IllustrationONLY ONE OF 4 ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT TIRES ON A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION HAD EXECSSIVE AND UNSAFE WEAR ( FEATHERING) ON THE INSIDE TREAD OF A TIRE AFTER 23,000 MILES . THE TIRES WERE ROTATED EVERY 4000 MILES. MANUFACTURER REFUSED TO ADJUST THE TIRE. FORD REFUSED TO ADJUST THE TIRE. PHOTOS AVAIALABLE UPON REQUEST.
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 →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Expedition years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
960–25K
5325–50K
6950–75K
7175–100K
105100–150K
69150K+
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
Tires complaints
57 reportsTREAD SEPARATION OF LOW MILEAGE CONTINENTAL TR 265/70/ 17 SUV TIRES- NO ACCIDENT OCCURED, PROBLEM NOTED BY FORD SERVICE DEPT DURING SERVICING. *AK
I BOUGHT A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. I HAVE BEEN HAVING PROBLEMS W/ THE RIDE, ONLY TO BE TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THE ONLY FIX IS TO REPLACE ALL OF THE TIRES. I ONLY HAVE 20000 MILES (ALMOST ALL HIGHWAY) ON THE TIRES, WITH GOOD TREAD DEPTH. ACCORDING TO THE TECHNICIAN "THEY'VE HAD TONS OF PROBLEMS" WITH THE CONTINENTAL CONTITRAC S…
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. I HAVE BEEN HAVING PROBLEMS W/ THE RIDE, ONLY TO BE TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THE ONLY FIX IS TO REPLACE ALL OF THE TIRES. I ONLY HAVE 20000 MILES (ALMOST ALL HIGHWAY) ON THE TIRES, WITH GOOD TREAD DEPTH. ACCORDING TO THE TECHNICIAN "THEY'VE HAD TONS OF PROBLEMS" WITH THE CONTINENTAL CONTITRAC SUV TIRES. IF THIS IS THE CASE, WHY ISN'T THERE A RECALL? THIS VEHICLE IS VERY HARD TO STEER WITH THE TIRE PROBLEM, AND IT SHOULDN'T BE THE CONSUMER THAT PAYS FOR THESE FLAWS.*AK
THE CONTINENTAL CONTRATRAC 265/70R17 TIRES ON MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION HAVE STRESS CRACKS ON THE SIDEWALLS. SO FAR, THREE OUT OF FOUR. HAVE 25,000 MILES ON IT. AM NOW GOING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN CONTINENTAL, THE FORD DEALER, AND TIRE DEALER. CONTINENTAL DOES NOT SEEM TO WANT TO CONSIDER THIS A DEFECT. HOWEVER, MY SON'S EXPE…
Read full complaint
THE CONTINENTAL CONTRATRAC 265/70R17 TIRES ON MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION HAVE STRESS CRACKS ON THE SIDEWALLS. SO FAR, THREE OUT OF FOUR. HAVE 25,000 MILES ON IT. AM NOW GOING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN CONTINENTAL, THE FORD DEALER, AND TIRE DEALER. CONTINENTAL DOES NOT SEEM TO WANT TO CONSIDER THIS A DEFECT. HOWEVER, MY SON'S EXPEDITION-IDENTICAL AND PURCHASED SAME DAY AS MINE, NOW HAS ONE TIRE DOING SAME THING. *AK
MY EXPEDITION IS A 1YR AND 5 MONTHS. WITH LESS THAN 500 MILES PAID FOR A FRONT END ALIGNMENT AND TIRE ROTATION, BECAUSE OF BAD VIBRATION AT SPEEDS OF 60-70 MILES AN HOUR. STILL HAD VIBRATION, TOOK IT BACK TO DEALER, THEY SAID THE TRUCK CAME WITH TIRES OUT OF BALANCE. STILL HAD VIBRATION, TOOK IT BACK TO DEALERSHIP, A BOX DEALING…
