Illustration1) SQUEAK IN STEERING 2) SAME. 3) REPLACE 2 TIE RODS ON FRONT END. CAR HAS 37,000 MILES ON IT. *NM
2002 Ford Mustang Gt
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2002 Ford Mustang Gt do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 51.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Mustang Gt years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
130–25K
925–50K
650–75K
675–100K
7100–150K
0150K+
41 reports with mileage · 7 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 16 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Seat Belts. Review the 8 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
5 crash reports1 fire reports3 injury reports
What owners actually said
48 reportsLEMON LAW VEHICLE. 2002 MUSTANG CONVERTIBLE. *JB
COMING OUT OF A RED LIGHT, I HEARD THE SOUND OF COMPRESSED AIR BEING BLOWN OUT. I IMMEDIATELY PARKED IN A LOCAL STORE PARKING LOT AND GOT TOWED TO A LOCAL PEP-BOYS. PEP-BOYS INDICATED THAT ONE OF MY SPARK PLUGS HAD BLOWN OUT AND THAT THE THREADING ON THE HEAD WAS DAMAGED. HOWEVER, THEY INDICATED THAT THEY DID NOT DO THAT TYPE OF…
Read full complaint
COMING OUT OF A RED LIGHT, I HEARD THE SOUND OF COMPRESSED AIR BEING BLOWN OUT. I IMMEDIATELY PARKED IN A LOCAL STORE PARKING LOT AND GOT TOWED TO A LOCAL PEP-BOYS. PEP-BOYS INDICATED THAT ONE OF MY SPARK PLUGS HAD BLOWN OUT AND THAT THE THREADING ON THE HEAD WAS DAMAGED. HOWEVER, THEY INDICATED THAT THEY DID NOT DO THAT TYPE OF REPAIR AND RECOMMENDED THAT I TAKE IT TO A FORD DEALER. THE FIRST TIME I CONTACTED FORD WAS WHEN I TOWED MY CAR TO THE DEALER FOR REPAIR. AFTER PERFORMING AN INSPECTION, THEY INDICATED THAT THE ONE OF MY SPARK PLUGS HAD BLOWN OUT AND THAT THE THREADING ON THE HEAD WAS DAMAGED. FORD INDICATED THAT THERE WERE TWO METHODS OF FIXING THE PROBLEM: 1.) I COULD REPLACE THE ENGINE HEAD (AND ASSOCIATED HARDWARE) ON THE SIDE THAT BLEW OUT. THIS OPTION WAS ESTIMATED AT APPROXIMATELY $3200.00. THIS OPTION HOWEVER ONLY INCLUDED 1 YR. WARRANTY ON THE SIDE THAT WOULD BE REPLACED. IN ADDITION, FORD WOULD NOT GUARANTEE THAT THE SAME PROBLEM COULDN'T OCCUR ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ENGINE OR TO ANOTHER SPARK PLUG. 2.) THE OTHER OPTION FORD RECOMMENDED WAS TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE ENGINE. THIS OPTION WOULD COST APPROX. $4565.00. THIS OPTION INCLUDED 3-YR OR 36,000 MILES OF WARRANTY ON THE ENGINE. THIS IS THE OPTION THAT I CHOSE. PRIOR TO TAKING THE CAR OUT OF THE DEALER, I ASKED THE SERVICE TECHINITIAN IF THERE WAS ANYTHING THAT I COULD DO TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN. HE INDICATED THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THAT I COULD DO. FURTHERMORE, HE INDICATED THAT THEY HAD SEEN THIS PROBLEM BEFORE. HE EXPLAINED THAT THEY HAD SEEN THESE TYPES OF FAILURES ON FORD TRUCKS LIKE THE F-150 AND SPECIALLY THE F-250.
