NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
14 reportsClear category filter197,540 miles · Oct 30, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY FORD E350 1999 MADE A LOUD FLAPPING NOISE AS I WAS LEAVING MY HOME. I PULLED RIGHT BACK INTO THE DRIVEWAY AND SHUT OFF THE ENGINE. I FOUND OUT THAT THE #2 SPARK PLUG HAD COMPLETELY BLOWN OUT OF THE CYLINDER HEAD. THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED ON ANY VEHICLE I HAVE EVER OWNED. I TAKE GOOD CARE OF MY VEHICLES. I AM A MECHANIC, …
Read full complaint
MY FORD E350 1999 MADE A LOUD FLAPPING NOISE AS I WAS LEAVING MY HOME. I PULLED RIGHT BACK INTO THE DRIVEWAY AND SHUT OFF THE ENGINE. I FOUND OUT THAT THE #2 SPARK PLUG HAD COMPLETELY BLOWN OUT OF THE CYLINDER HEAD. THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED ON ANY VEHICLE I HAVE EVER OWNED. I TAKE GOOD CARE OF MY VEHICLES. I AM A MECHANIC, AND FORMER JET ENGINE MECHANIC ALSO. MY OBDII CONFIRMED A MISFIRE ON CYLINDER #2 THAT IS HOW I LOCATED WHICH PLUG IT WAS. FORD SAID IT WOULD COST $260 TO LOOK AT IT, AND UP TO $1700 IF THEY COULD REPAIR IT. PLUS TOWING. I ASKED HOW MUCH A NEW ENGINE WOULD COST SINCE THE VAN IS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION. FORD SAID IT WOULD COST $7,200 FOR A NEW ENGINE. THIS VAN HAS COST MORE FOR REPAIRS THAN ANY VEHICLE I HAVE OWNED IN MY LIFE. I AM 62. AIR CONDITIONING COMPRESSOR $700.00 COIL ON SPARK PLUG $130 ABS BRAKE SENSOR $138.00 FLEX PLATE AND FLYWHEEL $700.(CAUSED BY LOOSE IGNITION SWITCH) EGR BLACK BOX $400 REPLACEMENT. FORD WANTED $100.00 TO CHANGE MY FUEL FILTER. I WENT TO THE STORE AND BOUGHT THE SPECIAL WRENCH FOR $16 ,DID IT MYSELF IN 15 MINUTES. RECALL FOR WIRING NEAR THE MASTER CYLINDER THAT COULD CATCH FIRE, 1/2 DAYS WAGES LOST. IT TOOK ME 4 HOURS TO CHANGE SPARK PLUGS. IT WAS THE WORST DESIGN I HAVE EVER SEEN. A NIGHTMARE TO GET TO THE SPARK PLUGS. I SOLD THE VAN FOR $500 TONIGHT. GLAD THE NIGHTMARE IS OVER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10433618
76,589 miles · Sep 6, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingFire
THE SPARK PLUG EJECTED FOR THE SECOND TIME IN TWO WEEKS AND THIS TIME HAD A SMALL FIRE THAT WAS PUT OUT RIGHT AWAY THAT COULD HAVE BEEN REAL TROUBLE AS WE HAD 9 PEOPLE IN THE MOTORHOME AT THE TIME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10423894
170,000 miles · Apr 29, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
WELL IT GOES LIKE THIS, NEW PLUGS AND COIL PACKS WHERE INSTALLED AT DEAN ARBOUR FORD IN PINCONNING MICHIGAN IN MY 1999 E350 ECONOLINE VAN. SO THE ISSUE AT HAND FROM WHAT I HAVE READ ABOUT WAS IMPROPER INSTALLATION OF SAID PLUG OR PLUGS FROM WHAT I HAVE READ IN ANSWERS.COM FROM WHAT FORD MOTOR COMPANY HAS SAID THAT IT IS IMPROPER…
Read full complaint
WELL IT GOES LIKE THIS, NEW PLUGS AND COIL PACKS WHERE INSTALLED AT DEAN ARBOUR FORD IN PINCONNING MICHIGAN IN MY 1999 E350 ECONOLINE VAN. SO THE ISSUE AT HAND FROM WHAT I HAVE READ ABOUT WAS IMPROPER INSTALLATION OF SAID PLUG OR PLUGS FROM WHAT I HAVE READ IN ANSWERS.COM FROM WHAT FORD MOTOR COMPANY HAS SAID THAT IT IS IMPROPER INSTALLATION OR OVER TIGHTENING, NOT TORQUED PROPERLY. WELL IF THIS WAS THE ISSUE AT HAND THEN THEY ARE NOT PROPERLY TRAINING THEIR TECH'S, WHICH I DO NOT SEE THAT BEING THE ISSUE AT HAND. IT IS AS I SEE, POORLY DESIGNED AS TO THE SAME ISSUE HAPPENING TO SO MANY OTHERS. WHICH I SEE THEY SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE DESIGN FLAW. MY EXPERIENCE