THE 1997 FORD EXPLORER 4D EDDIE BAUER EDITION HAS A COMPUTER CONTROLLED MESSAGE CENTER. THE MESSAGE CENTER CONTROLS AMONG OTHER THINGS THE VEHICLE HEADLIGHTS AND FOG LAMPS. THE LIGHT OUT MODULE (LOM) ALSO KNOWN AS THE INDICATOR WARNING SYSTEM CONTROL IS LOCATED INSIDE THE MESSAGE CENTER CONSOLE AND RUNS "HOT" IN TEMPERATURE BE…
Read full complaint
THE 1997 FORD EXPLORER 4D EDDIE BAUER EDITION HAS A COMPUTER CONTROLLED MESSAGE CENTER. THE MESSAGE CENTER CONTROLS AMONG OTHER THINGS THE VEHICLE HEADLIGHTS AND FOG LAMPS. THE LIGHT OUT MODULE (LOM) ALSO KNOWN AS THE INDICATOR WARNING SYSTEM CONTROL IS LOCATED INSIDE THE MESSAGE CENTER CONSOLE AND RUNS "HOT" IN TEMPERATURE BECAUSE OF A FLAWED DESIGN. THE CURRENT DESIGN LEADS TO INTERNAL ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILURES THAT RESULT IN A LOSS OF THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS. THE SYSTEM IS DESIGNED TO NOTIFY THE DRIVER OF A HEADLIGHT OR LAMP FAILURE, ETC, HOWEVER, THE FAILURE OF THE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM CAUSES THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS (AND FOG LAMPS AS THEY ARE ON THE SAME CIRCUIT) TO FAIL. ON JUNE 25, 2014, THE SECOND FAILURE OF THE SYSTEM OCCURRED (WE ARE THE ORIGINAL OWNERS AND HAVE PREVIOUSLY REPLACED THE INDICATOR WARNING SYSTEM CONTROL OR LIGHT OUT MODULE (LOM) AT GREAT EXPENSE). FORD MOTOR COMPANY MUST RECALL THE 1997 FORD EXPLORER EDDIE BAUER EDITION AND ANY OTHER LIKE DESIGNED FORD PRODUCT WITH A LIGHT OUT MODULE (LOM) THAT FAILS LEAVING THE DRIVER WITHOUT LOW BEAMS AND NO MEANS OF FIXING THE SAID DEFECT WITHOUT AN AUTHORIZED FORD DEALER'S REPAIR (AT GREAT EXPENSE) THAT IS LIFE THREATENING IN THE INTERIM. SUCH REPAIRS ARE NOT POSSIBLE IF ON AN EXTENDED TRIP IN RURAL SETTINGS. THE ABSENCE OF LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS AFTER SUNSET AND BEFORE SUNRISE IS LIFE THREATENING AND UNACCEPTABLE TO THE OCCUPANTS OF A 1997 FORD EXPLORER AS WELL AS TO PEDESTRIANS AND OTHER VEHICLES WHO CANNOT SEE THE FORD EXPLORER OPERATING WITHOUT HEADLIGHTS. THE CORRECTIVE SOLUTION NEEDS A VENTING SYSTEM SUCH THAT THE MESSAGE CENTER DOES NOT CONTINUALLY MELT THE INDICATOR WARNING SYSTEM CONTROL OR LIGHT OUT MODULE (LOM). THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND FOR YOUR PROMPT ATTENTION TO THIS DEFECT REQUIRING A CORRECTIVE RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10607048
180,000 miles · Jun 5, 2013
Exterior LightingStructure
I OWN A FORD EXPLORER XLT 1997 AND THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR ON THE DRIVERS SIDE ONLY OPENS FROM THE INSIDE WHILE THE OTHER REAR PASSENGER DOOR WILL NOT OPEN FROM THE INSIDE OR OUT (CHILD LOCK NOT ACTIVATED). THE DRIVERS DOOR DOESN'T LOCK AND WHEN IT DOES LOCK, IT DOESN'T UNLOCK OR STICKS SO BAD IT HAS BE UNLOCKED WITH PLIERS, CA…
Read full complaint
