NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
21 reportsClear category filter92,400 miles · Jul 25, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
(7/23/06) 1999 FORD MUSTANG GT, 4.6L BLEW SPARK PLUG FOR THE THIRD TIME NOW. THE FIRST TIME WAS BACK IN 2005 WHILE DRIVING ON THE 15 FREEWAY HEADING SOUTH AT ABOUT 8:00 PM. STOP TO GET GAS AND UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE TO CONTINUE MY WAY HOME IT MADE LOUD POP AND THEN CONTINUED TO POP, POP, POP. AT FIRST I THOUGHT I HAD AN EXHA…
Read full complaint
(7/23/06) 1999 FORD MUSTANG GT, 4.6L BLEW SPARK PLUG FOR THE THIRD TIME NOW. THE FIRST TIME WAS BACK IN 2005 WHILE DRIVING ON THE 15 FREEWAY HEADING SOUTH AT ABOUT 8:00 PM. STOP TO GET GAS AND UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE TO CONTINUE MY WAY HOME IT MADE LOUD POP AND THEN CONTINUED TO POP, POP, POP. AT FIRST I THOUGHT I HAD AN EXHAUST MANIFOLD PROBLEM, BUT UPON THE REPAIR SHOP INSPECTION OF THE VEHICLE THEY NOTED THAT THE NUMBER ONE SPARK PLUG HAD BLEW OUT OF THE PISTON. THEY REPAIRED IT FOR ABOUT $ THE SECOND TIME WAS ABOUT 6 MONTHS AGO WHEN THE NUMBER TWO SPARK PLUG (ALL THIS BEING ON THE DRIVERS SIDE) BLEW OUT. NO DAMAGE TO THE THREADS AND A NEW SET OF SPARK PLUGS WERE PUT INTO THE VEHICLE ALL AROUND. THEN ON SUNDAY EVENING, JULY 23RD 2006, THE SAME NUMBER 2 SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT AGAIN; THIS TIME TAKING ALL THE THREADS WITH IT. I HAD TO HAVE THE CAR TOWED TO MY PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND NOW I AM IN THE PROCESS OF FINDING A REPAIR SHOP TO RE-THREAD THE PISTON. I AM SURE THEY WILL HAVE TO GET A NEW COIL AS WELL; SINCE IT BROKE OFF AT THE PLACE OF WERE IT IS BOLTED TO THE HEAD. I CALLED FORD MOTOR COMPANY ON TUESDAY, JULY 25TH 2006 AND SPOKE TO CUSTOMER SERVICE REP. AND BASICALLY WAS GIVEN A NOT OUR PROBLEM ATTITUDE. THIS IS APPALLING THAT SUCH A LARGE COMPANY AS FORD WILL NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM AND FIX IT! I AM A SINGLE MOTHER AND CAN NOT AFFORD TO HAVE MY CAR FIXED AT OVER $3000.00! I AM NOT HAPPY WITH FORD AND WILL NOT BUY FROM THEM AGAIN. I WAS A HUGE FORD FAN; WHEN ANYONE WOULD TRY TO DISCREDIT THEM I WOULD BACK THEM ALL THE WAY! NOT ANY MORE THEY DON'T BACK THEIR CUSTOMERS. I GUESS FORD MOTOR COMPANY HAS NO LOYALTY TO THEIR CUSTOMERS WHAT SO EVER! SO I SHALL NO LONGER BE LOYAL TO THEM. I WILL BE BUYING A CHEVY OR OTHER VEHICLE THAT HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH THE FORD NAME, AS SOON AS THIS IS FIXED. SHE'S BEING TRADED IN ASAP! *JB
NHTSA ODI #10163438
Mileage unknown · Mar 11, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
HTTP://WWW.CONSUMERAFFAIRS.COM/AUTOMOTIVE/FORD_MANIFOLDS.HTML I FOUND INFO WITH THE ABOVE LINK. WE HAVE A 1999 35TH ANN. EDITION MUSTANG . THE PLASTIC MANIFOLD CRACKED AND SINCE IT IS WITHIN 7 YEARS OF PURCHASE THE DEALER TOWED AND IS FIXING FREE WITH THE INFO FROM THE LINK ABOVE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10152481
