Why Ford is recalling these vehicles a second time
The recall is for the 2022 Ford F-150, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). In total, 1,278 of these vehicles are being recalled because the vehicles were repaired incorrectly under a recall from Sept. 14, 2022.
'The parking lights may flicker when the headlights are activated,' the administration explained. 'As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard number 108, 'Lamps Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.'"
Ford estimates that 100% of these recalled vehicles could have the defect. The company added that it's unaware of any reports of accidents or injuries related to this condition.
As a remedy, dealers will replace the light emitting diode control model and update the software, free of charge. Owner notification letters explaining the safety risk will be mailed on Sept. 15.
More Business News
Amazon to remove its app on these devices come Wednesday, Aug. 20
Dairy tech company to close Mass. manufacturing facility, lay off 80 workers
Recall alert: More than 120K Jaguar Land Rover suspension arms at risk of detaching
Jersey Mike's to open four new Mass. locations in 2025 — here's where
Business Monday ETC: Aug. 18, 2025
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Tesla Probed by US Agency Over Reporting Crashes Months Late
US auto safety regulators are looking into delays by Tesla Inc. in reporting details of crashes involving driver-assistance technology. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has identified multiple incident reports from the automaker that were submitted 'several months or more' after the accidents took place, according to a filing posted to the agency's website. Under an agency order, companies were generally required to file such reports within one or five days of receiving notice of a crash, NHTSA said.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
US probing delays in Tesla crash reports involving driver assistance systems
(Reuters) -The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Thursday it is opening an investigation into delays in Tesla reports of crashes involving advanced driver assistance systems or self-driving vehicles. The auto safety agency said it has identified numerous incident reports submitted by Tesla in which reported crashes occurred several months or more before the dates of the reports, while the agency required a report to be submitted within one or five days of Tesla receiving notice of the crash. NHTSA said it is opening an audit query "to evaluate the cause of the potential delays in reporting, the scope of any such delays, and the mitigations that Tesla has developed to address them." Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
USA Today
6 hours ago
- USA Today
The U.S. won't enforce car fuel efficiency rules. That could cost you money.
Last month, President Donald Trump's signature bill eliminated the penalties car makers would have had to pay for not meeting fuel economy requirements. The car industry applauded the move, which, federal data shows, has cost manufacturers over a billion dollars in fines in the last decade. While the fuel efficiency rules are still in the books, for now, taking away the fines, some experts say, can remove incentives to make cars use fewer gallons for more miles. 'If there's no penalty, the auto companies can cheat at will,' said Dan Becker, the director of the Safe Climate Transport Campaign at The Center for Biological Diversity. 'It's a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card.' But what does that mean for you? To illustrate the impact fuel economy rules could have on how much you pay at the gas station, USA TODAY compiled data for nearly 100 of the most popular cars by sales in the country. For example, driving the most efficient 2025 Ford F-150 for 15,000 miles costs about $2,000 today. That cost would be cut nearly in half if Ford retrofitted the truck to meet federal efficiency standards it was required to follow by 2031. That conclusion is based on the miles-per-gallon rating of this car now, compared with what it's required to have in a few years. Using the same method across all the popular car models, potential saving estimated by USA TODAY ranged from $53 up to $1,432, with most cars saving between $900 and $1,200, if the requirements are met. The analysis included passenger cars, SUVs, minivans and pickup trucks. Although car manufacturers plan their models years ahead, the rollback could mean that eventually they won't feel pressure to innovate or make their cars more fuel-efficient, Becker said. K. Venkatesh Prasad, senior vice president of research and chief innovation officer at the Center for Automotive Research, said there could be a slowdown in mileage improvements without regulatory demand, but the industry thinks on a global scale. 'Avoiding local (say, U.S.) cost given relaxed local regulations would hurt global sales or add new cost to sales of the US-designed products in other markets (China and Europe) so car makers and equally importantly the major suppliers would all invest to be ready for all major markets,' Prasad said in an emailed statement. Last year, the Biden administration said its fuel efficiency standards for 2027 through 2031 would save Americans over $23 billion. While it's an imperfect system, experts say the fuel efficiency requirements work, not only for drivers but for the environment too. David Greene, a research professor at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, co-authored a study that estimated the almost-doubling of fuel economy between 1975 and 2018 saved 2 trillion gallons of gasoline and 17 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide. Beyond the removal of fines, the broader fuel economy requirements set by the previous administration are also being reviewed, a National Highway Transportation Safety Administration agency spokesperson told USA TODAY, in a statement. Asked whether it still projects that drivers will save $23 billion in fuel costs in the coming years, the agency said: 'We look forward to sharing the updated assessment of costs and benefits as part of the rulemaking process. Once the updated standards are completed, the agency will continue to track and notify companies when they are out of compliance.' The agency pointed to the projected increase in costs for new cars from the standards in place. Its analysis last year showed that, while regulatory costs would add a few hundred dollars to car prices, that increase would eventually be offset by fuel savings. The removal of penalties is part of a larger trend to undo regulations around the fossil fuel industry. Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed to rollback greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars. These two standards work together: the less fuel a car needs to use, the lower its emissions. Greene, who previously served as an advisor for the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, acknowledges that the emissions standards were ambitious, but said removing these could hamper efforts to curb climate change. 'That's a huge blow to the U.S. efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to mitigate the damaging effects of climate change, which we see just about every day now,' Greene said. Transportation, which also includes ships, trains and planes, is the largest sector emitting climate-warming gases, according to the EPA. When EPA administrator Lee Zeldin announced the car greenhouse gas emissions repeal, he touted the more affordable prices and regulatory relief. However, the agency's own draft assessment showed that the move could cost the economy hundreds of billions of dollars, USA TODAY previously reported. The Biden EPA rule would have increased costs of new cars: between $900 for a sedan to $2,600 for an SUV, according to the projections announced at the time. But in the long run, cheaper maintenance and fuel savings would have offset those initial costs, estimating sedan and SUV drivers saving $4,400 over the lifetime of the car. Incentives to switch to electric cars, which would have added to the savings, are also vanishing. For example, people who buy new electric cars no longer get $7,500 in federal tax credits. Trump administration also pulled the plug on a Biden initiative to grow the network of electric vehicle chargers. Whether car makers will continue to comply with the future fuel economy standards is yet to be determined, but Becker points towards the past. After the fuel standards were initially set, they stayed about the same for about two decades and emissions didn't improve further until they were upped again during Obama's administration. 'The auto companies, without the rules, failed to improve the efficiency of their vehicles,' Becker said. Our methodology USA TODAY based its analysis on the 100 most popular cars in the country. We looked up each model on a federal database to find its miles-per-gallon rating for 2025 models, or the latest available for some recently discontinued models. Each model has various trims (like 2WD or 4WD) with different fuel economy. We used the most efficient trim, excluding EVs and plug-in electric hybrids, to lean on a conservative estimate. We compared costs under that current fuel economy against the required economy for 2031, using the current fuel prices from the Energy and Information Administration. Some caveats: The fuel economy ratings for current cars are taken under ideal lab conditions. Real world fuel efficiency tends to be lower than lab ratings. The government-required levels also don't mean that every car meets or will meet them. These apply as a fleet average, weighted by sales, to car manufacturers. Potential fuel savings from an alternative method that David Greene showed USA TODAY projected smaller savings but still in the hundreds of dollars. This method calculated a fractional reduction in fuel consumption based on current and future fuel economy requirements.
