NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Suspension complaints
962 reportsClear category filter75,350 miles · Apr 14, 2008
Suspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. WHILE DRIVING 5 MPH, SHE HEARD A RATTLING NOISE COMING FROM THE TIRE. THE CONTACTS HUSBAND INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT THE DRIVER SIDECOIL SPRING BROKE AND PUNCTURED THE TIRE. AS OF APRIL 14, 2008, THE DEALER HAD NOT INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. THERE IS A RECALL FOR SUSPENSION: F…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. WHILE DRIVING 5 MPH, SHE HEARD A RATTLING NOISE COMING FROM THE TIRE. THE CONTACTS HUSBAND INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT THE DRIVER SIDECOIL SPRING BROKE AND PUNCTURED THE TIRE. AS OF APRIL 14, 2008, THE DEALER HAD NOT INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. THERE IS A RECALL FOR SUSPENSION: FRONT: SPRINGS: COIL SPRINGS (NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID #04V332000) HOWEVER HER VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 75,350.
NHTSA ODI #10224495
88,228 miles · Apr 14, 2008
Suspension
WHILE SITTING IN MY DRIVEWAY, IMMEDIATELY UPON PLACING THE CAR IN REVERSE, THE FRONT RIGHT COIL SPRING BROKE, PUNCTURING MY TIRE. THE CAR WAS REQUIRED TO BE TOWED AND I AM NOW PAYING FOR BOTH SIDES OF THE CAR TO HAVE THE SPRINGS REPLACED INCLUDING STRUTS AND BEARINGS IN ADDITION TO REPLACING THE TIRE. THIS IS A RECALLED ITEM …
Read full complaint
WHILE SITTING IN MY DRIVEWAY, IMMEDIATELY UPON PLACING THE CAR IN REVERSE, THE FRONT RIGHT COIL SPRING BROKE, PUNCTURING MY TIRE. THE CAR WAS REQUIRED TO BE TOWED AND I AM NOW PAYING FOR BOTH SIDES OF THE CAR TO HAVE THE SPRINGS REPLACED INCLUDING STRUTS AND BEARINGS IN ADDITION TO REPLACING THE TIRE. THIS IS A RECALLED ITEM IN THE 2001 TAURUS AND FORD HAS NOT BEEN RECALLED THE 2002. I WAS EXTREMELY FORTUNATE THAT THE FAILURE DID NOT OCCUR WHILE DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10224426
105,032 miles · Apr 13, 2008
Suspension
FORD ISSUED A RECALL ON ITS TAURUS THAT ENDED WITH 2001 MODELS. THE NHTSA ACTION # IS PE04044. IT DESCRIBES FAILING COIL SPRINGS THAT CAN CAUSE TIRES TO BE TORN UP. I HAVE HAD THIS HAPPEN NOW TO MY 2002. THE CAR WAS IN THE GARAGE AND BEING LOADED WITH SOME THINGS MY DAUGHTER WAS TAKING BACK TO COLLEGE AFTER THE WEEKEND. THERE WA…
Read full complaint
FORD ISSUED A RECALL ON ITS TAURUS THAT ENDED WITH 2001 MODELS. THE NHTSA ACTION # IS PE04044. IT DESCRIBES FAILING COIL SPRINGS THAT CAN CAUSE TIRES TO BE TORN UP. I HAVE HAD THIS HAPPEN NOW TO MY 2002. THE CAR WAS IN THE GARAGE AND BEING LOADED WITH SOME THINGS MY DAUGHTER WAS TAKING BACK TO COLLEGE AFTER THE WEEKEND. THERE WAS A "BANG" WE HEARD WHOSE SOURCE WAS UNDETERMINED. WHEN SHE BEGAN TO BACK OUT THE FRONT LEFT TIRE BLEW OUT. UPON INSPECTION THE SPRING HAD BROKEN AND PIERCED THE TIRE. THIS WEBSITE OUTLINES MANY SIMILAR CASES INVOLVING ALL 4 CORNERS OF THE CAR. HTTP://WWW.CONSUMERAFFAIRS.COM/AUTOMOTIVE/FORD_SPRINGS.HTML I'VE UNDERSTOOD FORD WILL NOT PROVIDE ANY SATISFACTION TO OWNERS OF THESE CARS. AS IT IS SUNDAY I HAVE NO REPAIR OPTIONS AVAILABLE, BUT THE CAR WILL HAVE TO BE TOWED AND A TIRE AND AT LEAST THE SPRING WILL HAVE TO BE REPLACED. BASED ON THE RESPONSES IN THE ABOVE WEB PAGE COSTS COULD GO BEYOND $1,000. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10224348
77,000 miles · Apr 12, 2008
Suspension
I HAVE HAD 3 OR THE 4 SPRINGS ON MY 2002 FORD TAURUS. BREAK. BOTH BACK ONES AND THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE. THE BACK ONES WERE DISCOVERED, TO BE BROKEN, BY THE DEALER. I TOOK IT IN BECAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE THE BACK WAS SCRAPING THE GROUND AT TIMES. THE OTHER DAY I NOTICED THAT THE TIRE ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE IN THE FRONT WAS FLA…
Read full complaint
