← New search

2003 Ford Explorer

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2003 Ford Explorer do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 609.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

916 reports with mileage · 215 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.

  • Structure. Review the 354 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 335 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 69 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

60 crash reports10 fire reports45 injury reports

Structure complaints

354 reports
Clear category filter
47,000 miles · Nov 6, 2006
Structure

FORD EXPLORER- 2003 LOCATION REAR HATCH OR DOOR. PANEL BELOW WINDOW WHERE FORD EMBLEM APPEARS. PLASTIC BODY PART SPLITS FOR NO APPARENT REASON. HAS HAPPENED TO MANY OTHER EXPLORERS. DEALER SAYS IT IS CAUSED BY REAR WIPER MOTOR BEING HOUSED BEHIND CRACK. DEALER WILL NOT REPAIR, THOUGH THIS IS A KNOWN DEFECT, WITHOUT CHARGING…

Read full complaint

FORD EXPLORER- 2003 LOCATION REAR HATCH OR DOOR. PANEL BELOW WINDOW WHERE FORD EMBLEM APPEARS. PLASTIC BODY PART SPLITS FOR NO APPARENT REASON. HAS HAPPENED TO MANY OTHER EXPLORERS. DEALER SAYS IT IS CAUSED BY REAR WIPER MOTOR BEING HOUSED BEHIND CRACK. DEALER WILL NOT REPAIR, THOUGH THIS IS A KNOWN DEFECT, WITHOUT CHARGING CUSTOMER AN EXTENDED WARRANTY DEDUCTIBLE. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10172768

Mileage unknown · Nov 6, 2006
Structure

I OWN A 2003 FORD EXPLORER XLT, AND YESTERDAY I NOTICED THAT THE BACK PANEL BELOW THE BACK GLASS, HAS A 1/4 CRACK ALL THE WAY DOWN IT! IT IS LOCATED A INCH OR TWO RIGHT OF THE FORD EMBLEM. THIS IS RIDICULOUS, I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY TOLD ME TO BRING IT IN FOR AN ESTIMATE, SINCE I HAVE 59,000 MILES ON THE VEHICLE, IT ISN…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2003 FORD EXPLORER XLT, AND YESTERDAY I NOTICED THAT THE BACK PANEL BELOW THE BACK GLASS, HAS A 1/4 CRACK ALL THE WAY DOWN IT! IT IS LOCATED A INCH OR TWO RIGHT OF THE FORD EMBLEM. THIS IS RIDICULOUS, I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY TOLD ME TO BRING IT IN FOR AN ESTIMATE, SINCE I HAVE 59,000 MILES ON THE VEHICLE, IT ISN'T COVERED UNDER THE WARRANTY. WELL, ON THE FORD WEBSITE UNDER MY WARRANTY INFORMATION IT STATES THAT CORROSION AND DEFECTIVE PARTS ARE COVERED FOR 5 YEARS REGARDLESS OF MILES DRIVEN. WELL WHAT DOES THIS FALL UNDER? I HAVE PUT SO MUCH MONEY IN THIS VEHICLE BECAUSE OF OTHER MECHANICAL PROBLEMS, THAT I AM NOT GOING TO PUT MORE MONEY IN IT FOR THIS. FORD NEEDS TO COVER IT, OR START SOME TYPE OF INVESTIGATION FOR A RECALL. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10172699

45,000 miles · Oct 19, 2006
Structure

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE PARKED IN A DRIVEWAY UNLOADING THE VEHICLE, THE REAR GATE HINGES FRACTURED AND THE GLASS DROPPED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED, AND INFORMED THERE WAS NO RECALL FOR THIS DEFECT. THE CONTACT EXPRESSED CONCERN BECAUSE THE HINGES HELD THE GLASS AND THE INCIDENT COULD HAPPEN WHILE DRIVING AFFECTING …

Read full complaint

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE PARKED IN A DRIVEWAY UNLOADING THE VEHICLE, THE REAR GATE HINGES FRACTURED AND THE GLASS DROPPED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED, AND INFORMED THERE WAS NO RECALL FOR THIS DEFECT. THE CONTACT EXPRESSED CONCERN BECAUSE THE HINGES HELD THE GLASS AND THE INCIDENT COULD HAPPEN WHILE DRIVING AFFECTING OTHER VEHICLES ON THE ROAD.

