NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
127 reportsClear category filter79,850 miles · Apr 21, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
WE OWN A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION EDDIE BAUER. IN JANUARY 2009, WE HAD A "MISFIRE" IN THE #6 SPARK PLUG AND WAS ADVISED TO CHANGE ALL OF THE SPARK PLUGS - WHICH WE DID. SINCE THAT TIME, WE'VE HAD 3 OTHER "MISFIRES" IN THE #6, #8 AND #7 SPARK PLUGS. EACH TIME A REPAIR IS MADE, THERE IS A MISFIRE IN ANOTHER SPARK PLUG WITHIN 3 MONTH…
Read full complaint
WE OWN A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION EDDIE BAUER. IN JANUARY 2009, WE HAD A "MISFIRE" IN THE #6 SPARK PLUG AND WAS ADVISED TO CHANGE ALL OF THE SPARK PLUGS - WHICH WE DID. SINCE THAT TIME, WE'VE HAD 3 OTHER "MISFIRES" IN THE #6, #8 AND #7 SPARK PLUGS. EACH TIME A REPAIR IS MADE, THERE IS A MISFIRE IN ANOTHER SPARK PLUG WITHIN 3 MONTHS OF THE REPAIR. ON 4/19/2010, THE NUMBER 4 SPARKPLUG BLEW COMPLETELY OUT OF THE ENGINE UPON STARTING THE CAR. WE HAVE HAD THE VEHICLE SERVICED REGULARLY AT THE FORD DEALER AND ALL REPAIRS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE FORD DEALER. WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT FORD KNOWS OF THE DESIGN DEFECT IN THEIR ENGINES AND IT IS A REGULAR PROBLEM WITH THE V8 ENGINES IN THE FORD TRUCKS AND THEY ARE CHOOSING TO DO NOTHING ABOUT IT. WE HAVE SPENT WELL OVER $3000 TOTAL TO FIX ALL OF THESE ISSUES. WHY ISN'T FORD STANDING BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT - ARE THEY WAITING FOR A INJURY OR WORSE, A FATALITY IN ORDER TO ISSUE A RECALL? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10326798
112,800 miles · Apr 11, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAVE A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION WITH THE TRITON 5.4L ENGINE. I HAD THE SPARK PLUG EJECT FROM THE #7 CYLINDER. IN MY CASE THE GARAGE THAT I TOOK IT TO HAD TO REMOVE THE CYLINDER HEAD TO HELICOIL THE CYLINDER. IT TOOK 5 WEEKS TO GET MY TRUCK BACK AND COST OVER $1200 TO FIX. I HAD TO REPLACE 2 COIL PACKS, A SPARK PLUG, THE HEAD GASKE…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION WITH THE TRITON 5.4L ENGINE. I HAD THE SPARK PLUG EJECT FROM THE #7 CYLINDER. IN MY CASE THE GARAGE THAT I TOOK IT TO HAD TO REMOVE THE CYLINDER HEAD TO HELICOIL THE CYLINDER. IT TOOK 5 WEEKS TO GET MY TRUCK BACK AND COST OVER $1200 TO FIX. I HAD TO REPLACE 2 COIL PACKS, A SPARK PLUG, THE HEAD GASKET, INTAKE AND EXHAUST MANIFOLD GASKETS, OIL PAN GASKET, VALVE COVER GASKET AND TIMING CHAIN GASKET. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10324937
108,023 miles · Apr 6, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
SPARK PLUG HAD BLOWN OUT OF ITS PLACE IN THE ENGINE. AT FIRST, I HAD THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AND I HAD PROMPTLY TAKEN TO THE SHOP (ASE CERT.) BUT THE LIGHT DIDN'T COME ON ANY MORE. AFTER THE SERVICE MAN RAN THE TEST SOME TIME LATER, NOTHING APPEARED TO BE WRONG. A DAY OR SO LATER, I WAS HEARING A "CLICKING" SOUND UNDER THE…
Read full complaint
SPARK PLUG HAD BLOWN OUT OF ITS PLACE IN THE ENGINE. AT FIRST, I HAD THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AND I HAD PROMPTLY TAKEN TO THE SHOP (ASE CERT.) BUT THE LIGHT DIDN'T COME ON ANY MORE. AFTER THE SERVICE MAN RAN THE TEST SOME TIME LATER, NOTHING APPEARED TO BE WRONG. A DAY OR SO LATER, I WAS HEARING A "CLICKING" SOUND UNDER THE HOOD, LATER, I HAD LOST A SPARK PLUG. WHICH BY THE WAY IS A HORRIBLE NOISE! I WAS TOLD BY THE SERVICE TECHNICIAN THAT IT WAS A PROBLEM WITH FORD VEHICLES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10324088
Mileage unknown · Apr 6, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAVE A 2003 EXPEDITION 5.4L AND SINCE 2006 TO PRESENT EVERY TWO OR THREE MONTHS I HAVE TO REPLACE A COIL PACK AND SPARK PLUG. NOW SINCE THE COIL PACKS HAVE BLOWN OUT SO MANY TIMES MY CATALYTIC CONVERTER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE HAS MELTED ON THE INSIDE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10323950
112,000 miles · Mar 12, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION THREW A SPARK PLUG. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10319107
