← New search

1998 Ford Crown Victoria

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Crown Victoria years

Owner complaints for the 1998 Ford Crown Victoria are substantially higher than the model-year median of 53.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

31 reports with mileage · 88 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.

  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Suspension. Review the 18 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Fuel System, Gasoline. Review the 15 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

3 crash reports6 fire reports4 injury reports

What owners actually said

119 reports
237,000 miles · Mar 19, 2020
Electrical SystemFire

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO START THE VEHICLE, SMOKE EMITTED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FUSE WHICH CONTROLS THE IGNITION COILS AND THE POWERTRAIN CONTROL MODULE UNDER THE DASHBOARD BLEW. THE VEHICLE WAS DIAGNOSED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO ST…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO START THE VEHICLE, SMOKE EMITTED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FUSE WHICH CONTROLS THE IGNITION COILS AND THE POWERTRAIN CONTROL MODULE UNDER THE DASHBOARD BLEW. THE VEHICLE WAS DIAGNOSED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO STATED THAT THERE WAS AN ELECTRICAL SHORT TO THE GROUND WIRE FOR THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. BILL BROWN FORD LOCATED AT (32222 PLYMOUTH RD, LIVONIA, MI 48150 (734) 399-4244) WAS CONTACTED HOWEVER, AN APPOINTMENT WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO HAVE THE VEHICLE DIAGNOSED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE BUT OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 237,000.

NHTSA ODI #11318675

180,000 miles · Aug 29, 2019
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)SuspensionFire

HAD MY CAR SINCE 2014 I WORKED HARD TO BUY IT. IT DROVE PRETTY DECIDE UNTILL ELECTRIC PROBLEMS STARTED TO OCCUR. THEN MY PASSANGER SIDE WHEEL FOLDED IN WHILE OPERATING WITH MY KIDS LIFE OR DEATH SITUATION IM JUST A HARD WORKING FATHER TRYING TO PROVIDE A SAFE TRANSPORTATION FOR MY FAMILY

NHTSA ODI #11252146

160,000 miles · Feb 28, 2018
EngineFire

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE CONTACT NOTICED SMOKE UNDER THE HOOD OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT COASTED THE VEHICLE TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND NOTICE FLAMES UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. THE FIRE WAS EXTINGUISHED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS ILLUMIN…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE CONTACT NOTICED SMOKE UNDER THE HOOD OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT COASTED THE VEHICLE TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND NOTICE FLAMES UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. THE FIRE WAS EXTINGUISHED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A TOWING LOT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER OR INDEPENDENT MECHANIC TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 160,000.

NHTSA ODI #11075422

Mileage unknown · Jan 19, 2018
Tires

BOUGHT A SET OF TIRES FROM EBAY / SIMPLETIRE. THEY WERE LISTED AS NEW WITHOUT ANY DISCLAIMER. ORDERED THEM JAN. 11TH 2018, AND RECEIVED THEM JAN. 16TH, 2018 VIA FEDEX. CHECKED THE DOT DATE CODE AND SAW THAT ALL FOUR TIRES ARE OVER SIX YEARS OLD. ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT SIMPLE TIRE THROUGH EBAY MESSAGING AND THEY HAVE NOT REPLIED. …

Read full complaint

BOUGHT A SET OF TIRES FROM EBAY / SIMPLETIRE. THEY WERE LISTED AS NEW WITHOUT ANY DISCLAIMER. ORDERED THEM JAN. 11TH 2018, AND RECEIVED THEM JAN. 16TH, 2018 VIA FEDEX. CHECKED THE DOT DATE CODE AND SAW THAT ALL FOUR TIRES ARE OVER SIX YEARS OLD. ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT SIMPLE TIRE THROUGH EBAY MESSAGING AND THEY HAVE NOT REPLIED. HERE IS THE TIRE INFORMATION YOU ARE REQUESTING: HANKOOK I*CEPT EVO W310 235/55R17 103V XL THIS IS A MATCHED SET OF FOUR. THE FOUR DOT ARE AS FOLLOWS: DOT 5M3F EU H 3511, DOT 5M3F EU H 3811, DOT 5M3F EU H 3811, DOT 5M3F EU H 3911 AFTER READING ALL YOUR HELPFUL INFORMATION ON YOU WEBSITE I FELT THEY SOLD ME EXPIRED TIRES. HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO USE THEM AS THE TIRES ON MY WIFE'S CAR ARE IN POOR CONDITION, AND WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE EXTRA MONEY TO BUY MORE. ANOTHER CONCERN OF MINE IS HOW MANY UNSUSPECTING CONSUMERS ARE DRIVING AROUND ON EXPIRED TIRES THEY IN GOOD FAITH BOUGHT FROM SIMPLETIRE @ EBAY?

