TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH, A LOUD NOISE EMITTED AND THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO VEER TO THE LEFT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO INFORMED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE STRUT FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH, A LOUD NOISE EMITTED AND THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO VEER TO THE LEFT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO INFORMED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE STRUT FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 210,000. UPDATED 09/09/15*LJ *CN
NHTSA ODI #10746685
116,000 miles · Dec 21, 2011
Suspension
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 25 MPH IN AN EXTENDED DRIVEWAY WHEN THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE COIL SPRING FRACTURED AND SHREDDED THE INNER SIDE OF THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE TIRE. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE WHO ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS FOR THE FAILURE AND OFFERED NO ASSIS…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 25 MPH IN AN EXTENDED DRIVEWAY WHEN THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE COIL SPRING FRACTURED AND SHREDDED THE INNER SIDE OF THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE TIRE. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE WHO ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS FOR THE FAILURE AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS FOR THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 116,000.
NHTSA ODI #10440865
14,323 miles · Oct 8, 2006
Power TrainSteeringSuspensionCrash
AFTER COMPLAINT TO DEALER PRIOR TO THEIR INSPECTION, AND AFTER, TIE ROD BOLT AND ROD BROKE CAUSING LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL. NO FORMAL DATE OF SERVICE WAS MADE EXCEPT INSPECTION THE DAY OF PURCHASE. THREE TIMES DRIVEN AND THIS THEN HAPPENED. *NM
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES BUILT FOR ONE SPECIFIC FLEET CUSTOMER WERE MODIFIED FOR OPTIONAL HANDS-FREE CELLULAR PHONE OPERATING CAPABILITY. TO PROVIDE THIS FUNCTIONALITY, A SPECIAL OVERLAY WIRE HARNESS WAS INSTALLED THAT INADVERTENTLY DID NOT INCLUDE THE CIRCUITS FOR PASSENGER AIR BAG DEACTIVATION INDICATOR (PADI) LAMP FUNCTION. AS A RESULT, THESE VEHICLES DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 208, 'OCCUPANT CRASH PROTECTION.'
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE PADI LAMP WILL FAIL TO ILLUMINATE AND THE AIR BAG WARNING LAMP IN THE CLUSTER WILL STAY ILLUMINATED.
Remedy: THE FLEET CUSTOMER WAS NOTIFIED AND ALL VEHICLES HAVE BEEN REPAIRED. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 28, 2006.
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS, PASSENGER CARS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE WINDSHIELD WIPER MOTOR MAY HAVE BEEN PRODUCED WITHOUT GREASE BEING APPLIED TO THE OUTPUT SHAFT GEAR.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AFTER A PERIOD OF CONTINUOUS USE ON THE HIGH SPEED SETTING, LACK OF GREASE ON THE OUTPUT SHAFT GEAR MAY CAUSE THE GEAR TO DISTORT OR FRACTURE DURING OPERATION RESULTING IN A LOSS OF WIPER FUNCTION. INOPERATIVE WIPERS UNDER INCLEMENT WEATHER CONDITIONS COULD CAUSE A CRASH DUE TO IMPAIRED VISIBILITY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE WIPER MOTOR FOR THE PRESENCE OF GREASE AND GREASE THE WIPER MOTOR GEARS IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 22, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673 OR LINCOLN/MERCURY AT 1-800-521-4140.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.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 do
Additional source detail variants (2)
Vehicle Speed Control:cables
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.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 do
Vehicle Speed Control
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.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 do
2006 Ford Taurus Problems, Complaints & Recalls | Skip That Year
Illustration