NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Electrical System complaints
19 reportsClear category filter190,019 miles · Apr 18, 2025
Electrical System
The contact owns a 2004 Ford F-350. The contact stated that while driving approximately 76 MPH with his wife in the front passenger seat, the vehicle shuddered uncontrollably and stalled. The contact and his wife were concerned for their safety. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact was able to regain control of th…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2004 Ford F-350. The contact stated that while driving approximately 76 MPH with his wife in the front passenger seat, the vehicle shuddered uncontrollably and stalled. The contact and his wife were concerned for their safety. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact was able to regain control of the vehicle and pulled over to the side of the road. The vehicle failed to restart and was towed to the residence. The contact stated that as an independent mechanic, he used a code reader to retrieve diagnostic trouble codes for the fuel control module wiring harness failure. The contact related to the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 05V270000 (Electrical System). The contact stated that the fuel control module wiring harness failure had caused warning lights to fail to illuminate as needed. The dealer was notified of the failure and informed the contact that the vehicle had previously been repaired under the recall. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and informed the contact that an elbow vacuum tubing connector was previously replaced under the recall; however, the contact advised the manufacturer that the recall involved replacing the entire fuel control module wiring harness. The manufacturer informed the contact that the recall was already marked completed and no further repairs could be covered. The contact stated that the dealer and the manufacturer had failed to honor the recall repair. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was 190,019.
NHTSA ODI #11655439
83,000 miles · Mar 9, 2016
Electrical System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE WOULD SUDDENLY SHUT OFF AND ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS WOULD NOT START. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO DETERMINED THAT THE FUEL INJECTION CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE CONTACT NOT…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE WOULD SUDDENLY SHUT OFF AND ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS WOULD NOT START. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO DETERMINED THAT THE FUEL INJECTION CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE CONTACT NOTIFIED THE MANUFACTURER, WHO EXPLAINED THAT THE HARNESS WAS REPLACED IN 2005 UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 05V270000 (ELECTRICAL SYSTEM). THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 83,000.
NHTSA ODI #10845783
100,000 miles · Mar 9, 2016
Electrical System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE, IT EXPERIENCED A COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE WIRING HARNESS WAS DEFECTIVE AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. PRIOR TO THE FAILURE, THE VEHICLE WAS REMEDIED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE, IT EXPERIENCED A COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE WIRING HARNESS WAS DEFECTIVE AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. PRIOR TO THE FAILURE, THE VEHICLE WAS REMEDIED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 07E066000 (EQUIPMENT). THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 100,000.
NHTSA ODI #10845706
176,253 miles · Oct 2, 2014
Electrical System
SHORTLY AFTER STARTING FROM A STOP THE VEHICLE LOST POWER AND HAD TO BE TOWED TO REPAIR SHOP. PROBLEM DIAGNOSED AND REPAIRED AS REPLACING THE PCM AND REFLASH OF THE ONBOARD COMPUTER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10640857
18,000 miles · Jul 22, 2014
Electrical System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE AT A STOP, THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED EXCESSIVE FORCE WAS APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL WHEN MAKING A STOP. IN ADDITION, THE VEHICLE STALLED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO RESTART. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE AT A STOP, THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED EXCESSIVE FORCE WAS APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL WHEN MAKING A STOP. IN ADDITION, THE VEHICLE STALLED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO RESTART. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER, WHO DIAGNOSED THAT AN OIL CHANGE AND THE ICP SENSOR NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 05V270000 (ELECTRICAL SYSTEM). THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 18,000. UPDATED 9/12/14*CN UPDATED 1/27/15 *JS
NHTSA ODI #10615244
140,000 miles · Mar 31, 2014
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THE COMPUTER MODULE WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED HOWEVER, THE FAILURE RECURRED THE FOLLOWING DAY AND THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THE COMPUTER MODULE WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED HOWEVER, THE FAILURE RECURRED THE FOLLOWING DAY AND THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER WHERE THE COMPUTER MODULE WAS REPLACED A SECOND TIME BUT TO NO AVAIL. THE DEALER THEN REPLACED THE FUSE BOX AS BUT THE REPAIR DID NOT PREVENT THE FAILURE FROM RECURRING. ADDITIONALLY, THE TURN SIGNALS, DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS AND THE TAIL LIGHTS HAD BECOME INOPERABLE. THE CONTACT CALLED THE MANUFACTURE IN REGARD TO NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 11V352000 (EXTERIOR LIGHTING) AND WAS ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 140,000.
