NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
86 reports30,000 miles · Mar 8, 2007
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL*- THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PULLING THE 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAK WITHN 30000 FAILURE MILEAGE INTO THE DRIVEWAY THE CONTACT PUT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK AND BEGAN TO HEAR A TAPPING FROM THE FRONT OF THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER, WHO DETERMINED THAT THE VALVE SPRING WAS WORN. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT B…
Read full complaint
TL*- THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PULLING THE 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAK WITHN 30000 FAILURE MILEAGE INTO THE DRIVEWAY THE CONTACT PUT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK AND BEGAN TO HEAR A TAPPING FROM THE FRONT OF THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER, WHO DETERMINED THAT THE VALVE SPRING WAS WORN. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 33000.*AKI
NHTSA ODI #10184516
25,000 miles · Dec 27, 2006
Suspension
I HAVE EXPERIENCED ACCELERATED FRONT TIRE WEAR, AND ASSOCIATED NOISE AND VIBRATION ON THIS VEHICLE, WITH CURRENT MILEAGE AT 37000 MILES. I HAVE HAD THE WHEELS BALANCED RELIGIOUSLY EVERY 5000-6000 MILES SINCE I BOUGHT IT. I FIRST NOTICED THE WEAR AND VIBRATION AT ABOUT 25000 MILES. I TOOK THE VEHICLE IN TO HAVE THE WHEELS BALANCE…
Read full complaint
I HAVE EXPERIENCED ACCELERATED FRONT TIRE WEAR, AND ASSOCIATED NOISE AND VIBRATION ON THIS VEHICLE, WITH CURRENT MILEAGE AT 37000 MILES. I HAVE HAD THE WHEELS BALANCED RELIGIOUSLY EVERY 5000-6000 MILES SINCE I BOUGHT IT. I FIRST NOTICED THE WEAR AND VIBRATION AT ABOUT 25000 MILES. I TOOK THE VEHICLE IN TO HAVE THE WHEELS BALANCED AND WAS TOLD THAT THE BALL JOINTS WERE LOOSE AND OUT OF SPECIFICATION. I THEN RETURNED THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THE VIBRATION AND WEAR PROBLEM ADDRESSED UNDER WARRANTY. THE DEALER TOLD ME THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE, AND THAT THE NOISE WAS SIMPLY DUE TO TIRE WEAR. WHEN I INDICATED THAT A THIRD PARTY SHOP HAD FOUND LOOSE BALL JOINTS, THE DEALER STATED THAT THEY WERE IN SPEC, AND THEN RECOMMENDED FRONT END ALIGNMENT WHICH I HAD PERFORMED. THE VIBRATION AND NOISE FROM THE FRONT TIRES CONTINUED AFTER THE ALIGNMENT WAS DONE. AT THIS RATE, I WILL HAVE TO REPLACE THE TIRES AND LIKELY THE BALL JOINTS ON THIS VEHICLE PRIOR TO REACHING 40000 MILES. SEVERAL OTHER COMPLAINTS TO NHTSA ARE VERY SIMILAR TO MY EXPERIENCE WITH THIS VEHICLE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10177129
36,700 miles · Oct 23, 2006
Power Train
DURING THE ACCELERATION FROM A STOP LIGHT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SHIFT FROM 2ND TO 3RD. THE OVERDRIVE OFF LIGHT THEN BEGAN FLASHING. THIS CAUSED UNEXPECTED POOR ACCELERATION AND IN TRAFFIC COULD RESULT IN POSSIBLY BEING REAR ENDED BY TRAFFIC BEHIND YOU. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10171675
Mileage unknown · Oct 20, 2006
Tires
I BOUGHT A 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAC IN BRUNSWICK, GA IN LATE SEPT 2006. AFTER LEAVING THE DEALER, WE NOTICED A BUMPING/VIBRATION. TOOK IT BACK TO THE DEALER 3 TIMES, EACH TIME IT DID NOT FIX THE PROBLEM. WE WERE TOLD THAT IT NEEDED AN ALIGNMENT (DID NOT WORK). THEN, WE WERE TOLD BY THE MECHANIC THAT THE TIRES (GOODYEAR …
