NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Electrical System complaints
10 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Jan 8, 2023
Electrical SystemUnknown Or Other
My 99 ford crown victoria lx has front end issues. I have had to replace the ball joints about 4 times every 2 to 3 months because the front end keeps dropping. I'm not sure if you guys know about this but I've spoken with our local Ford mechanic and a few friends who have crown Victoria's as well and said that it has been a big…
Read full complaint
My 99 ford crown victoria lx has front end issues. I have had to replace the ball joints about 4 times every 2 to 3 months because the front end keeps dropping. I'm not sure if you guys know about this but I've spoken with our local Ford mechanic and a few friends who have crown Victoria's as well and said that it has been a big issue with them along with the electrical components for the turn signals
NHTSA ODI #11500729
80,584 miles · Mar 21, 2007
Electrical SystemExterior LightingInterior Lighting
BURNING SMELL UNDER DASH)WHEN BRAKE PEDAL AND/OR DOOR WAS OPEN. EVENTUALLY, I COULDN'T START THE CAR AS THE 'BRAKE LIGHTS' WOULD NOT COME ON. I CALLED THE FORD DEALER IN A RAGE THAT THEY HAD IDIOT LIGHTS FOR EVERYTHING ELSE,. AND AS FAR AS I KNEW, HAND SIGNALS WERE STILL LEGAL, THEY TOLD ME TO TURN THE IGNITION 1 CLICK, PUT …
Read full complaint
BURNING SMELL UNDER DASH)WHEN BRAKE PEDAL AND/OR DOOR WAS OPEN. EVENTUALLY, I COULDN'T START THE CAR AS THE 'BRAKE LIGHTS' WOULD NOT COME ON. I CALLED THE FORD DEALER IN A RAGE THAT THEY HAD IDIOT LIGHTS FOR EVERYTHING ELSE,. AND AS FAR AS I KNEW, HAND SIGNALS WERE STILL LEGAL, THEY TOLD ME TO TURN THE IGNITION 1 CLICK, PUT THE CAR IN NEUTRAL, THEN I WOULD BE ABLE TO START THE CAR. AFTER BRINGING THE CAR TO A CERTIFIED ELECTRICAL MECHANIC, HE STATED THAT FORD PUT THE SHORTEST, TIGHTEST WIRE CONNECTING THE BRAKE PEDAL AND AFTER CONSTANT APPLICATIONS THE WIRE SNAPPED. BUT THE BRAKE LIGHTS WENT OUT AGAIN, THIS TIME A DIFFERENT CONNECTION WAS BAD AND ARCHING, CAUSING THE WIRES TO BURN. HOWEVER, DURING THIS TIME, THE DOME, COURTESY, AND HEADLIGHTS WOULD COME ON/OFF PERIODICALLY AND AT ANY GIVEN TIME, AS IF IT WAS POSSESSED. I FINALLY PULLED THE INTERIOR LIGHTS OUT SO IT WOULD NOT DRAIN THE BATTERY. THE LATEST EXPERIENCE WAS THE WINDSHIELD WIPERS WOULD SHUT OFF IN THE OPEN POSITION AND THE BLINKER LIGHTS WOULD GO ON/OFF, SOMETIMES JUST ABOUT ON OR FULLY LIT. IT TURNED OUT TO BE THE BLINKER/ARM UNIT WAS BAD. SINCE THAT WAS JUST REPLACED, I AM HOPING THAT UNIT WAS THE PROBLEM AND THERE WILL BE NO MORE ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10185869
110,111 miles · Aug 5, 2006
Electrical SystemExterior LightingInterior Lighting
HEADLIGHTS, TAILLIGHTS AND ALL INTERIOR DASH LIGHTS FLASH OFF FOR PERIODS OF UP TO 30-45 SECONDS AT A TIME WHILE DRIVING. LIGHTING CONTROL MODULE HAS BEEN REPLACED TWICE AT SUBSTANTIAL COST. LIGHT SWITCH REPLACED TWICE. THIS IS A SAFETY HAZARD AT ANY SPEED. FORD IS NON COOPERATIVE. I AM A POLICE OFFICER, THIS IS A PERSONALLY OWN…
Read full complaint
HEADLIGHTS, TAILLIGHTS AND ALL INTERIOR DASH LIGHTS FLASH OFF FOR PERIODS OF UP TO 30-45 SECONDS AT A TIME WHILE DRIVING. LIGHTING CONTROL MODULE HAS BEEN REPLACED TWICE AT SUBSTANTIAL COST. LIGHT SWITCH REPLACED TWICE. THIS IS A SAFETY HAZARD AT ANY SPEED. FORD IS NON COOPERATIVE. I AM A POLICE OFFICER, THIS IS A PERSONALLY OWNED POLICE INTERCEPTOR VEHICLE. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10164596
