Ford Motor Co. is recalling more than 1 million trucks, including the F-150, the top-selling U.S. vehicle, because straps that secure fuel tanks to the vehicles may corrode and cause the tanks to fall.

The defect has led to three fires and one injury, Wesley Sherwood, a Ford spokesman, said in an e-mail. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced the recall today on its website, reported Bloomberg.

The recalls follow an investigation opened last year by the U.S. auto-safety regulator. They are made in 21 U.S. states, and the District of Columbia, where de-icing chemicals used on roads in cold weather may cause corrosion of the metal straps.

“Ford has been polishing their image and getting it very, very good, so this doesn’t help,” said Jim Hall, principal of 2953 Analytics Inc., a consulting firm in Birmingham, Michigan. “They’ve got to get ahold of the affected customers fast; get it handled and put to bed. Don’t let it linger.”

The trucks being recalled are “older, higher-mileage” vehicles and have fuel-tank straps that “can corrode after operation for extended periods of time in high-corrosion areas,” Sherwood said.

Ford, based in Dearborn, Michigan, said the recall covers 1.1 million pickup trucks, including F-150s from model years 1997 to 2004; F-250s from model years 1997 to 1999; and Lincoln Blackwoods from model years 2002 to 2003.

The company said it will notify owners of affected vehicles in mid-September and make repairs at no cost. If replacement straps aren’t available when the recall repairs are done, the company said it may install a cable support under the fuel-tank strap as an interim repair.

Ford earlier this year recalled more than 1 million F-150s for air-bag defects after a push by U.S. regulators. Air bags in trucks from model years 2004 to 2006 may not deploy when needed. None of the trucks were included in both recalls, Sherwood said.

Ford rose 14 cents, or 1.2 percent, to $12.35 at 4:02 p.m. U.S. East Coast time in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The shares have lost 26 percent this year.

Ford Motor Co., poised to begin negotiations with the United Auto Workers, said second-quarter profit fell less than estimates as buyers paid more for models such as the Fiesta subcompact.

Net income fell to $2.4 billion from $2.6 billion a year earlier, Dearborn, Michigan-based Ford said today in a statement. Excluding some items, profit was 65 cents a share, beating the 61-cent average of 14 analysts’ estimates compiled by Bloomberg. Sales climbed 1.4 percent to $35.5 billion even after last year’s sale of Volvo Cars.

Ford is set to begin contract talks this week with the UAW to close a gap in labor costs with rivals. Chief Executive Officer Alan Mulally raised prices for Fiesta and Explorer sport-utility vehicles to offset some of the $4 billion in higher costs that Ford expects this year, including manufacturing spending.

“This wasn’t the easiest of quarters,” Lewis Booth, Ford’s Chief Financial Officer, told reporters today in Dearborn. In North America and Europe, “demand was a little bit weaker in both markets versus the first quarter” because of Europe’s debt crisis and supply constraints in North America.

Shares rose 25 cents, or 1.9 percent, to $13.42 before the start of regular trading.

Pretax profit in Ford’s European operations plunged 45 percent to $176 million. While the results compared unfavorably to a year earlier when the company was rebuilding inventories after government programs to scrap older vehicles, the figures were “well in-line with our planning,” Booth said.

Industrywide U.S. light-vehicle sales slowed to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 12.1 million in the second quarter from 13.1 million in the prior three months, according to Autodata Corp. The March 11 earthquake and tsunami in Japan reduced supply of vehicles and parts.

Ford’s U.S. deliveries rose 9 percent to 1.07 million in the first half, trailing the industry’s 13 percent gain. The 9 percent figure includes year-ago sales of Volvo vehicles.

“We’re looking at it being a rough ride for the rest of this year not just for Ford, but for the industry as a whole,” Stephen Spivey, an analyst at Frost & Sullivan Inc. in San Antonio, said in a phone interview before results were released.

Ford raised prices three times and lowered discounts more than the industry average in their home market during the first half, according to Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey-based Autodata. Higher prices boosted global revenue by $1.1 billion, the company said.

Mulally, 65, is betting U.S. consumers will switch from larger vehicles to more fuel-efficient cars such as the Fiesta and pay more for amenities such as heated leather seats as gasoline prices rise. Regular unleaded gas has exceeded $3.50 a gallon in the U.S. since March, according to AAA.

The cost of developing new models and improving the Ford and Lincoln brand images will add $2 billion to the company’s structural costs this year. Ford also reiterated its forecast for commodity costs to rise by another $2 billion.

“There are various kinds of initial hits to the bottom line as you’re bringing out new product, but if it’s done right you make that up on the back end,” Stephen Brown, a Chicago- based analyst at Fitch Ratings, said in a phone interview before results were released.

