NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
31 reportsClear category filter67,000 miles · Apr 19, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 FORD MUSTANG. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE HAD A CRACKED MANIFOLD AND IT WAS LEAKING ANTIFREEZE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A MECHANIC WHO STATED THAT THE MANIFOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED HIM THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS OR WARR…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 FORD MUSTANG. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE HAD A CRACKED MANIFOLD AND IT WAS LEAKING ANTIFREEZE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A MECHANIC WHO STATED THAT THE MANIFOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED HIM THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS OR WARRANTIES AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 67,000.
NHTSA ODI #10396750
53,396 miles · Sep 16, 2006
Engine And Engine CoolingVisibility
ON JANUARY 3, 2005, THE HEATER CORE ON MY 1999 MUSTANG HAD TO BE COMPLETELY REPLACED, INCLUDING THE THERMOSTAT. THE WINDOWS HAD FOGGED UP BEFORE AND THE CAR SMELLED LIKE SYRUP BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST VENTS. THE HEATING CORE HAD TO BE REPLACED AND THE COOLANT HAD TO BE RECHARGED AND REPLACED ALSO THIS CAME UP TO $700 DOLLARS.…
Read full complaint
ON JANUARY 3, 2005, THE HEATER CORE ON MY 1999 MUSTANG HAD TO BE COMPLETELY REPLACED, INCLUDING THE THERMOSTAT. THE WINDOWS HAD FOGGED UP BEFORE AND THE CAR SMELLED LIKE SYRUP BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST VENTS. THE HEATING CORE HAD TO BE REPLACED AND THE COOLANT HAD TO BE RECHARGED AND REPLACED ALSO THIS CAME UP TO $700 DOLLARS. ON AUGUST 16 2005, 2 WEEKS AFTER CHANGING THE COOLANT THE WATER PUMP HAD TO BE REPLACED, ONCE AGAIN THE SYSTEM HAD TO BE FLUSHED THE COST WAS$400. ON JULY 2006 I HAD THE COOLANT SYSTEM FLUSHED AND CHANGED, 1 MONTH AFTER THE COOLANT WAS CHANGED THE WINDOWS STARTING FOGGING UP, I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE AND I WAS UNABLE TO GET A CLEAR VIEW OF THE ROAD DUE TO THE FOGGY WINDOWS, THE HEATING CORE ONCE AGAIN HAS TO BE REPLACED, IS GOING TO COST ME ANOTHER $600 DOLLARS TO FIX THIS, I HAVE ALL OF THE PAPERWORK FROM FIRESTONE, I HAVE KEPT UP WITH ALL OF THE MAINTENANCE REQUIRED BY THE MANUFACTURER. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10168452
65,000 miles · Sep 6, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
DT: CALLER'S SAYS VEHICLE HAD A CRACKED MANIFOLD INTAKE. CALLER BELIEVED THIS PART SHOULD NOT BREAK DOWN. DEALER AND MANUFACTURER DID OFFER HIM ANY HELP. CALLER HAD TO REPLACE THE GASKET TWO YEARS AGO, AND IT WAS GETTING WORSE ALL THE TIME. *AK *NM
NHTSA ODI #10130034
59,000 miles · Mar 17, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAVE A 1999 MUSTANG 3.8L-V6. RECENTLY, THE CAR BEGAN TO EXPEL A WHITE VAPOR FROM THE TAILPIPE WHEN THE ENGINE IS HOT, ALONG WITH A VIBRATION NOISE. THIS HAS HAPPENED AS MANY AS 2-3 TIMES PER DAY. I TOOK THE CAR TO A FORD DEALER FOR SERVICE AND REPLACED AN AIR PUMP. THIS DID NOT CORRECT THE PROBLEM. I DID SOME RESEARCH ON …
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 1999 MUSTANG 3.8L-V6. RECENTLY, THE CAR BEGAN TO EXPEL A WHITE VAPOR FROM THE TAILPIPE WHEN THE ENGINE IS HOT, ALONG WITH A VIBRATION NOISE. THIS HAS HAPPENED AS MANY AS 2-3 TIMES PER DAY. I TOOK THE CAR TO A FORD DEALER FOR SERVICE AND REPLACED AN AIR PUMP. THIS DID NOT CORRECT THE PROBLEM. I DID SOME RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET AND FOUND THAT MANY PEOPLE HAVE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM WHICH TURNED OUT TO BE DUE TO BLOWN HEAD GASKETS. I DISCUSSED THAT ISSUE WITH THE DEALER REPRESENTATIVE AND THEY SAID THAT THERE IS NO RECORD OF THAT KIND OF PROBLEM WITH A 1999 MUSTANG. I HAVE FOUND THAT THIS IS NOT TRUE.