105,000 miles · Aug 17, 2005
Electrical SystemFire
DT: THE CONTACT STATES WAS GOING TO A MEDICAL APPOINTMENT WHEN HE HANDED KEYS TO A VALET, ABOUT 15 MINUTES LATER, HE WAS NOTIFIED THAT CAR HAD WAS ON FIRE ON 8-10-05. HE WAS NOT HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE CAR PRIOR TO FIRE. HE DID NOT KNOW WHERE THE FIRE ORIGINATED BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO SAW THE FIRE SAID IT WAS HARD TO…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONTACT STATES WAS GOING TO A MEDICAL APPOINTMENT WHEN HE HANDED KEYS TO A VALET, ABOUT 15 MINUTES LATER, HE WAS NOTIFIED THAT CAR HAD WAS ON FIRE ON 8-10-05. HE WAS NOT HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE CAR PRIOR TO FIRE. HE DID NOT KNOW WHERE THE FIRE ORIGINATED BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO SAW THE FIRE SAID IT WAS HARD TO SEE WHERE IT WAS COMING FROM BECAUSE THE CAR WAS INSIDE A PARKING GARAGE. THE MOST DAMAGE OCCURRED IN THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. HE HA NOT YET NOTIFIED THE DEALER NOR THE MANUFACTURER. *AK *SC
NHTSA ODI #10132600
139,771 miles · Jul 25, 2004
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine Cooling
(1) DRIVING ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAY CAR ENGINE SUDDENLY LOST POWER WHILE CHANGING LANE. WAS ALMOST HIT FROM BEHIND BUT LUCKILY THE OTHER CAR WAS ABLE TO STOP. (2) THE ENGINE IN MY CAR, '99 FORD CROWN VICTORIA, HAD BLOWN A SPARK PLUG.*AK (3) REPAIR INVOLVED CHANGING THE CYLINDER HEAD IN THE ENGINE OR REPLACE THE WHOLE ENGINE THAT…
Read full complaint
(1) DRIVING ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAY CAR ENGINE SUDDENLY LOST POWER WHILE CHANGING LANE. WAS ALMOST HIT FROM BEHIND BUT LUCKILY THE OTHER CAR WAS ABLE TO STOP. (2) THE ENGINE IN MY CAR, '99 FORD CROWN VICTORIA, HAD BLOWN A SPARK PLUG.*AK (3) REPAIR INVOLVED CHANGING THE CYLINDER HEAD IN THE ENGINE OR REPLACE THE WHOLE ENGINE THAT I OPTED TO DO. AT FIRST I THOUGHT THIS IS JUST A SINGLE INCIDENT BUT I LATER LEARNED THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED THE SAME MAINLY ON FORD PICK-UP TRUCKS BUT ALSO ON OTHER VEHICLES WITH THE SAME ENGINE / CYLINDER HEAD DESIGN. A FORD DEALER WHO DID THE WORK FOR REPLACING THE ENGINE SAID THEY HAVE NOT HEARD ABOUT THIS BEFORE. I HAVE LATER ALSO LEARNED THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE EXPERIENCE THE SAME WITH FORD, I.E. THEY CLAIM NOT KNOWING ABOUT THE ISSUE BUT THEY MUST AS SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THIS. IN MY LIFETIME I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT CAR ENGINES WEAR OUT OVER TIME. IT IS NOT A NORMAL MODE OF FAILURE THAT CAR ENGINE BLOWS SPARK PLUGS AND CAUSES THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF UNEXPECTED COST TO CONSUMERS LIKE ME. NEARLY $5000 'CHRISTMAS PRESENT' WAS NOT IN MY PLANS. WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO GET FORD TO STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT IN THIS CASE? AS IT MIGHT NOT SOUND A SAFETY ISSUE AT FIRST JUST THINK WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN IF A SPARK PLUG BLOWS DURING A PASSING OF ANOTHER VEHICLE ON A 2-LANE HIGHWAY WHEN ANOTHER VEHICLE IS APPROACHING IN NOT SO FAR DISTANCE? IT BECOMES A SAFETY ISSUE IN A HURRY! ABOUT THIS ISSUE CAN BE READ IN THE INTERNED. JUS SEARCH BLOWN SPARK PLUG AND IT'S ALL IN FRONT OF YOU. THANK YOU, ARI ROUSU
NHTSA ODI #10082609
Mileage unknown · Feb 14, 2002
Electrical System
I HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE "BATTERY" LIGHT. IT WOULD COME ON AND STAY ON. THE CAR WAS RETRUNED TO THE DEALER SEVERAL TIMES. THE LAST TIME THE DEALER TOLD ME THAT THEY KNEW WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS AND WOULD ORDER A PART AND THAT THE CAR WAS "SAFE" TO DRIVE IN THE MEANTIME. NOT SO. THE CAR HAD LOSS OF ELECTRICAL POWER AND ENGINE SH…
Read full complaint
I HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE "BATTERY" LIGHT. IT WOULD COME ON AND STAY ON. THE CAR WAS RETRUNED TO THE DEALER SEVERAL TIMES. THE LAST TIME THE DEALER TOLD ME THAT THEY KNEW WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS AND WOULD ORDER A PART AND THAT THE CAR WAS "SAFE" TO DRIVE IN THE MEANTIME. NOT SO. THE CAR HAD LOSS OF ELECTRICAL POWER AND ENGINE SHUTDOWN. ENGINE SHUTDOWN, LOSS OF POWER STEERING, LOSS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE AND LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL. THE CAR WAS TOWN INTO THE DEALER THAT NIGHT. THEY DENY KNOWING THERE WOULD BE ANY "PROBLEM." SEE YOUR NHTSA RECALL NO. 94V056/FORD RECALL NO. 94S83. DIFFERENT YEAR AND REGION. SIMILAR "PROBLEM."
NHTSA ODI #758224
Mileage unknown · Feb 6, 2002
Electrical System
BATTERY LIGHT COMES ON INTERMITTENTLY AND STAYS ON FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, WHICH LEADS TO A SHUTDOWN WHILE DRIVING, VEHICLE BEEN TO THE DEALER ON TWO OCCASIONS, AND PROBLEM STILL REOCCURRING.*AK
NHTSA ODI #8003636
Mileage unknown · Jan 14, 2002
Electrical System
HORN FAILED TO SOUND AFTER PRESSURE WAS APPLIED TO THE STEERING WHEEL. DEALER HAS BEEN CONTACTED.*AK DEALER STATES THERE IS NOTHING WRONG. *JB
NHTSA ODI #8002138
Mileage unknown · Nov 13, 2000
Electrical System
WHILE DRIVING, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT WARNING SHUT OFF. THIS MEANT I HAD NO POWER, NO POWER STEERING, AND NO CONTROL.THE ENGINE STARTED AGAIN WHEN I USED THE STARTER. CAR ACTED NORMALLY UNTIL THE NEXT DAY THE SAME THING OCCURRED.THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS SAFETY PROBLEM. IF IT HAPPENED IN HEAVY TRAFFIC OR THE INTERSTATE A …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT WARNING SHUT OFF. THIS MEANT I HAD NO POWER, NO POWER STEERING, AND NO CONTROL.THE ENGINE STARTED AGAIN WHEN I USED THE STARTER. CAR ACTED NORMALLY UNTIL THE NEXT DAY THE SAME THING OCCURRED.THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS SAFETY PROBLEM. IF IT HAPPENED IN HEAVY TRAFFIC OR THE INTERSTATE A VERY SERIOUS ACCIDENT COULD OCCUR. THE DEALER HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND SO REFUSES TO TAKE ANY ACTION. FORD WILL NOT AUTHORIZE ANY CORRECTIVE ACTION EITHER. I FEEL THE CARE IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE UNTIL SOME COREECTIVE ACTION IS TAKEN. *AK
NHTSA ODI #736246
Mileage unknown · Jan 19, 2000
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
DUE TO A DEFECTIVE ALTERNATOR VEHICLE SURGES FOWARDS OR BACKWARDS. WHEN OCCUPANT WAS IN REVERSE POSITION VEHICLE SUDDENLY SURGED BACKWARD, HITTING ANOTHER PERSON AND CAUSING SERIOUS INJURIES. PLEASE PROVIDE FURTHER INFORMATION. *AK
NHTSA ODI #855098
Official recalls
5Nov 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.
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.
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.
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.
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
7DP05005 · 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
Illustration