NHTSA ODI #10171357

60,000 miles · Sep 9, 2006
Structure

THE PANEL DIRECTLY BELOW THE REAR WINDOW IN MY 2003 FORD EXPLORER HAS DEVELOPED LARGE CRACKS IN IT. AFTER TALKING TO THE DEALER, IT WAS VERY EVIDENT THAT THIS IS A COMMON DEFECT AS THEY SAID THEY SEE A MINIMUM OF 10 PER YEAR AND THAT FORD WILL NOT FIX IT UNLESS IT IS UNDER WARRANTY. MY VEHICLE HAS 68,000,MILES ON IT. I ALSO HAVE…

Read full complaint

THE PANEL DIRECTLY BELOW THE REAR WINDOW IN MY 2003 FORD EXPLORER HAS DEVELOPED LARGE CRACKS IN IT. AFTER TALKING TO THE DEALER, IT WAS VERY EVIDENT THAT THIS IS A COMMON DEFECT AS THEY SAID THEY SEE A MINIMUM OF 10 PER YEAR AND THAT FORD WILL NOT FIX IT UNLESS IT IS UNDER WARRANTY. MY VEHICLE HAS 68,000,MILES ON IT. I ALSO HAVE SEEN THIS DEFECT LISTED MULTIPLE TIMES IN AUTOMOBILE DEFECT WEBSITES SUCH AS WWW.CARCOMPLAINTS.COM. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10167758

Mileage unknown · Sep 7, 2006
Structure

THE REAR PANEL BELOW MY WINDOW ON MY 2003 FORD EXPLORER CRACKED ALL THE WAY THROUGH. I WENT SNOW SKING AND AFTER DOING RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET, I FOUND THAT THIS SCENARIO IS COMMON. THE PANEL GETS MOISTURE BEHIND IT AND FREEZES, THEN CRACKS. I HAVE A FORD MANUFACTURER WARRANTY, AND I AM STILL UNDER WARRANTY. I CONTACTED THE…

Read full complaint

THE REAR PANEL BELOW MY WINDOW ON MY 2003 FORD EXPLORER CRACKED ALL THE WAY THROUGH. I WENT SNOW SKING AND AFTER DOING RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET, I FOUND THAT THIS SCENARIO IS COMMON. THE PANEL GETS MOISTURE BEHIND IT AND FREEZES, THEN CRACKS. I HAVE A FORD MANUFACTURER WARRANTY, AND I AM STILL UNDER WARRANTY. I CONTACTED THE DEALERSHIP WHERE I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE, I CALLED THE FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE LINE, AND CONTACTED THE LOCAL MEDIA, WHO SUGGESTED YOUR WEBSITE. NO ONE IS WILLING TO FIX THE PROBLEM, AND ONE DAY IT WILL FALL OFF WHILE I AM IN TRAFFIC. CURRENTLY I HAVE NOT FIXED THE PROBLEM. I ADVISED THE FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE PEOPLE THAT I WOULD NEVER FIX THE PROBLEM. I WOULD KEEP IT THERE AS A CONSTANT REMINDER OF THEIR COMMITMENT TO CUSTOMER SERVICE. CHECK OUT THE INTERNET (AUTOBEEF.COM) LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE HAVING THE SAME ISSUE. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10167562

Mileage unknown · Aug 12, 2006
StructureInjury

AFTER OPENING THE HATCHBACK TO PUT GROCERIES INSIDE, THE WINDOW FELL. AFTER INSPECTING IT, IT TURNS OUT THE HINGE ON HATCHBACK BROKE CAUSING THE WINDOW TO FALL. IT HIT MY LEFT ARM AND FOREARM CAUSING SEVERE BRUISING, OTHER THAN THAT NOBODY ELSE WAS HURT AND THE WINDOW DID NOT FALL OFF COMPLETELY. I CALLED THE DEALER AND WAS ASKE…

Read full complaint

AFTER OPENING THE HATCHBACK TO PUT GROCERIES INSIDE, THE WINDOW FELL. AFTER INSPECTING IT, IT TURNS OUT THE HINGE ON HATCHBACK BROKE CAUSING THE WINDOW TO FALL. IT HIT MY LEFT ARM AND FOREARM CAUSING SEVERE BRUISING, OTHER THAN THAT NOBODY ELSE WAS HURT AND THE WINDOW DID NOT FALL OFF COMPLETELY. I CALLED THE DEALER AND WAS ASKED TO DROP IT OFF FOR INSPECTION. WAS EVENTUALLY FIXED. BUT I CAN'T HELP TO WONDER IF IT WILL HAPPENED AGAIN AND IF THE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE WORSE. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10165308

25,000 miles · Aug 1, 2006
Structure

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PAINT ON THE EDGES OF THE VEHICLE FRONT HOOD WAS BUBBLED AND PEELED. THE SERVICE DEALER DETERMINED IT WAS CAUSED BY CORROSION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND REQUESTED THE VEHICLE OWNER TO PROVIDE A REPORT ON THE PAINT ISSUE FROM THE SERVICE DEALER. THE CONTACT WAS WAITING FOR THE REPORT FROM…