WHILE ON DRY PAVEMENT AND ENTERING THE HIGHWAY BEHIND TWO VEHICLES CONSUMER'S VEHICLE VEERED OFF THE ROAD, HITTING THE SIDE OF AN EMBANKMENT. VEHICLE CONTINUED AND VEERED ONTO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RAMP. AFTER VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED REAR ROTOR BROKE ALONG WITH BENDING OF THE REAR AXLE. THE TERMINOLOGY WAS DESCRIBED AS TH…
Read full complaint
WHILE ON DRY PAVEMENT AND ENTERING THE HIGHWAY BEHIND TWO VEHICLES CONSUMER'S VEHICLE VEERED OFF THE ROAD, HITTING THE SIDE OF AN EMBANKMENT. VEHICLE CONTINUED AND VEERED ONTO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RAMP. AFTER VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED REAR ROTOR BROKE ALONG WITH BENDING OF THE REAR AXLE. THE TERMINOLOGY WAS DESCRIBED AS THE MUSTANG WIGGLE OR SHUFFLE. A RECOMMENDATION OF REPLACING TIRES BY USING FALCON BRAND AND WIDEN REAR WHEELS. *AK THIS SEEMS TO BE A PROBLEM WITH THE MUSTANGS SINCE 1982. THEY ARE TO LIGHT IN THE REAR. *BF
I WAS DRIVING AND ALL OF SUDDEN THE CAR LOST ALL POWER WHICH I COULD NOT TURN OR BRAKE AND I ALMOST HIT THE PILLAR OF A BRIDGE. TOOK IT TO FORD AND SAID THEY DID NOT FIND ANY PROBLEMS. THE TRANSMISSION HAS BEEN REBUILT BECAUSE OF GRINDING IN TRANSMISSION. IT WAS BUILT 10,000 MILES AGO, IT STARTED DOING IT AGAIN. ALSO I HAVE TAL…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING AND ALL OF SUDDEN THE CAR LOST ALL POWER WHICH I COULD NOT TURN OR BRAKE AND I ALMOST HIT THE PILLAR OF A BRIDGE. TOOK IT TO FORD AND SAID THEY DID NOT FIND ANY PROBLEMS. THE TRANSMISSION HAS BEEN REBUILT BECAUSE OF GRINDING IN TRANSMISSION. IT WAS BUILT 10,000 MILES AGO, IT STARTED DOING IT AGAIN. ALSO I HAVE TALKED TO OTHER MUSTANG OWNERS HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM WHERE THE CAMSHAFT POSITION SENSOR CODES ARE BEING THROWN FROM THE COMPUTER. NOBODY HAS FIGURED IT OUT YET. I TOOK THE CAR TO FORD, THEY TOLD ME THEY COULDN'T FIND WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE CAR...THEY WOULD HAVE TO TAKE IT APART. DIDN'T DO THAT BECAUSE I COULDN'T AFFORD IT. I DON'T UNDERSTAND, THE CAR ONLY HAD 49,000 MILES ON IT, I EXPECT THE CAR NOT TO GIVE ME THIS MUCH TROUBLE. *JB
I WAS DRIVING THROUGH A CONSTRUCTION SITE. THE VEHICLE WAS STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT ABOUT THE 4TH OR 5TH CAR BACK. I DROVE FORWARD AND AS I WAS COMING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION WHERE THE WAS A CHANGE IN ROAD HEIGHT OF ABOUT 4 TO 5 INCHES. MY ENGINE CROSS MEMBER BOTTOMED OUT ON THE ROAD AND CAUSED MY AIRBAGS TO DEPLOY. I WAS NOT…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING THROUGH A CONSTRUCTION SITE. THE VEHICLE WAS STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT ABOUT THE 4TH OR 5TH CAR BACK. I DROVE FORWARD AND AS I WAS COMING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION WHERE THE WAS A CHANGE IN ROAD HEIGHT OF ABOUT 4 TO 5 INCHES. MY ENGINE CROSS MEMBER BOTTOMED OUT ON THE ROAD AND CAUSED MY AIRBAGS TO DEPLOY. I WAS NOT TRAVELING VERY FAST, AT THE MOST 15 MPH. NO OTHER DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE OCCURRED EITHER. *JB
WHILE DRIVING, CLUTCH AND BRAKE PRESSED CAR COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN WHILE APPROACHING TRAFFIC, LEAVING THE CONSUMER WITH NO STEERING OR BRAKE POWER TO HANDLE THE CAR. CAR IMPACTED SUV. VEHICLE TOWED TO FORD DEALER.*AK
THROW OUT BEARING HAS BEEN REPLACED 1 TIME. THE SECOND TIME, FORD MOTOR COMPANY 800 NUMBER WAS CALLED AND REPORTED. DEALER HAD CAR ALL DAY. AT 4:00 PM WE WERE CALLED AND INSTRUCTED THE CAR WAS READY-- COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM. THE SQUEAL WAS GONE. RETURNED LAST IN THE WEEK. DEALERSHIP DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM TO BE THROW OUT BEARIN…
Read full complaint
THROW OUT BEARING HAS BEEN REPLACED 1 TIME. THE SECOND TIME, FORD MOTOR COMPANY 800 NUMBER WAS CALLED AND REPORTED. DEALER HAD CAR ALL DAY. AT 4:00 PM WE WERE CALLED AND INSTRUCTED THE CAR WAS READY-- COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM. THE SQUEAL WAS GONE. RETURNED LAST IN THE WEEK. DEALERSHIP DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM TO BE THROW OUT BEARING AGAIN. CAR NOW HAS 40,000 MILES. I BELIEVE THIS IS THE 3RD TIME THE BEARING WILL BE REPLACED. CAR DRIVEN 80% ON INTERSTATE BY MIDDLE AGED WOMAN. *NM
BRAKING SYSTEM INOPERABLE. *JB
2002 FORD MUSTANG 5 SPEED TRANSMISSION PROBLEM. THE TREMEC 3650 TRANSMISSION HAS A FLAW TERMED "COLD GEAR CLASH" WHICH RESULTS IN GRINDING, HARD SHIFTS. HUNDREDS OF MUSTANG OWNERS ARE GETTING THE RUN AROUND BY FORD. WE ARE BEING TOLD THAT THIS IS "NORMAL." "NO EFFECT ON PERFORMANCE OR DURABILITY." *AK
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
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
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.