NHTSA ODI #11063658

160,000 miles · Mar 13, 2017
Electrical System

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 160,000.

NHTSA ODI #10960301

Mileage unknown · Nov 3, 2016
Engine And Engine Cooling

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE OVERHEATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE FAILURE RECURRED TWICE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFI…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE OVERHEATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE FAILURE RECURRED TWICE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN AND FAILURE MILEAGE WERE UNKNOWN. UPDATED 04/05/17*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED CAR OVERHEATING DUE TO INTAKE MANIFOLD, HAD TO REPLACE INTAKE MANIFOLD. VIN FAILURE UPDATED 7/3/18*JB *TR

NHTSA ODI #10924141

3 miles · Nov 2, 2016
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)

TAKATA RECALL MY 98 FORD CROWN VIC HEAD LIGHTS TURN ON AND OFF WHEN I DRIVE. IT MAINLY TURN ON AND OFF IS WHEN I HAVE MY HIGH BEAMS WHEN IN MOTION. I DONT KNOW WAT CAUSES IT IT RECENTLY STARTED HAPPINGING

NHTSA ODI #10923834

209,026 miles · Jun 27, 2016
Engine And Engine Cooling

MY INTAKE MANIFOLD FOR MY THERMOSTAT IS COMPLETELY BROKEN WHEN I LOOKED UP ONLINE TO SEE HOW MUCH THE PART WOULD COST ME TO HAVE FIXED IT SAID THERE WAS A RECALL ON THE PART BECAUSE IN BETWEEN THE YEARS 1997-2006 FORD USED GENERIC PLASTIC TO MAKE THE PART I JUST PURCHASED THE CAR OFF A GUY LIKE 6 MONTHS AGO SO IF THERE WERE ANY …

Read full complaint

MY INTAKE MANIFOLD FOR MY THERMOSTAT IS COMPLETELY BROKEN WHEN I LOOKED UP ONLINE TO SEE HOW MUCH THE PART WOULD COST ME TO HAVE FIXED IT SAID THERE WAS A RECALL ON THE PART BECAUSE IN BETWEEN THE YEARS 1997-2006 FORD USED GENERIC PLASTIC TO MAKE THE PART I JUST PURCHASED THE CAR OFF A GUY LIKE 6 MONTHS AGO SO IF THERE WERE ANY RECALLS ON THE VEHICLE I HAD NO IDEA TILL IT BROKE ON ME AND I LOOKED IT UP I CALLED A FEW FORD DEALERSHIPS AND ALSO THE MAIN FORD HEADQUARTERS IN DETROIT AND EVERYONE'S GIVING ME THE RUN AROUND AND TELLING ME THERE WERE NEVER ANY RECALLS ON MY CAR AND THAT I HAVE TO PAY TO HAVE IT FIXED MEANWHILE ITS THERE FAULT FOR PUTTING THE WRONG PART IN THE CAR IN THE FIRST PLACE I NEED YOUR HELP GETTING THESE PEOPLE TO FIX MY CAR PLEASE CONTACT ME AT [XXX] OR IF I CAN'T BE REACHED ON THAT NUMBER [XXX] THANK YOU. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10876989