Mileage unknown · Mar 8, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD CRACKED AT THERMOSTAT HOUSING, THUS ALLOWING ANTI-FREEZE TO LEAK ONTO THE ENGINE. I MUST PAY FOR THE PARTS AND LABOR TO REPLACE THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AT + $350.00 FOR TOTAL REPAIR OF PROBLEM THAT FORD HAS BEEN AWARE OF FOR YEARS !!! *JB
NHTSA ODI #10152205
37,500 miles · Nov 10, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
99 FORD MUSTANG GT. 4.6L ENGINE. SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT. DEFECTIVE HEAD. COST ME $3000. I UNDERSTAND A CA LAWYER HAS FILED A LAWSUIT OR COMPLAINT AGAINST THIS DEFECT. I WANT IN ON THE ACTION. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10142419
75,000 miles · Oct 17, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY CAR IS LOSING COOLANT THROUGH A CRACK IN THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD. FORD WILL NOT REPAIR IT UNDER ANY WARRANTY. IT IS A DESIGN FLAW THAT FORD SHOULD TAKE CARE OF! ALSO MY CAR SURGES IN RPMS WHEN FIRST STARTING AND SHIFTING INTO DRIVE,,,VERY DANGEROUS!!!!! *NM
NHTSA ODI #10139866
87,525 miles · Oct 3, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
1) A TICKING NOISE BEGAN COMING FROM THE UPPER MIDDLE OF THE ENGINE. AFTER A MONTH, 2) THE TICKING BECAME A 'TAPPING' THAT BECAME INCREASINGLY LOUDER. ENROUTE TO HAVE IT EXAMINED BY A LOCAL PERFORMANCE SHOP, THERE WAS A LOUD SOUND SIMILAR TO A GUN SHOT AND AN INSTANT LOSS IN POWER. THIS OCCURRED AT 2000 RPM. UPON EXAMINATI…
Read full complaint
1) A TICKING NOISE BEGAN COMING FROM THE UPPER MIDDLE OF THE ENGINE. AFTER A MONTH, 2) THE TICKING BECAME A 'TAPPING' THAT BECAME INCREASINGLY LOUDER. ENROUTE TO HAVE IT EXAMINED BY A LOCAL PERFORMANCE SHOP, THERE WAS A LOUD SOUND SIMILAR TO A GUN SHOT AND AN INSTANT LOSS IN POWER. THIS OCCURRED AT 2000 RPM. UPON EXAMINATION, THE SPARK PLUG HAD BEEN EJECTED FROM THE 2ND FROM THE LAST CYLINDER ON THE PASS. SIDE BANK. SUCH FORCE WAS EXHIBITED THAT THE MOUNTING TAB OF THE IGNITION COIL WAS BROKEN AND THE COIL WAS SHATTERED. UPON EXAMINATION OF THE HEAD ITSELF, THE PLUG THREADS WERE COMPLETELY STRIPPED. 3)TRUE BLUE PERFORMANCE, A MUSTANG SPECIALTY SHOP, EXAMINED THE PARTS AND CONCLUDED THAT THE ONLY REMEDY VIABLE WAS TO REPLACE THE HEAD, PLUG, AND COIL. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10138379
53,564 miles · Jul 26, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
CRACK ON THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD AT THE THERMOSTAT HOUSING ALLOWING ANTI-FREEZE TO LEAK ON THE ENGINE. THE INTAKE MANIFOLD MUST BE REPLACED AT MY EXPENSE. FORD IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM AND HAS RECALLED THE FAULTY INTAKE MANIFOLDS ON ALL FLEET VEHICLES BUT REFUSES TO DO ANYTHING FOR PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES. THIS IS NOT R…
Read full complaint
CRACK ON THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD AT THE THERMOSTAT HOUSING ALLOWING ANTI-FREEZE TO LEAK ON THE ENGINE. THE INTAKE MANIFOLD MUST BE REPLACED AT MY EXPENSE. FORD IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM AND HAS RECALLED THE FAULTY INTAKE MANIFOLDS ON ALL FLEET VEHICLES BUT REFUSES TO DO ANYTHING FOR PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES. THIS IS NOT RIGHT!!!