In 2008, Ford’s sales plunged when gas prices peaked at $4.11 a gallon and damped demand for the automaker’s pickups and SUVs. Ford had $30.1 billion in losses from 2006 through 2008, before earning $9.28 billion in the last two years.

Ford shares have declined 22 percent this year through yesterday after a 68 percent gain in 2010.

Ford’s second-quarter sales of $35.5 billion topped nine analysts’ average estimate for $32.1 billion.

The automaker boosted North American production for the quarter by 8.7 percent percent to 710,000 cars and trucks, in line with its forecast on April 26. Pretax profit for the region rose less that 1 percent percent to $1.91 billion.

Ford forecast a 7.5 percent increase to third-quarter production to 630,000 units in North America, according to today’s statement. Worldwide output will rise 7.3 percent to 1.35 million.

Ford maintained its for full-year industrywide U.S. sales of 13 million to 13.5 million vehicles, including medium-and heavy-duty trucks.
“We probably feel closer to the bottom end of that, but we’re still expecting to see some recovery in the second half as availability of product from all manufacturers becomes better,” Booth said.

Profit in Ford’s credit operations will fall by about $1.1 billion this year because of changes in lease depreciation and credit-loss reserves, repeating a previous forecast, the company said. Ford reiterated its forecast that the unit will distribute about $3 billion to the parent company this year.

Ford Credit distributed $1 billion to the parent company in the second quarter, bringing first-half contributions to $1.9 billion.

Ford’s automotive operations had $22 billion in cash on June 30, up from $21.3 billion on March 31. The company, which reduced debt by $14.5 billion last year, cut automotive debt to $14 billion on June 30, from $16.6 billion on March 31.

Ford has more debt than rivals because it borrowed more than $23 billion in late 2006 before credit markets froze, allowing it to avoid the bailouts and bankruptcies that befell the predecessors of General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC in 2009.

Ford Motor Co., poised to begin negotiations with the United Auto Workers, may report lower second-quarter profit tomorrow on rising costs for commodities and developing new vehicles.

Profit excluding some items may have dropped to 61 cents a share, according to the average of 14 analysts’ estimates, from 68 cents a year earlier. Ford formally begins talks this week with the UAW, which says workers should share more in Ford’s turnaround. Last year was Ford’s most profitable since 1999, reported Bloomberg.

Industrywide U.S. vehicle sales slowed in the quarter because of costlier cars and shortages after the March 11 tsunami in Japan. Chief Executive Officer Alan Mulally is raising prices for Fiesta subcompacts and Explorer sport-utility vehicles to offset some of the $4 billion in higher costs for commodities, advertising and new-product development.

“For Ford, the question is can you sustain the price discipline as the Japanese manufacturers come back?” Itay Michaeli, a New York-based analyst at Citigroup Inc., said in a phone interview. Michaeli rates Ford “buy” and predicts second-quarter profit of 60 cents a share.

U.S. auto sales slowed to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 12.1 million in the second quarter from a 13.1 million pace in the prior three months, according to Autodata Corp., as Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. deliveries tumbled.

Second-quarter profit will be equal or “slightly lower” than in the first quarter, when Ford earned $2.78 billion before taxes, Controller Bob Shanks said last month at an investor conference in Chicago.

Ford has said it wants to further lower labor costs, which it estimates are $8 an hour higher than the mostly non-union factories of foreign automakers and Chrysler Group LLC, which began its labor negotiations with the UAW today.

UAW President Bob King said in a July 22 interview in Southfield, Michigan, that the union will not be granting concessions.

“No way,” King said. “It would be the wrong thing to do to talk about concessions, they’re not needed today. The way that Ford can make up that cost gap really quickly is to grow market share and open up more facilities.”

Hourly workers at Chrysler and General Motors Co., as part of U.S-backed bankruptcies in 2009, agreed not to strike over wages and benefits during this year’s contract talks. Ford didn’t seek a U.S. bailout and UAW members at the automaker rejected the strike ban and arbitration.

King has said workers must be rewarded for the $7,000 to $30,000 in concessions they gave since 2005 to help U.S. automakers survive. The UAW’s contracts expire on Sept. 14.

The cost of developing new models and improving the Ford and Lincoln brand images will add $2 billion to Dearborn, Michigan-based Ford’s structural costs this year, Shanks said. Ford’s commodity costs may rise by another $2 billion.

Earnings from the Ford Credit finance unit this year will be $1.1 billion less because of changes in lease depreciation and credit-loss reserves, Ford said April 26.

Ford forecast a smaller year-over-year production increase in the second quarter than the 14 percent gain through March. North American output in the second quarter may rise 8.7 percent to 710,000 units, and production may fall in all other regions from the year-earlier period, Ford said.

