NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Suspension complaints
208 reportsClear category filter212,000 miles · May 4, 2015
Suspension
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 FORD WINDSTAR. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 70 MPH, THE VEHICLE EMITTED A LOUD NOISE. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE REAR AXLE FRACTURED DUE TO CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, BUT WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE REPAIR FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V19…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 FORD WINDSTAR. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 70 MPH, THE VEHICLE EMITTED A LOUD NOISE. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE REAR AXLE FRACTURED DUE TO CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, BUT WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE REPAIR FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V195000 (SUSPENSION) WAS PERFORMED; HOWEVER, THE REPAIR DID NOT CORRECT THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 212,000. UPDATED 7/1/15*CN
NHTSA ODI #10714299
140,000 miles · Oct 30, 2014
Suspension
THE REAR AXLE ON MY WINDSTAR VAN BROKE IN HALF. THE RECALL WAS ALREADY DONE PRIOR TO ME PURCHASING IT SO I CAN'T SAY WHEN. FORD IS NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING TO HELP. MY WIFE AND KIDS WERE IN THE VAN WHEN THIS HAPPENED AND SHE ALMOST LOST CONTROL WHEN THE TIRE EXPLODED AFTER THE AXLE SNAPPED. THE BREAK IS LOCATED ON THE DRIVER…
Read full complaint
THE REAR AXLE ON MY WINDSTAR VAN BROKE IN HALF. THE RECALL WAS ALREADY DONE PRIOR TO ME PURCHASING IT SO I CAN'T SAY WHEN. FORD IS NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING TO HELP. MY WIFE AND KIDS WERE IN THE VAN WHEN THIS HAPPENED AND SHE ALMOST LOST CONTROL WHEN THE TIRE EXPLODED AFTER THE AXLE SNAPPED. THE BREAK IS LOCATED ON THE DRIVERS SIDE UNDER THE REINFORCEMENT BRACKET. FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN ONLINE THIS IS VERY COMMON TO BREAK EVEN AFTER THE RECALL IS DONE. OBVIOUSLY THE REPAIR(IF YOU CAN CALL IT THAT) IS MERELY A BANDAID TO GET THE NHTSA OFF THERE BACK AND NOT TO MAKE THE VEHICLES SAFE. YOU NEED TO HOLD FORD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE VANS SAFETY, OR LACK OF. THERE ARE MANY OF THESE "TIME BOMBS" STILL ON THE ROAD. SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE! HOPEFULLY YOU RESPOND QUICKLY, THE VAN IS AT THE DEALER NOW. I WILL BE WELDING THE AXLE SATURDAY TO GET IT HOME TO REPLACE THE AXLE MYSELF. I WILL BE TAKING A LOT OF PICTURES BEFORE I DO. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10651279
101,345 miles · Sep 19, 2014
Suspension
THE SUB FRAME IS BEING REPLACED BY CAR DOCTOR JR BECAUSE IT WAS ROTTED THRU 2 YEARS AGO THE FORD DEALERSHIP TOLD ME THEIR WAS NO ISSUE WITH THE SUBFRAME. AND THEIR WAS NO RECALL
NHTSA ODI #10637915
131,000 miles · Sep 19, 2014
Electrical SystemSuspension
I HAVE A 1999 FORD WINDSTAR MINI VAN . MY INSTRUMENT CLUSTER GOES CRAZY ALL GAUGES JUST GO UP AND DOWN UNCONTROLLABLY. I NEVER KNOW HOW MUCH GAS I HAVE OR HOW FAST I AM GOING AND MY ABS BRAKE LITE STAYS ON ALWAYS. AND MY FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM IS BENDING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10637419
130,123 miles · Aug 25, 2014
Suspension
DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AT 40 MPH IT FELT LIKE A TIRE BLEW ON THE REAR. WHEN I PULLED OVER AD GOT OUT TO CHECK IT THE TIRES WERE FINE BUT THE REAR WHEELS WERE AT A BAD ANGLE. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION THE REAR AXLE BEAM HAS SPLIT RENDERING THE VEHICLE UNDRIVEABLE. I HAVE FOUND THAT FORD HAS RECALLED THIS PART ON MAY WINDSTAR MINIVAN…
Read full complaint
DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AT 40 MPH IT FELT LIKE A TIRE BLEW ON THE REAR. WHEN I PULLED OVER AD GOT OUT TO CHECK IT THE TIRES WERE FINE BUT THE REAR WHEELS WERE AT A BAD ANGLE. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION THE REAR AXLE BEAM HAS SPLIT RENDERING THE VEHICLE UNDRIVEABLE. I HAVE FOUND THAT FORD HAS RECALLED THIS PART ON MAY WINDSTAR MINIVANS UNDER 10S13. BUT NOT THIS ONE. I FIND THIS ODD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10627987
178,000 miles · Jul 15, 2014
StructureSuspensionCrash
