TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS EQUIPPED WITH HANKOOK OPTIMO H727 TIRES, SIZE: 215/60R16 (NA). WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE STEEL BELTS PUNCTURED THE SIDE OF THE FRONT DRIVER'S TIRE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRILL SHOCK TOWER MOUNT WAS MISALIGNED. IN ADDITION, THE VEHICLE MADE A HOWLING SOUND WHILE DRIVING VARIOU…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS EQUIPPED WITH HANKOOK OPTIMO H727 TIRES, SIZE: 215/60R16 (NA). WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE STEEL BELTS PUNCTURED THE SIDE OF THE FRONT DRIVER'S TIRE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRILL SHOCK TOWER MOUNT WAS MISALIGNED. IN ADDITION, THE VEHICLE MADE A HOWLING SOUND WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS. DUE TO THE FAILURE, THE TIRE WAS REPLACED ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION. BALISE MOTOR SALES IN SPRINGFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THE SHOCK TOWER MOUNT NEEDED TO BE DRILLED IN ORDER TO PERFORM A FOUR WHEEL ALIGNMENT TO PREVENT PREMATURE WEAR OF THE TIRES. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND RECOMMENDED THAT THE CONTACT REPLACE THE STRUTS. THE VIN AND DOT NUMBER WERE NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 31,000.
NHTSA ODI #11079111
181,003 miles · Feb 3, 2016
Tires
ON JAN. 10 2014 I PURCHASED 2 NEW TIRES FROM LES SWAB HERE IN OROVILLE CA. IN OCT. 2015 I NOTICED A WOBBLE IN MY STEERING, TOOK THE CAR BACK TO WHERE I PURCHASED THE TIRES AND ASK THEM TO ROTATE THE TIRES AND CHECK FOR DEFECTS. WAS TOLD TIRES WERE OK BUT THE PROBLEM PERSISTED, WENT TO A LOCAL REPAIR SHOP AND WAS TOLD I HAD A TIR…
Read full complaint
ON JAN. 10 2014 I PURCHASED 2 NEW TIRES FROM LES SWAB HERE IN OROVILLE CA. IN OCT. 2015 I NOTICED A WOBBLE IN MY STEERING, TOOK THE CAR BACK TO WHERE I PURCHASED THE TIRES AND ASK THEM TO ROTATE THE TIRES AND CHECK FOR DEFECTS. WAS TOLD TIRES WERE OK BUT THE PROBLEM PERSISTED, WENT TO A LOCAL REPAIR SHOP AND WAS TOLD I HAD A TIRE BAD TIRE SEPARATION, WENT BACK TO LES SWAB AND THEY REPLACED THE DEFECTIVE TIRE. TODAY THE LOCAL REPAIR SHOP ADVISED ME I HAD ANOTHER TIRE SEPARATION AND WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. IT IS EVIDENT TO ME THEY ARE SELLING DEFECTIVE TIRES THAT SHOULD BE RECALLED BEFORE SOMEONE GETS KILLED.
NHTSA ODI #10824055
125,000 miles · Sep 3, 2010
Tires
I HAD PURCHASED A SET OF BFGOODRICH PREMIUM TOURING TIRES FROM COSTCO. I HAVE HAD BLOWOUTS IN 4 OF 6 TIRES, ALL WITH AROUND 45-55000 MILES ON THEM. THE SIDEWALL HAD CRACKS THAT WENT FROM THE TREAD DOWN ACROSS THE SIDEWALL. I HAVE ONLY HAD 1 BLOWOUT SINCE I STARTED DRIVING SINCE 1978. BESIDES THESE TIRES. I PUT 70000 MILES ON…
Read full complaint
I HAD PURCHASED A SET OF BFGOODRICH PREMIUM TOURING TIRES FROM COSTCO. I HAVE HAD BLOWOUTS IN 4 OF 6 TIRES, ALL WITH AROUND 45-55000 MILES ON THEM. THE SIDEWALL HAD CRACKS THAT WENT FROM THE TREAD DOWN ACROSS THE SIDEWALL. I HAVE ONLY HAD 1 BLOWOUT SINCE I STARTED DRIVING SINCE 1978. BESIDES THESE TIRES. I PUT 70000 MILES ON THE ORIGINAL TIRES WITHOUT PROBLEMS. