Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
820–25K
7025–50K
9750–75K
14175–100K
257100–150K
104150K+
751 reports with mileage · 145 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
Structure. Review the 323 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Engine. Review the 141 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Suspension. Review the 125 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
32 crash reports30 fire reports17 injury reports
What owners actually said
896 reports
89,000 miles · Sep 30, 2013
Electrical SystemEngine
I HAVE ALMOST BEEN IN FOUR ACCIDENTS IN THE PAST WEEK AND A HALF DUE TO MY 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA STALLING IN THE MIDDLE OF INTERSECTIONS AND ROADS WITHOUT WARNING. AS I ACCELERATE THE CAR STARTS TO HESITATE, SPUTTER AND THEN JUST DIES OUT. THE LAST TIME IT DID THIS IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUSY ROAD WITH CARS GOING BY AT 50MPH, I H…
Read full complaint
I HAVE ALMOST BEEN IN FOUR ACCIDENTS IN THE PAST WEEK AND A HALF DUE TO MY 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA STALLING IN THE MIDDLE OF INTERSECTIONS AND ROADS WITHOUT WARNING. AS I ACCELERATE THE CAR STARTS TO HESITATE, SPUTTER AND THEN JUST DIES OUT. THE LAST TIME IT DID THIS IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUSY ROAD WITH CARS GOING BY AT 50MPH, I HAD TWO GOOD SAMARITANS AND TWO POLICE OFFICERS THAT WERE NEARBY HELP ME TO SAFETY WHERE I HAD TO HAVE THE VEHICLE TOWED BACK TO MY HOME WHERE IT SITS TODAY. THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON, IT SAID BAD CRANKSHAFT SENSOR, SO I REPLACED IT. THE SECOND TIME IT HAPPENED IT SAID BAD CAMSHAFT, SO I REPLACED IT. THE THIRD TIME IT HAPPENED IT SAID BAD CAMSHAFT SENSOR AGAIN, SO I REPLACED THINKING I BOUGHT A DEFECTIVE ONE. THIS DID NOT WORK EITHER AS THE CAR ENDED UP STALLING FOR GOOD TWO DAYS AGO. I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN RECALLS IN THE PAST FOR THIS EXACT STALLING CONDITION OF THE ENGINE, BUT CHRYSLER SAYS MY CAR DID NOT SHOW UP AS ONE OF THE RECALLED ONES. I FIND THIS VERY CONCERNING THAT THIS DANGEROUS CONDITION WOULD NOT BE COVERED BY CHRYSLER WHEN THEY KNOW IT HAS BEEN AN ISSUE ON THOUSANDS OF OTHER SIMILAR PACIFICAS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10546277
108,000 miles · Sep 26, 2013
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING THE OIL CHANGED, THE CONTACT NOTICED THE SUB FRAME CRADLE WAS RUSTED ON BOTH SIDES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 108,000. UP…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING THE OIL CHANGED, THE CONTACT NOTICED THE SUB FRAME CRADLE WAS RUSTED ON BOTH SIDES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 108,000. UPDATED 12/23/13*LJ
NHTSA ODI #10545490
Mileage unknown · Sep 25, 2013
Engine
MY 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFIA HAS HAD MANY ISSUES BUT THE ONE THAT I AM MOST CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE RUSTED, CORROSION OF THE ENGINE CRADLE, SUB FRAME. IT IS SO RUSTED THAT I WAS TOLD MY ENGINE MAY FALL OUT. WENT TO SEVERAL JUNK YARDS TO FIND PART AND ALL THE ONES I LOOKED AT HAVE THE SAME THING WRONG WITH THEM. THEY ARE RUSTED OUT AN…
Read full complaint
MY 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFIA HAS HAD MANY ISSUES BUT THE ONE THAT I AM MOST CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE RUSTED, CORROSION OF THE ENGINE CRADLE, SUB FRAME. IT IS SO RUSTED THAT I WAS TOLD MY ENGINE MAY FALL OUT. WENT TO SEVERAL JUNK YARDS TO FIND PART AND ALL THE ONES I LOOKED AT HAVE THE SAME THING WRONG WITH THEM. THEY ARE RUSTED OUT AND CANT BE USED. SOMETHING WRONG HERE. PLEASE RECALL THESE. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10545344
77,000 miles · Sep 21, 2013
EnginePower TrainUnknown Or Other
AFTER REPLACING A BOTH MOTOR MOUNTS IN JULY OF 2012. THEY BROKE AGAIN IN NOVEMBER 2012!! THIS TIME IT WAS SO BAD THAT WHEN I TURNED THE CORNER THE ENGINE DIED AND WOULD NOT START BACK UP. EVENTUALLY AFTER TRYING TO TURN IT OVER SO MANY TIME THE BATTERY DIED. WE HAD TO HAVE IT TOWED TO THE SHOP AFTER THE HOLIDAYS TO FIND OUT HOW …
Read full complaint
