IllustrationWHILE DRIVE DOWN THE STREET APPROX 25MPH THE ENGINE STARTED TO REV UP AND THE CAR ACCELERATED. EVEN WHEN I TRIED TO BRAKE THE CAR WANTED TO CONTINUE TO DRIVE. I TRIED STOMPING ON THE GAS PEDAL, BUT IF DIDN'T HAVE ANY AFFECT. I PULLED OFF THE ROAD SHUT OFF THE CAR AND RESTARTED THE PROBLEM DID NOT HAPPEN AGAIN. *TR
2006 Ford Taurus
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2006 Ford Taurus do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 318.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Taurus years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
80–25K
2225–50K
6650–75K
7075–100K
86100–150K
20150K+
272 reports with mileage · 46 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 176 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 32 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 25 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
19 crash reports4 fire reports8 injury reports
What owners actually said
318 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE RPM INCREASED EXCESSIVELY AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSIS BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE REPLICATED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHIC…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE RPM INCREASED EXCESSIVELY AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSIS BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE REPLICATED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 76,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE 78,000. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL BUT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. AFTER PLACING THE GEAR IN NEUTRAL, THE RPM READING INCREASED. THE CONTACT SHUTDOWN THEN RESTARTED THE VEHICLE A…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL BUT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. AFTER PLACING THE GEAR IN NEUTRAL, THE RPM READING INCREASED. THE CONTACT SHUTDOWN THEN RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND WAS ABLE TO DRIVE WITHOUT FAILURE. THE CONTACT INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT THE THROTTLE CABLE SEIZED CAUSING THE ACCELERATION. THE FAILURE OCCURRED THREE DIFFERENT TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY WOULD HAVE TO BE CLEANED. AFTER THE REPAIR THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WHICH STOPPED THE SUDDEN ACCELERATION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 55,100.
AS I WAS COMING UP THE HILL NEAR MY APARTMENT AT 30 MPH ON SATURDAY, MARCH 2, 2013, MY VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AS I REACHED THE TOP OF THE HILL. I IMMEDIATELY BEGAN TO BRAKE BUT THE CAR WAS STILL PUSHING FORWARD. I WAS ABLE TO PARK, BUT THE CAR WAS STILL TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD. I APPLIED THE EMERGENCY BREAK. SUDDENLY, MY RP…
Read full complaint
AS I WAS COMING UP THE HILL NEAR MY APARTMENT AT 30 MPH ON SATURDAY, MARCH 2, 2013, MY VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AS I REACHED THE TOP OF THE HILL. I IMMEDIATELY BEGAN TO BRAKE BUT THE CAR WAS STILL PUSHING FORWARD. I WAS ABLE TO PARK, BUT THE CAR WAS STILL TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD. I APPLIED THE EMERGENCY BREAK. SUDDENLY, MY RPMS SHOT UP TO AROUND 6000. I CUT THE CAR OFF. WHEN I TURNED IT ON THIRTY MINUTES LATER (STILL IN PARK), THE RPMS SHOT UP AGAIN. I CHECKED THIS MORNING AND IT WAS NO LONGER DOING THIS, BUT I AM HESITANT TO GET BEHIND THE WHEEL OF THIS CAR RIGHT NOW. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH, THE ENGINE RPMS INCREASED EXCESSIVELY AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT HAD TO DEPRESS THE BRAKE PEDAL WITH EXTREME FORCE AND SHIFT INTO NEUTRAL IN ORDER TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAK…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH, THE ENGINE RPMS INCREASED EXCESSIVELY AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT HAD TO DEPRESS THE BRAKE PEDAL WITH EXTREME FORCE AND SHIFT INTO NEUTRAL IN ORDER TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER TO HAVE A DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 105,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 105,593. UPDATED 04/30/13*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WOULD ACCELERATE AT ANY GIVEN TIME. SOMETIMES, WHEN PUTTING THE VEHICLE IN PARK OR NEUTRAL, THE ENGINE WOULD RETURN TO NORMAL.