NHTSA ODI #10575937
111,000 miles · Dec 20, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFire
FOR UNKNOWN REASONS ON 12/20/13 AT 0030 HRS MY TRUCK CAUGHT ON FIRE AS IT SAT IN MY DRIVEWAY. I DROVE THE TRUCK LAST ON 12/14/13. THE FIRE STARTED IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT ON THE DRIVERS SIDE. I HAVE OWNED THE TRUCK FOR ABOUT 8 MONTHS AND IT HAD 105000 MILES ON IT WHEN I PURCHASED IT. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ADVISED IT COULD BE …
Read full complaint
FOR UNKNOWN REASONS ON 12/20/13 AT 0030 HRS MY TRUCK CAUGHT ON FIRE AS IT SAT IN MY DRIVEWAY. I DROVE THE TRUCK LAST ON 12/14/13. THE FIRE STARTED IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT ON THE DRIVERS SIDE. I HAVE OWNED THE TRUCK FOR ABOUT 8 MONTHS AND IT HAD 105000 MILES ON IT WHEN I PURCHASED IT. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ADVISED IT COULD BE DUE TO SOME TYPE OF ELECTRICAL ISSUE NEAR THE MASTER CYLINDER. I TOLD THEM THAT I HAVE NOT DONE ANY WORK UNDER THE HOOD IN MONTHS AND THAT WAS OIL/FILTER CHANGE. STILL UNDER INVESTIGATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10556774
89,000 miles · Jan 26, 2012
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingFuel System, Gasoline
MY 2004 FORD F-350 6.0 DIESEL. HESITATE OR SURGES WHILE DRIVING, AND/OR THE ENGINE MAY STALL WHILE DRIVING AT ALL SPEEDS INCLUDING HIGHWAY SPEED, WILL LOSE POWER STEERING AND BRAKES AND WHEN AT A STOP IT WILL LUNGE FORWARD. THE ENGINE MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART AFTER STALL. I FEEL THAT THIS IS A GREAT SAFETY CONCERN I HAVE ALMOST L…
Read full complaint
MY 2004 FORD F-350 6.0 DIESEL. HESITATE OR SURGES WHILE DRIVING, AND/OR THE ENGINE MAY STALL WHILE DRIVING AT ALL SPEEDS INCLUDING HIGHWAY SPEED, WILL LOSE POWER STEERING AND BRAKES AND WHEN AT A STOP IT WILL LUNGE FORWARD. THE ENGINE MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART AFTER STALL. I FEEL THAT THIS IS A GREAT SAFETY CONCERN I HAVE ALMOST LOST CONTROL OF MY VEHICLE ON A FEW OCCASIONS WHILE TOWING MY BOAT AND GOING AROUND CORNERS. I HAVE HEARD OF OTHER PEOPLE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH THEIR 2004 6.0 DIESELS. PLEASE HELP! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10445520
3,000 miles · Feb 25, 2010
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine Cooling
SINCE NEW VEHICLE PURCHASE, MY FORD F350 DIESEL P/U EXPERIENCED ENGINE SURGING (200-250 RPM) WHILE STOPPED WITH THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION IN DRIVE. THE SURGE WAS SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO LURCH THE TRUCK FORWARD WITH THE BRAKE APPLIED, SUCH AS AT A STOPLIGHT. IN SEVERAL CASES, I ALMOST REAR ENDED OTHER VEHICLES BEFORE APPLYING TH…
Read full complaint