Read full complaint
MY EXPEDITION IS A 1YR AND 5 MONTHS. WITH LESS THAN 500 MILES PAID FOR A FRONT END ALIGNMENT AND TIRE ROTATION, BECAUSE OF BAD VIBRATION AT SPEEDS OF 60-70 MILES AN HOUR. STILL HAD VIBRATION, TOOK IT BACK TO DEALER, THEY SAID THE TRUCK CAME WITH TIRES OUT OF BALANCE. STILL HAD VIBRATION, TOOK IT BACK TO DEALERSHIP, A BOX DEALING WITH THE STEERING WHEEL HAD TO BE REPLACED. SINCE THEN I HAVE PAID FOR ANOTHER FRONT END ALIGNMENT AND TIRE BALANCE, NOW TIRES HAVE WORN SO BAD DEALERSHIP WILL PROBABLY BLAME WORN TIRES FOR THE VIBRATION. THERE IS MORE!!! THE SEAL ON THE FRONT WINDSHIELD CAME LOOSE AND STARTED LEAKING, AND HAD TO BE REPLACED. IN THE FRONT DEFROST VENT SOME FOAM STUFF HAD COME LOOSE AND WOULD FLAP AROUND WHEN THE VENT WAS ON, THE DEALERSHIP CALLED IT ( PACKING) IT WAS REPLACED OR GLUED BACK DOWN. THE SIDE TRIM ON BOTH SIDES FROM THE TWO FRONT DOORS, TO THE TWO REAR DOORS FADED BADLY, AND HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE DOME LIGHT HAD A PINCHED WIRE AND WOULD FLICKER WHEN TURNED ON OR HIT A BUMP, IT WAS REPAIRED. THE POWER WINDOW SWITH LIGHT, DRIVER SIDE WENT OUT, AND THE UNIT HAD TO BE REPLACED, AND NOW THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL NOT STAY ENGAGED WHEN I HIT A BUMP MOST OF THIS HAPPENED IN UNDER A YEAR. *AK
THERE WAS EXCESSIVE TREAD WEAR AND EXPOSED STEEL BELTS ON THE LEFT FRONT TIRE. THE FRONT RIGHT TIRE SHOWED EXACTLY THE SAME SIGNS. HAD TO PURCHASE TWO NEW TIRES AFTER 16K MILES.*AK
THIS IS TO LET YOU KNOW ABOUT A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS PROBLEM WITH THE CONTINENTAL CONTITRAC TR TIRES THAT CAME STANDARD ON THE 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE FOLLOWING IS A COPY OF AN EMAIL THAT I SENT TO THE CONTINENTAL CUSTOMER SERVICE DEPARTMENT. I THINK THAT HAS ALL OF THE INFORMATION YOU WILL NEED TO START LOOKING INTO THIS P…
Read full complaint
THIS IS TO LET YOU KNOW ABOUT A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS PROBLEM WITH THE CONTINENTAL CONTITRAC TR TIRES THAT CAME STANDARD ON THE 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE FOLLOWING IS A COPY OF AN EMAIL THAT I SENT TO THE CONTINENTAL CUSTOMER SERVICE DEPARTMENT. I THINK THAT HAS ALL OF THE INFORMATION YOU WILL NEED TO START LOOKING INTO THIS PROBLEM. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CALL ME WITH ANY QUESTIONS SINCE I THINK THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. YOU HAVE A LENGTH OF ONLY 2000 WORDS AND MY MESSAGE TO THEM IS TOO LONG SO PLEASE CONTACT ME FOR THE REST OF THE MESSAGE. DEAR RASHIDA, (OR WHOMEVER ELSE SEES THIS MESSAGE) I THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP AND CONCERN THIS MORNING. I HAVE SOME INTERESTING NEWS. I THINK IT IS QUITE ASTOUNDING AND WILL WARRANT SOME MAJOR ATTENTION FROM THE POWERS THAT BE. NOT ONLY IS THE DAMAGE TO MY TIRES A MANUFACTURER DEFECT BUT THE DAMAGE IS IN ALL OF MY TIRES, INCLUDING ONE THAT WAS REPLACED ABOUT 6 MONTHS