84,000 miles · Feb 15, 2015
SteeringSuspensionWheels

I WAS A PROFESSIONAL MECHANIC AND WENT TO SCHOOL FOR IT ALSO WITH OVER TEN YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD ! THIS IS THE STORY I DECIDED TO REPLACE UPPER AND LOWER BALL JOINTS AND OUTER TIE ROD ENDS WITH UPPER CONTROL ARM BUSHINGS AND WHEEL BEARING HUB ASSEMBLY'S ALL AT THE SAME TIME TO AVOID A VEHICLE BREAKDOWN LIKE WHAT JUST HAP…

Read full complaint

I WAS A PROFESSIONAL MECHANIC AND WENT TO SCHOOL FOR IT ALSO WITH OVER TEN YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD ! THIS IS THE STORY I DECIDED TO REPLACE UPPER AND LOWER BALL JOINTS AND OUTER TIE ROD ENDS WITH UPPER CONTROL ARM BUSHINGS AND WHEEL BEARING HUB ASSEMBLY'S ALL AT THE SAME TIME TO AVOID A VEHICLE BREAKDOWN LIKE WHAT JUST HAPPENED ! THE CAR HAD ABOUT 54000 MILES ON IT WHEN I DID THIS WITH ME KNOWING THESE PARTS WERE ABOUT TO GO OUT DUE TO WEAR BEFORE 75000 MILES AT THE LATEST FROM EXPERIENCE ON AVERAGE ! BUT THIS IS THE COMPLAINT AND CONCERN ! MY LOWER PASSENGER FRONT BALL JOINT SEPARATED AT ABOUT 84000 MILES ON THE CAR WHICH IS ONLY THIRTY THOUSAND MILES OF LIFE ON THIS BALL JOINT ! NOT REASSURING AT THE LEAST ! EVEN UNDER EXTREME DRIVING I HAVE FOUND BALL JOINTS TO LAST AT LEAST 50000 MILES BEFORE GOING BAD ! THE BALL JOINT IS A DRIVE WORKS BRAND PART #DW-K8685 ADVANCE AUTO PARTS BRAND BUT HERE IS THE STRANGE PART THEY DO NOT KNOW WHO MAKES THEIR PARTS EVEN WHEN YOU CALL THEIR 1-800 # ARE THESE PARTS TESTED OR BUILT TO FEDERAL SAFETY STANDARDS THESE BALL JOINTS IF THEY SEPARATE ON THE FREEWAY CAN KILL PEOPLE THIS IS A SERIOUS SUBJECT ! I WAS BLESSED THIS BALL JOINT SEPARATED AT ABOUT 20 MILES AN HOUR ! CAN THEY BE TESTED OR RECALLED ! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10683532

Mileage unknown · May 8, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control

1998 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE CRUISE CONTROL FAILURE. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED FOR THE SECOND TIME, THE CRUISE CONTROL FAILED. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10586959

Official recalls

7

08V051000 · Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control

Feb 4, 2008

FORD IS RECALLING 225,000 MY 1992-2003 ECONOLINE, MY 1993-1995 TAURUS SHO, MY 1992-1998 CROWN VICTORIA, MY 1993 BRONCO, F-SERIES, MY 1995-1997 F-SERIES SUPER DUTY STRIPPED CHASSIS, MY 1992-1998 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS, AND MY 1992-1995 LINCOLN TOWN CAR VEHICLES. THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE PREVIOUSLY REPAIRED USING A WIRING HARNESS THAT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE VEHICLE CIRCUIT POLARITY.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: AS A RESULT, THE FUSE IS LOCATED IN THE OUTPUT CIRCUIT RATHER THAN IN THE INTENDED INPUT POWER FEED CIRCUIT, AND MAY NOT OFFER THE INTENDED PROTECTION IN THE EVENT OF AN ELECTRICAL SHORT TO GROUND.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A NEW WIRING HARNESS, OR REPLACE THE MATING ELECTRICAL COMPONENT. THE RECALL BEGAN ON FEBRUARY 18, 2008. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.

