NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
159 reports100,000 miles · Mar 31, 2011
Suspension
SINCE NEW MY 2004 F 350 HAS HAD A BOUNCING ISSUE @ 38 TO 45 MPH REGUARDLESS OF ACCLERATION OR DECELLERATION ITS THERE NOW ITS BAD ENOUGH IT WILL SPILL DRINKS THAT ARE IN THE CUP HOLDER. HAVE WENT THROUGH NUMEROUS SETS/BRANDS OF TIRES INSTALLED NEW SHOCKS HAVE TRIED VARIOUS TIRE PRESSURE COMBOS. HAVE TAKEN IT BACK TO THE DEALERSH…
Read full complaint
SINCE NEW MY 2004 F 350 HAS HAD A BOUNCING ISSUE @ 38 TO 45 MPH REGUARDLESS OF ACCLERATION OR DECELLERATION ITS THERE NOW ITS BAD ENOUGH IT WILL SPILL DRINKS THAT ARE IN THE CUP HOLDER. HAVE WENT THROUGH NUMEROUS SETS/BRANDS OF TIRES INSTALLED NEW SHOCKS HAVE TRIED VARIOUS TIRE PRESSURE COMBOS. HAVE TAKEN IT BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP AND HAVE BEEN TOLD BY TO DIFFERENT DEALERS THAT ITS HOW THAT TRUCK RIDES??? IT DOES THE BOUNCING WETHER ITS EMPTY OR WHEN I HAVE 10,000 LBS IN TOW. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10393840
98,800 miles · Feb 25, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO BE RESTARTED AND WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE VEHICLE WAS DIAGNOSED AS THE FICM WIRING HARNESS NEEDING REPLACEMENT. THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE FAILURE OF THE FICM WIRING…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO BE RESTARTED AND WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE VEHICLE WAS DIAGNOSED AS THE FICM WIRING HARNESS NEEDING REPLACEMENT. THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE FAILURE OF THE FICM WIRING HARNESS CAUSED THE FUEL PUMP AND INJECTOR TO FAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURED WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 98,800.
NHTSA ODI #10384491
121,355 miles · Jan 5, 2011
Fuel System, Diesel
SUDDEN POWER LOSSES AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS RESULTING IN ENGINE SHUTTING OFF AND NOT BEING ABLE TO BE RESTARTED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10374729
123,000 miles · Oct 5, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. UPON ENTERING THE VEHICLE HE APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT EXTENDED TO THE FLOOR. HE STEPPED OUT OF THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED BRAKE FLUID LEAKING FROM UNDERNEATH. HE ALSO NOTICED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE COMPLETELY COVERED WITH RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT EXAMINED OR REPAIRED. TH…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350. UPON ENTERING THE VEHICLE HE APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT EXTENDED TO THE FLOOR. HE STEPPED OUT OF THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED BRAKE FLUID LEAKING FROM UNDERNEATH. HE ALSO NOTICED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE COMPLETELY COVERED WITH RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT EXAMINED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 123,000.
NHTSA ODI #10359292
50,051 miles · Sep 23, 2010
Tires
GENERAL TIRES - AMERITRAC MTS LT 235/85R16 - ON 9/23/2010 WE WERE DRIVING ON I-75 IN 2004 FORD F-350 SUPER DUTY DUALLY - THE LEFT FRONT TREAT SEPARATED FROM THE TIRE, THE TIRE DIDN'T LOOSE TIRE PRESSURE, BUT IT CAME APART. IT DAMAGED THE LEFT FRONT FENDER, FRONT BUMPER, AND DRIVER SIDE DOOR. THESE TIRES HAD OVER HALF OF THE T…
Read full complaint
GENERAL TIRES - AMERITRAC MTS LT 235/85R16 - ON 9/23/2010 WE WERE DRIVING ON I-75 IN 2004 FORD F-350 SUPER DUTY DUALLY - THE LEFT FRONT TREAT SEPARATED FROM THE TIRE, THE TIRE DIDN'T LOOSE TIRE PRESSURE, BUT IT CAME APART. IT DAMAGED THE LEFT FRONT FENDER, FRONT BUMPER, AND DRIVER SIDE DOOR. THESE TIRES HAD OVER HALF OF THE TREAD REMAINING. LUCKILY WE WERE ABLE TO KEEP CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10357235
38,000 miles · Aug 19, 2010
TiresCrash
ON 6-13-09 I HAD A TIRE EXPLODE ON MY 2004 FORD F350 SUPER DUTY PICKUP TRUCK WHILE DRIVING ON THE NORTHEAST EXTENSION OF THE PA TURNPIKE. WE WERE PULLING A 5TH WHEEL TRAILER LOADED WITH ATV'S AND MY HUSBAND AND I HAD OUR 11 YEAR OLD NIECE AND 12 YEAR OLD NEPHEW WITH US. WE STRUCK A MINIVAN. THE MINIVAN INCURRED DAMAGE TO PASSEN…
Read full complaint
