← New search

2003 Ford Expedition

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Expedition years

Owner complaints for the 2003 Ford Expedition are substantially higher than the model-year median of 155.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

463 reports with mileage · 152 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 127 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 104 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 61 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

57 crash reports36 fire reports39 injury reports

Structure complaints

32 reports
Clear category filter
79,000 miles · Aug 7, 2010
Engine And Engine CoolingStructure

I WAS DRIVING MY 2003 EXPEDITION O THE HIGHWAY WITH MY FAMILY IN THE CAR, ALL OF A SUDDEN THE JEEP JUST CUT RIGHT OFF NO WARNING ANYTHING I HIT MY BLINKERS TO COME ON TRY AND CUT IT ON AGAIN AND IT DID BUT AGAIN CUT RIGHT BACK OFF. I HAD TO CONTINUE CUTTING ON AND CUTTING ON CONSTANTLY UNTIL I GOT IT TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. IT …

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING MY 2003 EXPEDITION O THE HIGHWAY WITH MY FAMILY IN THE CAR, ALL OF A SUDDEN THE JEEP JUST CUT RIGHT OFF NO WARNING ANYTHING I HIT MY BLINKERS TO COME ON TRY AND CUT IT ON AGAIN AND IT DID BUT AGAIN CUT RIGHT BACK OFF. I HAD TO CONTINUE CUTTING ON AND CUTTING ON CONSTANTLY UNTIL I GOT IT TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. IT WAS THE SCARIEST MOMENT OF MY LIFE THIS COULD HAVE CAUSED A SERIOUS ACCIDENT INJURING NOT ONLY MY FAMILY BUT OTHER PEOPLE ON THE HIGHWAY. WHEN I TAKE THE JEEP TO THE MECHANIC HE STATES THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM A LOT OF PEOPLE COMPLAIN OF AND FORD WILL NO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT. FORD BUILD THIS JEEP THIS WAY SO PEOPLE CAN ONLY RETURN TO FORD FOR THE REPAIRS WHICH COST A LOT. THE COILS ON THE JEEP WERE WHITE AND RUSTED BECAUSE THE WAY THIS JEEP WAS BUT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO GET TO THEM A MECHANIC LITERALLY HAS TO MOVE THE MOTOR OR MOTOR PARTS TOGET TO IT. FORD HAS THIS PROBLEM AS A RECALL ON OTHER FORD VEHICLES BUT WILL NOT HONOR THIS AS A RECALL FOR THE 2003 EXPEDITIONS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10347931

67,000 miles · Feb 18, 2009
Structure

I OWN A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. WHILE WASHING MY SUV, I RECENTLY DISCOVERED THAT THE FRONT OF THE SLOTS ON THE ROOF BETWEEN THE LUGGAGE RACKS HAVE RUST BUBBLING UP THROUGH THE PAINT. THERE IS NO APPARENT DAMAGE IN THIS AREA AND 3 OF THE TRACKS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AT VARYING STAGES OF PROGRESSION. I WAS INFORMED BY FORD THAT THIS…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. WHILE WASHING MY SUV, I RECENTLY DISCOVERED THAT THE FRONT OF THE SLOTS ON THE ROOF BETWEEN THE LUGGAGE RACKS HAVE RUST BUBBLING UP THROUGH THE PAINT. THERE IS NO APPARENT DAMAGE IN THIS AREA AND 3 OF THE TRACKS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AT VARYING STAGES OF PROGRESSION. I WAS INFORMED BY FORD THAT THIS WAS NOT COVERED UNDER MY WARRANTY AND THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD (WOULD) DO FOR ME. I CALLED THE FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE HOT LINE AND WAS TOLD THE SAME. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10259273

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

18,000 miles · Jan 19, 2008
Electrical SystemStructureVisibility

OUTSIDE MIRROR LIGHTS AND INTERIOR LIGHTS WOULD NOT GO OFF AFTER GETTING OUT OF VEHICLE AND PRESSING REMOTE LOCK BUTTON. THEY EVENTUALLY RAN THE BATTERY DOWN. THIS WAS AFTER A HARD RAIN. A FEW WEEKS LATER THE SAME THING HAPPENED ONLY THIS TIME, THE RADIO WOULD NOT TURN OFF (KEY OUT OF IGNITION AND DOORS OPEN) THE CHIME KEPT G…

