NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
127 reportsClear category filter100,008 miles · Oct 22, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
AT 92,000 ABOUT MILES THE PASSENGER SIDE PLUG BLEW OUT. I PUT JB. WELD AROUND THE PLUG AND PUT IT BACK IN THE TRUCK. IT WORKED FOR 3 MONTHS AND NOW ITS DONE IT AGAIN. I AM NOW OUT OF WORK AND MY WIFE CAN'T MAKE IT TO HERE JOB BECAUSE OF THE TRUCK. SO I AM LOOKING FOR A HELI COIL REPAIR KIT. BUT NO WAY TO GO AND GET IT I HAVE ON…
Read full complaint
AT 92,000 ABOUT MILES THE PASSENGER SIDE PLUG BLEW OUT. I PUT JB. WELD AROUND THE PLUG AND PUT IT BACK IN THE TRUCK. IT WORKED FOR 3 MONTHS AND NOW ITS DONE IT AGAIN. I AM NOW OUT OF WORK AND MY WIFE CAN'T MAKE IT TO HERE JOB BECAUSE OF THE TRUCK. SO I AM LOOKING FOR A HELI COIL REPAIR KIT. BUT NO WAY TO GO AND GET IT I HAVE ONE TRUCK. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO NEXT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10246350
66,000 miles · Oct 9, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
AS I WAS DRIVING, MY VEHICLE MADE A LOUD POP, AND THEN A RATTLING SOUND. I IMMEDIATELY PULLED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, AND POPPED THE HOOD TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON, AND NOTICED THAT MY SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED OUT OF THE CYLINDER HEAD. I THEN HAD TO WALK APPROX 1/2 MILE (WHILE I WAS 8 MONTHS PREGNANT) TO CALL A TOW TRUCK TO HAVE…
Read full complaint
AS I WAS DRIVING, MY VEHICLE MADE A LOUD POP, AND THEN A RATTLING SOUND. I IMMEDIATELY PULLED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, AND POPPED THE HOOD TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON, AND NOTICED THAT MY SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED OUT OF THE CYLINDER HEAD. I THEN HAD TO WALK APPROX 1/2 MILE (WHILE I WAS 8 MONTHS PREGNANT) TO CALL A TOW TRUCK TO HAVE MY VEHICLE TAKEN TO A MECHANIC. THE MECHANIC REPORTED THAT THE PLUGS THAT WERE IN WERE FACTORY, AND INFORMED ME THAT THIS WAS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM AMONG FORDS. THE MECHANIC REPLACED THE PLUGS WITH A HEALING COIL, AND THEN INFORMED ME THAT THIS WAS NOT A GUARANTEED FIX, IT WAS MORE LIKE PUTTING A BAND AID ON THE PROBLEM, IF I WANTED TO GUARANTEE THE ISSUE WAS FIXED, THAT I WOULD NEED TO REPLACE THE HEAD. I OPTED TO REPLACE THE PLUGS BECAUSE THEY WERE CONSIDERABLY CHEAPER, AND ABOUT 5 MONTHS LATER, I EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM AGAIN. SINCE I WAS QUITE A WAYS AWAY FROM THE MECHANIC THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY WORKED ON IT, I TOOK IT TO A DIFFERENT SHOP. THEY FIXED THE PROBLEM BY PUTTING AN INSERT IN, AND CHARGING ME AN ADDITIONAL $300. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10244919
Mileage unknown · Sep 24, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY WIFE WAS ALMOST TO THE END OF THE OFF RAMP TO THE 210 FREEWAY AND HEARD A LOUD POP AND THEN AN AWFUL NOISE. IT SOUND LIKE SHE BLEW A HOLE IN THE EXHAUST MANIFOLD. IT TURNED OUT TO BE THE #3 SPARK PLUG BEING EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE. WE PURCHASED THE VEHICLE FROM THE DEALER AND HAVE NEVER CHANGED PLUGS. WE WERE FORTUNATE TH…
Read full complaint
MY WIFE WAS ALMOST TO THE END OF THE OFF RAMP TO THE 210 FREEWAY AND HEARD A LOUD POP AND THEN AN AWFUL NOISE. IT SOUND LIKE SHE BLEW A HOLE IN THE EXHAUST MANIFOLD. IT TURNED OUT TO BE THE #3 SPARK PLUG BEING EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE. WE PURCHASED THE VEHICLE FROM THE DEALER AND HAVE NEVER CHANGED PLUGS. WE WERE FORTUNATE THAT IT HAPPENED LOCAL AND NOT ON THE ROAD FOR VACATION. THE TRUCK WAS TOWED AND REPAIRED AND A TUNE UP DOWN. AN EXPENSIVE DAY AND NEEDLESS TIME OFF WORK FOR A PROBLEM THAT SEEMS TO DUE TO BAD ENGINEERING. A TAPERED SPARK PLUG AND 1/4 THREAD LOCK IN THE HEAD IS NOT A SAFE AND SMART DESIGN. A 3/4 THREAD LOCK WOULD BE MUCH BETTER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10243362