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THIS MANY TIRES HAVE BLOWN. BY THE WAY, THE 2 TIRES THAT DID NOT BLOW OUT HAD CRACKS FORMING ON THE SIDEWALL BY THE TREAD AS WELL. (THE REASON I HAD 6 IS BECAUSE 2 WERE REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY) THE "TIRES PLUS" STORE I WENT TO DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THE TIRES WERE DOING WHAT THEY WERE DOING, BUT HE DID SAY THAT IT WAS NOT NORMAL. I JUST WANT TO HELP PREVENT ACCIDENT OR INJURY TO OTHERS. IT MAY JUST BE THE TIRE SIZE THAT IS AFFECTED. THE TIRES WERE NOT OLD, THE TIRES PLUS MANAGER CHECKED THAT FIRST WHEN HE SAW THE TIRE. I HAVE A SET THAT WERE PLACED ON MY 1991 FORD TEMPO AND THEY ARE NOT SHOWING THE SAME CRACKING. I ONLY HAVE ABOUT 30000 MILES ON THEM RIGHT NOW. 3 OF THE 4 BLOWOUTS WERE ON THE FRONT AND ONE ON THE PASSENGER REAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10353768
Mileage unknown · Aug 24, 2010
Tires
S10 APPROPRIATE HANDLING-LETTER FROM REGARDING A COMPLAINT ABOUT CONTINENTAL TIRES *TGW 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONSUMER STATED AS THE VEHICLE SAT IN HIS GARAGE, A HIGHLY VISIBLE BULGE WAS NOTICED ON THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10352068
49,785 miles · Apr 9, 2009
Tires
OUR FRONT LEFT TIRE LITERALLY EXPLODED WHILE DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY AT APPROXIMATELY 70 MILES PER HOUR. IT LOOKS LIKE A BOMB HAD EXPLODED INSIDE IT. WE HAVE NEVER HAD THIS HAPPEN BEFORE - THIS TYPE OF CATASTROPHIC FAILURE IN A TIRE. THE COMPANY IS CONTINENTAL AND THE TIRE SIZE IS P215.60R16 94T (FOR A MID SIZE CAR) AND ON TH…
Read full complaint
OUR FRONT LEFT TIRE LITERALLY EXPLODED WHILE DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY AT APPROXIMATELY 70 MILES PER HOUR. IT LOOKS LIKE A BOMB HAD EXPLODED INSIDE IT. WE HAVE NEVER HAD THIS HAPPEN BEFORE - THIS TYPE OF CATASTROPHIC FAILURE IN A TIRE. THE COMPANY IS CONTINENTAL AND THE TIRE SIZE IS P215.60R16 94T (FOR A MID SIZE CAR) AND ON THE LOWER SIDE IT HAS TOURING CONTACT AS. THIS IS A BRAND THAT WE HAVE NEVER PURCHASED BEFORE - IT WAS ON THE CAR WHEN PURCHASED AS A USED CAR (1 YEAR OLD). WE THANK GOD THIS DID NOT RESULT IN A TERRIBLE ACCIDENT, CONSIDERING THE SPEED AND LOCATION IT HAPPENED. IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION REGARDING OTHER PROBLEMS WITH THIS TIRE, WE WOULD APPRECIATE BEING ADVISED OF THIS. *TR THORNTON WEYMOUTH
NHTSA ODI #10264869
Mileage unknown · Jan 9, 2008
Tires
I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM WORK ON I 10 FROM CASA GRANDE, AZ TO PHOENIX, AZ, I WAS ABOUT 2 MILE FROM EXIT 164 WHEN I THOUGHT THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE BLEW OUT, BUT THERE WAS NO PULL TO THE RIGHT AND I DID NOT LOSE ANY CONTROL OF THE CAR. WHEN I GOT THE CAR TO THE SIDE I DISCOVERED THAT THE TIRE WAS STILL FULLY INFLATED, BUT ALL THE TRE…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM WORK ON I 10 FROM CASA GRANDE, AZ TO PHOENIX, AZ, I WAS ABOUT 2 MILE FROM EXIT 164 WHEN I THOUGHT THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE BLEW OUT, BUT THERE WAS NO PULL TO THE RIGHT AND I DID NOT LOSE ANY CONTROL OF THE CAR. WHEN I GOT THE CAR TO THE SIDE I DISCOVERED THAT THE TIRE WAS STILL FULLY INFLATED, BUT ALL THE TREAD WAS GONE, YOU COULD SEE THE STEEL BANS. I FIGURE OUT THE LOUD BANGING I HEARD THAT I THOUGHT WAS A BLOW OUT WAS THE TREAD COMING OFF. IN THE PROCESS OF THE TREAD COMING OFF IT BROKE OUT MOST OF THE PLASTIC LINING IN THE WHEEL WELL, THE MOLDING ON THE LOWER PANEL OF THE PASSENGER'S SIDE AND PUT A LARGE DENT IN THE DOOR. YOU CAN SEE CLEARLY THAT THE TREAD JUST PEELED AWAY. *TR
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