I HAVE HAD 3 OR THE 4 SPRINGS ON MY 2002 FORD TAURUS. BREAK. BOTH BACK ONES AND THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE. THE BACK ONES WERE DISCOVERED, TO BE BROKEN, BY THE DEALER. I TOOK IT IN BECAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE THE BACK WAS SCRAPING THE GROUND AT TIMES. THE OTHER DAY I NOTICED THAT THE TIRE ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE IN THE FRONT WAS FLAT. AS I WAS TRYING TO BLOW THE TIRE UP, IT WAS DEFLATING JUST AS FAST. THE SPRING WAS BROKEN AND WAS STUCK IN THE TIRE. THANK GOD, IT BROKE IN THE DRIVEWAY. THE LAST TIME WE HAD THE CAR ON THE ROAD WE WERE ON THE FREEWAY GOING 65 MILES PER HOUR. I CALLED FORD AND WAS TOLD THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO AS THERE WAS NO EXTENDED WARRANTY OR RECALL ON THE 2002 TAURUS SPRINGS. IT SEEMS THAT SOME OF THE SPRINGS WERE COVERED ON THE TAURUS FROM 1999 THROUGH 2001. WHEN I WENT TO THE GOODYEAR DEALER TO GET A NEW TIRE, THEY TOLD ME THAT THE TAURUS WAS FAMOUS FOR THAT PROBLEM. I WAS TOLD THAT FORD SIMPLY PUT A SHIELD ON THE 2002 TO KEEP THE SPRING FROM PUNCTURING THE TIRE. WE COULD FIND NO SHIELD. IF THE TAURUS HAS AN INHERENT SAFETY PROBLEM THEY ARE AWARE OF, THEY SHOULD HAVE TO FIX IT FREE OF CHARGE. MY FAMILY HAS HAD FORDS SINCE 1936. WE HAVE HAD AT LEAST 15 NEW FORDS SINCE THEN. TO BE HONEST, SINCE I, MYSELF, SAW THE SPRING STICKING IN THE TIRE, I AM ALMOST FEARFUL TO RIDE IN MY TAURUS. IF IT IS A PROBLEM, WILL IT HAPPEN AGAIN WHEN I AM DRIVING THE CAR AT HIGHER SPEEDS? SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. IT COULD HAPPEN IN ANY BRAND CAR BUT IF THE FORD IS KNOWN FOR THAT PROBLEM AND NOTHING IS DONE THEN SHAME ON THEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10224314
78,000 miles · Apr 11, 2008
Suspension
THE OTHER DAY I NOTICED THAT MY FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE WAS FLAT. I COULDN'T GET THE TIRE TO HOLD AIR. I FOUND THE PROBLEM ----THE SPRING HAD BROKEN AND WENT COMPLETELY THROUGH MY TIRE. I COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED IT I HAD BEEN DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY. I CHECKED ON FORD RECALLS AND NOTICED THAT THEY HAD A RECALL OR EXTENDED W…
Read full complaint
THE OTHER DAY I NOTICED THAT MY FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE WAS FLAT. I COULDN'T GET THE TIRE TO HOLD AIR. I FOUND THE PROBLEM ----THE SPRING HAD BROKEN AND WENT COMPLETELY THROUGH MY TIRE. I COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED IT I HAD BEEN DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY. I CHECKED ON FORD RECALLS AND NOTICED THAT THEY HAD A RECALL OR EXTENDED WARRANTIES ON THE SPRINGS-UP TO AND INCLUDING 2001. MAYBE THE 2002 AND NEWER TAURUS SHOULD BE RECALLED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10224202
Mileage unknown · Apr 9, 2008
Suspension
FRONT COIL SPRINGS BROKEN ON DRIVERS SIDE CAUSING DAMAGE TO VEHICLE, BROKEN SWING ARM AND HAD TO HAVE BOTH SIDES REPLACED AND HAVE THE CAR REALIGNED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10223827
81,543 miles · Apr 8, 2008
Suspension
WHEN I WENT TO LEAVE WORK THIS MORNING, MY DRIVER SIDE FRONT TIRE WAS FLAT. AFTER REMOVING THE TIRE, I FOUND THAT THE SPRING HAD BROKE. AFTER COMING HOME AND DOING SOME RESEARCH ONLINE, I FOUND THAT THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM, ONE THAT FORD SHOULD PROBABLY HAVE A RECALL FOR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10223671
108,000 miles · Apr 7, 2008
Suspension
I BACKED MY 2002 FORD TAURUS OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY AND THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE SPRING BROKE CAUSING A COMPLETE TIRE FAILURE. HAD I BEEN DRIVING WHEN THIS OCCURRED THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS OTHER TAURUS MODEL YEARS (2001 FOR ONE) HAVE BEEN RECALLED FOR THIS SAME ISSUE. IN LOOKING AROUND THE INTE…
Read full complaint
I BACKED MY 2002 FORD TAURUS OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY AND THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE SPRING BROKE CAUSING A COMPLETE TIRE FAILURE. HAD I BEEN DRIVING WHEN THIS OCCURRED THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS OTHER TAURUS MODEL YEARS (2001 FOR ONE) HAVE BEEN RECALLED FOR THIS SAME ISSUE. IN LOOKING AROUND THE INTERNET I SEE MANY, MANY OTHERS COMPLAINTS THAT THEY HAD THE EXACT SAME ISSUE. I AM IN THE PROCESS OF COSTLY OUT OF POCKET REPAIRS AT THIS TIME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10223550
100,100 miles · Apr 4, 2008
SuspensionCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE TIRE BLEW OUT. THE CONTACT LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND STRUCK A GUARDRAIL. HE REPLACED THE BLOWN TIRE WITH A SPARE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTO GARAGE AND IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE FRONT COIL PENETRATED AND SHEARED THE TIRE. THE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE TIRE BLEW OUT. THE CONTACT LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND STRUCK A GUARDRAIL. HE REPLACED THE BLOWN TIRE WITH A SPARE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTO GARAGE AND IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE FRONT COIL PENETRATED AND SHEARED THE TIRE. THE MANUFACTURER TOOK A REPORT; HOWEVER, THEY STATED THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS FOR THE 2002 MODELS. THEY FURTHER STATED THAT THE MILEAGE EXCEEDED THE WARRANTY COVERAGE; THEREFORE, THEY WOULD NOT ASSIST WITH THE REPAIR. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED, WHICH INCLUDED REPLACING THE COIL SPRING AND THE TIRE AT THE COST OF $530.85. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 102,554 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 100,100. UPDATED 04/29/08. *LJ PHONE INTERVIEW UPDATES (6/17/08): MR. ESFORD INDICATED THAT FRONT SUSPENSION SPRING BREAKAGE HAD OCCURRED WHILE HE WAS DRIVING. THE ROAD WAS A DIVIDED HIGHWAY, PAVED AND DRY. THE TRAFFIC WAS LIGHT AND THERE WAS NO PRECIPITATION. SUDDENLY, MR. ESFORD HEARD A LIGHT "POP" AND THE RIGHT FRONT CORNER OF THE VEHICLE DROPPED; THE STEERING WHEEL WAS PULLED OUT OF HIS HAND MOMENTARY. INSTINCTIVELY, HE GRABBED THE STEERING WHEEL AND HIT THE BRAKES. HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE HAD ALREADY PULLED TO THE RIGHT AND STRUCK THE GUARD RAIL. NO OTHER VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED AND NO POLICE WAS CALLED. THE BROKEN SPRING AND PUNCTURED TIRE REPLACEMENT COSTED MR. ESFORD CLOSE TO $500. THE FENDER ALSO NEEDS TO BE REPLACED; MR. ESFORD ESTIMATE THAT WILL COST AN ADDITIONAL $800 TO $1,000.
NHTSA ODI #10223402
67,048 miles · Apr 2, 2008
Suspension
I STARTED MY CAR, PUT IT IN REVERSE, STEPPED ON THE GAS, WENT BACK ABOUT 6 INCHES AND HEARD A LOUD CLUNK AND THEN THE SOUND OF A TIRE EXPLODING. I REMOVED THE TIRE AND FOUND THAT THE LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING HAD FRACTURED, LEAVING A SHARP END THAT PUNCTURED THE TIRE. UPON CHECKING ON THE INTERNET, I FOUND THAT SEVERAL HUNDRED TH…
Read full complaint
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
NHTSA ODI #10223186
Official recalls
3Mar 2, 2004
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES ARE BEING RECALLED TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH A MALFUNCTIONING STOP LAMP SWITCH AND/OR ASSOCIATED WIRING. THIS MALFUNCTIONING COULD RENDER THE STOP LAMPS INOPERABLE OR CAUSE THEM TO STAY ON ALL THE TIME. THIS COULD CAUSE CONFUSION TO A FOLLOWING DRIVER, WHICH COULD LEAD TO A CRASH.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN ADDITION, IF THE SWITCH AND/OR ASSOCIATED WIRING FAIL IN THE OPEN POSITION, THE BRAKE LIGHTS WILL NOT ACTUATE AND THE DRIVER WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE OUT OF "PARK" IF THEY FAIL IN THE CLOSED POSITION, THE BRAKE LIGHTS WILL REMAIN ON, WHICH WILL NOT ALLOW THE SPEED CONTROL TO BE ACTIVATED. THIS COULD ALSO CAUSE THE BATTERY TO DISCHARGE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REMOVE THE STOP LAMP SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING ASSEMBLY AND INSTALL A NEWLY DESIGNED STOP LAMP SWITCH AND WIRE ASSEMBLY. OWNER NOTIFICATION IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN ON APRIL 5, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
Mar 10, 2003
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 212, "WINDSHIELD MOUNTING." THE WINDSHIELDS MAY POTENTIALLY EXHIBIT INCREASED WIND NOISE, WATER LEAKAGE, AND SQUEAKS AND RATTLES.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: POTENTIAL LOSS OF WINDSHIELD RETENTION MAY ALSO REDUCE OCCUPANT PROTECTION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THESE WINDSHIELDS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON MARCH 31, 2003. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT FORD/MERCURY AT 1-800-392-3673.