Earnings in Europe may “deteriorate” from the first quarter on a 10 percent sequential drop in production and “competitive” promotional activity in the region, Joseph Amaturo, a New York-based analyst at Buckingham Research Group, said in a July 13 research note. Ford reported an operating profit of $293 million in Europe for the first quarter.

Ford fell 14 cents to $13.17 at 4 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The shares have declined 22 percent this year after a 68 percent gain in 2010.

Investors are concerned that Ford’s “product cadence” is peaking and that pricing may weaken, Peter Nesvold, a Jefferies & Co. analyst in New York, wrote in a July 14 research note.

“We think the new Ford Escape can move the needle meaningfully,” said Nesvold, who has a “buy” rating on Ford. “It seems to us that the stock is ascribing a very low probability on Ford’s ability to continue to get price.”

The average price U.S. buyers paid for Ford’s models rose 6 percent in April and 4 percent in May, George Pipas, Ford’s sales analyst, said on the company’s monthly sales conference calls. Ford’s average transaction price increase exceeded the industry’s in June, Pipas said July 1, without giving specifics.

Ford’s average spending on U.S. discounts and promotions through June declined 14 percent from a year earlier to $2,551, according to Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey-based Autodata. Industrywide incentive spending fell by 11 percent to an average of $2,437 per vehicle sold.

A new labor agreement with the UAW that “does not meaningfully erode” Ford’s financial and operating ability could contribute to an upgrade to the automaker’s credit rating, Fitch Ratings said in July 6 report.

“Although Fitch expects all three Detroit automakers will seek to tie compensation more closely with profitability, the negotiations are likely to be difficult, and labor costs could rise with the ratification of a new agreement,” Stephen Brown, a Chicago-based analyst at Fitch, wrote in the report, which also named labor talks as one of its rating risks.

Ford may achieve investment-grade ratings by 2012, Eric Selle, a JPMorgan Chase & Co. debt analyst in New York, said in May. Ford is rated two levels below investment grade by Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch, and three levels below by Standard & Poor’s.

Ford Motor Co. said today it is endorsing a federal ban on hand-held cell phone calls by drivers — becoming the first automaker to do so.

The Dearborn automaker said it is supporting a bill introduced last month by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y.Pete Lawson, Ford’s vice president of government affairs, said the company is backing the bill “because it represents a practical, common sense approach to a national problem.”

Ford has been eager to protect its in-vehicle technologies — such as Sync and MyFord Touch — that allow drivers to make hands-free calls and receive or send some limited text messages orally.

Just nine states and the District of Colombia have barred the use of hand-held cell phones by drivers, reported The Detroit News. The Governors Highway Safety Association last week told states that haven’t banned their use to hold off until further research is completed.

Ford has taken other steps to reduce distracted driving. The automaker has been concerned about efforts by some to crack down on in-vehicle technologies that allow drivers to make and receive hands-free cell phone calls.

“Research conducted in labs and on roads shows that activity drawing drivers’ eyes away from the road — whether text messaging, manually dialing a cell phone or reading maps — substantially increases the risk of an accident or near misses,”Lawson said. “Ford believes hands-free, voice-activated technology significantly reduces that risk by allowing drivers to keep their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road.”

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has urged drivers not to use hand-held phones behind the wheel and raised concerns about cognitive distractions from calls. But he won’t recommend any restrictions on hands-free calls until the government completes extensive research.

“When you look at your BlackBerry for four seconds, you are driving the length of a football field without watching the road. And when you talk on your cell phone, you tell your brain it’s OK to devote your primary attention to something other than your driving,” LaHood wrote on a government blog last year.

General Motors Co. bars employees driving company cars from using a hand-held cell phone behind the wheel and has supported Oprah Winfrey’s efforts to crack down on hand-held cell phone use.

DETROIT – Ford Motor Co.’s June sales outpaced the industry’s gains on strong sales of small cars and a slight rebound in pickup sales.

Despite falling gasoline prices, the supply of the Fiesta subcompact and the Focus compact remains tight because of “exceptional demand,” said Ken Czubay, Ford’s vice president of U.S. marketing, sales and service.

Ford’s new Fiesta subcompact and redesigned 2012 Focus compact combined for 26,920 in June sales, up 66 percent from the year-earlier period, reported Automotive News.

George Pipas, Ford’s top sales analyst, said both cars ended the month at about a 30-day supply.

Ford enters the second half of 2011 with “cautious optimism,” Czubay said.

“We have a lot of momentum on showroom floors,” he said. “But we’re watching closely the U.S. economy. The economic data is mixed. Our data suggests that many owners are delaying purchases until the Ford model they want becomes available.”