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT A 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAC IN BRUNSWICK, GA IN LATE SEPT 2006. AFTER LEAVING THE DEALER, WE NOTICED A BUMPING/VIBRATION. TOOK IT BACK TO THE DEALER 3 TIMES, EACH TIME IT DID NOT FIX THE PROBLEM. WE WERE TOLD THAT IT NEEDED AN ALIGNMENT (DID NOT WORK). THEN, WE WERE TOLD BY THE MECHANIC THAT THE TIRES (GOODYEAR WRANGLERS) WERE OUT OF ROUND, BUT YET THEY DID A FORCE BALANCING INSTEAD OF REPLACING THE TIRES; WHICH DID NOT FIX IT AND NOW IN ADDITION TO THE BUMPING, IT IS NOW PULLING HARD TO THE RIGHT. I AM TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THIS IS A "TRUCK" AND THERE WILL BE A LITTLE VIBRATION AND BUMPING. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS SINCE I HAVE DRIVEN TRUCKS ALL OF MY LIFE WITHOUT THIS PROBLEM. I TRADED A 1998 EXPLORER THAT DID NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM. I HAVE ASKED THE DEALER TO REPLACE THE TIRES AS A TEST TO SEE IF IT IS THE TIRES. THEY DON'T WANT TO DO THIS BECAUSE OF COST ISSUES. I ASKED THEM TO LET ME DRIVE ONE OF THE NEW 2007 SPORT TRACS TO SEE IF THEY HAVE THIS PROBLEM. THE REPLY WAS THAT THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT SUSPENSION. THE VEHICLE IS STILL UNDER MANUFACTURERS WARRANTY. I HAVE TOLD THE DEALER THAT IF THIS PROBLEM CAN NOT BE FIXED THAN I DON'T WANT THE VEHICLE. WHAT AM I TO DO? *NM
NHTSA ODI #10171406
34,000 miles · Sep 8, 2006
Air BagsEquipmentExterior LightingCrashInjury
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKED UP AND THE CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE WAS LOST RESULTING IN AN ACCIDENT AND INJURIES. THE RECIRCULATION BALL AND THE RACK AND PINION FAILED CAUSING THE STEERING TO LOCK UP. THE DEALER AND THE MANUFACTURER WERE ALERTED OF THE INCIDENT. THE CONSUMER CAME AROUND A…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKED UP AND THE CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE WAS LOST RESULTING IN AN ACCIDENT AND INJURIES. THE RECIRCULATION BALL AND THE RACK AND PINION FAILED CAUSING THE STEERING TO LOCK UP. THE DEALER AND THE MANUFACTURER WERE ALERTED OF THE INCIDENT. THE CONSUMER CAME AROUND A CORNER AND SUDDENLY LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE, THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT 5 MONTHS PRIOR, AND HE BELIEVED THE VEHICLE MAY HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY FIXED WHICH MAY HAVE CAUSED THE ACCIDENT. THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED THE AIR DID NOT DEPLOY IN THIS ACCIDENT. THE POLICE CONCLUDED THAT THE CONSUMER WAS TRAVELING TOO FAST FOR CONDITIONS AND UPON ROUNDING THE CORNER, HE LOST CONTROL AND STRUCK THE BANK ON THE SIDE OF THE ROADWAY CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO OVERTURN. THE CONSUMER HAD PREVIOUS REPAIRS ON THE VEHICLE SUCH AS AN INOPERABLE TURN SIGNAL LIGHT AND THE REAR VENTS DID NOT BLOW OUT AIR. UPDATED 10/3/06 *JB UPDATED 10/25/2006 - *NM
NHTSA ODI #10167719
59,544 miles · Aug 23, 2006
Engine And Engine CoolingExterior LightingVehicle Speed Control
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS STARTED, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED CONSTANTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SERVICE DEALER WHERE THE SPEED CONTROL SWITCH, TURN SIGNAL SWITCH, AND OXYGEN SENSOR WERE ALL REPLACED.
