IllustrationDRIVER SEAT BOLT
2001 Ford Explorer Sport
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Explorer Sport years
Owner complaints for the 2001 Ford Explorer Sport are substantially higher than the model-year median of 68.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Explorer Sport 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
100–25K
2225–50K
3150–75K
1975–100K
21100–150K
13150K+
116 reports with mileage · 72 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.
- Suspension. Review the 33 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 30 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
18 crash reports11 fire reports16 injury reports
Seats complaints
15 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT UPON SITTING IN THE FRONT DRIVER'S SEAT, THE SEAT UNEXPECTEDLY RECLINED. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THE SEAT CUSHION DROPPED DOWNWARD. NUMEROUS AUTHORIZED DEALERS WERE NOTIFIED AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE PARTS NECESSARY TO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT UPON SITTING IN THE FRONT DRIVER'S SEAT, THE SEAT UNEXPECTEDLY RECLINED. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THE SEAT CUSHION DROPPED DOWNWARD. NUMEROUS AUTHORIZED DEALERS WERE NOTIFIED AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE PARTS NECESSARY TO REMEDY THE FAILURE WERE NO LONGER MANUFACTURED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL ASSOCIATED WITH NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 03V281000 (SEATS:FRONT ASSEMBLY:RECLINER). THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SEAT WOULD UNEXPECTEDLY SHIFT WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH. THE DEALER HAD NOT BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL ASSOCIAT…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SEAT WOULD UNEXPECTEDLY SHIFT WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH. THE DEALER HAD NOT BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL ASSOCIATED WITH NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 03V281000 (SEATS:FRONT ASSEMBLY:RECLINER). NO FURTHER ASSISTANCE WAS OFFERED. NO REPAIRS WERE PERFORMED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 151,000.
THE DRIVER'S SEAT IS LOOSE AND TILTS TO THE RIGHT. THERE IS CLEARLY SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE WAY IT IS AFFIXED TO THE VEHICLE. THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM HAS A DEFECT CAUSING THIS LOOSENESS. THE DEGREE OF LOOSENESS HAS INCREASED SINCE IT BECAME CLEARLY APPARENT IN FEBRUARY OF 2009; 5 MONTHS AFTER PURCHASING THE VEHICLE. IT IS N…
Read full complaint
THE DRIVER'S SEAT IS LOOSE AND TILTS TO THE RIGHT. THERE IS CLEARLY SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE WAY IT IS AFFIXED TO THE VEHICLE. THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM HAS A DEFECT CAUSING THIS LOOSENESS. THE DEGREE OF LOOSENESS HAS INCREASED SINCE IT BECAME CLEARLY APPARENT IN FEBRUARY OF 2009; 5 MONTHS AFTER PURCHASING THE VEHICLE. IT IS NOW EVEN MORE LOOSE AND THERE IS CLEARLY A PROBLEM THAT COULD LEAD TO HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS IF NOT FIXED BY THE DEALER. I WAS LIED TO AT THE DEALER SEVERAL TIMES, I REQUESTED CARFAX REPEATEDLY, BUT WAS NEVER PROVIDED WITH ONE. I REQUESTED A CAR MANUAL REPEATEDLY, BUT WAS NEVER GIVEN ONE. I OBTAINED A CARFAX ON MY OWN THAT SHOWS THE DEALER LIED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF PREVIOUS OWNERS, THE SERVICE OF ONE FORD RECALL, AND THE EXISTENCE OF A SECOND FORD RECALL. THAT IS THE SEAT RECLINING MECHANISM. THERE IS A SAFETY RECALL 03S04, DATED AUGUST 2003. CERTAIN 2001-2002 MODEL YEAR 2-DOOR EXPLORER/EXPLORER SPORT* VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH HIGH BACK SEATS, BUT AT THE LOUISVILLE ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM JOB #1, 2001 THROUGH JOB LAST 2002. IN 2001, THE EXPLORER 2-DOOR WAS RENAMED EXPLORER SPORT. AFFECTED VEHICLES ARE IDENTIFIED OASIS. IN ADDITION, FOR A LIST OF VEHICLES ASSIGNED TO YOUR DEALERSHIP, VISIT THE WEBSITE. THIS INFORMATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE ON APRIL 5, 2006. SOME OF THE VEHICLES AFFECTED BY THIS PROGRAM WILL RECEIVE ONE LETTER DESCRIBING BOTH PROGRAMS. FOR CUSTOMERS CONVENIENCE, PLEASE COMPLETE BOTH PROGRAMS 03S03 AND 03S04 DURING ONE CUSTOMER VISIT. THE REASON FOR THIS SAFETY RECALL IS IN SOME OF THE AFFECTED VEHICLES, A BOLT THAT ATTACHES THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM TO THE DRIVER SEAT BACK FRAME MAY FRACTURE. IF THIS CONDITION WERE TO OCCUR, THE CUSTOMER MAY EXPERIENCE LOOSENESS OR NOISE IN THE SEAT. IN EXTREME CASES THE SEAT BACK MAY RECLINE UNTIL IT MAKES CONTACT WITH AN OBJECT BEHIND THE SEAT OR THE SECOND ROW CUSHION. THE OCCUPANT COULD POTENTIALLY LOSE CONTACT WITH THE STEERING WHEEL OR FOOT PEDALS, POSSIBLY RESULTING IN A CRASH. *TR
DRIVER'S SEAT RECLINER. PER NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN 03V281000 ON OTHER FORD EXPLORER SPORT MODELS OF THE SAME YEAR THERE WAS A RECALL ISSUED ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE RECLINER WHERE THE SEAT WOULD RECLINE DURING ACCELERATION , CAUSING THE DRIVER TO LOSE CONTACT WITH STEERING WHEEL AND PEDALS. THE 2001 FORD EXPLORER FELL OUTSIDE OF T…
Read full complaint
DRIVER'S SEAT RECLINER. PER NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN 03V281000 ON OTHER FORD EXPLORER SPORT MODELS OF THE SAME YEAR THERE WAS A RECALL ISSUED ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE RECLINER WHERE THE SEAT WOULD RECLINE DURING ACCELERATION , CAUSING THE DRIVER TO LOSE CONTACT WITH STEERING WHEEL AND PEDALS. THE 2001 FORD EXPLORER FELL OUTSIDE OF THE TIME FRAME FOR THE RECALL YET HAD THE SAME PROBLEMS. I AM ASKING TO EXPAND THE TIME FRAME SINCE SAME CONDITIONS EXISTED. *AK
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TRAVELING 30 MPH, THE PASSENGER SIDE SEAT RECLINED WITHOUT WARNING. THE PASSENGER GRABBED THE DRIVER, CAUSING THE DRIVER TO SWERVE AND HIT THE CURB. THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE TIRE BLEW OUT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THE RECLINER ASSEMBLY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED.
JOHN KILLEN WAS DRIVING HIS 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRUCK, WHEN THE DRIVER'S SEAT COMPLETELY RECLINED. APPARENTLY THE SEAT HAD BROKEN. THE BOLT CONNECTING THE TOP PORTION OF THE "HIGH-BACK" SEAT TO THE ASSEMBLY RECLINER HAD SPLIT IN HALF. THE SEAT CAN NOT BE PUT BACK INTO THE UPRIGHT POSITION WITHOUT HAVING TO BE PROPPED UP…
Read full complaint
JOHN KILLEN WAS DRIVING HIS 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT TRUCK, WHEN THE DRIVER'S SEAT COMPLETELY RECLINED. APPARENTLY THE SEAT HAD BROKEN. THE BOLT CONNECTING THE TOP PORTION OF THE "HIGH-BACK" SEAT TO THE ASSEMBLY RECLINER HAD SPLIT IN HALF. THE SEAT CAN NOT BE PUT BACK INTO THE UPRIGHT POSITION WITHOUT HAVING TO BE PROPPED UP. JOHN HAD TALKED TO A NEIGHBOR ABOUT THE PROBLEM, THE NEIGHBOR STATED THAT THERE HAD BEEN A RECALL. UPON FURTHER INVESTIGATION, THERE WAS THE RECALL ON THE INTERNET. JOHN HAD CALLED FORD TO INQUIRE THE RECALL, AND TO STATE THAT THE SEAT IN HIS TRUCK HAD BROKEN. THE CUSTOMER SERVICE REP. STATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL. JOHN CALLED A SECOND TIME AND A DIFFERENT CUSTOMER REP STATED THAT HIS TRUCK HAD ALREADY BEEN FIXED. JOHN CALLED A THIRD TIME AND THE CUSTOMER REP STATED THAT HIS TRUCK WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL- EVEN THOUGH THE PART THAT BROKE IN JOHN'S DRIVER SEAT WAS THE SAME PART DESCRIBED IN THE RECALL. NOW FORD WANTS JOHN TO PAY FOR THE REPAIR ON THE DEFECTED PART.*JB
DT: CONSUMER OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. SHE FOUND RECALL 03V281000 FOR SAME YEAR, MAKE AND MODEL, 03V281000. BUT HER VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL, ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER. THE CONSUMER WOULD LIKE TO HAVE HER VEHICLE INCLUDED IN THE RECALL BECAUSE HER VEHICLE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM AS DESCRIBED IN THE RE…
Read full complaint