AFTER REPLACING A BOTH MOTOR MOUNTS IN JULY OF 2012. THEY BROKE AGAIN IN NOVEMBER 2012!! THIS TIME IT WAS SO BAD THAT WHEN I TURNED THE CORNER THE ENGINE DIED AND WOULD NOT START BACK UP. EVENTUALLY AFTER TRYING TO TURN IT OVER SO MANY TIME THE BATTERY DIED. WE HAD TO HAVE IT TOWED TO THE SHOP AFTER THE HOLIDAYS TO FIND OUT HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST TO FIX ($1200) AND EXACTLY WHAT THE ISSUE WAS. THE TECH INFORMED ME THAT BESIDES THE MOUNTS BEING BROKE, WHEN I TURNED THE CORNER THE ENGINE LIFTED AND CUT THRU ALL OF THE WIRES LEADING TO THE FAILURE OF THE CAR'S POWER CONTROL MODULE. THIS RESULTED IN A LOSS OF SPEEDOMETER, OTHER ELECTRICAL FUNCTIONS, AND THE LOSS OF THREE IGNITION COILS. I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHY THEY KEEP MAKING "RUBBER" ENGINE MOUNTS IF THE[XXX] THINGS ARE USELESS IN THE FIRST PLACE? THERE HAS TO BE A REASON ALL THESE CARS ARE HAVING THE SAME ISSUE AND IF I HAD KNOWN ABOUT THIS BEFORE I FINANCED THIS "POS", I WOULD NEVER HAVE PUT MY CHILDRENS LIVES IN DANGER.!! I HAD THE CAR FIXED AND EVERYTHING WAS GOING FINE UNTIL LAST NIGHT, ONCE AGAIN! I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AND SOME STUPID PERSON SLAMMED ON HER BRAKES IN FRONT OF ME SO I HIT MINE AND WHEN I DID MY CAR LUNGED FORWARD AND I HEARD THE GOD AWFUL "POP" SOUND AGAIN!!! NOW I AM BACK TO SQUARE ONE AND WITHIN A YEARS TIME THIS CAR WILL HAVE HAD 3 SETS OF MOTOR MOUNTS PUT ON IT. SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME THERE IS NOT A DEFECT SOMEWHERE, BECAUSE WHOEVER HANDLES THESE ISSUES AT DAIMLER/CHRYSLER NEEDS TO DRIVE ONE OF THESE CARS FOR THEMSELVES AND SEE WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH FOR SO LONG. ALSO, ANOTHER ISSUE IS THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND IT HAS TO DO WITH A VERY SMALL LEAK INSIDE THE GAS TANK. I HAVE BEEN TOLD THIS IS A RECALL, BUT HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET ANYONE TO FIX IT. I JUST WANT SOME ANSWERS, MORE SO FOR MY KIDS SAKE SO I CAN TRY AND GET IT FIXED COMPLETELY OR A NEW CAR SO THEY ARE OUT OF HARMS WAY. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10544705
128,651 miles · Sep 20, 2013
Structure
DURING ENGINE WARNING LIGHT INSPECTION AT HERB CHAMBERS CHRYSLER IN MILLBURY MA THE TECHNICIAN FOUND THE FRONT ENGINE CRADLE SHOULD BE REPLACED DUE TO ROT. CHRYSLER WAS CONTACTED TO FIND OUT IF THE EXTENDED WARRANTY FOR 10 YEARS/150,000 ON THE ENGINE CRADLE APPLIED TO THIS VEHICLE AND FOUND THAT IT WAS NOT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10544557
116,527 miles · Sep 15, 2013
StructureSuspension
OUR CAR SUFFERED FROM A SEVERELY RUSTED FRONT SUB FRAME (ENGINE CRADLE) THAT REQUIRED REPLACEMENT. WE HAD THE SUB FRAME REPLACED, CHRYSLER REFUSED TO HELP OR COMPENSATE IN ANY WAY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10543661
140,000 miles · Sep 13, 2013
Engine
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PARKED, THE ENGINE CRADLE BECAME DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE DUE TO CORROSION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THERE WAS A MANUFACTURER'S RECALL BUT THE CONTACT'S VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAI…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PARKED, THE ENGINE CRADLE BECAME DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE DUE TO CORROSION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THERE WAS A MANUFACTURER'S RECALL BUT THE CONTACT'S VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 140,000. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10543512
143,565 miles · Sep 11, 2013
TiresWheels
THESE VEHICLES HAVE A BALD PROBLEM WITH THE TIRES GOING BALD WAY TOO SOON AND THAT IS A SAFETY HAZARD THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE REPLACED EVERY 10,000 MILES I ALWAYS GOT NEW TIRES AT 45,000 TO 60,000 BUT NOW I CANT WAIT THAT LONG. I'VE SEEN MANY OF OTHER COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS NOT JUST ME. I DID PLENTY OF RESEARCH BEFORE I FILED A…
Read full complaint
THESE VEHICLES HAVE A BALD PROBLEM WITH THE TIRES GOING BALD WAY TOO SOON AND THAT IS A SAFETY HAZARD THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE REPLACED EVERY 10,000 MILES I ALWAYS GOT NEW TIRES AT 45,000 TO 60,000 BUT NOW I CANT WAIT THAT LONG. I'VE SEEN MANY OF OTHER COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS NOT JUST ME. I DID PLENTY OF RESEARCH BEFORE I FILED A COMPLAINT ABOUT THIS.. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10543013
150 miles · Sep 2, 2013
Visibility
SUNROOF SHATTERED WHILE DRIVING. NOT CAUSED BY ANY PROJECTILE. SEEMS TO HAVE HAPPENED SPONTANEOUSLY. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10538345
