NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
37 reportsClear category filter111,500 miles · Feb 24, 2011
Vehicle Speed Control
CRUISE CONTROL OFTEN TIMES "TAKES OFF" AND DOES NOT HOLD THE SPEED AS SET. I HAVE LOOKED DOWN AT THE SPEEDOMETER SEVERAL TIMES TO FIND MYSELF GOING WELL BEYOND 85MPH - AFTER SETTING THE CRUISE CONTROL AT 60. I HAVE TO DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL FOR MY VEHICLE TO STOP CONTINUOUSLY SPEEDING UP. THEN, THERE ARE TIMES WHERE THE CR…
Read full complaint
CRUISE CONTROL OFTEN TIMES "TAKES OFF" AND DOES NOT HOLD THE SPEED AS SET. I HAVE LOOKED DOWN AT THE SPEEDOMETER SEVERAL TIMES TO FIND MYSELF GOING WELL BEYOND 85MPH - AFTER SETTING THE CRUISE CONTROL AT 60. I HAVE TO DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL FOR MY VEHICLE TO STOP CONTINUOUSLY SPEEDING UP. THEN, THERE ARE TIMES WHERE THE CRUISE CONTROL DOES NOT ENGAGE AT ALL. THE GREEN LIGHT WILL COME ON, BUT THE SPEED WILL NOT HOLD. IN THESE INSTANCES, MY SPEED ACTUALLY DECREASES.
NHTSA ODI #10385208
46,100 miles · Jun 21, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I WAS APPROACHING A RED TRAFFIC LIGHT AT A VERY LOW RATE OF SPEED . I HAD MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND WAS PREPARING TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP WHEN THE ENGINE SUDDENLY SPED UP. I INCREASED THE PRESSURE ON THE BRAKE PEDAL BUT COULD NOT STOP THE CAR. I WAS AFRAID THAT I WOULD HIT A CAR IN FRONT OF ME WAITING AT THE TRAFFIC LIGHT. I …
Read full complaint
I WAS APPROACHING A RED TRAFFIC LIGHT AT A VERY LOW RATE OF SPEED . I HAD MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND WAS PREPARING TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP WHEN THE ENGINE SUDDENLY SPED UP. I INCREASED THE PRESSURE ON THE BRAKE PEDAL BUT COULD NOT STOP THE CAR. I WAS AFRAID THAT I WOULD HIT A CAR IN FRONT OF ME WAITING AT THE TRAFFIC LIGHT. I THEN SHIFTED THE CAR INTO NEUTRAL AND THEN WAS ABLE TO STOP THE CAR. MY TACHOMETER WAS READING ABOVE 5000 RPM. I TAPPED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND THE RPM RETURNED TO NORMAL. THIS ALL HAPPENED WITHIN A FEW SECONDS. I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE THE CAR HOME WITHOUT FURTHER PROBLEMS. I HAVE AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE CAR CHECKED BY A FORD DEALER TOMORROW. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10339379
39,000 miles · Jan 30, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
WE OWN A 2003 FORD EXPLORER EDDIE BAUER - 4WD AT TIMES THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL EITHER WORK, NOT WORK AT ALL, WORK AFTER BEING WARMED UP, WORK AFTER SHUTTING THE MOTOR OFF AND RESTARTING, WORK WITH THE SPEED ACCELERATING CONTINUOUSLY AT DANGEROUS LEVELS, OR INDICATE IT IS WORKING BUT IS NOT. AFTER VIEWING SEVERAL SITES WHERE MA…
Read full complaint
WE OWN A 2003 FORD EXPLORER EDDIE BAUER - 4WD AT TIMES THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL EITHER WORK, NOT WORK AT ALL, WORK AFTER BEING WARMED UP, WORK AFTER SHUTTING THE MOTOR OFF AND RESTARTING, WORK WITH THE SPEED ACCELERATING CONTINUOUSLY AT DANGEROUS LEVELS, OR INDICATE IT IS WORKING BUT IS NOT. AFTER VIEWING SEVERAL SITES WHERE MANY OTHER OWNERS ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM, WE WENT TO OUR DEALER. OUR DEALER REPLACED A DEFECTIVE DEACTIVATION PRESSURE SWITCH THAT CAUSED THE CRUISE CONTROL TO REACT ERRATICALLY. THEY USED IDS HOOK UP TO LOCATE PROBLEM AT A COST TO US OF $325.89. AFTER TALKING TO SOMEONE AT THE DEALERSHIP, IT BECAME APPARENT THIS IS NOT AN UNCOMMON PROBLEM, AND IT IS A DEFECTIVE PART THAT IS CAUSING A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION TO OCCUR. THE DRIVER THAT DOES NOT DETECT THE INCREASING SPEED OR PANICS WHEN IT OCCURS COULD HAVE A SERIOUS OR DEADLY ACCIDENT. FORD SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO REPLACE THESE PARTS AT NO COST TO THE OWNERS AT NO COST, ESPECIALLY SINCE OUR VEHICLE HAS JUST 39,000 MILES ON IT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10303325
50,000 miles · Dec 1, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control