I WAS DRIVING AND MY ACCELERATOR GOT STUCK. I WAS ONLY GOING 10 MPH BUT IT KEPT GOING WHEN I HIT THE BRAKES. I PLACED THE CAR IN PARK AND ABOUT AN HOUR LATER I TRIED TO DRIVE HOME. IT HAPPENED LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES LATER. THE ENGINE REVVED UP, THE ACCELERATOR WAS TO THE FLOOR. I HIT THE BRAKES, THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, AND PUT THE …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING AND MY ACCELERATOR GOT STUCK. I WAS ONLY GOING 10 MPH BUT IT KEPT GOING WHEN I HIT THE BRAKES. I PLACED THE CAR IN PARK AND ABOUT AN HOUR LATER I TRIED TO DRIVE HOME. IT HAPPENED LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES LATER. THE ENGINE REVVED UP, THE ACCELERATOR WAS TO THE FLOOR. I HIT THE BRAKES, THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, AND PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND CUT OFF THE CAR. THE ACCELERATOR WAS VISIBLY TO THE FLOOR. I WAS TERRIFIED BUT THANKFUL I NEVER MADE IT ON THE HIGHWAY. *TR
I BOUGHT A FORD TAURUS ON DECEMBER 3 GOT IT HOME AND PUT IT IN PARK AND IT WAS LIKE THE ACCELERATOR WAS STUCK. HAVE HAD IT IN SHOP NUMEROUS TIMES. IT DOES THIS GOING DOWN THE ROAD AT TIMES AND IS UNPREDICTABLE. IT IS VERY HARD TO APPLY THE BRAKE TO STOP IT AND I HAVE TO ROMP ON THE GAS AND THEN HIT THE BRAKES. MY CRUISE CONTROL …
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT A FORD TAURUS ON DECEMBER 3 GOT IT HOME AND PUT IT IN PARK AND IT WAS LIKE THE ACCELERATOR WAS STUCK. HAVE HAD IT IN SHOP NUMEROUS TIMES. IT DOES THIS GOING DOWN THE ROAD AT TIMES AND IS UNPREDICTABLE. IT IS VERY HARD TO APPLY THE BRAKE TO STOP IT AND I HAVE TO ROMP ON THE GAS AND THEN HIT THE BRAKES. MY CRUISE CONTROL IN MY CARE DOES NOT WORK AND HAVE READ THAT IT MAYBE PART OF THE PROBLEM. *TR
LAST FALL I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE ABOUT 45 MILES. WHEN I REACHED THE CITY I WAS VISITING I GOT OFF INTERSTATE AND CAME TO RED LIGHT. VEHICLE ENGINE STARTED REVVING. I HAD TO KEEP FOOT ON BRAKE TO PREVENT REARENDING CAR IN FRONT OF ME. MY CAR CONTINUED TO DO THIS WHILE IN TRAFFIC. I GOT HOME OK AND DIDN'T HAVE A PROB…
Read full complaint
LAST FALL I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE ABOUT 45 MILES. WHEN I REACHED THE CITY I WAS VISITING I GOT OFF INTERSTATE AND CAME TO RED LIGHT. VEHICLE ENGINE STARTED REVVING. I HAD TO KEEP FOOT ON BRAKE TO PREVENT REARENDING CAR IN FRONT OF ME. MY CAR CONTINUED TO DO THIS WHILE IN TRAFFIC. I GOT HOME OK AND DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM AGAIN UNTIL I DROVE IT ON THE INTERSTATE AGAIN. THE PROBLEM SEEMED TO STOP FOR A MONTH OR TWO UNTIL MY HUSBAND WAS DRIVING IN DECEMBER 2012 AND HE TRIED TO USE THE CRUISE CONTROL AND IT WOULD NOT WORK. WHEN WE GOT TO THE CITY OFF THE INTERSTATE THE CAR BEGAN THE ACCELERATION AGAIN WHILE IN BUMPER TO BUMPER TRAFFIC. IT HAPPENED ONCE AGAIN TO ME TWO WEEKS AGO AND LAST WEEK THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT HAS COME ON. THE CAR SEEMS TO DRIVE OK UNTIL WE DRIVE IT AT INTERSTATE SPEEDS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AND THEN SLOW DOWN. I AM AFRAID THIS IS GOING TO CAUSE AN ACCIDENT. *TR
2006 FORD TAURUS. CONSUMER REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRANSMISSION FAILURE IN VEHICLE. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED THE TORQUE CONVERTER WAS REPLACED. *JB UPDATED 02/19/13
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE ERRONEOUSLY ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO DECELERATE BY SHIFTING INTO NEUTRAL. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED SEVERAL TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT THERE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE ERRONEOUSLY ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO DECELERATE BY SHIFTING INTO NEUTRAL. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED SEVERAL TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM WITH THE ON-BOARD COMPUTER. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 144,000.
Official recalls
206V119000 · Electrical System: Instrument Cluster/panel
Apr 10, 2006
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.
05V520000 · Visibility:windshield Wiper/washer:motor
Nov 9, 2005
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 ↗
NHTSA investigations
1PE12005 · Stuck Throttle
Opened Mar 7, 2012 · Closed Oct 22, 2012
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; 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
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