SINCE NEW VEHICLE PURCHASE, MY FORD F350 DIESEL P/U EXPERIENCED ENGINE SURGING (200-250 RPM) WHILE STOPPED WITH THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION IN DRIVE. THE SURGE WAS SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO LURCH THE TRUCK FORWARD WITH THE BRAKE APPLIED, SUCH AS AT A STOPLIGHT. IN SEVERAL CASES, I ALMOST REAR ENDED OTHER VEHICLES BEFORE APPLYING THE BRAKE HARD ENOUGH TO STOP THE TRUCK FROM MOVING FORWARD. I LATER LEARNED TO ANTICIPATE THE SURGE USING THE BRAKES TO MINIMIZE MOVEMENT OF THE TRUCK WHILE STOPPED. MY SURGING PROBLEM WAS CONFIRMED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS BY TECHNICIANS DURING TEST RIDES, BUT THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM IN THE SHOP. IN ALL CASES, THE FIRST STEP WAS TO REFLASH THE ECM WHICH MASKED THE PROBLEM FOR SEVERAL DAYS WHILE THE TRUCK RELEARNED MY DRIVING HABITS AND PREVENTED A DIAGNOSIS. THE ENGINE HAD TO BE OPERATED AT FULL TEMPERATURE IN ROAD CONDITIONS BEFORE THE PROBLEM DEVELOPED. IN THE SHOP, IDLING THE ENGINE TO WARM UP TO NORMAL OPERATING TEMPERATURE WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO REPLICATE THE PROBLEM. FORD DEALERS MADE MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS (10 OR MORE) TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM: REPLACING INJECTOR CONTROL PRESSURE (ICP) MODULE, EGR VALVE, AND ICP WIRING CONNECTORS TO NO AVAIL. THE PROBLEM WAS FINALLY DIAGNOSED AND CORRECTED, OUT OF WARRANTY AT APPROX. 44,500 MILES, BY REPLACING THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS. I FOUND A DEALER WHO WAS WILLING TO SEND A TECHNICIAN ON A TEST RIDE WITH ME AND HOOK UP AN ONBOARD COMPUTER LAPTOP THAT IDENTIFIED THE PROBLEM BEFORE REFLASHING THE COMPUTER ECM. A NUMBER OF SURGING COMPLAINTS FROM OTHER OWNERS OF FORD F350 ARE POSTED IN ONLINE FORUMS DOCUMENTING SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES AND FRUSTRATION. THE INCIDENT DATE PROVIDED IS THE APPROXIMATE DATE OF THE FIRST OCCURRENCE. IN MY CASE, THE SURGING OCCURRED ON A NEAR DAILY BASIS, ALTHOUGH INTERMITTENTLY, FOR 41000 MILES OF DRIVING WITHOUT ANY RESOLUTION FROM FORD. THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS WAS REPLACED IN FEB 2009 WHICH CORRECTED THE SURGING IN MY TRUCK. I PAID A $100 DEDUCTIBLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10314198
4,000 miles · Mar 26, 2006
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingPower Train
WHEN TRUCK ORIGINALLY PURCHASED BUBBLE ON TIRE, AND DEALER SAID THEY ALL COME THAT WAY, TIRE WENT FLAT WHILE PARKED ABOUT A MONTH LATER, NO HOLES, WE WERE TOLD TIRE WAS NO GOOD, HAD TO BE REPLACED. TRUCK KEPT STALLING, LOSS OF BRAKES AND STEERING WHILE NAVIGATING DOWNHILL, SOLENOID ASSEMBLY REPLACED. 2 DAYS LATER KEPT STALLING. …
Read full complaint
WHEN TRUCK ORIGINALLY PURCHASED BUBBLE ON TIRE, AND DEALER SAID THEY ALL COME THAT WAY, TIRE WENT FLAT WHILE PARKED ABOUT A MONTH LATER, NO HOLES, WE WERE TOLD TIRE WAS NO GOOD, HAD TO BE REPLACED. TRUCK KEPT STALLING, LOSS OF BRAKES AND STEERING WHILE NAVIGATING DOWNHILL, SOLENOID ASSEMBLY REPLACED. 2 DAYS LATER KEPT STALLING. DEALER HAD TRUCK 21 DAYS TO REBUILD TRANSMISSION, AGAIN SOLENOID ASSEMBLY REPLACED AFTER THAT REPLACED WIRING HARNESS. SINCE THEN, CALIPER BROKE AND BRAKES WENT, TURBO HAS BEEN REPLACED. VEHICLE HAS REPEATEDLY STALLED, NOISES FROM REAR END WITH NO DX. NOW ENGINE SMOKING, LOSS OF POWER, RPMS JUMP WHILE IDLING. TRUCK HAS ALSO REPEATEDLY CHANGED GEARS AUTOMATICALLY, IE WHILE AT RED LIGHT TRUCK WOULD JUMP TO 3RD AND THEN TRUCK WOULD STALL. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10153745
Official recalls
2Jul 13, 2011
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.
Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.
Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.
May 17, 2004
CERTAIN LARIAT AND KING RANCH MODEL PICKUP TRUCKS FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 120, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS FOR MOTOR VEHICLES OTHER THAN PASSENGER CARS." SOME TRUCKS WERE INADVERTENTLY EQUIPPED WITH AN INCORRECT LOAD RANGE TIRE. THIS WOULD RESULT IN INCORRECT TIRE LOAD RATINGS FOR THE STATED VEHICLE AXLE GROSS AXLE WEIGHT RATING. ALSO, THE TIRE MAY BE INFLATED ABOVE THE DOT LISTED INFLATION PRESSURE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF A TIRE WAS OPERATED IN AN OVER-LOADED OR OVER-INFLATED CONDITION, THE TIRE MAY RUPTURE RESULTING IN A RAPID AIR LOSS, WHICH CAN CAUSE A CRASH WITHOUT WARNING.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE ANY INCORRECT LOAD RANGE TIRES. ADDITIONALLY, IF ANY TIRE REQUIRED REPLACEMENT, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE WHEEL LUG NUT TORQUE BE CHECKED WITHIN 500 MILES AFTER ANY TIRE REPLACEMENT. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON MAY 21, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT. FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
2DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
PE04070 · Engine Stalling
Opened Oct 7, 2004 · Closed Feb 15, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:diesel
TWENTY FIVE OF THE ODI FAILURE REPORTS ARE DUPLICATIVE OF FORD COMPLAINTS.TWENTY ODI REPORTS DO NOT CONTAIN A VIN (AND MAY OR MAY NOT BE DUPLICATIVE OF FORD REPORTS).THE 14 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 2 ALLEGED INJURIES WERE ALL MINOR.SUBMITTED DURING PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE) 04-070, FORD'S RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER CONTAINED ABOUT 5,000 CONSUMER REPORTS (MORS) AND 8,700 FIELD REPORTS (CQIS).FORD REVIEWED THE COMPLAINTS AND CATEGORIZED THEM.THE MANUFACTURER REPORTS SHOWN ABOVE REPRESENT A COUNT OF UNIQUE VEHICLES THAT FORD CATEGORIZED AS ALLEGEDLY STALLING DUE TO A SUBJECT ENGINE COMPONENT ('A' CATEGORY, SEE FORD'S IR RESPONSE LETTER FOR FURTHER DETAIL); SOME OF THESE VEHICLES RECEIVED MULTIPLE REPORTS.ODI HAS NOT YET CONFIRMED FORD'S CATEGORIZATION OF THESE REPORTS, NOR HAS ODI CONFIRMED FORD'S CATEGORIZATION OF THE REMAINING REPORTS (WHICH FORD STATES DO NOT PERTAIN TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT).FORD SUBMITTED NEARLY 19,000 WARRANTY CLAIMS, MANY OF WHICH INVOLVED CLAIMS FOR A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB 04-13-08) AND FIELD SERVICE ACTION (FSA 03B05) WHICH FORD IDENTIFIED AS POTENTIAL REMEDIES FOR STALLING COMPLAINTS.ODI HAS NOT CONFIRMED THAT EITHER OF THESE ARE A REMEDY FOR ENGINE STALLING COMPLAINTS.SEVERAL OTHER DEALER COMMUNICATIONS RELATED TO ENGINE STALL WERE ALSO SUBMITTED AS WELL AS OVER 50 PRODUCT MODIFICATIONS, 15 OF WHICH INVOLVE REVISIONS TO THE SOFTWARE FOR THE ELECTRONIC ENGINE CONTROL UNIT.FURTHER INVESTIGATION IS REQUIRED AND ODI IS UPGRADING PE04-070 TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA).DURING THE EA, ODI WILL ESTABLISH AND UPDATE MANUFACTURER FAILURE REPORT COUNTS, FURTHER INVESTIGATE THE FREQUENCY AND TREND OF STALLING COMPLAINTS, AND DETERMINE THE SCOPE AND SAFETY IMPLICATION OF STALLING EVENTS.ODI WILL ALSO INVESTIGATE FORD'S REMEDIES, THEIR EFFECTIVENESS, AND WHETHER FURTHER ACTION IS REQUIRED.
Illustration