07V336000 · Vehicle Speed Control

Aug 3, 2007

ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, PASSENGER VEHICLES, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND MOTOR HOMES CHASSIS, THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH MAY, UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN AN UNDERHOOD FIRE.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. OWNERS OF THE PASSENGER CARS INCLUDED IN THIS CAMPAIGN WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN THEIR VEHICLES TO THEIR DEALERS TO HAVE THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH DISCONNECTED AS AN INTERIM REPAIR. AS SOON AS REPAIR PARTS ARE AVAILABLE (EXPECTED OCTOBER 2007), OWNERS WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN TO THE DEALERS FOR INSTALLATION OF A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 13, 2007, AND MAILING COMPLETED BY SEPTEMBER 19, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.

03V472000 · Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly

Nov 6, 2003

ON CERTAIN NATURAL GAS VEHICLES, IF A FLAME FROM A VEHICLE INTERIOR FIRE BECOMES LOCALLY DIRECTED AT THE NATURAL GAS FUEL TANK LOCATED IMMEDIATELY BEHIND THE REAR SEAT, THE FLAME COULD DAMAGE THE FIBERGLASS WRAP ON THE TANK WEAKENING THE TANK.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THE STRENGTH OF THE TANK IS SIGNIFICANTLY COMPROMISED, IT COULD RUPTURE, INCREASING THE RISK OF A FIRE.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL AN INSULATOR BEHIND THE CURRENT SEAT BACK. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON JANUARY 7, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.

00V200000 · Equipment:mechanical:integrated Jack/leveler/stabilizer

Jul 18, 2000

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THESE VEHICLES HAVE JACKING INSTRUCTIONS WHICH, IF FOLLOWED, COULD CAUSE THE VEHICLE OPERATOR TO PLACE THE JACK ON A FRAME WELD WHEN ATTEMPTING TO RAISE A REAR WHEEL. IF THE VEHICLE IS JACKED UP WITH THE JACK PLACED ON THE FRAME WELD AND IF THE VEHICLE IS FREE TO ROLL (WHEELS NOT BLOCKED OR CHOCKED), THE JACK COULD YIELD AND THE VEHICLE MAY DROP SUDDENLY.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS AND ANY PORTION OF THE OPERATOR'S BODY IS UNDER THE VEHICLE, THE POTENTIAL FOR PERSONAL INJURY EXISTS.

Remedy: OWNERS WILL BE PROVIDED WITH A REVISED JACK INSTRUCTION AND STOWAGE CARD AND JACK WARNING LABEL, AS WELL AS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE OWNER GUIDE.

00V157001 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage

Jun 12, 2000

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES USING AFTERMARKET DRIVER'S SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE SOLD BY FORD PARTS DEPARTMENTS FROM JANUARY 1, THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000. THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES." THE EQUIPMENT INVOLVED IS SERVICE STOCK SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES, MODEL NOS. H 9977, H 9979, T 9063, AND T 9217, BUILT BY TRW VEHICLE SAFETY SYSTEMS, INC. (TRW) MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 1998 THROUGH MAY 21, 2000. SOME OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AS SERVICE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT ON THE VEHICLES INVOLVED IN THE RECALL.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION, THESE SEAT BELTS MAY NOT RESTRAIN AN OCCUPANT INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THESE VEHICLES AND REPLACE THE SERVICE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE INSTALLED IN THESE VEHICLES FROM JANUARY 1 THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000.

00V157002 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage

Jun 12, 2000

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES USING AFTERMARKET FRONT PASSENGER SIDE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE SOLD BY FORD PARTS DEPARTMENTS FROM JANUARY 1, THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000. THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES." THE EQUIPMENT INVOLVED IS SERVICE STOCK SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES, MODEL NOS. H 9977, H 9979, T 9063, AND T 9217, BUILT BY TRW VEHICLE SAFETY SYSTEMS, INC. (TRW) MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 1998 THROUGH MAY 21, 2000. SOME OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AS SERVICE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT ON THE VEHICLES INVOLVED IN THE RECALL.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION, THESE SEAT BELTS MAY NOT RESTRAIN AN OCCUPANT INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THESE VEHICLES AND REPLACE THE SERVICE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE INSTALLED IN THESE VEHICLES FROM JANUARY 1 THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000.