MY 2003 FORD EXPLORER EXHIBITS MOST OF THE SYMPTOMS DESCRIBED IN CONSUMER ADVISORY DATED 13 OCTOBER 2009. IT HAS AN INTERMITTENTLY FUNCTIONING CRUISE CONTROL, A PERMANENTLY ON ABS INDICATOR LIGHT, AND IT OCCASIONALLY GETS STUCK IN PARK. I WAS WONDERING WHY 2003 WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE SAFETY RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10294171
115,000 miles · Oct 16, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control
I HAVE A 2003 FORD EXPLORER MANUFACTURED IN 01/03. IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CURRENT 'VOLUNTARY' RECALL OF FORD VEHICLES DUE TO A DEFECTIVE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH. HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE EXHIBITS THE SYMPTOMS OF THE VEHICLES WITH A DEFECTIVE SPEED CONTROL SWITCH (SEE FAQ BELOW FROM FORD.COM): Q. ARE THERE ANY EARLY W…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2003 FORD EXPLORER MANUFACTURED IN 01/03. IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CURRENT 'VOLUNTARY' RECALL OF FORD VEHICLES DUE TO A DEFECTIVE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH. HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE EXHIBITS THE SYMPTOMS OF THE VEHICLES WITH A DEFECTIVE SPEED CONTROL SWITCH (SEE FAQ BELOW FROM FORD.COM): Q. ARE THERE ANY EARLY WARNING SIGNS OR SYMPTOMS I WOULD NOTICE THAT WOULD INDICATE A PROBLEM? A. IF THE SYSTEM MALFUNCTIONS, A CUSTOMER MAY NOTICE VEHICLE SYMPTOMS SUCH AS; THE SPEED CONTROL MAY BECOME INOPERABLE, THE VEHICLE MAY NOT SHIFT OUT OF PARK, THE REAR BRAKE LAMPS MAY NOT WORK, BRAKE FLUID MAY LEAK AT THE SWITCH, THE BATTERY MAY DRAIN OR GO DEAD, THE ABS WARNING LIGHT MAY FLASH OR A FUSE IN THE SYSTEM MAY OPEN. MY VEHICLE HAS AN INOPERABLE SPEED CONTROL. IT STARTED AS AN INTERMITTENT PROBLEM, BUT IS NOW INOPERABLE. THE VEHICLE FREQUENTLY DOES NOT SHIFT OUT OF PARK, AND THE ABS LAMP FREQUENTLY ILLUMINATES. I HAVE CONTACTED FORD, AND THE DEALER TO REQUEST THE VEHICLE BE INCLUDED IN THE RECALL AND HAVE THE PROBLEM CORRECTED AT NO COST. BOTH HAVE REFUSED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10288640
35 miles · Feb 26, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control
2003 FORD EXPLORER STARTED ACCELERATION FROM 40 KM UP TO 90 KM IN JUST SECONDS, BRAKES WOULDN'T STOP OR SLOW IT DOWN, USED EMERGENCY BRAKE, AND IT EVENTUALLY STOPPED. TOOK IT TO FORD, AND THEIR REASON FOR THE ACCELERATION WAS FLOOR MAT IN THE WAY. WHAT A JOKE, THAT'S WAS THE FIRST THING I CHECKED FOR AND THEY WEREN'T IN THE WAY…
Read full complaint
2003 FORD EXPLORER STARTED ACCELERATION FROM 40 KM UP TO 90 KM IN JUST SECONDS, BRAKES WOULDN'T STOP OR SLOW IT DOWN, USED EMERGENCY BRAKE, AND IT EVENTUALLY STOPPED. TOOK IT TO FORD, AND THEIR REASON FOR THE ACCELERATION WAS FLOOR MAT IN THE WAY. WHAT A JOKE, THAT'S WAS THE FIRST THING I CHECKED FOR AND THEY WEREN'T IN THE WAY. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10260030
93,000 miles · Dec 15, 2008
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 70 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATED, THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE CRUISE CONTROL FAILED TO DEACTIVATE AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS. IN ADDITION, THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATION MECHANISM FAILED TO RESPOND AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SLOW DOWN. I…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 70 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATED, THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE CRUISE CONTROL FAILED TO DEACTIVATE AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS. IN ADDITION, THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATION MECHANISM FAILED TO RESPOND AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SLOW DOWN. IMMEDIATELY, THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND THE IGNITION KEY WAS TURNED OFF WITH THE GEAR SHIFTER PLACED IN THE PARK POSITION. THE VEHICLE COMPLETELY STOPPED. THE CONTACT WAS UNAWARE IF THE WARNING INDICATORS WERE ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE ENGINE REVVED AND THE RPM'S RACED WHEN THE IGNITION WAS RESTARTED. THE CONTACT TURNED OFF THE IGNITION AND, AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS, THE ENGINE IDLED NORMALLY. WHENEVER THE CRUISE CONTROL SYSTEM WAS NOT IN USE, THE VEHICLE OPERATED PROPERLY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 93,000. UPDATED 3/12/10 *CN UPDATED 06/01/10.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10251823