NHTSA ODI #10062466
Mileage unknown · May 20, 2003
Engine And Engine CoolingStructure
THE EXHAUST MANIFOLD WAS CRACKED WHEN THE VEHICLE STARTED TO LOSE POWER AND MADE A LOUD NOISE AS IF THE MUFFLER HAD FALLEN OFF. ALSO, THERE WAS A RUST SPOT ON THE ROOF OF THE VEHICLE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10020223
Mileage unknown · May 7, 2003
Engine And Engine Cooling
WHEN THE CONSUMER STARTED HIS VEHILE IN VEHICLE IN THE MORNING IT WAS VERY LOUD FOR ABOUT 15-20 MINUTES. HE ALSO STATED THAT WHEN HE MADE A RIGHT TURN THERE WAS A LOUD KNOCKING NOISE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A MECHANIC WHO THOUGHT THE PROBLEM WAS THE MANIFOLD HEATER VALVE. *NLM
NHTSA ODI #10019397
50,000 miles · Apr 30, 2003
Engine And Engine Cooling
CHECK ENGINE LIGHT STAYS ON CONSTANTLY. ENGINES IDLES ROUGH AND STALES AT ABOUT 1500 RPM'S. IF YOU TURN ON THE HEATER OR AC. THE PROBLEM GETS WORSE. I SCANNED THE CAR AND GOT A MISFIRE CODE AND AN EGR CODE. REPLACED ALL IGNITION PARTS AND ALL EMISSION PARTS AND THE CODE AND PROBLEM WON'T GO AWAY. HELP PLEASE. ANY INFO CAN BE SEN…
Read full complaint
CHECK ENGINE LIGHT STAYS ON CONSTANTLY. ENGINES IDLES ROUGH AND STALES AT ABOUT 1500 RPM'S. IF YOU TURN ON THE HEATER OR AC. THE PROBLEM GETS WORSE. I SCANNED THE CAR AND GOT A MISFIRE CODE AND AN EGR CODE. REPLACED ALL IGNITION PARTS AND ALL EMISSION PARTS AND THE CODE AND PROBLEM WON'T GO AWAY. HELP PLEASE. ANY INFO CAN BE SENT TO SKIPPEMA@YAHOO.COM THANKS
NHTSA ODI #10016740
Mileage unknown · Aug 8, 2002
Engine And Engine Cooling
CAR STALLS WHEN STARTING ON A COLD ENGINE REGARDLESS OF OUTSIDE TEMP. SOMETHING STICKS UNDER HOOD. IF YOU HOLD YOUR FOOT ON ACCELERATOR, IT WILL STAY RUNNING BUT WILL ABRUPTLY DIE WHEN LET OFF PEDAL. EVEN IF YOU START DRIVING, IT CAN STILL STICK, CAUSING ENGINE SHUTOFF WHILE MOVING RESULTING IN LOSS OF P. STEERING, BRAKES, ETC.,…
Read full complaint
CAR STALLS WHEN STARTING ON A COLD ENGINE REGARDLESS OF OUTSIDE TEMP. SOMETHING STICKS UNDER HOOD. IF YOU HOLD YOUR FOOT ON ACCELERATOR, IT WILL STAY RUNNING BUT WILL ABRUPTLY DIE WHEN LET OFF PEDAL. EVEN IF YOU START DRIVING, IT CAN STILL STICK, CAUSING ENGINE SHUTOFF WHILE MOVING RESULTING IN LOSS OF P. STEERING, BRAKES, ETC., HAS BEEN IN UNDER WARRANTY ONCE, WAS NOT FIXED. DOES THIS ON ABOUT 1 OUT OF 10 COLD STARTS RANDOMLY. HAVE HEARD NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS FROM OTHER MUSTANG OWNERS. NEEDS TO BE A RECALL !*AK
NHTSA ODI #765380
Mileage unknown · Aug 5, 2002
Engine And Engine CoolingPower TrainSuspension
VEHICLE WOULD VIBRATE SEVERELY WHEN DRIVING. INTERMITTENTLY TRANSMISSION WOULD NOT GO INTO GEAR. DEALER CONTACTED.*AK THE DEALER COULD NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE TRANSMISSION HAD NO LEAKS BUT WAS OUT OF TRANSMISSION FLUID. THIS VEHICLE HAS HAD 2 BLOWN HEAD GASKETS, THE REAR SEAL IN THE MOTOR WAS REPLACED, THE HEATER CORE, THE TRA…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE WOULD VIBRATE SEVERELY WHEN DRIVING. INTERMITTENTLY TRANSMISSION WOULD NOT GO INTO GEAR. DEALER CONTACTED.*AK THE DEALER COULD NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE TRANSMISSION HAD NO LEAKS BUT WAS OUT OF TRANSMISSION FLUID. THIS VEHICLE HAS HAD 2 BLOWN HEAD GASKETS, THE REAR SEAL IN THE MOTOR WAS REPLACED, THE HEATER CORE, THE TRANSMISSION, AND THE CATALYTIC CONVERTOR HAVE ALL BEEN REPLACED. *JG
NHTSA ODI #8015512
Mileage unknown · Aug 3, 2002
Engine And Engine Cooling
