the DCT mild hybrid thing built by the cheapest supplier! Better than Toyota! Honest!”
One word: Ecoboost. While an aged wet timing belt may loose teeth and clog oil passages perfectly fine by itself, Ford of Europe also did quite bad job of communicating the oil requirements, when the ecoboost was introduced. Apparently even dealerships had occasionally used wrong spec oil. Leading to swelling and disintegrating timing belts later. Even a top up with wrong oil can be enough to cause problems later in life, apparently. Same with PSA and their 1.2 engines. Of course these can be supplier caused issues, but the customer does not care and everyone knows or should know that the affected cars are potential time bombs. Toyota quality, maybe not…part of the Toyota reliability image in Yurp is based on the fact that they have been reasonable with their customers. They have a 10y/200k km warranty, provided that the cars are serviced at official dealers. And it can be reactivated even.
Regarding the wet timing belt issue, Stellantis has given extended warranties in some countries, but you are probably out of luck if you can’t prove that correct oil was used every time. Ford? Cancelled Focus and Fiesta… Maybe not for this reason, only, but likely included in the equation. Of course some warranty work is done, but what about the older cars? Shit resale value, that is for sure.
“Quality” is a term understood very differently by Ford the manufacturer and the consumer who buys a new car. Ford is not, has never and will never, attempt to build the most durable, longest lasting, best vehicle possible.
Ford just wants your money.
Ford would like to keep your vehicle running through the warranty period and a little longer to satisfy your minimum expectations. “Quality” is the minimum level of quality / durability / reliability that will meet the consumers expectations – the minimum.
In the 1990’s Ford’s catch phase was “At Ford, Quality in Job 1”. At the same time, the Essex V6 in my wife’s ‘96 Mustang blew its head gaskets at just 75,000 miles (a well known quality issue for which Ford refused to accept responsibility) and the transmission refused to go into gear if the outside temp was below 50F (another known defect). Even the speedometer failed. If Ford wanted to sell me a new vehicle they’d have to first reimburse me for those past expenses, with interest.
“Ford just wants your money.”
Uh, that’s kind of how every company works. The sooner you learn companies don’t care about their customers, the happier you’ll be.
And at the same time with their QC issues, Mr Farley is wasting time entertaining celebrities such as Ms Sydney Sweeney. And Mr Jimmy Fallon.
I wonder how he will react when SHE has a problem with her new Ford product…probably he can’t ignore it or take his time as he does with us laypeople…
Considering how explody Toyota truck engines have been lately, he’s probably spot on.
Funny story, I have owned three Toyotas and two of them threw rods through through the side of the block, I do like Toyotas though.
They are durable, the problem is reliability.
Every automaker has their particular reliability quirks. Ford’s is that they can’t launch a vehicle. I mean, look at how many of their product launches have gone disastrously in the past 10-20 years. Jim Farley is even quoted in the article as pointing out that they had two good launches in the past year — which, to their credit, IS an improvement.
I remember hearing the advice about Ford is to buy a car in its last model year in order to have the best shot at a good vehicle. (But that is probably solid advice for most cars.)
I wonder how many recalls aren’t official recalls, as opposes to critical fixes rolled into routine maintenance software upgrades, which get pushed out frequently.
I don’t know if it was designed under Farley or previous CEOs, but the software in the brand new Explorer I rented exactly a year ago was buggier than the mattresses in an hourly hourly motel in Queens I used to frequent (for business).
Speaking of Toyota: what happens to those 100k replaced engines? Do they rebuild them to keep as warranty replacements later on? Melt them? Mount them on the CEO’s office walls?
29k for an engine replacement….count me out.
Ha ha ha ha ha! Oh, man. The very idea . . .
Considering what I’ve heard about the power train in the new Tundra/Tacoma/Land Cruiser, this could be accurate! I’ve had good experiences with all of the Fords I’ve owned (minus my 90 F250, but that’s shitty aftermarket parts fault) but I have the benefit of buying used ones that have proven track records. (Grand Marquis, 1st and 2nd Gen Escape)
I’ve also owned Toyotas, and they were pretty good, but considering their LEgEnDarY status (91 Toyota Pickup/Hilux, 80 Series Land Cruiser) I wouldn’t consider them worth the absolutely stupid amount of money they command these days.