Oct 2, 2002
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PADELS ARE BEING RECALLED IN ORDER TO ADJUST THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS TO A MINIMUM OF 50 MM OF LATERAL SEPARATION. SIMULTANEOUS APPLICATION OF BOTH THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS COULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN ENGINE RPM.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A CUSTOMER EXPERIENCING AN "UNINTENDED VEHICLE SPEED INCREASE" OR A PERCEIVED "UNABLE TO STOP" CONDITION.
Remedy: OWNERS WILL BE INSTRUCTED AS TO THE PROPER WAY TO SET THE POSITION OF THE PEDALS AND TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE SPACING BETWEEN THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS MEASURED. IF THE SPACING IS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN 50 MM, THE DEALER WILL ADJUST THE PEDALS TO INCREASE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THEM TO GREATER THAN 50 MM. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN OCTOBER 28, 2002. OWNERS WHO DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-866-436-7332.
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
4PE12033 · Speed Control Cable Damage
Opened Oct 24, 2012 · Closed Jun 26, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:cables; Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Vehicle Speed Control:cables
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Vehicle Speed Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
EA08018 · Front Suspension Coil Spring Fracture
Opened Aug 28, 2008 · Closed Jun 30, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:front:springs:coil Springs
To date, ODI is aware of 2,401 non-duplicative complaints related to the alleged defect. In addition, ODI is aware of 1,411 subject vehicles with one or more warranty claims related to the alleged defect. In total, ODI is aware of 3,645 unique subject vehicles that have experienced one or more front suspension coil spring fractures. ODI is also aware of four minor crashes related to the alleged defect resulting in one minor injury.With greater than eight years of exposure, a large subject vehicle population and approximately 2,052 reported front tire punctures caused by fractured coil springs (at all speeds), there have been no reported severe crashes, deaths or injuries related to the alleged defect. The real world consequences of these defective coil springs have been a small number of minor control problems that resulted in minor damage; suggesting that the effect of the defect on vehicle control is minor.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted. Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency will continue to monitor this issue and will take further action if warranted by the circumstances. See the EA08-018 Engineering Analysis Closing Report for more details.
RP03001 · Brake/accelerator Pedal Application
Opened Oct 31, 2003 · Closed Mar 23, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages
MS. RODMAN REPORTED THAT AFTER HER VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED FOR THE RECALL, HER MOTHER EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN ACCELERATION AND CRASHED THE SABLE INTO A LIGHT POLE.PREVIOUSLY NHTSA HAD CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION FOR THIS ISSUE (PE02-035) THAT RESULTED IN THE RECALL (02V-266) OF 369,000 MY 2000-2002 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS TO INSURE THAT THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE PEDALS WAS AT LEAST 50MM..A REVIEW OF ODI'S DATABASE FOR COMPLAINTS REGARDING RECALL 02V-266 DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY RECALL REMEDY COMPLAINTS OTHER THAN THE PETITIONER'S.MS. RODMAN?S VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY ODI USING FORD?S SPECIAL TOOL AND HER VEHICLE WAS FOUND TO EXCEED 50MM.ALSO, THE LATERAL MOVEMENT OF THE PEDALS WAS FOUND NOT TO BE EXCESSIVE RELATIVE TO OTHER COMPARABLE TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES.THEREFORE, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER REQUIRING FORD TO PROVIDE A DIFFERENT REMEDY FOR THIS DEFECT.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.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS ANALYSIS, PLEASE REFER TO THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE DATED MARCH 23, 2004 (VOL 69, NO 56, PAGES 13619-13620).
RQ03008 · Brake Light Switch Failure
Opened Oct 23, 2003 · Closed Mar 5, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Additional source detail variants (5)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Illustration