ON 6-13-09 I HAD A TIRE EXPLODE ON MY 2004 FORD F350 SUPER DUTY PICKUP TRUCK WHILE DRIVING ON THE NORTHEAST EXTENSION OF THE PA TURNPIKE. WE WERE PULLING A 5TH WHEEL TRAILER LOADED WITH ATV'S AND MY HUSBAND AND I HAD OUR 11 YEAR OLD NIECE AND 12 YEAR OLD NEPHEW WITH US. WE STRUCK A MINIVAN. THE MINIVAN INCURRED DAMAGE TO PASSENGER SIDE REAR QUARTER PANEL. OUR TRUCK INCURRED DAMAGE TO THE DRIVER'S SIDE FRONT QUARTER PANEL, THE DRIVER'S SIDE FRONT DOOR, THE FRONT BUMPER, THE ABS SENSOR, AND THE RUNNING BOARD. THE TIRE WAS SENT TO A FORENSIC LAB AND THE REPORT INDICATES THAT THE GENERAL AMERICTECH TIRE WAS NOT ONLY MANUFACTURED INCORRECTLY BUT WAS ALSO DESIGNED INCORRECTLY. I HAD TO REPLACE 7 TIRES ON MY TRUCK AS I FELT THE AMERITECH'S WERE NOT SAFE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10350576
150,000 miles · Jul 16, 2010
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F350. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR FACILITY FOR ROUTINE BRAKE MAINTENANCE. THE MECHANIC ADVISED THAT THE REAR BACKING PLATES ON BOTH REAR WHEELS WERE COMPLETELY RUSTED AND WERE AFFECTING THE BRAKE PADS. THE MECHANIC WAS ABLE TO MAKE REPAIRS TO THE BRAKES. THE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F350. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR FACILITY FOR ROUTINE BRAKE MAINTENANCE. THE MECHANIC ADVISED THAT THE REAR BACKING PLATES ON BOTH REAR WHEELS WERE COMPLETELY RUSTED AND WERE AFFECTING THE BRAKE PADS. THE MECHANIC WAS ABLE TO MAKE REPAIRS TO THE BRAKES. THE MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE WITH THE CORROSION FAILURE. THE CONTACT STATED THE TRANSMISSION LINES WERE PREVIOUSLY REPLACED, AT HIS EXPENSE, DUE TO CORROSION. IN ADDITION, THE OIL PAN WAS ALSO CORRODED. THERE WERE NO FURTHER REPAIRS. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 150,000.
NHTSA ODI #10343609
121,000 miles · Mar 26, 2010
Engine And Engine CoolingFuel System, Gasoline
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F350. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY BEGAN TO SHAKE AND JERK FORWARD. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE EGR COOLER AND THREE FUEL INJECTORS WERE THE CAUSE FOR THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AT THAT TIME. L…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F350. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY BEGAN TO SHAKE AND JERK FORWARD. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE EGR COOLER AND THREE FUEL INJECTORS WERE THE CAUSE FOR THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AT THAT TIME. LATER, THE HIGH OIL PRESSURE PUMP AND OIL COOLER FAILED. THE VEHICLE WAS AWAITING FURTHER REPAIRS AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE CONTACT CALLED THE MANUFACTURER BUT WAS TOLD THAT SHE WOULD HAVE TO ASSUME ALL REPAIR COSTS AT HER EXPENSE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE APPROXIMATELY WAS 121,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 130,000.
NHTSA ODI #10322358
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
86,000 miles · Jan 15, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
2004 F350 DIESEL 6.0 ,EGR COOLER WENT OUT. I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HWY WHEN THIS OCCURED. CLOUDS OF SMOKE WENT OUT THE TAILPIPE, ENGINE OVERHEATING STRANDING ME IN THE CENTER LANE STOPPED BEFORE I COULD GET OVER TO THE SHOULDER. PASSERBY'S HELP ME PUSH MY TRUCK OFF A BUSY HWY. SMOKE WAS SO THICK I COULDNT NOR COULD OTHER DRIV…
Read full complaint
2004 F350 DIESEL 6.0 ,EGR COOLER WENT OUT. I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HWY WHEN THIS OCCURED. CLOUDS OF SMOKE WENT OUT THE TAILPIPE, ENGINE OVERHEATING STRANDING ME IN THE CENTER LANE STOPPED BEFORE I COULD GET OVER TO THE SHOULDER. PASSERBY'S HELP ME PUSH MY TRUCK OFF A BUSY HWY. SMOKE WAS SO THICK I COULDNT NOR COULD OTHER DRIVERS SEE AROUND ME. FORD HAS HAD NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ON THIS ENGINE AND PART,BUT HAVE FAILED TO RESPOND,OR THEY WAITING FOR A DEATH TO OCCUR. THE INTERNET IS FULL OF COMPLAINTS FOR THE EXACT SAME THING. LETTERS TO FORD MOTOR CO. AND MY LOCAL DEALER LEIF JOHNSON FORD WERE UNSUCCESSFUL. I'M NOT ABLE TO PAY THE ALMOST $3000 THE DEALER WANTS TO FIX THE PROBLEM. THIS IS AN OBVIOUS DEFECT ON FORD'S PART. VERY FUSTRATED AS I HAVE A EXPENSIVE TRUCK JUST PARKED FOR SEVERAL MONTHS IN MY DRIVEWAY. UPDATED 2/17/10 *CN UPDATED 02/22/10
NHTSA ODI #10299874
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