98V322000 · Suspension:front:control Arm:lower Ball Joint

Dec 16, 1998

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN 1996-1999 FORD CROWN VICTORIA POLICE, FLEET, NATURAL GAS, AND 1996-1999 LINCOLN TOWN CAR LIMOUSINE VEHICLES THAT WERE PRODUCED WITH A LOWER CONTROL ARM BALL JOINT CONTAINING A ONE PIECE BEARING; AND 1990-1996 FORD CROWN VICTORIA POLICE, FLEET, AND NGV VEHICLES AND 1990-1996 LINCOLN TOWN CAR LIMOUSINE VEHICLES THAT HAVE BEEN SERVICED WITH EITHER A BALL JOINT CONTAINING THE ONE-PIECE BEARING OR A FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM CONTAINING A BALL JOINT WITH A ONE-PIECE BEARING. THE ONE-PIECE BEARING WITHIN THE LOWER CONTROL ARM BALL JOINT CAN WEAKEN SLOWLY DURING USE AND EVENTUALLY CRACK. THIS COULD RESULT IN SEPARATION OF THE BALL AND CAP OF THE JOINT, ALLOWING THE CONTROL ARM TO DROP TO THE GROUND.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS WHILE THE VEHICLE IS MOVING, REDUCED STEERING CONTROL COULD OCCUR, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE LOWER CONTROL ARM BALL JOINTS (2).

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

9

DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head

Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline

ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.

Additional source detail variants (3)

Engine And Engine Cooling:engine

ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.

Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline

ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.

Engine And Engine Cooling

ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.

EA03001 · Cng Tank Explosion

Opened Jan 27, 2003 · Closed Nov 19, 2003

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly

IN SEPTEMBER 2002, A FUEL CYLINDER IN A NATURAL GAS POWERED VEHICLE (NGV) EXPLODED DURING A FIRE.FORD AND VRTC TEST ENGINEERS JOINTLY EXAMINED THE INCIDENT VEHICLE AND REVIEWED TESTING TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE (PRD) WAS PROPER.THE PURPOSE OF A PRD IS TO PROTECT A COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS TANK FROM OVERPRESSURE BY ALLOWING THE CNG TO VENT WHEN THE TEMPERATURE REACHES A SPECIFIC POINT.THE PRD WAS REMOVED FROM THE FAILED TANK AND SUBJECTED TO A YIELD TEMPERATURE DETERMINATION TEST. IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT A DIRECT FLAME (FROM THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE) ONTO THE CYLINDER (LOCATED BEHIND THE REAR SEAT IN THE TRUNK)COMPROMISED THE HOOP STRENGTH OF THE NATURAL GAS CYLINDER, THUS ALLOWING THE CYLINDER TO FAIL PRIOR TO THE PRD RELEASING AT ITSDESIGNED TEMPERATURE.AS A RESULT OF THIS TESTING AND REVIEW OF THE INVOLVED VEHICLE, FORD HAS DEVELOPED AN INSULATOR TO INSULATE THE NATURAL GAS FUEL TANK FROM A LOCALLY DIRECTED FLAME PROJECTING FROM THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE.INSULATORS WILL BE INSTALLED BEHIND THE BACK SEAT ON SUBJECT VEHICLES TO PREVENT FUTURE FAILURES OF THIS TYPE. FORD'S ACTION ADDRESSES THE CONCERNS OF ODI.THEREFORE, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.

PE02071 · Cng Tank Exploding In A Fire

Opened Oct 1, 2002 · Closed Jan 27, 2003

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly

AN EXPLOSION OF A COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG) TANK SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OCCUR, AS THE TANK IS FITTED WITH A PRESSURE RELIEF DEVICE (PRD). THIS PRD SHOULD RELEASE THE CNG IN THE TANK, PRIOR TO THE PRESSURE REACHING THE TANK BURST PRESSURE.THE PRD DID NOT RELEASE IN THE SUBJECT WISCONSIN POLICE CRUISER EXPLOSION.NHTSA HAS RECOVERED THE PRD VALVE FROM THE TANK THAT EXPLODED AND TESTING WILL BE NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH WHY THIS TANK SAFETY VALVE DID NOT RELEASE IN THE VERY HIGH TEMPERATURE FIRE THAT OCCURRED IN THE POLICE CRUISER.THERE IS ONLY THE SINGLE KNOWN EVENT, BUT DUE TO THE CATASTROPIC FORCE OF SUCH AN EXPLOSION AND THE POTENTIAL FOR INJURY AND LOSS OF LIFE, THIS INVESTIGATION IS BEING UPGRADED.