I OWN A FORD EXPLORER XLT 1997 AND THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR ON THE DRIVERS SIDE ONLY OPENS FROM THE INSIDE WHILE THE OTHER REAR PASSENGER DOOR WILL NOT OPEN FROM THE INSIDE OR OUT (CHILD LOCK NOT ACTIVATED). THE DRIVERS DOOR DOESN'T LOCK AND WHEN IT DOES LOCK, IT DOESN'T UNLOCK OR STICKS SO BAD IT HAS BE UNLOCKED WITH PLIERS, CAUSING THE DRIVER TO HAVE TO GET IN AND OUT OF THE CAR THROUGH THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE DOOR. THE INTERIOR MAP LIGHT AND REAR INTERIOR DOOR LIGHT ABOVE THE BACKSEATS STAY ON CONSTANTLY EVEN WHEN SWITCHED OFF AND THE LIGHTBULBS HAD TO BE REMOVED BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T TURN OFF AND WERE OVERHEATING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10515198
176,000 miles · Aug 25, 2006
Electrical SystemExterior LightingSuspension
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TRAVELING 50 MPH ON ANY ROAD CONDITION, THE VEHICLE SWAYED VIOLENTLY FROM SIDE TO SIDE. THE SWAY BAR WAS REPLACED IN 2003. A FEW MONTHS LATER, THE CONTACT NOTICED THERE WAS A NHTSA RECALL, #00V402000, REGARDING THE SUSPENSION. THE SERVICE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND DETERMINED THAT A DIAGNOSTICS TES…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TRAVELING 50 MPH ON ANY ROAD CONDITION, THE VEHICLE SWAYED VIOLENTLY FROM SIDE TO SIDE. THE SWAY BAR WAS REPLACED IN 2003. A FEW MONTHS LATER, THE CONTACT NOTICED THERE WAS A NHTSA RECALL, #00V402000, REGARDING THE SUSPENSION. THE SERVICE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND DETERMINED THAT A DIAGNOSTICS TEST NEEDED TO BE PERFORMED BEFORE ANY WORK WAS TO BE DONE. THE TEST SHOWED THE UPPER AND LOWER BALL JOINTS ALONG WITH THE CAMBER CASTOR KIT WERE DAMAGED. ALSO THE PASSENGER AND BOTH REAR DOORS DID NOT OPEN. THE FRONT DRIVER'S DOOR HAD DIFFICULTIES CLOSING ON TWO OCCASIONS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE MANUFACTURER WHICH OFFERED $6000 FOR A TRADE IN. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL DUE TO THE VIN. THE LOCKS WERE INOPERATIVE, THE HEADLAMP SWITCH WAS BROKEN. THE VEHICLE NEEDED UPPER AND LOWER BALL JOINTS, HOWEVER THE CONSUMER DECLINED ALL REPAIRS. UPDATED 10/11/06. *JB
SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH THIS AUTO, IT SEEMS TO BE FALLING APART. THE DRIVER SIDE SEAT BELT NO LONGER LATCHES. WE HAVE TO LOOP THE DRIVER SIDE THROUGH THE PASSENGER SIDE. IT APPEARS THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH SEVERAL OF THESE MODELS. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD AND SEAT BELTS ARE MANDATORY BY LAW. IS THERE ANYTHING BEING DONE? T…
Read full complaint
SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH THIS AUTO, IT SEEMS TO BE FALLING APART. THE DRIVER SIDE SEAT BELT NO LONGER LATCHES. WE HAVE TO LOOP THE DRIVER SIDE THROUGH THE PASSENGER SIDE. IT APPEARS THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH SEVERAL OF THESE MODELS. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD AND SEAT BELTS ARE MANDATORY BY LAW. IS THERE ANYTHING BEING DONE? THE LEFT TURN INDICATOR HAS HAD ELECTRICAL ISSUES FOR YEARS. IT MAKES A ZZZZ SOUND AND NO LONGER WORKS. I AM ALSO DOWN TO ONLY ONE DOOR THAT THE KEY WORKS ON. THAT IS THE BACK LIFT. THE DOOR KEY HAD NOT WORKED ON THE DRIVER SIDE FOR YEARS, THEN THE PASSENGER SIDE WENT. I HAVE THE SAME HEAT PROBLEM THE OTHERS ARE HAVING. YOU EITHER GET FULL ON HEAT AND HAVE TO TURN IT ON AND OFF WHEN IT GETS TOO HOT OR YOU GET PARTIAL AC, ALWAYS A LITTLE WARM. BOTH THE AC AND HEAT HAS BEEN SERVICED, THE PROBLEM IS IN THE SWITCH SOMEWHERE. AND NOW THE REASON I'M WRITING IS I HAVE MAJOR ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS. FUSES AND SOLINOIDS HAVE BEEN LOOKED AT, THERE ARE NO LONGER LIGHTS IN THE DASH AREA. THE LIGHTS ON ALARM (DING DING DING DING) REMAINS ON WHEN THE CAR IS OFF, THE KEYS OUT AND THE DOOR SHUT WHICH HAS DRAINED MY BATTERY COMPLETLY. I HAVE JUMPED STARTED IT TWICE AND NOW IT SITS IN MY DRIVEWAY BECAUSE IT WILL COST A FORTUNE TO HAVE THE ELECTRICAL LOOKED AT. IF THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH ANYONE ELSE IT SHOULD BE REPORTED TO FORD. NOT ONLY CAN I NO LONGER DRIVE THIS CAR, IT WOULD BE TOTALLY UNSAFE TO USE IT. I NEED 4WHEEL DRIVE JUST TO GET OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY IN WINTER AND HAVE NO IDEA HOW I'M GOING TO COME UP WITH THE MONEY FOR ALL THESE REPAIRS. PLEASE ADVISE IF THERE ARE ANY RECALLS THAT ADDRESS THESE ISSUES. THE INCIDENT DATE I LISTED BELOW IS FOR THE TIME THE SEATBELT STARTED TO FAIL COMPLETLY. WE WERE ON A VACATION TRIP!
NHTSA ODI #10129981
100,000 miles · Jan 6, 2005
Exterior Lighting
THE HEADLIGHTS/TURN SIGNAL FAILSEDTO WORK INTERMITTENTLY. DEALERSHIP WAS NOTIFIED, BUT DID NOT RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10106933
Mileage unknown · Aug 26, 2003
Exterior LightingLatches/locks/linkages
DURING A VEHICLE INSPECTION SEVERAL PROBLEMS WERE FOUND. THE CHILD SAFETY LOCK ON THE PASSENGER SIDE REAR DOOR WAS BROKEN AND THE DRIVER SIDE TAIL LIGHT DOESN'T WORK. PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS.
NHTSA ODI #10034600
Mileage unknown · Jan 24, 2003
Exterior Lighting
CONSUMER STATED WHILE TRAVELING WITHOUT ANY INDICATION VEHICLE HEAD LIGHT WENT OUT. DEALER HAS BEEN CONTACTED. PLEASE PROVIDE FURTHER INFORMATION. TS
NHTSA ODI #10004558
Mileage unknown · Jan 2, 2003
Exterior Lighting
CONSUMER IS THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF THE VEHICLE AND STATED HAS HAD TO REPLACE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH 3 TIMES IN 5 YEARS. SWITCH CONTROLS FUNCTIONS OF HEAD LIGHTS, WIPERS, HIGH/LOW BEAMS, ETC. THE MOST RECENT FAILURE OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING. THE CONSUMER NOTICED SMOKE EMITTING FROM SWITCH AND STEERING COLUMN THAT FILLED UP THE ENT…
Read full complaint
CONSUMER IS THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF THE VEHICLE AND STATED HAS HAD TO REPLACE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH 3 TIMES IN 5 YEARS. SWITCH CONTROLS FUNCTIONS OF HEAD LIGHTS, WIPERS, HIGH/LOW BEAMS, ETC. THE MOST RECENT FAILURE OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING. THE CONSUMER NOTICED SMOKE EMITTING FROM SWITCH AND STEERING COLUMN THAT FILLED UP THE ENTIRE CABIN. HAD TO PULL OVER TO AVOID A COLLISION.