Where I am from, that era of Toyota was legendary for RUST. To the point they had a massive recall to replace frames. But I have no doubt that in places with no salt they things lasted forever.
I live in one of those rustless places. Old beat to shit toyotas command about 10x what they should be worth. Neither the Cruiser or the Pickup had a spot of rust on them when I sold, but the Pickup had its second blown headgasket, and the interior on the cruiser was crumbling to dust.
Oh, the Toyota Tax is second only to the Porsche Tax, and a lot less justified, IMHO.
I have no interest in overpaying for a bland appliance, no matter how “reliable’ it is supposed to be. A Range Rover is reliable enough for my purposes, in my hands. Unlike Dougie DuhMuro, I know which end of a screwdriver is which too.
LC70s rust badly in Canada. In the Middle East they last forever (with proper maintenance however, as I have seen some examples with potentially blown engines as they tend to be abused by their owners).
EVERY BoF Toyota rusts horribly anywhere there is lots of road salt. And the cars aren’t that great either, if far better than in the past.
I’m with you here, no issues with the powertrain of any Fords’ I’ve owned. With Dodge however I have not had the same luck.
I’ve never had proper powertrain problems on really any of the rigs I’ve owned, or at least any that weren’t excusable by mileage. I’m pretty meticulous when it comes to maintenance though, which probably helps. That and, again, I tend to buy older vehicles with known track records of reliability.
The Focus was a better car when Ford was partnering with and owned part of Mazda. I owned an early Focus, but my last two cars were Mazda. The engines in early Foci were developed with or by Mazda. The companies split and we got Skyactiv and Ecoboom …ah Ecoboost respectively. As for Jim Farley there may be a picture of him if you look up hubris in dictionary.
““Our durability of our powertrains that we’re testing are fully competitive, we believe, with the likes of Toyota,””
Uh huh… and are you still equipping engines with wet oil pump belts that are impossible to change without tearing down the engine? You know, like in the 2.7L Ecoboost?
https://youtu.be/xZJicuObVDY?si=cTQdUoML03Uio5rh&t=1038
Or in the current 1.5L Ecoboost?
https://youtu.be/CEzqz8C4lxw?si=VRV2RItCsoWzdWpd&t=960
And having you done anything about internal coolant pumps on your transverse V6 engines that leak coolant into the oil eventually and prematurely kill the engines?
If you haven’t taken care of these issues, you’re not on par with Toyota.
But are the wet-belt engines unreliable? A “replace this labor-intensive part after 100,000 miles” engine is not the same thing as an “unreliable” engine, however repugnant the former may be to some people.
They do seem to die young if the wrong oil is used (definitely an issue in a country where many people can barely change it on time, never mind with the specified unicorn tears), but I consider that user error.
Click on the 2nd link and go to 16 min in and take a look at the condition of that belt after just 4 years and 70,000 miles.
And then ask yourself if that oil pump belt will allow that engine to last for another 10 years and/or 130,000 miles…
Oh sure… it’s “good enough” to last past the warranty period. And that’s about it.
The new 1.5L EcoBoost doesn’t. It’s now based on the Modular Power Cylinder architecture with the 2.0L and 2.3L with a chain.
“The new 1.5L EcoBoost doesn’t.”
While the 1.5L Ecoboost doesn’t have a wet timing belt anymore, it still inexplicably has a wet OIL PUMP BELT. Look at the 2nd video I linked. You can see it at 16 minutes in.
It’s called “confident failure” and it’s a mandatory soft skill for any auto exec.
IQS surveys probably don’t mean much to the poor bastards nursing their powershift transmissions to their third job.
Fords has always had a culture of letting the customer be the final prototype testers. A first year Ford product is a rolling casino, and the house always wins.