Mileage unknown · Aug 31, 2013
SteeringWheelsCrash
THE FRONT WHEEL STUDS ARE BREAKING OFF THE VEHICLE AND THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED IN THE LAST 3 MONTHS BOTH TIME THERE HAS BEEN BRAND NEW STUDS AND BOLTS PUT ON. IT HAS CAUSED THE WHEEL TO FALL OFF THE VEHICLE AND CAUSE OTHER DAMAGES TO THE FENDER. *JS
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A NGC-1 POWERTRAIN CONTROL MODULE, THE SOFTWARE PROTOCOLE USED TO TEST THE VEHICLE EXHAUST GAS RECIRCULATION (EGR) SYSTEM MAY LEAD TO ENGINE STALLING UNDER CERTAIN OPERATING CONDITIONS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD CAUSE A CRASH WITHOUT WARNING.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPROGRAM THE POWERTRAIN CONTROL MODULE SOFTWARE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON MARCH 15, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT DAIMLERCHRYSLER AT 1-800-853-1403.
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE CHASSIS FUEL SUPPLY TUBE MAY HAVE BEEN INCORRECTLY MANUFACTURED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: UNDER CERTAIN ENGINE AND VEHICLE DYNAMIC CONDITIONS, THE FUEL LINE MAY SEPARATE, RESULTING IN A FUEL LEAK AND AN INCREASED RISK OF A VEHICLE FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A SECONDARY RETENTION CLIP TO THE FUEL LINE QUICK CONNECT. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON DECEMBER 15, 2003. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT DAIMLERCHRYSLER AT 1-800-992-1997.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Fuel System, Gasoline:storage
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
Fuel System, Other:storage
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
RQ06002 · Engine Stalling
Opened Feb 27, 2006 · Closed Jun 22, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Fuel System, Gasoline; Vehicle Speed Control
ON FEBRUARY 27, 2006 RQ06-002 WAS OPENED IN RESPONSE TO 60 COMPLAINTS OF ENGINE STALL, MOSTLY DURING LEFT-HAND TURNS, IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2006 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 04V-113.IN MARCH 2004, DAIMLERCHRYSLER INITIATED RECALL 04V-113 ON 34,561 MY 2004 PACIFICA VEHICLES TO CORRECT A CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL WHILE MAKING A LEFT-HAND TURN AFTER A COLD-START.DURING RQ06-002 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RECALL 04V-113 DID CORRECT THE SPECIFIC CAUSE OF THE ENGINE STALLING CONDITION FOR THAT SPECIFIC POPULATION.HOWEVER, TWO OTHER CONDITIONS WERE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD ALSO CAUSE ENGINE STALLING DURING TURNING MANEUVERS:(1) AN ISSUE WITH MISBUILT FUEL PUMPS THAT PRIMARILY AFFECTED ABOUT 17,000 MY 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT DURING AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2004; AND (2) A SOFTWARE CONDITION AFFECTING VAPOR PURGE IN ABOUT 131,000 MY 2005-06 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT FROM JULY 2004 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2005. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, EA06-013, HAS BEEN OPENED TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THESE CONDITIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON FEBRUARY 27, 2006 RQ06-002 WAS OPENED IN RESPONSE TO 60 COMPLAINTS OF ENGINE STALL, MOSTLY DURING LEFT-HAND TURNS, IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2006 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 04V-113.IN MARCH 2004, DAIMLERCHRYSLER INITIATED RECALL 04V-113 ON 34,561 MY 2004 PACIFICA VEHICLES TO CORRECT A CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL WHILE MAKING A LEFT-HAND TURN AFTER A COLD-START.DURING RQ06-002 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RECALL 04V-113 DID CORRECT THE SPECIFIC CAUSE OF THE ENGINE STALLING CONDITION FOR THAT SPECIFIC POPULATION.HOWEVER, TWO OTHER CONDITIONS WERE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD ALSO CAUSE ENGINE STALLING DURING TURNING MANEUVERS:(1) AN ISSUE WITH MISBUILT FUEL PUMPS THAT PRIMARILY AFFECTED ABOUT 17,000 MY 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT DURING AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2004; AND (2) A SOFTWARE CONDITION AFFECTING VAPOR PURGE IN ABOUT 131,000 MY 2005-06 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT FROM JULY 2004 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2005. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, EA06-013, HAS BEEN OPENED TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THESE CONDITIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Fuel System, Gasoline