NHTSA ODI #10166319
Mileage unknown · Jul 1, 2006
SuspensionTires
I OWN A 2004 FORD SPORT TRAC XLT WITH GOODYEAR WRANGLER RT/S TIRES (M+S P255/70R16). I HAVE THE TIRES ROTATED EVERY 3 TO 5 THOUSAND MILES. PROBLEM IS THE TIRES KEEP CUPPING OUT, WHICH CREATES A LESS SAFE DRIVING ENVIRONMENT AND CAUSES EXCESSIVE ROAD NOISE. I'VE BEEN TOLD BY THE LOCAL TIRE STORE THAT THIS IS A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2004 FORD SPORT TRAC XLT WITH GOODYEAR WRANGLER RT/S TIRES (M+S P255/70R16). I HAVE THE TIRES ROTATED EVERY 3 TO 5 THOUSAND MILES. PROBLEM IS THE TIRES KEEP CUPPING OUT, WHICH CREATES A LESS SAFE DRIVING ENVIRONMENT AND CAUSES EXCESSIVE ROAD NOISE. I'VE BEEN TOLD BY THE LOCAL TIRE STORE THAT THIS IS A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM WITH THE VEHICLE AND BUYING NEW TIRES WILL NOT CORRECT IT. HOW SHOULD I PROCEED TO HAVE THIS ISSUE CORRECTED? NOTE, THE WHEELS ARE WITHIN ALIGNMENT SPECIFICATIONS. PLEASE ADVISE...THANKS. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10161201
Mileage unknown · Jun 27, 2006
Electrical System
THIS VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED BRAND NEW IN OCTOBER 2004. SIX MONTHS ALONG THE CAR SHUT DOWN AS I WAS DRIVING AND FAILED TO TURN OVER. CAR WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE ORIGINALLY PURCHASED AND AFTER FOUR DAYS CAR WAS RETURNED TO ME. HAD NO PROBLEMS FOR THE NEXT 6 MONTHS. IN FEBRUARY 2006 ON MY WAY HOME FROM WORK ONE EVENING, TH…
Read full complaint
THIS VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED BRAND NEW IN OCTOBER 2004. SIX MONTHS ALONG THE CAR SHUT DOWN AS I WAS DRIVING AND FAILED TO TURN OVER. CAR WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE ORIGINALLY PURCHASED AND AFTER FOUR DAYS CAR WAS RETURNED TO ME. HAD NO PROBLEMS FOR THE NEXT 6 MONTHS. IN FEBRUARY 2006 ON MY WAY HOME FROM WORK ONE EVENING, THE CAR STALLED ONCE AGAIN . SAME SITUATION . I HAD THE CAR TOWED TO ANOTHER FORD DEALER. THREE DAYS LATER GOT IT BACK, THEY CLAIMED THE FIRST TIME THE CAR WAS NOT FIXED CORRECTLY. YESTERDAY JUNE 26TH I WAS ABOUT TO GET ON THE HIGHWAY WITH MY CHILDREN IN THE CAR AND AS I AM DRIVING ON THE RAMP TO THE BROOKLYN QUEENS EXPRESSWAY IT DIES ONCE AGAIN. THIS IS THE THIRD INCIDENT WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. I FEEL SO UNSAFE IN THIS CAR. IMAGINE IF IT HAD SHUT DOWN ON ME ON THE HIGHWAY AS I WAS DRIVING. I WOULD HATE TO THINK WHAT WOULD'VE HAPPENED. THE CAR IS A 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAC. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10160843
32,000 miles · Jun 15, 2006
Air Bags
THE SIDE AIR BAGS (BOTH) DEPLOYED FOR NO APPARENT REASON WHILE I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH. MY VEHICLE IS A 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAC. (4 DOOR PICKUP). THE VEHICLE WAS RETURNED TO A FORD DEALER FOR REPAIR AND INITIALLY THEY SAID IT WOULD BE A WARRANTY REPAIR BUT CALLED BACK A WEEK LATER INDICATING TH…
Read full complaint
THE SIDE AIR BAGS (BOTH) DEPLOYED FOR NO APPARENT REASON WHILE I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH. MY VEHICLE IS A 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAC. (4 DOOR PICKUP). THE VEHICLE WAS RETURNED TO A FORD DEALER FOR REPAIR AND INITIALLY THEY SAID IT WOULD BE A WARRANTY REPAIR BUT CALLED BACK A WEEK LATER INDICATING THAT FORD WOULD NOT WARRANT THE REPAIRS AND THE COST TO ME WOULD BE $2300 TO $2500. I AM NOW CONCERNED THAT THIS COULD REOCCUR IN THE FUTURE AND PERHAPS WITH MY GRAND CHILDREN OR DOG IN THE VEHICLE WITH A HAND OR HEAD OUT OF THE WINDOW. THE EXPLOSIVE FORCE OF THE DEPLOYMENT HAS ME CONCERNED ABOUT EVER DRIVING THE VEHICLE AGAIN NOT TO MENTION THE UNWARRANTED EXPENSE AND THE DESTRUCTIVE NATURE OF THE DEPLOYMENT. IT DESTROYED THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE INCLUDING MY DRIVER SIDE SEAT BELT (NOW NON OP AND BEING REPLACED AT MY EXPENSE) HEADLINER, A PILLAR MOLDINGS, C PILLAR MOLDING ETC. I HAVE TO WONDER IF THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THIS VEHICLE OR UNIQUE TO MINE. I'M CONTEMPLATING A TRADE IN FOR A TOYOTA. ANY INSIGHT YOU CAN OFFER WOULD BE APPRECIATED. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10159911
20,000 miles · Jun 14, 2006
Vehicle Speed Control
