About the author

Paul Feldman is a FairWarning staff writer.

5 comments to “Hit by Complaints About Fumes, Ford to Begin Providing Free Fixes for Explorers”


    As I asked you in my post, do you drive a FORD EXPLORER? You did not answer, so I would assume, NO? I don’t know. Ford is definitely hiding the cracked exhaust manifold problems. And yes, the carbon monoxide has been detected with the proper equipment. Not a home detector, but a low level carbon monoxide detector as I already stated. As the exhaust manifolds heat up to disperse the exhaust fumes, the cracks are enlarging on these defective manifolds and therefore letting alot of the exhaust fumes escape BEFORE it even enters the catalytic converter. This has been happening on our vehicle since the very first night we brought our vehicle home, after we got to drive it on the interstate at highway speeds. That is why people are not aware of the carbon monoxide poisoning until they drive on the interstate and it really makes them sick. When you are driving the vehicle just in town you don’t realize what is really happening. FORD ENGINEERS should be able to figure this out! And so with all of the open entry points all over these vehicles, that is a set up for poisoning. Exhaust fumes are escaping from the front of the vehicle, and making people deathly sick from this. I never said for you to be silent, and you are entitled to your opinion. I said out of respect for other people who own these vehicles, to not say, that people can imagine this. That highly offends me! What I am telling you is not my opinion, this is what we live with everytime we have to drive this vehicle. And if I offended you, then you should be in all of our positions. We are highly offended that we have to pay 50K to 60K for a vehicle and can’t use it safely. FORD has sent some of these vehicles to the NHTSA TESTING FACILITY IN OHIO and the FORD ENGINEERS cannot identify the problem? It’s not that complicated, and if there are no carbon monoxide problems then why has FORD issued 4 TSB’s to address the issue. The first one was issued in 2012. And the latest just recently. And now they are doing this as a complimentary service, for piece of mind. REALLY, I am very passionate about this issue and very upset that this has continued since 2011 until almost 2018. So I am not here to argue the point with you, but I am here to tell our story. So many people are being hurt by this and Ford needs to be held accountable. Thank you for your opinion and good luck in your continuing research, it is out there if you know where to look.

  2. Matthew Mabey

    Ms. Talbot,
    Thank you for informing me of the results of your measurements. Please note that I never said there was no proof. I avoid the use of the word “proof” outside of a mathematical context. What I did do was decry the lack of any mention of data in the reporting on this issue. What I did say was show me the data. Please, in this day and age, do not put words into my mouth (or posting in this case).

    Both you and Mr. Donnay have shared some data here. In the case of Mr. Donnay’s news story, data carried the day and Ford fixed the vehicle. Ford then apparently offered to buy the vehicle back when the customer wasn’t satisfied, even when the TV station’s independent data showed that their vehicle was fixed.

    I hasten to point out that the coverage of the news story linked to above avoided actual data. This is most especially true of the text version, which is what my searching on this issue is going to find. They didn’t tell us Mr. Donnay’s measurements for either before or after the Ford repairs. Why? They imply Ford is hiding something, but then they turn around and do the same thing in their reporting.

    So, I am still here decrying the lack of data in the coverage and discussion of this issue. But I am happy to hear that somebody has started making measurements. I knew that there are lots of people like Mr. Donnay out there that have the equipment to make these measurements. That is why I was pointing out the lack of data in the coverage. Why is so much ink devoted to subjective observations when objective data should at least accompany the subjective comments in the reporting.

    Ms. Talbot, you specify a cracked exhaust manifold in your post, which could easily be detected with the proper equipment. If you have a cracked exhaust manifold, Ford should unquestioningly be replacing it. It should be covered by the emissions warranty. Did you detect the crack, or have you just inferred it? It is certainly a reasonable inference, because very little CO should be exiting your tailpipe. I’m just wondering, because that statement jumped out at me. One of the biggest questions for me in this is where the CO is coming from in the first place. If, or when, present, it has to be coming from somewhere and it certainly shouldn’t be coming from downstream of the catalytic converter. How, and in what quantities, it gets into the passenger compartment is secondary to my way of thinking. No car should be spewing out CO for any of us to breath, inside or outside the vehicle.

    Finally, Ms. Talbot, no, I will not be silent on this issue. I have as much freedom of speech as you do. Your suggestion otherwise is highly offensive. Please reread my final line in my original post: “I will continue to watch this story develop, but I hope that somebody, somewhere, will start to backup claims of CO with measurements of CO.” My expressed hope was for data to backup the claims. Why, because data will help bring about a solution.