I have a ford for work, and a toyota for home. Both have been rock solid reliable since I bought them. 5 Years with the used f150, and 14 years for the tacoma. One recall on each.
Bullshit. I bought a 2022 Maverick and after 13 recalls and a power loss, I had had enough. I wanted to love it – some parts of it, I did. It’s the perfect “Dad car”, as it’s fuel efficient enough for a commute, can haul most things I need, and can fit the family in a pinch. But durable? What a joke. I dumped it at a Toyota dealership and drove away with a Tacoma. I can only hope that Toyota eventually builds something similar.
I think you are in luck. Toyota is certainly making one.
Durability? Maybe. Reliability? Maybe not.
There is a reason I refuse to buy American any more.If they could compete I would in a second but it’s not even close.
you are smart
Made in America isn’t inherently a bad thing. My ’06 Honda was built in Ohio and it’s proven itself quite reliable over the past 20 years.
Make people believe it’s true by saying it loud and repeatedly..
Seems to work for other talking heads.
Sorry, but “as durable as a Toyota” strikes me a a load of cack. Toyotas have fallen from their 90s-00s peak, but they still avoid the ridiculous wet belts, plastic pans/parts, and buggy code that Fords have sported during Jim Farley’s tenure. Youtube is friggin’ filled with engine tear-downs of prematurely deceased Ford Ecosport engines of various kinds. Even their vaunted F-150 reputation has taken a well-deserved hit (see linked image).
I’ve owned two Toyotas (and will probably own one or two more before I’m done) and exactly zero Fords. I WOULD have bought a hybrid Maverick when they were theoretically available for $21,600. for a couple years, but of course that was just theory if you lived anywhere within a few hundred miles of Southern California, where $5,000. to $10,000. dealer mark-ups were the norm. Now that base hybrid Mavericks are closer to $30K than to $20K, I’m content to stay Ford-free.
https://imgur.com/a/UD9C2j2
I agree Ford as a brand is nowhere close to Toyota despite their recent drop in quality. Most of their lineup is still as solid as it can get.
But your link is non-informative without model years. Only one of the problems listed has a timeframe and most of those model years are hovering a decade old so they’re not representative of anything on the new car sales lot.
The 5.0 no longer has oil burning issues, it was mainly a 2018-2020 thing. The 3.5 Ecoboost hasn’t had timing chain tensioner issues over this generation (2021+). The 10R still shifts funny in some cases but no longer has CDF drum issues. 2023 was the official year they fixed it, however there are already many 2018+ trucks with over 200K on their original 10R transmission. A safe bet would be 2021 and newer trucks.
And Toyota uses wet belts. That’s why Ford started using them. “Well, they do it, and they’re TOYOTA! If they can make it reliable, we should be able to, as well…”
Should is doing a lot of work there.
What Toyotas use a wet oil pump belt?
Dan, please educate me. Which Toyotas are using a wet belt please?
When the discussion of wet belt quality issues came up, one of the rationalizations cited was that Toyota, a classically conservative company from an engineering standpoint, uses wet timing belts in some of their engines. Ironically, it’s not exactly a Toyota engine (I think it came from PSA) but that it’s still Toyota standing behind it.
Are you able to provide more info? I am genuinely interested in this. And want to learn more about the issue and who actually uses these designs.
I have owned a few belt timed engines which feel like driving a possible grenade.
All of the many Toyotas we have owned have been timing chain equipped.
Appreciate any input, sources, links you can provide.
The Toyota example I recalled came from a discussion about why the choice was made in the first place – once the issue had begun to rear its head and warranty/quality teams were dealing with it.
So I’m not sure how much benchmarking they did (but they do a LOT); and the Toyota mention was a way to say “well, if the paragon of quality can do it, it should be ok.”
Also: using a wet timing belt to justify a wet oil pump belt is a little … stretch. You can at least inspect the timing belt.
I don’t think any Toyota engines use a belt-drive oil pump, but at least in some global markets, they used a PSA engine that had a wet timing belt in some displacements. Maybe they weren’t super concerned, since it’d be a supplier issue at that point.