CAR WILL KILL AT 10 MPH ALL OF A SUDDEN AND LEAVE ME WIT NO BRAKES OR STEERING. *AK
NHTSA ODI #765153
Official recalls
3Oct 30, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSIONS. IF A VEHICLE IS PARKED WITH THE PARKING BRAKE NOT FULLY APPLIED AND NOT IN FIRST GEAR, AS DIRECTED IN THE OWNER GUIDE, AND THE SELF ADJUSTMENT PAWL SUBSEQUENTLY SKIPS ONE OR TWO TEETH, THE VEHICLE COULD MOVE ON SOME GRADES.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AND A VEHICLE CRASH WITHOUT PRIOR WARNING.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE PARKING BRAKE CONTROL AND INSTALL A PLATE OR OVER-BRACKET TO THE CONTROL TO LOCK THE SELF ADJUST MECHANISM IN POSITION FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENT.
Sep 20, 1999
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE SEAT BELT RETRACTOR MAY HAVE A PIN SHAFT IN THE SWITCHABLE ELR/ALR MECHANISM THAT IS INCORRECTLY FORMED. IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES, THE SWITCHING MECHANISM COULD BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL, PREVENTING THE SEAT BELT WEBBING FROM BEING EXTRACTED FROM THE RETRACTOR. IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE THAT MALFUNCTION OF THE MECHANISM COULD PREVENT THE BELT FROM BEING SWITCHED INTO THE ALR MODE. THE ELR MECHANISM IS NOT AFFECTED BY THIS CONDITION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE MECHANISM MALFUNCTIONS AND DOES NOT ALLOW THE WEBBING TO BE EXTRACTED, THE LAP AND SHOULDER BELT COULD NOT BE WORN BY A VEHICLE OCCUPANT. IN THE EVENT THAT THE MECHANISM DOES NOT ALLOW THE ALR MODE TO BE ENGAGED, THE OPERATOR MAY BE UNABLE TO PROPERLY INSTALL A CHILD SEAT IN THAT SEATING POSITION.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE LAP AND SHOULDER BELT ASSEMBLIES. ASSEMBLIES WITH JULIAN DATE CODES OF 200 THROUGH 223 ARE SUSPECT AND WILL BE REPLACED.
Mar 30, 1999
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN 1997-1999 RHD EXPLORER EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L OHV/SOHC ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MAY 29, 1996 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1998-1999 EXPLORER/MOUNTAINEERS EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L OHV/SOHC OR 5.0L ENGINES OR 1998-1999 RANGERS EQUIPPED WITH 2.5L, 3.0L FFV/EFI OR 4.0L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM JANUARY 5, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1998-1999 MUSTANGS EQUIPPED WITH 3.8L, 4.6L 2-VALVE OR 4-VALVE ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1999 F250/F350/F450/F550 (OVER 8,500 LBS.) TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH 5.4L OR 6.8L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; AND 1999 F-53 STRIPPED CHASSIS EQUIPPED WITH 5.4L OR 6.8L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999. A CRUISE CONTROL CABLE CAN INTERFERE WITH THE SPEED CONTROL SERVO PULLEY AND NOT ALLOW THE THROTTLE TO RETURN TO IDLE WHEN DISENGAGING THE CRUISE CONTROL.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE CRUISE CONTROL IS USED AND THIS CONDITION IS PRESENT, A STUCK THROTTLE COULD RESULT, WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT IN A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE CRUISE CONTROL CABLES. AT THE PRESENT TIME, THE REPLACEMENT CABLES ARE NOT AVAILABLE. CUSTOMERS ARE BEING ADVISED NOT TO USE THE CRUISE CONTROL SYSTEM UNTIL A REPLACEMENT CAN BE MADE.
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.
Illustration