Read full complaint

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PAINT ON THE EDGES OF THE VEHICLE FRONT HOOD WAS BUBBLED AND PEELED. THE SERVICE DEALER DETERMINED IT WAS CAUSED BY CORROSION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND REQUESTED THE VEHICLE OWNER TO PROVIDE A REPORT ON THE PAINT ISSUE FROM THE SERVICE DEALER. THE CONTACT WAS WAITING FOR THE REPORT FROM THE SERVICE DEALER

NHTSA ODI #10164068

52,000 miles · Jul 7, 2006
Structure

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED AT HOME THE REAR LIFT GATE WINDOW EXPLODED. DURING THE INCIDENT THE TEMPERATURE OUT DOORS WAS ABOUT 70F. LAST YEAR, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHO REPLACED THE GATES DEFECTIVE HINGES, ACCORDING TO RECALL # 04V442000 INSTRUCTIONS. THE CONTACT EXPRESSED CONCERN A…

Read full complaint

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED AT HOME THE REAR LIFT GATE WINDOW EXPLODED. DURING THE INCIDENT THE TEMPERATURE OUT DOORS WAS ABOUT 70F. LAST YEAR, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHO REPLACED THE GATES DEFECTIVE HINGES, ACCORDING TO RECALL # 04V442000 INSTRUCTIONS. THE CONTACT EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE INCIDENT BECAUSE IT COULD HAVE CAUSED A SERIOUS ACCIDENT. *AK THE CONSUMER WAS TOLD POOR QUALITY GLASS MAY HAVE USED TO PERFORM THE RECALL WORK. THE CONSUMER HAD THE WINDOW REPAIRED AT HIS EXPENSE, HOWEVER DAYS LATER HE HEARD A NOISE AND UPON INSPECTION, THE CONSUMER DISCOVERED THE INSIDE PANEL OF THE LIFTGATE WAS VERY LOOSE AND IT LOOKED AS THOUGH IT WAS ABOUT TO FALL OFF. UPDATED 08/02/06. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10161837

Mileage unknown · Jul 1, 2006
Structure

EXPLORER LIMITED. SIX MONTHS INTO OWNING THIS CAR, BOUGHT AT APPROXIMATELY. 32,000 MILES, I NOTICED THERE WAS BUBBLING ON THE HOOD OF CAR. IT WAS ON THE FRONT OF THE HOOD ON BOTH SIDES ABOVE HEAD LAMPS AS WELL AS IN THE MIDDLE (POINT OF THE OF THE HOOD). EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A MANUFACTURERS DEFECT KENNY ROSS IN PITTSBURGH WILL NO…

Read full complaint

EXPLORER LIMITED. SIX MONTHS INTO OWNING THIS CAR, BOUGHT AT APPROXIMATELY. 32,000 MILES, I NOTICED THERE WAS BUBBLING ON THE HOOD OF CAR. IT WAS ON THE FRONT OF THE HOOD ON BOTH SIDES ABOVE HEAD LAMPS AS WELL AS IN THE MIDDLE (POINT OF THE OF THE HOOD). EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A MANUFACTURERS DEFECT KENNY ROSS IN PITTSBURGH WILL NOT WORK WITH ME IN GETTING REPAIRED. ONE OF THEIR COLLISION MEN SAID I WAS OUT OF WARRANTY. I SPOKE TO THE MANAGER HE SAID IF IT IS UNDER WARRANTY NOT A PROBLEM. THEN THE HEAD GUY OF THE COLLISION DEPARTMENT SAID EVEN IF I HAD A WARRANTY THE HOOD WOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED ONLY UNDER THE 12 MONTHS, 12,000 MILES WARRANTY (???). JUST THE BASIC RUN AROUND AND THEY INSULT YOUR INTELLIGENCE. THE PAINT IS NOW CRACKING AND PEELING OFF. I NOTICED THE BUBBLING AT ABOUT 39,000+ MILES AND JUST REPORTED IT TO FORD MAY OF THIS 2006, ALTHOUGH I DID MENTION IT TO THE GUY THAT SOLD ME THE CAR A YEAR OR SO AGO. IN ADDITION I PURCHASED THE EXTENDED SERVICE PLAN FROM THIS SO CALLED DEALERSHIP THINKING I WAS GETTING AN EXTENDED WARRANTY, WHICH WAS IMPLIED, ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT THE EXTENDED WARRANTY AND THE EXTENDED SERVICE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. BUYER BEWARE BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE TO DISCLOSE THE DIFFERENCE. WHY WOULD I BUY AN ESP WHEN I CAN EXTEND THE WARRANTY FOR JUST ABOUT THE SAME PRICE. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10161208

12,000 miles · Jun 30, 2006
Fuel System, GasolinePower TrainSeats

HELLO. I HAVE SEVERAL COMPLAINTS REGARDING MY 2003 FORD EXPLORER INCLUDING SEVERAL SAFETY ISSUES. THE FIRST COMPLAINT IS REGARDING THE DRIVER'S SEAT WHICH SHIFTS ROUTINELY ON ACCELERATION AND DE-ACCELERATION. THIS CONCERNS ME IF I GET INTO AN ACCIDENT AND THE SEAT MALFUNCTIONS. THE SECOND COMPLAINT IS REGARDING THE GEAR SHIF…

