NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
60 reports150,000 miles · Apr 10, 2017
Fuel/propulsion System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E-150. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS FILLING UP THE FUEL TANK WITH FUEL, THE FUEL LEAKED OUT. THE SERVICE ENGINE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED, INDICATING A FUEL LEAK. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE MIDSHIP FUEL TANK DEVELOPED A CRACK WHERE IT CONTACTED T…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E-150. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS FILLING UP THE FUEL TANK WITH FUEL, THE FUEL LEAKED OUT. THE SERVICE ENGINE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED, INDICATING A FUEL LEAK. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE MIDSHIP FUEL TANK DEVELOPED A CRACK WHERE IT CONTACTED THE FRAME CROSS MEMBER AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE CONTACT REFERENCED NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 01V114000 (FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE). THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000.
NHTSA ODI #10971593
84,000 miles · Feb 4, 2015
Equipment Adaptive/mobilityCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 1998 FORD E-150 EQUIPPED WITH A CCI AIRTOUCH PNEUMATIC GAS/BRAKE. THE MODEL WAS UNKNOWN. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE WITHOUT CAUSE OR WARNING. THE FAILURE CAUSED A CRASH WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE, TREES, AND A STREET LAMP. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE, BUT THE VEHICLE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 1998 FORD E-150 EQUIPPED WITH A CCI AIRTOUCH PNEUMATIC GAS/BRAKE. THE MODEL WAS UNKNOWN. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE WITHOUT CAUSE OR WARNING. THE FAILURE CAUSED A CRASH WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE, TREES, AND A STREET LAMP. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE, BUT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED AND THE CONTACT WAS INJURED. MEDICAL ATTENTION WAS NOT REQUIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 84,000.
NHTSA ODI #10681211
152,000 miles · Jul 7, 2014
Wheels
LEFT FRONT TIRE (MICHELIN P235/75R15 LTX M/S2) SEPARATION AT 25 MPH. ALSO, NOTICEABLE STRESS CRACKS ON THE SIDEWALL OF THE TIRE. TIRES BOUGHT 01/2010; WITH 7/32 TREAD REMAINING. REFERENCE 13T012000. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10608670
80,750 miles · Nov 14, 2012
Fuel/propulsion System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E-150. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER REFUELING, FUEL SPEWED OUT OF THE FILLER NECK AND ONTO THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER TO BE INSPECTED. THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT THE FUEL TANK FAILED DUE TO CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E-150. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER REFUELING, FUEL SPEWED OUT OF THE FILLER NECK AND ONTO THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER TO BE INSPECTED. THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT THE FUEL TANK FAILED DUE TO CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 80,750.
NHTSA ODI #10484587
250,000 miles · Sep 14, 2011
Fuel System, Gasoline
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E-150. THE CONTACT STATED THE FUEL TANK STRAPS FRACTURED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FUEL TANK AND STRAPS WERE THE SAME AS THE ONES UTILIZED ON THE 1998-2003 FORD F-150, IN WHICH WAS RECALLED FOR THE SAME FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INSPECTED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 250,000.
NHTSA ODI #10425451
200,000 miles · Aug 1, 2011
Seat BeltsCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E-150. WHILE AT A STOP SIGN THE CONTACT WAS REAR ENDED BY A VEHICLE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN AWAY FROM THE SCENE WITH DAMAGE TO THE REAR BUMPER AND FRAME. THE CONTACT SUFFERED NECK PAIN AND WAS SEEN BY A DOCTOR AT THE HOSPITAL. A CAT SCAN WAS…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E-150. WHILE AT A STOP SIGN THE CONTACT WAS REAR ENDED BY A VEHICLE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN AWAY FROM THE SCENE WITH DAMAGE TO THE REAR BUMPER AND FRAME. THE CONTACT SUFFERED NECK PAIN AND WAS SEEN BY A DOCTOR AT THE HOSPITAL. A CAT SCAN WAS PERFORMED BUT THERE WAS NO DIAGNOSIS. APPROXIMATELY FOUR MONTHS AFTER THE CRASH OCCURRED THE CONTACT CONTINUED TO SUFFER FROM NECK PAIN. THE DOCTOR PERFORMED AN MRI AND DIAGNOSED THAT THE CONTACT SUSTAINED A BROKEN NECK CAUSED BY TRAUMA. THE CONTACT STATED THE INJURY MAY HAVE OCCURRED DUE TO THE SEAT BELT LAYING ON THE NECK DURING THE CRASH. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 200,000.