NHTSA ODI #10001862
Mileage unknown · Nov 23, 2001
Exterior LightingVisibility
WINDSHIELD WASHER COMES ON INTERMITTENTLY WHILE DRIVING. VEHICLE TAKEN TO DEALER TWICE, MULTI FUNCTION SWITCH WAS REPLACED THE FIRST TIME. IT DID NOT REMEDY THE PROBLEM. SECOND TIME DEALER COULD NOT FIND CAUSE. *AK THE CONSUMER STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS AT THE DEALER FOR ONE DAY IN COLD WEATHER OUTSIDE, PROBLEM WAS REPLICATED…
Read full complaint
WINDSHIELD WASHER COMES ON INTERMITTENTLY WHILE DRIVING. VEHICLE TAKEN TO DEALER TWICE, MULTI FUNCTION SWITCH WAS REPLACED THE FIRST TIME. IT DID NOT REMEDY THE PROBLEM. SECOND TIME DEALER COULD NOT FIND CAUSE. *AK THE CONSUMER STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS AT THE DEALER FOR ONE DAY IN COLD WEATHER OUTSIDE, PROBLEM WAS REPLICATED AND THEY FOUND RELAYS OVERHEATING AND STICKING CAUSED BY SHORTED MALFUNCTION SWITCH ON PRIOR REPAIR AND THEY REPLACED BOTH RELAYS. *YH
NHTSA ODI #899395
Mileage unknown · Oct 10, 2001
Exterior Lighting
THE FAILURE OF THE THIRD BRAKE LIGHT WHICH IS AN LED (LIGHT EMITTING DIODE) ASSEMBLY IS A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN. WHEN THE BRAKE LIGHT FAILURE WAS DISCOVERED I WENT TO THE MANUFACTURER'S DEALERSHIP TO HAVE IT REPAIRED. FIRST I WAS QUOTED A REPAIR PRICE 35 TIMES HIGHER THEN THE AVERAGE BRAKE LIGHT REPLACEMENT OR $350.00. ULTIMAT…
Read full complaint
THE FAILURE OF THE THIRD BRAKE LIGHT WHICH IS AN LED (LIGHT EMITTING DIODE) ASSEMBLY IS A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN. WHEN THE BRAKE LIGHT FAILURE WAS DISCOVERED I WENT TO THE MANUFACTURER'S DEALERSHIP TO HAVE IT REPAIRED. FIRST I WAS QUOTED A REPAIR PRICE 35 TIMES HIGHER THEN THE AVERAGE BRAKE LIGHT REPLACEMENT OR $350.00. ULTIMATELY, I HAD THE REPAIR DONE FOR $265.00 AFTER SOME SERIOUS DIALOGUE ABOUT THE COST OF THIS PART VERSUS NORMAL BRAKE LIGHT REPLACEMENTS. I EMPHASIED A PART COSTING $35 TIMES THE NORMAL BRAKE LIGHT BULB REPAIR SHOULD BE ENGINEERED TO LAST THE LIFE OF THE VEHICLE. IF IT DID NOT THEN IT MUST BE AN ENGINEERING OR MANUFACTUREING DEFECT. THE DEALERSHIP SAID FORD WOULD NOT RESPOND POSITIVELY TO MY ARGUEMENTS AND THE BEST THEY COULD DO WAS $265.00. I BELEIVE THE SAFETY ISSUE IS DRIVEN BY THE COST OF THIS ASSEMBLY. THERE MAYBE MANY FORD EXPLORERS ON THE ROAD WITH THIS DEFECTIVE PART, SIMPLY BECAUSE THE COST TO REPAIR IS PROHIBITIVE. IN SOME STATES VEHICLE INSPECTIONS ARE NOT REQUIRED UNTIL THE VECHICLE IS RESOLD AND THEREFORE THE PROBLEM COULD GO UNDECTED CREATING A SERIOUS RISK FOR THE DRIVER OF THE FAILING VEHICLE AND ANYONE FOLLOWING BEHIND. I SUGGEST A SAFETY ALERT BE ISSUED IF IT HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN DONE GIVING CONSIDERATION TO THE NUMBER OF LED ASSEMBLIES, BRAKE LIGHT FAILURES AND THE COST OF THE REPAIR THAT A RECALL ALSO BE CONSIDERED.*AK
FORD IS RECALLING MODEL YEARS 1995-2003 WINDSTAR, 2000-2003 EXCURSION DIESEL, 1993-1997 AND 1999-2003 F-250 SD THROUGH F-550 SD DIESEL, 1992-2003 E-150 THROUGH E-550, 1995-2002 EXPLORER, 1997 AND 2002 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER, 1995-1997 AND 2001-2003 RANGER, AND 1994 F53 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS). THE SCDS MAY LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A VEHICLE FIRE COULD OCCUR WITH OR WITHOUT THE ENGINE RUNNING.