71,221 miles · Sep 23, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF ENGINE HEAD ON A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION WITH A 5.4L ENGINE THE SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF THE ENGINE HEAD AND GASOLINE WERE EXPELLED ON THE ENGINE AND EXHAUST FUMES INTO THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT. THE ENGINE HEAD HAD TO BE REPAIRED AT A COST OF $1,832.48. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10243215
100,000 miles · Sep 18, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
TODAY IS THE SECOND TIME WE HAVE HAD A SPARK PLUG BLOW OUT OF THE CYLINDER OF OUR FORD EXPEDITION. THE FIRST TIME IT STRANDED MY FAMILY IN THE MOUNTAINS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN THE WINTER. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO GO AWAY FOR A WEEKEND TRIP TOMORROW. IT COST US 3K THE FIRST TIME AND TODAY'S QUOTE IS ABOUT THE SAME. THIS IS VERY…
Read full complaint
TODAY IS THE SECOND TIME WE HAVE HAD A SPARK PLUG BLOW OUT OF THE CYLINDER OF OUR FORD EXPEDITION. THE FIRST TIME IT STRANDED MY FAMILY IN THE MOUNTAINS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN THE WINTER. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO GO AWAY FOR A WEEKEND TRIP TOMORROW. IT COST US 3K THE FIRST TIME AND TODAY'S QUOTE IS ABOUT THE SAME. THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS AND UNBELIEVABLE GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF OCCURRENCES THAT NOTHING IS BEING DONE. THIS IS BS! FORD IS DIGGING THEIR OWN GRAVE AND IF SOMEONE DIES DUE TO THIS HAPPENING IT WILL COST THEM MORE THAN MONEY....BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10242831
66,687 miles · Sep 8, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
THE # 1 SPARK PLUG ON MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION BLEW OUT AND STRIPPED THE THREADS AND BROKE THE COIL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10241392
69,529 miles · Aug 17, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
I WAS DRIVING AT ABOUT 15 MILES AN HOUR AND ALL OF A SUDDEN I HEARD A LOUD POP. I HAD TO HAVE IT TOWED TO A FORD DEALERSHIP. THEY SAID THAT FROM WHAT I WAS DESCRIBING IT WAS A SPARK PLUG THAT BLEW OUT OF THE ENGINE. BUT SINCE IT WAS ALMOST 5:00 P.M. AND THEY WERE ABOUT TO CLOSE THEY WOULDN'T KNOW ANYTHING UNTIL THEY COULD LOOK…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING AT ABOUT 15 MILES AN HOUR AND ALL OF A SUDDEN I HEARD A LOUD POP. I HAD TO HAVE IT TOWED TO A FORD DEALERSHIP. THEY SAID THAT FROM WHAT I WAS DESCRIBING IT WAS A SPARK PLUG THAT BLEW OUT OF THE ENGINE. BUT SINCE IT WAS ALMOST 5:00 P.M. AND THEY WERE ABOUT TO CLOSE THEY WOULDN'T KNOW ANYTHING UNTIL THEY COULD LOOK AT IT THE NEXT DAY. I DIDN'T DAMAGE THE HEADS BUT IT STILL COST ME OVER $400.00 TO FIX IT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10238548
112,000 miles · Aug 14, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
ORIGINAL AND 2ND FORD ENGINE BLEW. 1ST THREW A ROD, 2ND BLOCK CRACKED AND RUINED ENGINE DUE TO RAPID COOLANT LOSS. DEALERS OFFERED NO WARRANTY AS BOTH ENGINES BLEW AT 112,000 AND 120,000 RESPECTIVELY. THIS CAR WAS VERY WELL MAINTAINED AND RECEIVED ROUTINE RECOMMENDED SERVICE FOR OIL AND FLUID CHANGES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10238110
20,000 miles · Jul 25, 2008
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingInterior Lighting