77,000 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
FORD SPARK PLUG EJECTION, 2003 FORD EXPEDITION 5.4L TRITON ENGINE. "CONSUMERAFFAIRS.COM" HAS 317 PAGES OF COMPLAINTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE. FORD DOES NOT ACKNOWLEDGE A PROBLEM. I HAVE HAD TWO (2) BLOW-OUTS, COSTING ME $1,200.00 I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PETITION FOR RECALL STARTED, BASED ON POTENTIAL FIRE AND SAFETY ISSUES. IN …
Read full complaint
FORD SPARK PLUG EJECTION, 2003 FORD EXPEDITION 5.4L TRITON ENGINE. "CONSUMERAFFAIRS.COM" HAS 317 PAGES OF COMPLAINTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE. FORD DOES NOT ACKNOWLEDGE A PROBLEM. I HAVE HAD TWO (2) BLOW-OUTS, COSTING ME $1,200.00 I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PETITION FOR RECALL STARTED, BASED ON POTENTIAL FIRE AND SAFETY ISSUES. IN MY CASE, I WAS TRAVELING AT 60 MPH AND LOST POWER WHILE IN TRAFFIC. I HAD TO CAREFULLY PULL OFF HIGHWAY WITH VERY LITTLE ENGINE POWER. THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE WHICH NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. I NOW OWN A VEHICLE THAT I CAN NOT TAKE ON A LONG TRIP, FOR FEAR OF HAVING THE ENGINE EXPLODE AGAIN. HOPEFULLY, IT WILL NOT TAKE A FATALITY OR SERIOUS INJURY TO HAVE SOMEONE REVIEW THIS PROBLEM AND TAKE ACTION. THE FEBRUARY 21,2007 MEMO FROM DOT, REF: DP05-005 REVIEW IS IN NEED OF UPDATING. THE NUMBERS ARE NOW MUCH GREATER THAN PREVIOUSLY REPORTED. PLEASE REVIEW THIS PROBLEM. FORD SIMPLY SAYS " NOT MY PROBLEM". [XXX] *TR
NHTSA ODI #10315499
81,023 miles · Feb 23, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
2003 FORD EXPEDITION EDDIE BAUER, SPARK PLUG ON PASSENGER BACK SIDE EJECTED FROM HEAD WHILE I WAS DRIVING. THEY WERE STILL ORIGINAL SPARK PLUGS. GOING TO COST OVER $1000 TO TEMPORARILY FIX PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10313291
108,780 miles · Feb 19, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
I WAS STOPPED AT A LIGHT. I WENT TO GO AND I HEARD A POP,SO I WENT UNDER THE HOOD AND I COULD SEE THE LAST SPARK PLUG IN THE REAR ON THE PASSENGER SIDE FIRING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10312288
72,955 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
1ST OCCURANCE: 2003 FORD EPEDITION, 5.4L V8 ENGINE. FACTORY ORIGINAL SPARK PLUG EXPLODED WHILE TRAVELLING AT 60MPH.MILEAGE: 72,955. DATE: 8/17/08. 2ND OCCURANCE: SAME ENGINE, ORIGINAL PLUGS( LESS ABOVE REPAIR). 2/05/2010, MILES 77,525. SPARK PLUG EXPLODED WHILE TRAVELLING 40 MPH.
NHTSA ODI #10307395
69,000 miles · Feb 8, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY HUSBAND WAS DRIVING HIS 2003 FORD EXPEDITION ON THE WAY HOME FROM WORK ON FEB.4,2010. HE HEARD A BANG AND SMELLED A SMALL VAPOR OF GAS ALONG WITH THE TRUCK NOT RUNNING VERY WELL. HE MADE IT HOME SAFELY TO FIND THAT SPARK PLUG BLEW THROUGH THE HEAD!! WE WENT ONLINE TO SEE ABOUT THIS PROBLEM,AND WHAT COULD BE DONE. HE HAS ONLY …
Read full complaint
MY HUSBAND WAS DRIVING HIS 2003 FORD EXPEDITION ON THE WAY HOME FROM WORK ON FEB.4,2010. HE HEARD A BANG AND SMELLED A SMALL VAPOR OF GAS ALONG WITH THE TRUCK NOT RUNNING VERY WELL. HE MADE IT HOME SAFELY TO FIND THAT SPARK PLUG BLEW THROUGH THE HEAD!! WE WENT ONLINE TO SEE ABOUT THIS PROBLEM,AND WHAT COULD BE DONE. HE HAS ONLY 69,000 MILES ON IT AND HE IS THE ORIGINAL OWNER AND TAKES CARE TO KEEP UP ON EVERYDAY MAINENTANCE. I HAVE MADE PHONE CALLS TO NO AVAIL--FORD CISTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER TOLD ME TO TAKE IT TO THE DEALER OR REPUTABLE SERVICE CENTER. THIS IS NOT COVERED UNDER ANY WARRANTY AT ALL!! SO I AM GOING FURTHER WITH THIS BECAUSE IF YOU GO TO GET IT FIXED--(A) IT COULD HAPPEN AGAIN AND (B) A FIRE COULD START, AND (C) VERY EXPENSIVE TO GET FIXED. WE HAVE READ MANY OTHER CONSUMERS HAVE HAD THIS SAME PROBLEM BUT FORDS DOES'NT WANT TO HELP OUT. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE WORSE SCENARIOS HAPPEN WITH POSSIBLE DEATHS. TO MAKE MATTERS WORSE, I OWN A 2004 F-150 AND HAVE READ STORIES OF IT HAPPENING IN THOSE ENGINES TOO!
NHTSA ODI #10307389
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