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS THAT DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS IN LINE WITH THE SCDS. ON 1999-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH A LEAKING SCDS, DEALERS WILL ALSO INSPECT THE ABS CONTROL MODULE CONNECTOR AND REPAIR AS NECESSARY. REPAIRS WILL BE COMPLETED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON OCTOBER 27, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L SOHC ENGINES AND STILL RETAIN THE ORIGINAL THROTTLE BODY (PART NUMBERS 97JF-9E926AB OR 97JF-9E926-AC). SOME OF THE ORIGINAL THROTTLE BODIES INSTALLED ALLOWED A GAP BETWEEN THE PLATE AND BORE TO BE BUILT TOO NARROW. THIS REDUCED CLEARANCE ALLOWED THE ENGINE DEPOSITS NORMALLY PRESENT IN THE THROTTLE BODY TO CONTACT OR BRIDGE THE GAP. IF THE ENGINE DEPOSITS BRIDGED THE GAP BETWEEN THE THROTTLE PLATE AND BORE AND THEN HARDENED, ON THE INITIAL APPLICATION OF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AFTER THE ENGINE HAS COOLED, THE OPERATOR WOULD NEED TO APPLY ADDITIONAL FORCE TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL TO BREAK THE BRIDGE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN ENGINE SURGE WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BREAKS FREE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE ORIGINAL THROTTLE BODIES.
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MINI VANS, LIGHT PICKUP TRUCKS, AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. OFF LEASE CANADIAN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS WHICH MEET CANADIAN REQUIREMENTS AND NOT THE PHOTOMETRIC REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." ACCORDING TO FORD, THE VEHICLES WERE IMPORTED INTO THE U.S. ERRONEOUSLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE LIGHT GIVEN OFF FROM THE DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IS BRIGHTER THAN ALLOWED BY U.S. STANDARDS.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL BE ADVISED TO DEACTIVATE THE RUNNING LIGHT FUNCTION AND TO COMPLETE ANY OUTSTANDING SAFETY RECALLS ON THESE VEHICLES.
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN 1997-1999 RHD EXPLORER EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L OHV/SOHC ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MAY 29, 1996 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1998-1999 EXPLORER/MOUNTAINEERS EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L OHV/SOHC OR 5.0L ENGINES OR 1998-1999 RANGERS EQUIPPED WITH 2.5L, 3.0L FFV/EFI OR 4.0L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM JANUARY 5, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1998-1999 MUSTANGS EQUIPPED WITH 3.8L, 4.6L 2-VALVE OR 4-VALVE ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1999 F250/F350/F450/F550 (OVER 8,500 LBS.) TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH 5.4L OR 6.8L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; AND 1999 F-53 STRIPPED CHASSIS EQUIPPED WITH 5.4L OR 6.8L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999. A CRUISE CONTROL CABLE CAN INTERFERE WITH THE SPEED CONTROL SERVO PULLEY AND NOT ALLOW THE THROTTLE TO RETURN TO IDLE WHEN DISENGAGING THE CRUISE CONTROL.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE CRUISE CONTROL IS USED AND THIS CONDITION IS PRESENT, A STUCK THROTTLE COULD RESULT, WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT IN A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE CRUISE CONTROL CABLES. AT THE PRESENT TIME, THE REPLACEMENT CABLES ARE NOT AVAILABLE. CUSTOMERS ARE BEING ADVISED NOT TO USE THE CRUISE CONTROL SYSTEM UNTIL A REPLACEMENT CAN BE MADE.