In June, Ford Motor sold 193,415 units, up 10 percent from the year-earlier period, but the results trailed the advances at Chrysler and GM.

The industry finished the month up 7 percent.

For the first six months, Ford Motor sold 1.1 million vehicles, up 9 percent. The industry finished the first half up 13 percent.

In June, Ford sold 49,618 F-series pickups, a 7 percent improvement over the year-earlier period.

“That 49,000 — almost 50,000 — is one of our highest sales months for the F series in the past three years,” Pipas said.

The pickup truck segment made up 9 percent of U.S. retail sales in April and 10 percent in May, Pipas said. It’s now just above 11 percent, he said.

Ford has about a 79-day supply of pickups, Pipas said.

Said Czubay: “The dealers would just as soon keep it at that level.”

“It’s good for their business,” he said, “as long as we can keep a steady flow, which you’ve got to do to keep selling 50,000 pickups a month, and we’re right on line to keep doing that.”

Demand spiked for F-series pickups fitted with the direct-injection turbocharged V-6 EcoBoost engine.

“In May and June, the V-6 outsold the V-8s,” Czubay said of pickup sales. “It’s the first time since the mid-’80s that that happened.”

Among F-series pickup sales, 44 percent were powered by V-8s, 41 percent had Ford’s 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6s and 15 percent had 3.7-liter V-6s.

Czubay said sales of the redesigned 2011 Explorer crossover have been a “first half surprise to us.”

Through June, Ford’s sold 65,823 Explorers, more than double sales in the year-earlier period. In all of 2010, Ford sold 60,687 Explorers.

Czubay said more than 40 percent of the Explorers sold in the first half have been higher-trim models.

Ford has 426,000 vehicles at dealerships or in transit, Pipas said. Of those, 317,000 are trucks and 109,000 are cars and crossovers. The total gives Ford a 57-day supply. Ford ended May with a 52-day supply.

After steady year-on-year improvement, Ford has plunged from fifth position in 2010 to 23rd in the 2011 Initial Quality Study released by J.D. Power & Associates on Thursday. Lincoln, the luxury subsidiary of the Ford Motor Company, was ranked eighth last year, but fell to 17th this year.

The rankings, however, belie the automaker’s sustained manufacturing quality, the survey authors noted.

Primarily, the steep decline was attributed to consumer complaints about MyFord and MyLincoln Touch, the company’s in-car telematics systems that use a touch screen, dashboard display and voice commands presumably to help drivers operate radio and climate controls, as well as the navigation system.

Many in the automotive press, including The Times, have been critical of the system’s complexity. Consumer Reports said the “aggravating design” was one reason it could not give the Ford Edge its coveted designation of “Recommended.”

The initial quality study by J.D. Power examines vehicles during the first 90 days of ownership. This year, it was based on responses from more than 73,000 owners and lessees of new vehicles from the 2011 model year.

Vehicle owners were asked whether they had any of 228 possible problems, which included mechanical defects and malfunctions as well as design issues like the controls’ ease of use in categories like exterior, engine/transmission and audio/entertainment/navigation.

The study then graded automakers on the number of problems per 100 vehicles — the lower the number the fewer problems and the higher the initial quality rating. Over all, Lexus garnered first place in the study’s brand rankings. Rounding out the top five were Honda, Acura, Mercedes-Benz, and Mazda and Porsche in a tie for fifth.

In the 2010 ranking, when it placed fifth, Ford had 93 problems reported per 100 vehicles. That ratio has increased to 116 problems per 100 vehicles this year.

“They had a really good quality story,” said David Sargent, vice president of global vehicle research at J.D. Power, in a telephone interview. “They were progressing steadily year over year, and everything was going fine.”

“Consumers are looking for these touch technologies in vehicles and Ford took the, let’s say, brave decision to be a leader in this area,” he added.

But no good deed goes unpunished. Consumers complained that the system was not as intuitive to operate as they would have liked, while also airing their displeasure about the hands-free, voice-activated operations.

When asked whether there were other problems that contributed to Ford’s fall, Mr. Sargent said MyFord Touch was the primary driver, but “there were a few other things which together would add up.”

He would not elaborate on what those were, as none of the problems were significant enough to discuss in detail, he said.

There is some good news for Ford, however. In the realm of manufacturing defects and malfunctions, Ford “continues to perform pretty well,” Mr. Sargent said. “What we are witnessing here essentially has nothing to do with manufacturing,” he said.

What befell Ford this year echoes the experience of BMW in the 2006 survey. When J. D. Power redesigned the survey to add more questions about design problems, BMW performed poorly because its new iDrive interface system received significant criticism, yet its manufacturing quality was on a par with that of Toyota.