    Well Mr Mabey let me inform you that we have tested our 2015 Ford Explorer with a PYLE LOW LEVEL CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR PCMM05 and we have definitely identified that carbon monoxide is entering our vehicle. The carbon monoxide is escaping from the cracked exhaust manifolds and entering in over 80 entry points. The detector registered up to 64ppm after only 30 minutes of driving on the interstate. So for you to say that there is no proof, you are certainly wrong. We are not imagining this problem. We have been sick for over 2 years with these symptoms, and Ford continues to lie to their customers. Do you have an Explorer that is making you sick? Out of respect for all of the people who do own one, please don’t comment on this issue unless you or your family members have been made deathly sick with this. This is a very serious PROBLEM! FORD IS STEALING MONEY FROM PEOPLE FOR THESE VEHICLES AND WE CAN’T EVEN DRIVE THEM. GET ON THE NHTSA, 2015 FORD EXPLORER NHTSA, WE ARE NOT ALL IMAGINING THIS PROBLEM. IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS IT WITH SOMEONE WHO OWNS ONE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME. HAVE A GOOD DAY!

  4. Albert Donnay

    @Matthew raises a great point about measuring CO. It is very easy to do.

    As a consulting toxicologist, I’ve measured CO with professional instruments in a variety of civilian Explorers (MY2011, 2015, 2016, 2017) that had no aftermarket modifications. I did some of these investigations for NBC4 News in DC, which has aired several reports on the issue, see: http://www.nbcwashington.com/results/?keywords=ford+explorer

    I found peak CO levels in Explorers with exhaust leaks in the range of 20-30ppm, with steady state approx. 50%-75% lower. The exhaust enters only when rapidly accelerating or decelerating above 45mph, with AC or heat on recirculate. But others whose Explorers also have a cracked manifold have reported much higher readings (up to low 100s), and these are evident even when parked and idling. (see written complaints posted at safecars.gov and video of CO measurements at youtube.com)

    Ford claims that the CO levels inside Explorers “do not exceed what people are exposed to every day,” but this is not true. The EPA limit for outdoor exposure is 9ppm average, and this has not been exceeded in any city in over a decade. Non-smokers are now rarely exposed to more than 3ppm unless they live with inadequately vented attached garages or combustion appliances. For people habituated to less than 3ppm, exposure to 20ppm or more can quickly result in CO symptoms.

    Note also that seven years into this problem, Ford dealers still do not have CO detectors of any kind. They tell customers they can only test for and repair complaints about “odors.” On the rare occasions when Ford HQ has sent technicians from Dearborn to measure CO, they have come and gone without leaving their results in writing, either for the customer or the dealership. But in at least one case I was involved in, Ford’s expert admitted measuring 20ppm before repairs were made that lowered this to 3ppm.

    Ford won’t disclose the full range of CO levels it has measured in Explorers, and it won’t even disclose its own internal CO standards. Its spokespeople also deny any government standards exist specifically for CO in vehicles, but Russia established a 5ppm CO limit for vehicle interiors in 2006. And Russia is one of just three countries where Ford makes the Explorer (along with USA and Venezuela).

    I recommend that Explorer owners keep recirculate OFF to reduce the risk of leaks. Anyone who smells exhaust while driving should heed the warning in the Explorer owner’s manual and stop driving immediately. Such vehicles are not safe to drive because exhaust always contains CO. Any Ford dealer in your area should be willing to send a tow truck to get your vehicle, and they should give you a free loaner while they attempt repairs. Unfortunately, the recommended repairs do not always fix all the leaks, and so Ford has begun offering buybacks to some owners who remain dissatisfied.

  5. Matthew Mabey

    Nowhere have I seen any measurements indicating that CO is a problem in unmodified Ford Explorers.
    People do imagine things, especially in this day and age of the high-tech rumor mill that we call the Internet.
    Measuring CO is very straight-forward. If there is a problem, it should be easily measured and documented. The absence of any reference to such measurements in the reporting here, and elsewhere, makes me very skeptical.
    To me, it appears Ford is acting out of an abundance of caution, given that there appear to be absolutely no measurements of elevated CO in Ford Explorers. How does one fix something that can’t be observed and measured.
    I will continue to watch this story develop, but I hope that somebody, somewhere, will start to backup claims of CO with measurements of CO.
    Show me data.

Leave a comment