AGO. THE OTHER ORIGINAL THAT HAD TO BE REPLACED MAY HAVE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM SINCE IT HAD A GASH IN THE SIDE THAT CAUSED IT TO GO FLAT. AFTER TALKING WITH YOU I HAPPENED TO MENTION MY PROBLEM TO A NEIGHBOR WHO ASKED ME TO HAVE HER HUSBAND LOOK AT IT. AS IT TURNS OUT HE HAD BEEN A PLANT SUPERVISOR FOR KELLEY-SPRINGFIELD TIRES BEFORE MOVING UP TO THIS AREA. HE KNOWS ALL ABOUT TIRE MANUFACTURING AND TESTING. HE TOOK ONE LOOK AT MY TIRE AND SAID "THERE IS NO WAY THAT WAS CAUSED BY A RAZOR, THAT IS A DEFECT AND IT IS BAD NEWS." HE TOLD ME TO LET WHOMEVER I TALKED TO KNOW THAT THE TIRE IS SEPARATING "WHERE THE APEX MEETS THE SIDEWALL." HE WENT INTO A BIT MORE TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION BUT I AM NOT AN EXPERT SO I CAN'T ACCURATELY RELAY WHAT HE SAID. HE SAID IT IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE AND HE BETS THAT A MAJOR RECALL WILL BE OCCURRING, HOPEFULLY BEFORE ANYTHING TRAGIC OCCURS. HE IS NOT AN OVERLY EXCITABLE MAN BUT HE PROBABLY TOLD ME ABOUT 10 TIMES TO GET THE TIRES OFF OF MY CAR.*AK
CONTINENTAL TIRES, SIZE P265/70R15; WHILE DRIVING AT 30 MPH REAR DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE BLEW OUT. *AK
RIGHT REAR CONTINENTAL CONITRAC TIRE ON 2003 FORD EXPEDTION BLEW AT HIGHWAY SPEED(65-67MPH). HIGHWAY CONDTIONS WERE NORMAL. FORD DEALER EXAMINED TIRE AND COULD FIND NO FOREGIN OBJECT TO CAUSE SIDEWALL BLOWOUT. THEY SENT IT TO THE MANUFACTURER, WHO DETERMINED SAME THING. FORD/DEALER REIMBURSED ME FOR THE NEW TIRE, BUT DID NOT…
Read full complaint
RIGHT REAR CONTINENTAL CONITRAC TIRE ON 2003 FORD EXPEDTION BLEW AT HIGHWAY SPEED(65-67MPH). HIGHWAY CONDTIONS WERE NORMAL. FORD DEALER EXAMINED TIRE AND COULD FIND NO FOREGIN OBJECT TO CAUSE SIDEWALL BLOWOUT. THEY SENT IT TO THE MANUFACTURER, WHO DETERMINED SAME THING. FORD/DEALER REIMBURSED ME FOR THE NEW TIRE, BUT DID NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE OTHER 3, WHICH THOSE TIRES CONCERN ME THAT THEY MAY BLOW AT ANY TIME. *AK
AFTER 200 MILES I NOTICED A VIBRATION IN THE DRIVERS SEAT, FLOORBOARDS, AND STEERING WHEEL. I HAVE CONTINENTAL CONTITRAC 17 INCH TIRES. FORD TRIED FORCE ALIGNING THE TIRES. FORD MOTOR CO. AND DEALER SAYS IF I WANT A BETTER RIDE I NEED TO BUY NEW TIRES. I FOUGHT THEM ON THIS AND THEY BOUGHT ME BRAND NEW BF GOODRICH LONG TRAIL…
Read full complaint
AFTER 200 MILES I NOTICED A VIBRATION IN THE DRIVERS SEAT, FLOORBOARDS, AND STEERING WHEEL. I HAVE CONTINENTAL CONTITRAC 17 INCH TIRES. FORD TRIED FORCE ALIGNING THE TIRES. FORD MOTOR CO. AND DEALER SAYS IF I WANT A BETTER RIDE I NEED TO BUY NEW TIRES. I FOUGHT THEM ON THIS AND THEY BOUGHT ME BRAND NEW BF GOODRICH LONG TRAIL TIRES. I STILL HAVE VIBRATION. I FEEL THAT THIS PROVES IT IS THE EXPEDITION AND NOT THE TIRES. I WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER FORD! *CB
Official recalls
103V094000 · 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
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.