I HAVE A 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAC WITH CRUISE CONTROL. I HAVE COMPLAINED SEVERAL TIMES REGARDING THE FACT THAT IT DOES NOT DISENGAGE IMMEDIATELY. IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION IT TAKES A FULL SECOND OR MORE FOR IT TO DISENGAGE AFTER THE BREAKS ARE APPLIED. I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THIS IS NORMAL, THAT MY VEHICLE HAS …
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2004 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRAC WITH CRUISE CONTROL. I HAVE COMPLAINED SEVERAL TIMES REGARDING THE FACT THAT IT DOES NOT DISENGAGE IMMEDIATELY. IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION IT TAKES A FULL SECOND OR MORE FOR IT TO DISENGAGE AFTER THE BREAKS ARE APPLIED. I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THIS IS NORMAL, THAT MY VEHICLE HAS ELECTRONIC CRUISE CONTROL THAT IS CONTROLLED BY A CABLE DRIVEN BY AN ELECTRIC MOTOR AND NOT A VACUUM CONTROL LIKE MOST CARS. IF THIS IS TRUE IT IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION SINCE I HAVE HAD TO VEER OFF THE ROAD WHEN TRAVELING AT HIGH SPEED ON A HIGHWAY AND SOMEONE PULLED INTO MY LANE ABRUPTLY WHERE IF THE CRUISE DISENGAGED WHEN I HIT THE BRAKES THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN PLENTY OF TIME TO AVOID A COLLISION OR A CLOSE CALL. HOWEVER, AFTER HITTING THE BRAKES I WAS FIGHTING THE CONTINUAL ACCELERATION, OR SLOW DECELERATION OF THE ENGINE. MY OTHER CARS DUMP IMMEDIATELY, IN FACT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL HITS YOUR FOOT IF ITS THERE, NOT SO WITH THE FORD. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10159808
NHTSA investigations
2PE09020 · Vehicle Rollaway Allegations
Opened Apr 21, 2009 · Closed Aug 19, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device
IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED CONSUMER REPORTS OF HIGHER THAN EXPECTED EFFORTS WHEN SHIFTING INTO AND OUT OF PARK COULD BE A RESULT OF A GROOVE BEING WORN INTO THE SWING ARM RAMP OF THE STEERING COLUMN. THE SWING ARM IS A COMPONENT BOLTED TO THE STEERING COLUMN THAT ASSISTS IN SHIFTING THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION GEARS.AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY FORD OF RETURNED STEERING COLUMNS FOUND THE GROOVE COULD BE CREATED OVER TIME IF CONSUMER SHIFT MORE QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVE OR REVERSE TO PARK THAN THE BRAKE SHIFT INTERLOCK (BSI) SOLENOID PIN RETRACTS AFTER THE BRAKE PEDAL IS APPLIED. IN NOVEMBER OF 2004, FORD RELEASED A REDESIGNED BSI SOLENOID WITH A SHORTER PIN RETRACTING TIME AS A SERVICEABLE COMPONENT. FORD HAS NOTED THE SHORTER RETRACTION TIME SIGNIFICANTLY LESSENS THE LIKELIHOOD OF BSI SOLENOID PIN TO SWING ARM CONTACT EVEN WITH RAPID CONSUMER SHIFTS.FORD ALSO ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TSB 04-22-12, TO INSTRUCT SERVICE TECHNICIANS ON THE PROPER DIAGNOSIS AND VEHICLE REPAIR. REVIEWING COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 200 ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AFTER CONSUMERS BELIEVE THEY HAVE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE INTO PARK, RESULTING IN 85 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 32 ALLEGED INJURIES.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ODI HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED 883 REPORTS OF CONSUMERS ALLEGING DIFFICULTY OR THE INABILITY TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-013) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Steering:column
IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED CONSUMER REPORTS OF HIGHER THAN EXPECTED EFFORTS WHEN SHIFTING INTO AND OUT OF PARK COULD BE A RESULT OF A GROOVE BEING WORN INTO THE SWING ARM RAMP OF THE STEERING COLUMN. THE SWING ARM IS A COMPONENT BOLTED TO THE STEERING COLUMN THAT ASSISTS IN SHIFTING THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION GEARS.AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY FORD OF RETURNED STEERING COLUMNS FOUND THE GROOVE COULD BE CREATED OVER TIME IF CONSUMER SHIFT MORE QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVE OR REVERSE TO PARK THAN THE BRAKE SHIFT INTERLOCK (BSI) SOLENOID PIN RETRACTS AFTER THE BRAKE PEDAL IS APPLIED. IN NOVEMBER OF 2004, FORD RELEASED A REDESIGNED BSI SOLENOID WITH A SHORTER PIN RETRACTING TIME AS A SERVICEABLE COMPONENT. FORD HAS NOTED THE SHORTER RETRACTION TIME SIGNIFICANTLY LESSENS THE LIKELIHOOD OF BSI SOLENOID PIN TO SWING ARM CONTACT EVEN WITH RAPID CONSUMER SHIFTS.FORD ALSO ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TSB 04-22-12, TO INSTRUCT SERVICE TECHNICIANS ON THE PROPER DIAGNOSIS AND VEHICLE REPAIR. REVIEWING COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 200 ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AFTER CONSUMERS BELIEVE THEY HAVE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE INTO PARK, RESULTING IN 85 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 32 ALLEGED INJURIES.