NHTSA ODI #10130152
53,564 miles · Jul 26, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
CRACK ON THE PLASTIC INTAKE MINFOLD AT THE THERMOSTAT HOUSING ALLOWING ANTI-FREEZE TO LEAK ON THE ENGINE. THE INTAKE MANIFOLD MUST BE REPLACED AT MY EXPENSE. FORD IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM AND HAS RECALLED THE FAULTY INTAKE MINIFOLDS ON ALL FLEET VEHICLES BUT REFUSES TO DO ANYTHING FOR PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES. THIS IS NOT RI…
Read full complaint
CRACK ON THE PLASTIC INTAKE MINFOLD AT THE THERMOSTAT HOUSING ALLOWING ANTI-FREEZE TO LEAK ON THE ENGINE. THE INTAKE MANIFOLD MUST BE REPLACED AT MY EXPENSE. FORD IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM AND HAS RECALLED THE FAULTY INTAKE MINIFOLDS ON ALL FLEET VEHICLES BUT REFUSES TO DO ANYTHING FOR PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES. THIS IS NOT RIGHT!!!
NHTSA ODI #10130151
43,195 miles · Jan 17, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAVE A CRACKED INTAKE MANIFOLD ON MY 1999 FORD MUSTANG GT WITH A 4.6 L ENGINE. IT HAVE GAINED KNOWLEDGE THAT THIS HAS BEEN A COMMON DEFECT ON THIS ENGINE SINCE THE 1996 MODEL YEAR ON ALMOST EVERY FORD MOTORS VEHICLE WITH THIS ENGINE SETUP. FORD HAS NOT ISSUED A RECALL ON THIS KNOWN DEFECTIVE PART AND DOES NOT ADMIT TO THIS P…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A CRACKED INTAKE MANIFOLD ON MY 1999 FORD MUSTANG GT WITH A 4.6 L ENGINE. IT HAVE GAINED KNOWLEDGE THAT THIS HAS BEEN A COMMON DEFECT ON THIS ENGINE SINCE THE 1996 MODEL YEAR ON ALMOST EVERY FORD MOTORS VEHICLE WITH THIS ENGINE SETUP. FORD HAS NOT ISSUED A RECALL ON THIS KNOWN DEFECTIVE PART AND DOES NOT ADMIT TO THIS PROBLEM IN THEIR VEHICLES. UPON CONTACTING THEIR CUSTOMER SERVICE, THEY WILL NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE ON THE REPAIR THAT WILL COST THEIR INDIVIDUAL CUSTOMERS HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS TO REPAIR AND REPLACE. I FIND THIS UNACCEPTABLE FROM A COMPANY THAT MARKETS THEIR QUALITY TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WHILE NOT FESSING UP TO A MANUFACTURERS DEFECT THAT HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN YEARS. * CB
NHTSA ODI #10054325
56,650 miles · Oct 6, 2003
Engine And Engine Cooling
CAR STALLS WHEN SLOWING TO A STOP AND HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES. TOOK THE CAR TO FORD AND CLEANED THE THROTTLE BODY AND REFLASHED THE COMPUTER. THE PROBLEM CAME BACK SEVERAL DAYS LATER AND CHANGED THE IDLE AIR CONTROL VALVE YET THE PROBLEM STILL ARISES. WHEN SLOWING TO A STOP THE RPM DROP TO 500 RPM AND THEN BOUNCED BACK U…
Read full complaint
CAR STALLS WHEN SLOWING TO A STOP AND HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES. TOOK THE CAR TO FORD AND CLEANED THE THROTTLE BODY AND REFLASHED THE COMPUTER. THE PROBLEM CAME BACK SEVERAL DAYS LATER AND CHANGED THE IDLE AIR CONTROL VALVE YET THE PROBLEM STILL ARISES. WHEN SLOWING TO A STOP THE RPM DROP TO 500 RPM AND THEN BOUNCED BACK UP TO AN IDLE AT 700 RPM. OTHER TIMES THAT IT WILL DROP BELOW 500 RPM, AND THE CAR STARTS TO STALL. *LA
NHTSA ODI #10041289
NHTSA investigations
1DP05005 · 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