123,480 miles · Sep 4, 2008
Vehicle Speed Control
ON 9/4/08, DRIVING IN TOWN, I WAS AT A RED LIGHT, PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE, THEN PREPARED TO BRAKE, I NOTICED THAT WHEN I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE ACCELERATOR, THE VEHICLE'S SPEED KEPT ACCELERATING. I HAD TO RIDE MY BRAKES TO KEEP MY CAR FROM GOING ANY FASTER. WHEN I LET OFF THE BRAKE, THE ACCELERATOR TOOK OFF AGAIN ON ITS OWN AT A F…
Read full complaint
ON 9/4/08, DRIVING IN TOWN, I WAS AT A RED LIGHT, PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE, THEN PREPARED TO BRAKE, I NOTICED THAT WHEN I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE ACCELERATOR, THE VEHICLE'S SPEED KEPT ACCELERATING. I HAD TO RIDE MY BRAKES TO KEEP MY CAR FROM GOING ANY FASTER. WHEN I LET OFF THE BRAKE, THE ACCELERATOR TOOK OFF AGAIN ON ITS OWN AT A FAST RATE! I PULLED OVER TO TURN OFF MY CAR, WAITED FOR AT LEAST 30 MINUTES AND PROCEEDED AGAIN. AFTER DRIVING 5 MILES IT STARTED UP AGAIN, I RODE ON MY BRAKES THE REST OF THE WAY HOME AND THEN HAD MY HUSBAND FOLLOW ME TO THE DEALERSHIP TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT, WHERE IT IS RIGHT NOW. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10240948
11,330 miles · Jun 3, 2008
StructureVehicle Speed ControlVisibility
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATED, THE CRUISE CONTROL FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THE CRUISE CONTROL WIRING FAILED. THERE IS A RECALL FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL, BUT HIS VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED. THE RECALL NUMBER…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATED, THE CRUISE CONTROL FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THE CRUISE CONTROL WIRING FAILED. THERE IS A RECALL FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL, BUT HIS VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED. THE RECALL NUMBER WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 11,550 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 11,330. UPDATED 06/25/08. *LJ THE CONSUMER STATED AFTER THE DEALER FIXED THE RECALLED REAR HATCH PROBELM, THE CARGO HATCH FLEW OPEN WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY. A
NHTSA ODI #10229709
77,335 miles · Apr 21, 2008
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER. WHILE DRIVING 50 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO ENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL, THE SPEED RAPIDLY INCREASED ABOVE 55 MPH. THE CRUISE CONTROL LIGHT ILLUMINATED, WHICH INDICATED THAT THE CRUISE CONTROL WAS ENGAGED. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND ATTEMPTED TO DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL, B…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER. WHILE DRIVING 50 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO ENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL, THE SPEED RAPIDLY INCREASED ABOVE 55 MPH. THE CRUISE CONTROL LIGHT ILLUMINATED, WHICH INDICATED THAT THE CRUISE CONTROL WAS ENGAGED. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND ATTEMPTED TO DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL, BUT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL. THE CRUISE CONTROL INTERMITTENTLY FAILED TO OPERATE NORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT EQUIPPED WITH ANTILOCK BRAKES. THE FUEL SYSTEM AND DATE OF PURCHASE WERE UNAVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 77,335 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 77,392.
NHTSA ODI #10226149
NHTSA investigations
3EA09013 · 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.
Illustration