Read full complaint

OUTSIDE MIRROR LIGHTS AND INTERIOR LIGHTS WOULD NOT GO OFF AFTER GETTING OUT OF VEHICLE AND PRESSING REMOTE LOCK BUTTON. THEY EVENTUALLY RAN THE BATTERY DOWN. THIS WAS AFTER A HARD RAIN. A FEW WEEKS LATER THE SAME THING HAPPENED ONLY THIS TIME, THE RADIO WOULD NOT TURN OFF (KEY OUT OF IGNITION AND DOORS OPEN) THE CHIME KEPT GOING OFF AND THE BATTERY WENT DEAD BECAUSE I DID NOT DISCONNECT IT. I RESEARCHED ONLINE AND FOUND THIS IS NOT UNCOMMON BECAUSE THE WINDSHIELD LEAKS, FROM THE FACTORY, AND WATER DRIPS DOWN ONTO THE COMPUTER MODULE AND FUSE BOX. I CHECKED MY FUSE BOX AND I DID HAVE DRIPPING WATER IN IT ALONG WITH CORRODED CONNECTORS, INSIDE THE VEHICLE, INDICATION LONG TERM INTRUSION OF WATER. THIS CAUSES ALL KINDS OF PROBLEMS. OTHER OWNERS HAVE REPORTED COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER WHILE DRIVING. UPON INSPECTING MY OEM WINDSHIELD I FOUND IT COMPLETELY SEPARATED AT THE TOP AND I COULD SEE LIGHT BETWEEN THE GLASS AND SEAL. I NOW HAVE TO BUY A NEW WINDSHIELD ALONG WITH FUSE BLOCK AND COMPUTER CRAP. THE OTHER PROBLEM IS THAT THE ENTIRE TOP OF THE WINDSHIELD, AS MENTIONED, IS NOT SEALED. I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT THE WINDSHIELD INTEGRITY IS A HUGE PART OF THE STRENGTH OF THE VEHICLE AND THE WINDSHIELD IS USED TO SUPPORT THE PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG IN CASE OF DEPLOYMENT. I DON'T HAVE THAT INTEGRITY ON MY VEHICLE. THIS IS VERY UNSAFE CONDITION AND THIS SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT FORD PAYS FOR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10215449

18,000 miles · Mar 29, 2007
Structure

REAR HATCHBACK PAINT BUBBLING FOR THE SECOND TIME. IT WAS REPAINTED AFTER 1 YEAR AND NOW IS DOING THE SAME THING.*AK

NHTSA ODI #10186472

33,000 miles · Aug 28, 2006
Structure

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THERE WAS RUST APPEARING ON THE LIFTGATE UNDER THE HANDLE AND BETWEEN THE WINDOW AND THE DOOR. IT APPEARED TO BE BUBBLING AND RUST FORMED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A INDEPENDENT SERVICE SHOP FOR REGULAR MAINTENANCE WHEN THE RUST WAS OBSERVED. THE DEALER INDICATED THAT THE RUST MAY BE DUE TO WATER CAPTUR…

Read full complaint

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THERE WAS RUST APPEARING ON THE LIFTGATE UNDER THE HANDLE AND BETWEEN THE WINDOW AND THE DOOR. IT APPEARED TO BE BUBBLING AND RUST FORMED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A INDEPENDENT SERVICE SHOP FOR REGULAR MAINTENANCE WHEN THE RUST WAS OBSERVED. THE DEALER INDICATED THAT THE RUST MAY BE DUE TO WATER CAPTURED BETWEEN THE WINDOW AND THE STRUCTURE OF THE DOOR. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10166719

42,000 miles · Jul 27, 2006
StructureInjury

DT*: THE CONSUMER EXITED THE DRIVER'S SEAT, LEFT THE FRONT DOOR OPEN AND OPENED THE BACK DOOR TO PLACE SOME ITEMS IN THE BACK. UNAWARE HER 5 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER HAD CLIMBED OVER THE FRONT SEAT AND SAT IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT FACING THE OPEN DOOR, THE CONSUMER OPENED THE BACK DOOR FARTHER TO EXIT AND THEN SHUT THE DOOR. WHEN SHE SH…

Read full complaint

DT*: THE CONSUMER EXITED THE DRIVER'S SEAT, LEFT THE FRONT DOOR OPEN AND OPENED THE BACK DOOR TO PLACE SOME ITEMS IN THE BACK. UNAWARE HER 5 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER HAD CLIMBED OVER THE FRONT SEAT AND SAT IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT FACING THE OPEN DOOR, THE CONSUMER OPENED THE BACK DOOR FARTHER TO EXIT AND THEN SHUT THE DOOR. WHEN SHE SHUT THE DOOR THE CHILD'S HAND WAS CAUGHT IN THE DOOR, HER LEFT HAND RING FINGER WAS CRUSHED, ALMOST SEVERED BY THE HINGE THAT HOOKS THE DOOR TO THE VEHICLE. WHEN THE CONSUMER OPENED THE DOOR IT CRUSHED HER FINGER AND WHEN THE CONSUMER CLOSED THE DOOR IT RELEASED HER FINGER. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10163660