Read full complaint

HELLO. I HAVE SEVERAL COMPLAINTS REGARDING MY 2003 FORD EXPLORER INCLUDING SEVERAL SAFETY ISSUES. THE FIRST COMPLAINT IS REGARDING THE DRIVER'S SEAT WHICH SHIFTS ROUTINELY ON ACCELERATION AND DE-ACCELERATION. THIS CONCERNS ME IF I GET INTO AN ACCIDENT AND THE SEAT MALFUNCTIONS. THE SECOND COMPLAINT IS REGARDING THE GEAR SHIFTER NOT GOING INTO PARK EASILY. I HAVE TO JIGGLE IT TO INTO PARK. I AM CONCERNED THAT THIS MIGHT NOT PROPERLY ENGAGE PARK AND MY VEHICLE MIGHT ROLL. THIRDLY, MY REAR LIFT GATE TRIM HAS HAD TO BE REPAIRED AT LEAST 3 TIMES. I AM CONCERNED THAT ALTHOUGH THE DEALERSHIP SAYS THERE IS NO SAFETY ISSUE, THERE POSSIBLY COULD BE DUE TO THE REAR LIFT GATE HINGES BEING RECALLED AND REPRESENTATIVE INFORMING ME THAT THE REASON THAT I CONTINUE TO HAVE A CRACK APPEARING IS DUE TO DESIGN FLAW. THIS CONCERNS ME B/C I FREQUENTLY UTILIZE THE LIFT GATE TO RETRIEVE GROCERIES AND OTHER ITEMS AND DO NOT WANT THE WINDOW TO FAIL AND FALL ON MY HEAD. THE REMAINDER CONCERNS ARE REGARDING THE FUNCTION OF MY VEHICLE. I HAVE HAD TO HAVE 3 OF THE WINDOW MOTORS REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY. THE TRANSMISSION HAS HAD TO BE FIXED TWICE (SHIFTING MODULE MALFUNCTION). FINALLY, THE FUEL GAUGE HAD TO BE REPAIRED DUE TO IMPROPER FUEL READINGS. I GUESS ALL THESE ITEMS COULD BE VERY PROBLEMATIC AS WELL B/C I COULD RUN OUT OF GAS AND BE STRANDED WITH MY CHILD, MY VEHICLE MIGHT NOT SHIFT PROPERLY LEAVING ME STRANDED. PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CONTACT ME IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. PS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT AS I WAS COMPLETING THIS PROCESS I REMEMBERED THAT MY VEHICLE HAD A HIGH PITCHED WHINE THAT HAD TO BE REPAIRED. I DO NOT REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT HAD TO BE REPAIRED BUT IT WAS COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10161178

Official recalls

2

04V442000 · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments

Sep 13, 2004

ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE LIFTGATE GLASS STRUT MAY BECOME DISENGAGED OR THE HINGE MAY FRACTURE ALLOWING THE GLASS TO FALL AND POSSIBLY BREAK.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THE HINGE SHOULD FRACTURE, THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR THE GLASS TO FALL AND ULTIMATELY BREAK AND PERSONAL INJURIES COULD OCCUR.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL HAVE THE LIFTGATE GLASS STRUT BRACKETS AND GLASS HINGES REPLACED. FOR THE VEHICLES BUILT FROM AUGUST 1, 2000 THROUGH MARCH 3, 2002, THE DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE HINGES AND LIFTGATE STRUT BRACKET. ON VEHICLES BUILT FROM MARCH 3, 2002 THROUGH JUNE 23, 2003, THE DEALERS WILL ONLY REPLACE THE HINGES. THE RECALL BEGAN ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2004. A POSTCARD WAS SENT TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 27, 2004, ADVISING THEM THAT PARTS ARE NOW AVAILABLE. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.

03V094000 · Structure

Mar 7, 2003

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

Consequence & remedy

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

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE WIRING HARNESS ON THESE RUNNING BOARDS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN MARCH 7, 2003. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT SOUTHERN COMFORT AT 1-800-745-6096.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

3

EA09013 · Vehicle Rollaway Allegations

Opened Aug 18, 2009 · Closed Feb 12, 2013

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission:gear Position Indication (prndl); Power Train:automatic Transmission:lever And Linkage:column Shift; Steering; Steering:column; Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Additional source detail variants (5)

Power Train:automatic Transmission:gear Position Indication (prndl)

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Power Train:automatic Transmission:lever And Linkage:column Shift

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Steering:column

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Steering

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

PE09020 · 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.

Go deeper into Ford Explorer problems