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MULTI-PURPOSE PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L SINGLE OVERHEAD CAM ENGINES. THE ENGINE FUEL LINES CAN BE DAMAGED IF THE VEHICLE IS JUMP STARTED AND THE GROUND CABLE IS ATTACHED TO THE FUEL LINE BRACKET THAT IS LOCATED NEAR THE BATTERY. SINCE THE BRACKET IS NOT GROUNDED, THE STAINLESS STEEL FUEL LINE BRAID COULD ACT AS A GROUND POTENTIALLY OVERHEATING THE PTFE INNER LINER OF THE FUEL LINE RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO THE FUEL LINE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE FUEL LINES CAN LEAK, AND IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, A FIRE COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A WARNING LABEL ON THE FUEL LINE BRACKET ADVISING OWNERS NOT TO USE IT FOR A JUMP START GROUND. ALSO A REVISED BOLT WILL BE INSTALLED IN THE ALTERNATOR BRACKET TO PROVIDE A CONVENIENT JUMP START GROUND LOCATION.
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MULTI-PURPOSE PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 5.0L ENGINES ORIGINALLY SOLD OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE STATES OF ALASKA, IDAHO, IOWA, MAINE, MICHIGAN (UPPER PENINSULA ONLY), MINNESOTA, MONTANA, NEBRASKA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW YORK, NORTH DAKOTA, SOUTH DAKOTA, VERMONT, WISCONSIN, AND WYOMING. THESE VEHICLES, WHEN OPERATED FOR EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS AND TEMPERATURES BELOW -20 DEGREES FARENHEIT, DO NOT RETURN TO IDLE DUE TO ICE IN THE THROTTLE BODY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: ALTHOUGH THE VEHICLE CAN BE CONTROLLED BY EITHER APPLYING THE SERVICE BRAKES OR SHIFTING THE TRANSMISSION TO NEUTRAL, INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORTS OR SOME INCREASE IN STOPPING DISTANCE CAN RESULT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A REVISED PCV SYSTEM WITH WATER HEATED VACUUM SOURCE.
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
6
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.
PE99049 · Windshield Wiper Malfunction
Opened Jul 28, 1999 · Closed Apr 24, 2000
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Visibility
There is no summary currently available
PE99045 · Steering Knuckle Separations
Opened Jul 6, 1999 · Closed Oct 29, 1999
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering
There is no summary currently available
EA99001 · Throttle Sticking
Opened Jan 7, 1999 · Closed Feb 9, 2001
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
ON JANUARY 23, 1997, FORD MOTOR COMPANY ISSUED SPECIAL SERVICE MESSAGE (SSM) 10240, ANNOUNCING THAT A REVISED THROTTLE BODY WOULD BE AVAILABLE DURING THE FIRST QUARTER OF 1997 FOR 1997 MODEL YEAR FORD EXPLORERS EQUIPPED WITH THE 4.0L SINGLE OVERHEAD CAM (SOHC) ENGINE.THE SSM STATED THE REVISED THROTTLE BODY WOULD ADDRESS INCREASED THROTTLE EFFORTS THAT HAD BEEN EXPERIENCED ON THESE VEHICLES.ON JULY 31, 1998, THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED SERVICE QUERY SQ98-014 TO DETERMINE WHETHER A SAFETY RECALL WAS WARRANTED FOR THE PROBLEM ADDRESSED BY SSM 10240.AT THAT TIME ODI HAD 14 REPORTS ALLEGING THROTTLES STICKING OPEN, INCLUDING THREE CRASHES, ON 1997 EXPLORERS WITH THE 4.0L SOHC ENGINE.EA99-001 INVESTIGATED ALLEGED THROTTLE BODY STICKING, AND LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL, IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ON DECEMBER 22, 2000, FORD MOTOR COMPANY FILED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT CONCERNING THROTTLE BODY STICKING IN 1997-1998 MODEL YEAR EXPLORER AND MOUNTAINEER VEHICLES WITH 4.0 SOHC ENGINES THAT STILL RETAIN THE ORIGINAL THROTTLE BODY; SAFETY RECALL 00V-422.THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CLOSING REPORT IS ATTACHED.
RQ98020 · Fuel Line Damage From Jump Starting
Opened Nov 3, 1998 · Closed Nov 15, 2000
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
There is no summary currently available
SQ98014 · Throttle Sticking
Opened Jul 31, 1998 · Closed Jan 7, 1999
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
Illustration