23,000 miles · Jul 18, 2006
Structure

MY 2003 EXPEDITION HAD A CRACK IN THE OVERHEAD CONSOLE WHEN I PURCHASED IT USED IN 2004. I DIDN'T SEE IT AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE AND DIDN'T THINK THAT MUCH OF IT WHEN I DID DISCOVER THE CRACK. IN THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF THE CONSOLE HAS SIMPLY CRACKED APART AND THE PLASTIC IS VERY BRITTLE. I'VE GLUED IT A NUMBER OF TIMES BUT IT …

Read full complaint

MY 2003 EXPEDITION HAD A CRACK IN THE OVERHEAD CONSOLE WHEN I PURCHASED IT USED IN 2004. I DIDN'T SEE IT AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE AND DIDN'T THINK THAT MUCH OF IT WHEN I DID DISCOVER THE CRACK. IN THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF THE CONSOLE HAS SIMPLY CRACKED APART AND THE PLASTIC IS VERY BRITTLE. I'VE GLUED IT A NUMBER OF TIMES BUT IT KEEPS CRACKING APART IN DIFFERENT PLACES. I'VE CALLED THE PARTS DEPARTMENT AT MY LOCAL FORD DEALER AND THEY TELL ME THAT I CANNOT PURCHASE THE HOUSING FOR THE OVERHEAD CONSOLE SEPARATELY. THEREFORE, I MUST PURCHASE AN ENTIRE NEW CONSOLE PACKAGE INCLUDING THE LIGHTS, SWITCH, ETC. ACCORDING TO THE DEALER, THIS PART WILL COST ME APPROXIMATELY $450.00 NOT INCLUDING ANY INSTALLATION LABOR. I DON'T NEED THE LIGHTS, SWITCH, MIRROR, ETC., BECAUSE THOSE PARTS ARE ALL FUNCTIONAL AND FINE. ALL I NEED IS THE HOUSING. THE PART CANT BE WORTH MORE THAN $10.00, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU CONSIDER HOW EASILY IT BROKE INTO PIECES. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS PROBLEM IS PREVALENT IN OTHER EXPEDITIONS, BUT I SHOULD NOT BE FORCED TO PAY OVER $500.00 (PARTS AND LABOR) FOR A SMALL, CHEAP PIECE OF PLASTIC. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10162791

Mileage unknown · Mar 14, 2006
Structure

2003 EXPEDITION HEADLIGHT FAILED FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES DUE TO WATER LEAKAGE. HEAT BRACKETS RUSTED DUE TO WATER LEAKAGE. *TS THE CONSUMER STATED THAT FORD WAS AWARE OF THE BODY SEAL PROBLEM WITH THE VEHICLE, BUT DIDN'T ISSUE A RECALL. THE DEALER TRIED TO FIX THE PROBLEM SIX TIMES WITH NO SUCCESS. THE DRIVERS SIDE DOOR RATTLED.…

Read full complaint

2003 EXPEDITION HEADLIGHT FAILED FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES DUE TO WATER LEAKAGE. HEAT BRACKETS RUSTED DUE TO WATER LEAKAGE. *TS THE CONSUMER STATED THAT FORD WAS AWARE OF THE BODY SEAL PROBLEM WITH THE VEHICLE, BUT DIDN'T ISSUE A RECALL. THE DEALER TRIED TO FIX THE PROBLEM SIX TIMES WITH NO SUCCESS. THE DRIVERS SIDE DOOR RATTLED. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10154073

Mileage unknown · Mar 1, 2006
Structure

2003 EXPEDITION LEAKED WATER INTO HEADLIGHTS CAUSING IT TO FAIL. SEAT BRACKETS RUSTED CAUSED BY WATER LEAKS AND DOOR RATTLED. *TS THE DEALER WAS AWARE THAT THERE WAS BODY SEAL PROBLEM. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10153010

Official recalls

1

03V094000 · Structure

Mar 7, 2003

CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCK, VAN, AND MINI VAN CONVERSIONS EQUIPPED WITH SOUTHERN COMFORT BUILT RUNNING BOARDS THAT CONTAIN CERTAIN COURTESY LIGHTS MANUFACTURED BY AMERICAN TECHNOLOGY COMPONENTS, INC. THESE UNITS CONTAIN A COURTESY LIGHT OR LIGHTS THAT MIGHT OVERHEAT WHEN THE WIRE HARNESS IS EXPOSED TO EXCESSIVE MOISTURE AND ROAD SALT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS OVERHEATING CONDITION CAN CAUSE THE RUNNING BOARD TO MELT OR CAUSE A FIRE.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE WIRING HARNESS ON THESE RUNNING BOARDS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN MARCH 7, 2003. 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 SOUTHERN COMFORT AT 1-800-745-6096.

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

1

DP05005 · 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.