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ODI HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED 883 REPORTS OF CONSUMERS ALLEGING DIFFICULTY OR THE INABILITY TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-013) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device
IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED CONSUMER REPORTS OF HIGHER THAN EXPECTED EFFORTS WHEN SHIFTING INTO AND OUT OF PARK COULD BE A RESULT OF A GROOVE BEING WORN INTO THE SWING ARM RAMP OF THE STEERING COLUMN. THE SWING ARM IS A COMPONENT BOLTED TO THE STEERING COLUMN THAT ASSISTS IN SHIFTING THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION GEARS.AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY FORD OF RETURNED STEERING COLUMNS FOUND THE GROOVE COULD BE CREATED OVER TIME IF CONSUMER SHIFT MORE QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVE OR REVERSE TO PARK THAN THE BRAKE SHIFT INTERLOCK (BSI) SOLENOID PIN RETRACTS AFTER THE BRAKE PEDAL IS APPLIED. IN NOVEMBER OF 2004, FORD RELEASED A REDESIGNED BSI SOLENOID WITH A SHORTER PIN RETRACTING TIME AS A SERVICEABLE COMPONENT. FORD HAS NOTED THE SHORTER RETRACTION TIME SIGNIFICANTLY LESSENS THE LIKELIHOOD OF BSI SOLENOID PIN TO SWING ARM CONTACT EVEN WITH RAPID CONSUMER SHIFTS.FORD ALSO ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TSB 04-22-12, TO INSTRUCT SERVICE TECHNICIANS ON THE PROPER DIAGNOSIS AND VEHICLE REPAIR. REVIEWING COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 200 ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AFTER CONSUMERS BELIEVE THEY HAVE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE INTO PARK, RESULTING IN 85 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 32 ALLEGED INJURIES.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ODI HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED 883 REPORTS OF CONSUMERS ALLEGING DIFFICULTY OR THE INABILITY TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-013) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Steering
IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED CONSUMER REPORTS OF HIGHER THAN EXPECTED EFFORTS WHEN SHIFTING INTO AND OUT OF PARK COULD BE A RESULT OF A GROOVE BEING WORN INTO THE SWING ARM RAMP OF THE STEERING COLUMN. THE SWING ARM IS A COMPONENT BOLTED TO THE STEERING COLUMN THAT ASSISTS IN SHIFTING THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION GEARS.AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY FORD OF RETURNED STEERING COLUMNS FOUND THE GROOVE COULD BE CREATED OVER TIME IF CONSUMER SHIFT MORE QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVE OR REVERSE TO PARK THAN THE BRAKE SHIFT INTERLOCK (BSI) SOLENOID PIN RETRACTS AFTER THE BRAKE PEDAL IS APPLIED. IN NOVEMBER OF 2004, FORD RELEASED A REDESIGNED BSI SOLENOID WITH A SHORTER PIN RETRACTING TIME AS A SERVICEABLE COMPONENT. FORD HAS NOTED THE SHORTER RETRACTION TIME SIGNIFICANTLY LESSENS THE LIKELIHOOD OF BSI SOLENOID PIN TO SWING ARM CONTACT EVEN WITH RAPID CONSUMER SHIFTS.FORD ALSO ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TSB 04-22-12, TO INSTRUCT SERVICE TECHNICIANS ON THE PROPER DIAGNOSIS AND VEHICLE REPAIR. REVIEWING COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 200 ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AFTER CONSUMERS BELIEVE THEY HAVE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE INTO PARK, RESULTING IN 85 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 32 ALLEGED INJURIES.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ODI HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED 883 REPORTS OF CONSUMERS ALLEGING DIFFICULTY OR THE INABILITY TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-013) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
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.
Illustration