WITH MY PROBLEM AT HAND WAS NOT UNDER HEAVY LOAD, I WAS AT A STOP SIGN AND WENT TO PROCEED. WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THAT WAS STEPPING ON THE GAS SLOWLY TO MOVE FORWARD AND BANG, AND I MEAN (BANG). IT KEEP POPPING UNTIL I SHUT IT DOWN IGNITING AS THAT CYLINDER IN ROTATION CAME TO THAT FIRING ORDER FOR THAT CYLINDER. EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE READ INDICATES THAT THE CYLINDER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF A 5.4 TRITON HEAD 2ND ONE FROM THE BACK FORWARD IS THE ONE THAT IS FAMOUS FOR EJECTING FROM THE HEAD. RIGHT ABOVE THE PLUG IS THE COIL PACK AND ABOVE THAT IS THE FUEL RAIL WHICH INTERN WHEN THE PLUG EJECTED ITSELF COULD HAVE BEEN VERY HAZARDOUS. THE POPPING WAS THE PLUG SPARKING, WHICH WAS IGNITING THE FUEL PUMPED INTO THE CYLINDER BY THE INJECTOR. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A VERY EXPLOSIVE SITUATION MEANING (FIRE). WITH THE LUCK OF THE DRAW I WAS NOT LIKE SOME OF THE UNLUCKY ONES THAT HAVE CAUSED A FIRE FROM THE EJECTION OF THE SPARK PLUG. WITH THE COMPLAINTS THAT HAVE ARISED FROM THIS ISSUE THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THIS KNOWN PROBLEM, BEFORE SOMEONE LOOSES THEIR LIFE FROM THIS KNOWN ISSUE. YOU WOULD THINK THAT FORD WOULD WANT TO ADDRESS THIS KNOWN ISSUE FOR LIABILITY REASONS, BEFORE THE UNKNOWN HAPPENS. LOSS OF LIFE, YOU CAN'T REPLACE IT, BUT YOU CAN REPLACE OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10398301
36,103 miles · Jan 26, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
OIL LEAKING FROM UNDER HEAD (GASKET) ONTO EXHAUST MANIFOLD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10302358
Mileage unknown · Oct 14, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
HAVE A FORD 1999 ECONOLINE VAN WITH A TRITON ENGINE, HAVE SO FAR BLOWN X3 SPARKPLUGS, ALL FIXED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10287322
Mileage unknown · Dec 21, 2008
Engine And Engine CoolingFireInjury
I WAS DRIVING FROM NEW YORK TO PHILADELPHIA WHEN I ALMOST GOT HOME THE CAR CAUGHT ON FIRE ON THE BACK OF THE CAR WHERE THE WHEEL ARE, ON MY PASSENGER SIDE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10252371
Mileage unknown · Apr 8, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
1999 FORD ECONOLINE 250 SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT. CONSUMER STATES THAT THIS IS NOT A NORMAL WEAR ITEM. HE HAS HAD ALL WORK DONE BY FORD. FORD WILL NOT COVER THE REPAIR COST. HE STATES THAT IF SOMETHING IS WRONG IT IS FORD'S FAULT. *KB
NHTSA ODI #10224009
71,621 miles · Nov 30, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
FORD TRITON 5.4L BLEW OUT #2 SPARK PLUG. REQUIRING CYL. HEAD TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $2680.61. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10144082
62,000 miles · Oct 6, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
DT: THE CONSUMER STATES THAT 1999 FORD ECONOLINE 350 BLEW A SPARK PLUG AT 60 MPH. THIS BLEW OUT OF THE WHOLE MANIFOLD. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALER, AND THE PRICE THAT THE CONSUMER WAS QUOTED WAS AROUND $2500.00. THE CONSUMER WAS IN CONTACT WITH FORD. THE CONSUMER STATED THAT FORD COULD CARE LESS. THE VEHICL…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONSUMER STATES THAT 1999 FORD ECONOLINE 350 BLEW A SPARK PLUG AT 60 MPH. THIS BLEW OUT OF THE WHOLE MANIFOLD. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALER, AND THE PRICE THAT THE CONSUMER WAS QUOTED WAS AROUND $2500.00. THE CONSUMER WAS IN CONTACT WITH FORD. THE CONSUMER STATED THAT FORD COULD CARE LESS. THE VEHICLE WAS BEING REPAIRED NOW BY THE DEALERSHIP. THE VEHICLE DID NOT HAVE ANY PRIOR PROBLEMS. IT WAS REGULARLY MAINTAINED BY THE CONSUMER. *AK THE CONSUMER BELIEVES THIS HAPPENED DUE TO LACK OF THREAD ON THE ALUMINUM CYLINDER HEAD. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10136956