DT: CONSUMER OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. SHE FOUND RECALL 03V281000 FOR SAME YEAR, MAKE AND MODEL, 03V281000. BUT HER VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL, ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER. THE CONSUMER WOULD LIKE TO HAVE HER VEHICLE INCLUDED IN THE RECALL BECAUSE HER VEHICLE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM AS DESCRIBED IN THE RECALL. FRONT SEATS DID NOT LOCK IN THE UPRIGHT POSITION. IF SEAT BACKS WERE PRESSED ON THE SEAT THEY WILL GIVE AND FALL INTO THE RECLINED POSITION. SHE HAD NOT ANYONE LOOK AT SEATS TO SEE WHAT CAUSED THE PROBLEM. *AK
WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY MY SEAT COLLAPSE UNDER NEAT CAUSING MY BODY TO SLOUCH. I STARTED TO SWERVE THE CAR BUT HAD UNDER CONTROL AND LUCKILY CAUSED NO ACCIDENT. I TOOK IT TO A DEALERSHIP THE NEXT DAY , AND THEY TOLD ME THAT I WOULD HAVE TO PURCHASE A BRAND NEW SEAT FRAME AND CUSHION SINCE THE SEAT FRAME BROKE, THEY EVEN S…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY MY SEAT COLLAPSE UNDER NEAT CAUSING MY BODY TO SLOUCH. I STARTED TO SWERVE THE CAR BUT HAD UNDER CONTROL AND LUCKILY CAUSED NO ACCIDENT. I TOOK IT TO A DEALERSHIP THE NEXT DAY , AND THEY TOLD ME THAT I WOULD HAVE TO PURCHASE A BRAND NEW SEAT FRAME AND CUSHION SINCE THE SEAT FRAME BROKE, THEY EVEN SAID THEY HAVE NEVER HEARD THIS HAPPENED OR SEEN IT HAPPEN. THEY TOLD ME SINCE IT DOES NOT COVER UNDER WARRANTY OR EXTENDED WARRANTY, WHICH I HAD PURCHASED WHEN I BOUGHT THE CAR, THAT I WOULD HAVE PAY FOR IT AND THAT IT WILL COST ME ALMOST 400 DOLLARS. I TOLD THEM THAT I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR A SEAT FRAME THAT SHOULD NOT BREAK, I EVEN CALLED THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND ALL THEY SAID WAS THAT WE WILL TELL THE ENGINEERS AND THE ONLY THING THEY CAN OFFER WAS DISCOUNT. I AM NOT A HEAVY PERSON AND ANYWAY NO MATTER HOW HEAVY YOU ARE A SEAT FRAME SHOULD NOT BREAK OR COLLAPSE AT ANY POINT OF TIME. I HAVE ONLY OWNED THIS CAR FOR 4 YEARS AND IT SEEMS AS THOUGH FORD IS BLAMING ME FOR BREAKING THE PART AND IT IS MY FAULT. LIKE I HAVE SAID BEFORE I AM NOT WILLING TO PAY FOR A PART THAT SHOULD NOT BREAK. *JB
PASSENGER SIDE LATCH NOT CATCHING ON FRONT SEAT. I HURT MY UPPER BACK AND NECK. THE SEAT JUST GOES BACK ON ITS OWN. *AK
Official recalls
507V336000 · Vehicle Speed Control
Aug 3, 2007
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, PASSENGER VEHICLES, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND MOTOR HOMES CHASSIS, THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH MAY, UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN AN UNDERHOOD FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. OWNERS OF THE PASSENGER CARS INCLUDED IN THIS CAMPAIGN WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN THEIR VEHICLES TO THEIR DEALERS TO HAVE THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH DISCONNECTED AS AN INTERIM REPAIR. AS SOON AS REPAIR PARTS ARE AVAILABLE (EXPECTED OCTOBER 2007), OWNERS WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN TO THE DEALERS FOR INSTALLATION OF A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 13, 2007, AND MAILING COMPLETED BY SEPTEMBER 19, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
06V114000 · Seats:front Assembly:recliner
Apr 10, 2006
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH HIGH BACK SEATS, THE UPPER BOLT ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE HIGH BACK SEAT THAT ATTACHES THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM TO THE SEAT BACK FRAME, COULD FRACTURE. IF THE BOLT FRACTURES, THE SEAT BACK MAY RECLINE UNTIL IT MAKES CONTACT WITH AN OBJECT BEHIND THE SEAT, SUCH AS THE SECOND ROW SEAT CUSHION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER COULD POTENTIALLY LOSE CONTACT WITH THE STEERING WHEEL OR FOOT PEDALS DURING SUCH AN EVENT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE DRIVER SEAT UPPER BOLT WITH A METAL SPACER AND BOLT. IN ADDITION, SEATS WITH TUBULAR BACK FRAMES WILL HAVE THE FULLY THREADED LOWER RECLINER BOLT REPLACED WITH A PARTIALLY THREADED BOLT. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 10, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673. THIS IS A SUPPLEMENT TO A PREVIOUS RECALL CAMPAIGN (03V281).