NHTSA ODI #10416465
143,786 miles · May 16, 2011
Fuel System, Gasoline
98 FORD E-150 / SAFETY RECALL-01S14 I CONTACTED CHALMERS FORD DEALER ([XXX]) SANTA FE,NM 473-3673 / FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE([XXX]) 1-800-392-3673 MY VEHICLE EXHIBITS EXACTLY THE SAME SYMPTOMS AS RECALL AND WAS TOLD I WAS NOT ON THE LIST AND NOTHING COULD BE DONE-I DISCOVERED THE LEAK WHEN I WAS PUMPING GAS INTO THE GAS TANK AND …
Read full complaint
98 FORD E-150 / SAFETY RECALL-01S14 I CONTACTED CHALMERS FORD DEALER ([XXX]) SANTA FE,NM 473-3673 / FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE([XXX]) 1-800-392-3673 MY VEHICLE EXHIBITS EXACTLY THE SAME SYMPTOMS AS RECALL AND WAS TOLD I WAS NOT ON THE LIST AND NOTHING COULD BE DONE-I DISCOVERED THE LEAK WHEN I WAS PUMPING GAS INTO THE GAS TANK AND A HUGE PUDDLE OF GAS WAS OBSERVED DRIPPING FROM VAN BY AN OBSERVANT CUSTOMER-I STOPPED PUMPING GAS IMMEDIATELY AND RETURNED HOME-UPON MY RETURN I INSPECTED EDGE OF TANK AND ALL THE HOSES AND SAW THAT GAS HAD FORMED A RING WHERE THE FUEL HAD LEAKED OUT-DID NOT SEE LEAK FROM HOSES BUT THEY WERE DETERIORATED-LEAK WAS FROM UPPER TANK AREA AND FLOWED DOWNWARD-IF THIS IS NOT TAKEN CARE OF SOON THERE COULD BE MANY FORD OWNERS SUSCEPTIBLE TO CAR FIRES-MANY OF THE VEHICLES SUCH AS MINE ARE CONVERSION VANS AND WE CARRY OUR ENTIRE FAMILIES IN THEM-VERY DANGEROUS DEFECT OR CHEAP PART OR POOR DESIGN-PLEASE HELP IF YOU CAN. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10401188
59,000 miles · Dec 31, 2009
Engine And Engine CoolingStructure
06-03-2007 RIGHT DOOR HANDLE (OUTSIDE PART) BROKE AND I COULD NOT GET INTO MY VAN. NO ABUSE ON MY PART. I HAD THE DOOR HANDLE REPLACED BY FORD DEALERSHIP AT MY EXPENSE ($125.00). 03-03-2008 LEFT DOOR HANDLE (OUTSIDE PART) BROKE WHEN I PULLED THE HANDLE. I NOW HAVE TO GET INTO MY VAN BY THE PASSENGER SIDE, AND CRAWL OVER TO T…
Read full complaint
06-03-2007 RIGHT DOOR HANDLE (OUTSIDE PART) BROKE AND I COULD NOT GET INTO MY VAN. NO ABUSE ON MY PART. I HAD THE DOOR HANDLE REPLACED BY FORD DEALERSHIP AT MY EXPENSE ($125.00). 03-03-2008 LEFT DOOR HANDLE (OUTSIDE PART) BROKE WHEN I PULLED THE HANDLE. I NOW HAVE TO GET INTO MY VAN BY THE PASSENGER SIDE, AND CRAWL OVER TO THE DRIVERS SIDE. THIS IS AWFUL SINCE I HAD ADVANCED COPD BREATHING PROBLEMS. I HAD TO ORDER THE PART TODAY, AND HOPE FOR THE BEST TO GET IT INSTALLED, AGAIN AT MY EXPENSE. THE HANDLES SHOULD NOT BROKE ON A 1998 VEHICLE SO SOON. I HAVE READ ALL COMPLAINTS FOR 1998 FORD E150 VANS, I HAVE A SHERROD CONVERSION VAN. 04-10-2009 BACK A/C & HEAT DOES NOT BLOW COLD OR HEAT FROM BACK UNIT. THE FAN PART IS THE ONLY PART THAT WORKS IN THE BACK UNIT. IS THERE A RECALL ON THIS. 01-20-2002 THE FRONT A/C & HEAT DISTRIBUTION ASSEMBLY HAD TO BE REPLACED WHEN IT STOPPED WORKING COMPLETELY. DEALERSHIP TOLD ME SHERROD IS OUT OF BUSINESS AND THAT I WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT IN FOR A DIAGNOSTIC CHECK, AND REPLACEMENT AT MY EXPENSE. PLEASE INVESTIGATE THESE PROBLEMS, AND HELP ME OUT. THANK YOU. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10297724
142,865 miles · Apr 11, 2008
Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E15. WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN MAKING A PINGING SOUND IN THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY DECELERATED TO 50 MPH. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS LOSING OIL. ON JANUARY 23 2007, A REMANUFACTURED ENGINE WAS INSTALLED IN THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER REBUILT THE CYLINDER HEADS. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E15. WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN MAKING A PINGING SOUND IN THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY DECELERATED TO 50 MPH. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS LOSING OIL. ON JANUARY 23 2007, A REMANUFACTURED ENGINE WAS INSTALLED IN THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER REBUILT THE CYLINDER HEADS. FOR ONE YEAR, TWO MONTHS, AND NINETEEN DAYS, THE PINGING NOISE CONTINUED TO OCCUR. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO ASSIST HER WITH THE REPAIR, ALTHOUGH THE WARRANTY WAS VALID. A SECOND DEALER DIAGNOSED THE FAILURE ON APRIL 10, 2008 AND STATED THAT THE TRANSMISSION SEAL WAS LEAKING, THERE WERE OIL LEAKS PRESENT IN THREE PLACES ON THE OIL GASKETS, THE TIMING WAS OFF, AND THERE WAS CONDENSATION ON THE OIL CAP. THERE WERE NO WARNING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED PRIOR TO THE FAILURES. THE SECOND DEALER CHARGED THE CONTACT $107 TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THEY WERE WAITING ON A RESPONSE FROM THE MANUFACTURER PRIOR TO REPAIRING THE VEHICLE UNDER WARRANTY. THE CONTACT FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU. THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HAVE CRUISE CONTROL. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 142,865 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 161,100.
NHTSA ODI #10225068
140,000 miles · Mar 18, 2008
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 FORD E150. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A SAFETY RECALL NOTICE IN FEBRUARY OF 2008 FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. THE DEALER WAS CALLED THREE TIMES AND THEY STATED THAT THE PART WOULD BE AVAILABLE THE FOLLOWING MONTH. THE PURCHASE DATE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 140,000.
NHTSA ODI #10221539
Official recalls
4Oct 13, 2009
FORD IS RECALLING MODEL YEARS 1995-2003 WINDSTAR, 2000-2003 EXCURSION DIESEL, 1993-1997 AND 1999-2003 F-250 SD THROUGH F-550 SD DIESEL, 1992-2003 E-150 THROUGH E-550, 1995-2002 EXPLORER, 1997 AND 2002 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER, 1995-1997 AND 2001-2003 RANGER, AND 1994 F53 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS). THE SCDS MAY LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A VEHICLE FIRE COULD OCCUR WITH OR WITHOUT THE ENGINE RUNNING.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS THAT DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS IN LINE WITH THE SCDS. ON 1999-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH A LEAKING SCDS, DEALERS WILL ALSO INSPECT THE ABS CONTROL MODULE CONNECTOR AND REPAIR AS NECESSARY. REPAIRS WILL BE COMPLETED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON OCTOBER 27, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
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.
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.
Apr 5, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: ON CERTAIN VANS WITH AMBULANCE PREP PACKAGES OR OTHER SEVERE-DUTY APPLICATIONS INVOLVING OPERATION AT OR NEAR THE GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT WITH FREQUENT TWISTING OF THE VEHICLE BODY, SUCH AS OFF-ROAD, ROUGH ROAD OR SPEED BUMP EVENTS, THE 35 GALLON MID-SHIP FUEL TANK COULD DEVELOP A CRACK WHERE IT CONTACTS THE FRAME CROSS MEMBER. IF THE FUEL TANK CRACKS, FUEL LEAKAGE COULD OCCUR.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE FUEL TANK AND, IF CRACKED, WILL REPLACE THE TANK. INSULATOR PADS WILL BE INSTALLED ON ALL VEHICLES TO REDUCE THE STRESS LEVELS IN THE FUEL TANK. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN APRIL 19, 2001. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
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
1DP05005 · 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.
Illustration