55,000 miles · Apr 14, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
WHILE BRAKING AT LOW SPEED VEHICLE STALLED. DEALERSHIP WAS NOTIFIED, BUT DID NOT RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10067186
Official recalls
5Feb 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.
Sep 21, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: BI-FUEL CNG PICKUP TRUCKS AND BI-FUEL CNG VANS, MODIFIED BY CFI CONTROL SYSTEMS, INC., FAIL TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 303, "FUEL SYSTEM INTEGRITY OF COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS VEHICLES." THE LABEL AFFIXED TO THE FUEL FILLER DOOR BY THE VEHICLE MODIFIER CONTAINS THE INSPECTION DATE AND EXPIRATION DATE OF THE CNG TANK. HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT CONTAIN THE STATEMENT "SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE FUEL CONTAINER FOR INSPECTION AND SERVICE LIFE."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THESE VEHICLES DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS.
Remedy: OWNERS WILL BE PROVIDED A LABEL WITH THE REQUIRED STATEMENT, ALONG WITH INSTRUCTIONS FOR AFFIXING THE LABEL AT THE FUEL FILLER DOOR. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN NOVEMBER 2, 2000. 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.
Apr 19, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CUTAWAYS AND STRIPPED CHASSIS WITH SINGLE REAR WHEELS. THE LUG NUTS CAN POTENTIALLY BOTTOM OUT ON A SHOULDER ON THE STUDS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS, THERE CAN BE AN INADEQUATE CLAMP LOAD TO ATTACH THE WHEEL TO THE AXLE, RESULTING IN NOISE, DAMAGE TO THE WHEEL AND HUB, OR IN EXTREME CASES, LOSS OF A REAR WHEEL WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE REAR WHEEL ATTACHING STUDS.
Mar 15, 1999
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: UTILITY VANS EQUIPPED WITH THE "60/40" HINGED SIDE CARGO DOORS. THE STRIKERS FOR THE 60/40 DOOR SINGLE LATCH SYSTEM WERE FOUND TO CONTAIN STRESS CRACKS AT THE STRIKER WIRE LOWER STAKE JOINT. STRIKERS WITH STRESS CRACKS MAY NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 206, "DOOR LOCKS AND DOOR RETENTION COMPONENTS."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH, THE DOOR STRIKERS MAY NOT HOLD THE DOOR, INCREASING THE RISK OF PERSONAL INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE DOOR STRIKER.
Oct 14, 1998
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PICKUP TRUCKS BUILT WITH SINGLE REAR WHEELS AND EQUIPPED WITH 3.55:1 AND 3.73:1 AXLE RATIO. THESE VEHICLES WERE BUILT WITH INCORRECT SPEEDOMETER DRIVEN GEARS, RESULTING IN A LOWER SPEEDOMETER READING THAN THE ACTUAL VEHICLE SPEED BEING DRIVEN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS CAN RESULT IN THE VEHICLE BEING DRIVEN AT AN UNSAFE OR ILLEGAL SPEED SHOULD THE DRIVER NOT REALIZE THAT HIS VEHICLE ROAD SPEED IS GREATER THAN THE SPEEDOMETER INDICATION.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL THE CORRECT SPEEDOMETER GEAR.
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