03V280000 · Vehicle Speed Control:cables
Aug 5, 2003
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH SPEED CONTROL AND 4.0L SOHC ENGINES, IF THE STRAND COVER ON THE SPEED CONTROL CABLE BECOMES FLARED AT THE END, THE SPEED CONTROL CABLE MAY BIND WHEN THE SPEED CONTROL IS ACTIVATED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE THROTTLE RETURN SPRING FORCE MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE BINDING CONDITION WHEN THE SPEED CONTROL IS DISENGAGED. BRAKING FUNCTION WOULD BE MAINTAINED THOUGH STOPPING DISTANCES MAY BE INCREASED.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE SPEED CONTROL CABLE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE IT. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN AUGUST 29, 2003. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
03V281000 · Seats:front Assembly:recliner
Aug 5, 2003
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH HIGH BACK SEATS, THE UPPER BOLT ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE HIGH BACK SEAT, THAT ATTACHES THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM TO THE SEAT BACK FRAME, COULD FRACTURE. IF THE BOLT FRACTURES AND DOES NOT JAM IN THE SEAT BACK FRAME, THE SEAT BACK MAY RECLINE UNTIL IT MAKES CONTACT WITH AN OBJECT BEHIND THE SEAT, SUCH AS THE SECOND ROW SEAT CUSHION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER COULD POTENTIALLY LOSE CONTACT WITH THE STEERING WHEEL OR FOOT PEDALS DURING SUCH AN EVENT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE DRIVER SEAT UPPER BOLT WITH A METAL SPACER AND BOLT. IN ADDITION, SEATS WITH TUBULAR BACK FRAMES WILL HAVE THE FULLY THREADED LOWER RECLINER BOLT REPLACED WITH A PARTIALLY THREADED BOLT. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON AUGUST 29, 2003. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
00V394000 · Structure:body:hood:hinge And Attachments
Nov 28, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES WITH STEEL HOODS AND CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH SHEET MOLDING COMPOUND HOODS. A WIRE FORMED HOOD STRIKER COULD BE SUSCEPTIBLE TO FATIGUE FRACTURES. IF THE HOOD STRIKER FRACTURES, THE HOOD COULD FLY OPEN WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A HOOD FLY-UP WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING OPERATED COULD RESULT IN REDUCED DRIVER VISIBILITY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE HOOD STRIKER.
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
2DP05005 · 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.
PE03020 · Front Seat Back Recliner Attachment
Opened May 21, 2003 · Closed Sep 5, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats:front Assembly:recliner
BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 4, 2003, FORD NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 03V281) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1998-2001 FORD EXPLORER / MERCURY MOUNTAINEER 4-DOOR, MY 1998-2000 FORD EXPLORER 2-DOOR AND MY 2001-2002 FORD EXPLORER SPORT AND SPORT TRAC VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH HIGH BACK SEATS.COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THAT THE DRIVER'S SEAT BACK RECLINED WITHOUT WARNING.A BOLT BETWEEN THE UPPER SEAT RECLINER ATTACHMENT AND THE SEAT BACK FRAME MAY FRACTURE.FORD WILL REPLACE THE BOLT THAT ATTACHES THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM TO THE SEAT BACK FRAME ON THE DRIVER SIDE SEAT.BASED ON FORD'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.