FIRST, THE DOOR AJAR LIGHT CAME ON AND STAYED ON. I CONTINUED TO GO AROUND THE VEHICLE OPENING AND SHUTTING THE DOORS AND THE LIGHT REMAINED ON. CONSUMER COULD NOT START THE VEHICLE SINCE THE LIGHT CAME ON, AND HAD TO GET A JUMP TO START IT. AFTER A FEW DAYS OF THIS THE BATTERY WAS FINALLY RUINED, AND I WAS FORCED TO BUY A NEW …
Read full complaint
FIRST, THE DOOR AJAR LIGHT CAME ON AND STAYED ON. I CONTINUED TO GO AROUND THE VEHICLE OPENING AND SHUTTING THE DOORS AND THE LIGHT REMAINED ON. CONSUMER COULD NOT START THE VEHICLE SINCE THE LIGHT CAME ON, AND HAD TO GET A JUMP TO START IT. AFTER A FEW DAYS OF THIS THE BATTERY WAS FINALLY RUINED, AND I WAS FORCED TO BUY A NEW ONE. I USED LUBRICANTS TO TRY AND CLEAR DEBRIS FROM THE DOOR SENSORS AND THIS WORKED FOR 3 MONTHS. NOW IT WILL NOT WORK AT ALL. TALKED TO DEALER AND THEY WANT TO CHARGE 600 DOLLARS PER SENSORS. NOTHING WRONG WITH SENSOR ITS JUST DIRTY. SECOND, THE REAR AC IS MAKING A CLICKING NOISE AND WILL NOT CONTROL TEMPERATURE. I SENT IT UNDER WARRANTY TO THE DEALERSHIP AND REPLACED THE AC MECHANISM, STATED "THIS WAS A COMMON DEFECT WITH THE VEHICLE". 5 MONTHS LATER THIS PART WENT OUT AGAIN AND IT WAS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY AND THE DEALERSHIP WOULD NOT REPLACE THE PROBLEM AND WANTED TO CHARGE ME OVER 300 DOLLARS. THEY APPARENTLY REPLACED THE DEFECTIVE PART WITH THE SAME DEFECTIVE PART AND WOULD REPAIR IT AGAIN 5 MONTHS LATER!!!. THIRD, THE SIDE PANELS ON THE EXPEDITION EXTERIOR STARTED FADING AT ABOUT 20,000 MILES. THE DEALERSHIP REPLACED THEM UNDER WARRANTY. ABOUT 20,000 MILES LATER WE NOTICED THEY HAD FADED AGAIN. WE TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY WOULD NOT REPLACE THE DEFECTIVE PANELS THIS TIME BECAUSE IT WAS KNOW LONGER UNDER WARRANTY. EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ANOTHER DEFECT REPLACED WITH A DEFECTIVE PART. FORTH, THE REAR PASSENGER EXTERIOR DOOR/WINDOW TRIM IS BUBBLING AND PEELING OFF. THIS LOOKS HORRIBLE! FIFTH, THE FRONT PASSENGER AND FONT DRIVER WINDOW SWITCHES THAT ROLL DOWN THE WINDOWS ARE HAVING ISSUES. I HAD THE MOTOR REPLACED FOR THE PASSENGER WINDOW AND IT FIXED THE ISSUE FOR A LITTLE BIT. NOW THE PASSENGER CAN NOT ROLL DOWN THE WINDOW. HOWEVER THE DRIVER CAN??? PLEASE HELP! I NEED HELP WITH ANY OR ALL OF THESE ISSUES. I DON'T KNOW WHERE ELSE TO GO! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10235777
87,628 miles · Jun 16, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
I WAS DRIVING TO A BALLGAME WHEN I HEARD A LOUD POP. I PULLED OVER TO DETERMINE THE PROBLEM. I OPENED THE HOOD TO NOTICE THE #3 SPARK PLUG IN MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION 5.4L V8 WAS FLOPPING AROUND ON TOP OF THE HOOD. I HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED HOME. I TOOK MY VEHICLE TO THE LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD THAT THE ENTIRE RIGHT …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING TO A BALLGAME WHEN I HEARD A LOUD POP. I PULLED OVER TO DETERMINE THE PROBLEM. I OPENED THE HOOD TO NOTICE THE #3 SPARK PLUG IN MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION 5.4L V8 WAS FLOPPING AROUND ON TOP OF THE HOOD. I HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED HOME. I TOOK MY VEHICLE TO THE LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD THAT THE ENTIRE RIGHT SIDE HEAD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED FROM THIS ONE SPARK PLUG BLOWOUT. AFTER DOING RESEARCH ON SEVERAL ONLINE WEBSITES, FORUMS, AND BLOGS, I HAVE DETERMINED THIS IS A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH THE DESIGN OF THE FORD ENGINE. NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN MADE FROM FORD OWNERS ABOUT THIS SAME PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10231126
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