ON FEBRUARY 27, 2006 RQ06-002 WAS OPENED IN RESPONSE TO 60 COMPLAINTS OF ENGINE STALL, MOSTLY DURING LEFT-HAND TURNS, IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2006 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 04V-113.IN MARCH 2004, DAIMLERCHRYSLER INITIATED RECALL 04V-113 ON 34,561 MY 2004 PACIFICA VEHICLES TO CORRECT A CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL WHILE MAKING A LEFT-HAND TURN AFTER A COLD-START.DURING RQ06-002 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RECALL 04V-113 DID CORRECT THE SPECIFIC CAUSE OF THE ENGINE STALLING CONDITION FOR THAT SPECIFIC POPULATION.HOWEVER, TWO OTHER CONDITIONS WERE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD ALSO CAUSE ENGINE STALLING DURING TURNING MANEUVERS:(1) AN ISSUE WITH MISBUILT FUEL PUMPS THAT PRIMARILY AFFECTED ABOUT 17,000 MY 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT DURING AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2004; AND (2) A SOFTWARE CONDITION AFFECTING VAPOR PURGE IN ABOUT 131,000 MY 2005-06 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT FROM JULY 2004 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2005. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, EA06-013, HAS BEEN OPENED TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THESE CONDITIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Vehicle Speed Control
ON FEBRUARY 27, 2006 RQ06-002 WAS OPENED IN RESPONSE TO 60 COMPLAINTS OF ENGINE STALL, MOSTLY DURING LEFT-HAND TURNS, IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2006 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 04V-113.IN MARCH 2004, DAIMLERCHRYSLER INITIATED RECALL 04V-113 ON 34,561 MY 2004 PACIFICA VEHICLES TO CORRECT A CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL WHILE MAKING A LEFT-HAND TURN AFTER A COLD-START.DURING RQ06-002 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RECALL 04V-113 DID CORRECT THE SPECIFIC CAUSE OF THE ENGINE STALLING CONDITION FOR THAT SPECIFIC POPULATION.HOWEVER, TWO OTHER CONDITIONS WERE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD ALSO CAUSE ENGINE STALLING DURING TURNING MANEUVERS:(1) AN ISSUE WITH MISBUILT FUEL PUMPS THAT PRIMARILY AFFECTED ABOUT 17,000 MY 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT DURING AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2004; AND (2) A SOFTWARE CONDITION AFFECTING VAPOR PURGE IN ABOUT 131,000 MY 2005-06 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT FROM JULY 2004 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2005. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, EA06-013, HAS BEEN OPENED TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THESE CONDITIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
ON FEBRUARY 22, 2006, ODI OPENED PE06-009 TO INVESTIGATE REPORTS THAT THE FUEL TANKS ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2005 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES MAY BE PUNCTURED BY CONTACT WITH ROAD DEBRIS.THE NUMBER OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY CHRYSLER WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THOSE SUBMITTED BY OTHER MANUFACTURERS WHO WERE REQUESTED TO SUBMIT DATA AS PART OF INVESTIGATION PE05-050 INTO MY 2003 TO 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES THAT MAY HAVE HAD INSUFFICIENT SHIELDING OF THE FUEL TANK TO PREVENT PUNCTURES AFTER CONTACT WITH ROAD DEBRIS.NISSAN ISSUED RECALL 06V-003 INVOLVING INCREASING THE SHIELDING OF THE FUEL TANKS TO REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF TANK PUNCTURES. CHRYSLER HAS NOTED THAT THEY HAD IN PLACE FROM JANUARY 2003 TO JUNE 2005 A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM ON PACIFICA FUEL TANK REPLACEMENTS WHICH MAY HAVE MADE THE NUMBER OF REPORTS ARTIFICIALLY HIGH IN COMPARISON TO MANUFACTURERS WHICH DID NOT HAVE A SIMILAR PROGRAM IN EFFECT.CHRYSLER ALSO QUESTIONED WHETHER MANY OF THE FIELD REPORTS OF FUEL TANKS REPLACED DUE TO DAMAGE FROM UNKNOWN CAUSE WERE ACTUALLY PUNCTURED. THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA06-010) TO GATHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
2004 Chrysler Pacifica Problems, Complaints & Recalls | Skip That Year
Illustration