“Deliver X amount of engines at specified quality. If they break, you eat it, we manage our customers.” So in terms of exposure, yes, the brand is exposed if there’s a massive supplier quality issue, but that can be mitigated by how well you take care of your customers when there is an issue.
Guaranteed that VW was also benchmarked which – as much as that might make you snort coffee out your nose in a reliability discussion – DOES happen to be a major, large-scale automaker.
And yet, none of those problems should have happened in the first place. The 3.5EB, for example, should never have had a timing chain tensioner problem. The fact that it’s fixed now just means that it was defective as originally designed, which is the definition of poor quality in my book. I’m sure Ford saved $2 on the engine and then refused warranty service if you were 1 mile over.
We could also say Toyota’s 2AZ-FE should have never had oil burning issues and the 3VZ-E engine should’ve never had HG issues, yet they did. Toyota never fixed those, btw. They just phased those out for something else.
And their newest V35-FTS engine should’ve been smooth sailing considering lessons learned from all twin turbo V6 engines already on the market, but it wasn’t. It’s an spectacular failure of an engine and worse yet seems like big T is not making anything to solve it. Replacing engines is not a root cause analysis and worse yet, the Hybrid version is not being recalled despite also failing.
There are 2021+ F 150s in Qatar. Not a single cdf issue I have heard of.
I supposed Ford designed the 10 speed for the Middle East differently than they do for your market.
yeah just what I meant. Although it was officially fixed in 2023, off the record it seems like 2021+ vehicles are a safe bet.
Heck, I’ve seen 2018+ trucks with over 500K miles on them. I own one with 198K with a 2nd year all original 10R80 and a wet oil pump belt that has proved not to be an issue in the 2.7EB. But it was an issue on the older 1.0EB. Looks like they learned from that and implemented a much more reinforced belt on the 2.7EB and probably the 1.5 EB
In general, the 2.7 seems to be tougher than the other engines.
Owned nothing but Toyotas since 1991. But owned various Toyotas from 1971 up to this point in time. I doubt that another brand will be purchased with the exception of a Mazda perhaps.
Never had an engine issue except for a couple that I bought 50 years ago with blown head gaskets due to overheating. Fixed them and they are probably still running today somewhere. I have owned so many that I have lost count. The trucks were totally bullet proof, close to a million trouble free miles on the 3 trucks.
Latest one is ’09, 100K miles, not a dime spent except for oil and gas, tires, in 15 years. Beat that Ford…Or anyone else.
If I had to buy something new today Toyota would be the decision.
Ford sucks.
Fight me, I dare ya…
100Kmiles in anything with just wear and tear consumables is fantastic! 🙂
The Tundra is a no-go nowadays. A Ram Hurricane might be more reliable and that’s saying a lot.
Tundra is tied with Silverado and Sierra with the 6.2 on rock bottom reliability.
No experience with the Tundra.
But have heard a few horror stories.
Sorry Ford (and GM and whoever the hell makes the other US brand). Just like in the 70’s, I lost all faith in you building decent cars and trucks at a decent price. Maybe in 20 or 30 years you’ll pull your collective heads back out of your ass. But after spending weeks of research on replacing my 11 year old outback (which has had nothing but 1 set of brakes and tires in its lifetime) I am buying another Subaru. This time an impreza.
My 2018 Impreza has been super reliable. 124K miles atm. But my in-laws previous 2011 Outback required two HG jobs and head re-surfacing over the last 4 years they owned it. 220K miles by the time they got rid of it but it ended up being a quite expensive ownership experience. EJ25 strikes again.
Now my FB20D engine has nothing to do with that design and the dual injection system will give me many more miles of clean intake valves and great fuel economy
Let’s not pretend that Toyota has a perfect track record, and this is coming from a Toyota die-hard. The 7M engines in the 3rd gen Supras eat head gaskets for lunch. The 3VZ-FE (3.0 V6) sold in Pickups, T100s, and 4runners were notorious for head gasket issues. 5VZ-FE (3.4 V6) could see the milkshake of death. Early 1GR-FE (legendary 4.0 V6) experienced head gasket issues. The 2AZ-FE (2.4 engine) in the Camrys and XB’s were known to eat oil. That’s just engines! Don’t even get me started talking about frame rust.