DP02007 · FUEL-FED Fires

Opened Aug 22, 2002 · Closed Dec 4, 2002

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages

THE FARS DATA SHOWS THAT THE RISK OF FIRE FROM IMPACT IN ALL DIRECTIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS THE SAME AS ALL OTHER SEDANS.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE NOT OVER REPRESENTED WITH RESPECT TO THE RISK OF FIRE IN REAL-WORLD HIGH-ENERGY CRASHES.A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RELATED TO POST CRASH FIRES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS SET OUT IN THE CLOSING REPORT FOR SQ 01-014 AND THAT REPORT IS IN THE DOCKET FOR THIS PETITION.AFTER REVIEWING THE PETITION AND ITS SUPPORTING MATERIALS, AS WELL AS INFORMATION FURNISHED BY FORD AND GM, AND INFORMATION WITHIN THE AGENCY'S POSSESSION FROM PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS AND OTHER RELATED ACTIONS,NHTSA HAS CONCLUDED THAT FUTHER INVESTIGATION CONCERNING POST-CRASH FIRES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS NOT LIKELY TO LEAD TO A DECISION THAT THE VEHICLES CONTAIN A SAFETY DEFECT.

SQ01014 · Post Rear End Collision Fires

Opened Nov 27, 2001 · Closed Oct 3, 2002

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage

There is no summary currently available

PE00043 · Rear Axle Trailing Arm Frame Mounting

Opened Oct 20, 2000 · Closed Feb 2, 2001

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure

There is no summary currently available

PE99047 · Blow Back During Refueling

Opened Jul 12, 1999 · Closed Sep 23, 1999

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages

There is no summary currently available

PE98057 · Inertia Fuel Shut Off Switch

Opened Oct 28, 1998 · Closed Feb 11, 1999

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages

There is no summary currently available

PE98041 · Front Seat Anchor Bolt Failure

Opened Jul 23, 1998 · Closed Sep 29, 1998

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats

THE DRIVER'S SEAT, OF THE SUBJECT SPLIT-SEAT CONFIGURATION, IS SECURED TO THE VEHICLE FLOOR PAN WITH FOUR BOLTS.A SINGLE BOLT IS LOCATED AT BOTH THE FRONT AND REAR OF EACH OF THE TWO SEAT TRACKS.THESE TRACKS ARE LOCATED ON EACH SIDE OF THE SEAT.IF THE OUTBOARD-FORWARD BOLT FAILS, THE SEAT IS RETAINED BY 3 REMAINING BOLTS.WHEN RETAINED BY 3 BOLTS, THE REARWARD MOVEMENT OF THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SEAT BACK IS LIMITED TO APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES.THIS WAS DETERMINED BY FORD TESTING AND CONFIRMED BY ODI.THIS MINIMAL MOVEMENT SHOULD NOT CAUSE A DRIVER TO EXPERIENCE DIFFICULTIES CONTROLLING THE VEHICLE.FORD HAS DEVELOPED A KIT TO REPAIR THE SEAT BOLT BOSS, CONSISTING OF A LARGE, 3/16 INCH THICK WASHER, CONTOURED TO FIT INSIDE THE FLOOR PAN SEAT BOLT BOSS REINFORCEMENT.THIS FIX WAS ADDED TO PRODUCTION VEHICLES IN SEPTEMBER, 1997.FORD IS CURRENTLY PREPARTING A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TO BE SENT TO BOTH DEALER AND OPERATORS OF POLICE VEHICLES, ANNOUNCING THE AVAILABILITY OF THE KIT FOR IN-SEVICE REPAIRS.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION ON THESE MODELS IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.