Making cars is hard. Making cars that are reliable, while meeting regulations and fuel economy targets is really hard.
The difference between Ford and Toyota is that Ford likes to be on the forefront of technology while Toyota watches and waits. Toyota sees the failure points from other OEMs and designs a solution to hopefully mitigate the failure when that technology is introduced. When Toyota does fail, they are generally pretty quick about re-designing or fixing the flaw (except Frame Rust!!!).
I often say: Own a Ford for 5 years or a Toyota for 10-15.
+1 on the frame rust. Even the new frame in my parents’ 01 Tacoma is already starting to succumb to PA winters
Yes. Between a Ford or a Toyota, I would pick the Toyota simply because they are cheaper to maintain and offer good value for money. And I am no loyalist.
But this goes for small cars. I don’t trust trucks of any brand today.
I think the last durable thing Ford made was the 300-6 in my 92 F-250.
It might be the most durable engine ever put into a production vehicle.
I don’t use it much but years go by with nothing to do except oil changes and the occasional failing accessory. It’s a pig on fuel though, with mid teens mpg.
All the farmers near where I spent summers had white Ford trucks with 300/4.9s. The rest of the truck would return to the earth and the engine would keep going. A few were removed from the carcass of a rusted frame and used to power pumps and other equipment. It having a timing gear rather than a chain or belt was a huge reason they were so durable: that and the very low-stress and overbuilt nature of the engines since they were developed for industrial use.
And they did not complain about missing a maintenance schedule or two.
Or three, or all…
They were developed for the Falcon. They’re just an old design – inefficient but durable.
Even the first generation was widely used in industrial applications, and that requirement tends to drive a robust design. By the time the 300 came about, they started using seven main bearings, which was a significant upgrade to the four-bearing earlier models, which is what I believe was used in the Falcon.
The whole thing is a great example of why iterative designs can be such a great way to do things. You just need to change the things that don’t work and make minor adjustments to the things that do. The result tends to be very predictable.
Yeah don’t disagree. The Ford inline 6 is actually better than the GM 215/235/292
How bad were the 215/235/292 and how much did the cars they came in cost?
The Chevrolet inline 6 is phenomenal. Came in all sorts of things. If it’s a Chevy with a six from like 1962-the ’80s, it had that engine. And it’s great. I was off on displacements – and I was thinking of the earlier “Stovebolt” six, that was produced from like the 30s through the ’50s (it was the predecessor for the later engine)
Everyone made good inline sixes. The Ford Thriftmaster family is great. There’s the AMC 258 (and its smaller sizes), Chrysler’s flathead inline six had a long, long durable life (we had a pair of marine Crowns in a boat – they sounded great unmuffled), and of course the Slant 6.
The Hudson 306 cu in inline six…
And on and on.
Ok, I see.
I assume you were comparing the I6 of Ford in terms of performance.
The gas 460 was very reliable too.
The 7.3 PS, 6.9 IDI were also very reliable.
The Godzilla? Well…they had lifter issues for early models (fixed now), which neither the 460 nor the 6.8 v10 (minus the spark plug problems, which are probably easier to deal with) had.
Strange, that was kind of the selling point of the 300 in the 90’s, the 302 V8 made a bit more HP’s and thus felt less sluggish, but best you got in a 2wd short bed pickup was 16 mpg. Same truck, with the 300 was in the 20’s occasionally, but there was the slug slow trade off.
Mine has the check engine light on so it might not be running properly air/fuel wise but there are no drivability issues. It’s pre OBD-II so I don’t even have a scan tool that can scan it.
Try an OBD-I scanner; depending on the scanner and vehicle, you can get live data. I do with my ’95 F-150 with the 351.
Speaking of fuel economy, it sucks. I miss the 18mpg my ’98 Chevy C1500 got with the Vortec 305.
The 2-valve Modular motors were no slouch either.