FORD DEALER INSPECTED VEHICLE DUE TO RECALL FOR SUBFRAME/AXLE RUST ISSUE. DEALER CLAIMED FRAME OKAY. WHILE DRIVING THE LOWER CONTROL ARM CAME DETACHED FROM THE FRAME CAUSING CRASH DUE TO RUSTING OF MOUNTS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10610815
121,098 miles · Jun 11, 2014
SteeringSuspension
WAS DRIVING AROUND 40 MPH, REALIZED THE VAN HAD A WEIRD ODD STEERING PROBLEM SWERVING TO LEFT AND THEN TO THE RIGHT. I MADE IT HOME THEN LOOKED TOWARDS THE BACK REAR AXLE I SEEN A REAL LARGE CRACK IN THE REAR AXLE. THE VAN BACK SIDE WAS SITTING REALLY LOW LIKE THE AXLE WAS ABOUT TO COMPLETELY CRACK. IM NOT RISKING DRIVING BEING …
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING AROUND 40 MPH, REALIZED THE VAN HAD A WEIRD ODD STEERING PROBLEM SWERVING TO LEFT AND THEN TO THE RIGHT. I MADE IT HOME THEN LOOKED TOWARDS THE BACK REAR AXLE I SEEN A REAL LARGE CRACK IN THE REAR AXLE. THE VAN BACK SIDE WAS SITTING REALLY LOW LIKE THE AXLE WAS ABOUT TO COMPLETELY CRACK. IM NOT RISKING DRIVING BEING A SAFETY HAZARD. I SEEN THERE WAS A RECALL FOR IT BUT FORD SAYS ITS NOT VALID. I FOUND MANY OTHER PEOPLE HAVING THE SAME ISSUE SIMILAR TO MINE. WOULD LIKE THIS ISSUE RESOLVED, I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO REPAIR A ISSUE THAT IS FORDS PROBLEM WITH SALT ON ROADS DURING THE WINTER CORRODES THE METAL OF THE REAR AXLE FOR IT TO CRACK WAS THE RECALL I FOUND. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10597694
180,000 miles · Jun 8, 2014
Suspension
WE TOOK A TRIP TO CHATTANOOGA FOR THE WEEKEND. WHILE THERE WE WERE GOING TO DO SOME SHOPPING AND WE TURNED A CORNER AND THE WHEEL FLEW OFF. MY HUSBAND PAID FOR THE TOW AND OUR INSURANCE REIMBURSED HIM, AND MY HUSBAND PAID FOR THE REPAIRS. WE HAD NO IDEA THAT THIS VEHICLE HAS RECALLS. VERY SCARY!! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10596919
Mileage unknown · Jun 3, 2014
SteeringStructureSuspension
DRIVING ALONG WHEN RIGHT FRONT STARTED TO VEER RIGHT AND WOBBLE. THESE MODELS ARE NOT SAFE. FORD IS AWARE OF THIS YET, WILL NOT HONOR A RECALL WHICH AFFECTS THESE MODELS. ALTHOUGH THERE IS A CORROSION SUB FRAME BREAK ON 1999 FORD WINDSTAR'S AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED( MECHANIC WILL TESTIFY) TO MINE, THEY KEEP MAKING EXCUS…
Read full complaint
DRIVING ALONG WHEN RIGHT FRONT STARTED TO VEER RIGHT AND WOBBLE. THESE MODELS ARE NOT SAFE. FORD IS AWARE OF THIS YET, WILL NOT HONOR A RECALL WHICH AFFECTS THESE MODELS. ALTHOUGH THERE IS A CORROSION SUB FRAME BREAK ON 1999 FORD WINDSTAR'S AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED( MECHANIC WILL TESTIFY) TO MINE, THEY KEEP MAKING EXCUSES AND WILL NOT HONOR THE EXPENSES FOR THEIR FAULTY DESIGN. MY VEHICLE IS A 99 FORD WINDSTAR IN VERY GOOD SHAPE, NEW TIRES BATTERY,ETC. IT IS NOW SITTING IN MY DRIVEWAY BECAUSE OF A FRAME BROKEN THRU BY CORROSION. THE FRONT RIGHT ALMOST PUT ME INTO THE DITCH ON THE WAY HOME. THIS IS A DESIGN FLAW WHICH WAS IS OR SHOULD BE COVERED BY RECALL. FORD PREVIOUSLY RECALLED THE SAME MODELS 99-2003 FOR THIS EXACT PROBLEM. I HAVE CONTACTED MY FORD DEALER (RAPIDS FORD, WIS RAPIDS), THEY SAID THE RECALL NO LONGER APPLIES. HOW CAN THIS BE? THIS IS A VERY UNSAFE SITUATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10595930
150,000 miles · Mar 13, 2014
Suspension
FORD RECALLED AND REPLACED THE REAR AXLE IN 2011 I BELIEVE. THEY DID A REPAIR ON THE FRONT AXLE ON A SEPARATE RECALL IN 2011 AS WELL. NOW THE FRONT AXLE IS RUSTING; SAME ISSUE THAT WAS HAPPENING TO THE REAR AXLE AND WHAT WAS SOMEWHAT REPAIRED ON THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE. IF THE REAR AXLE WAS RECALLED FOR ABNORMAL RUSTING; IT …
Read full complaint
FORD RECALLED AND REPLACED THE REAR AXLE IN 2011 I BELIEVE. THEY DID A REPAIR ON THE FRONT AXLE ON A SEPARATE RECALL IN 2011 AS WELL. NOW THE FRONT AXLE IS RUSTING; SAME ISSUE THAT WAS HAPPENING TO THE REAR AXLE AND WHAT WAS SOMEWHAT REPAIRED ON THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE. IF THE REAR AXLE WAS RECALLED FOR ABNORMAL RUSTING; IT WOULD APPEAR THE SAME MATERIAL WAS USED ON THE FRONT AXLE. FORD BOUGHT OUT MOST WINDSTAR OWNERS SO THERE ARE PROBABLY NOT AS MUCH DOCUMENTATION OF THE FRONT AXLE ISSUE AS THERE WERE WITH THE REAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10569145
Official recalls
11Sep 29, 2015
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 1998-2003 Windstar vehicles manufactured September 2, 1997, to July 3, 2003. The affected vehicles were previously remedied to safeguard against the rear axle cracking from corrosion, however, the remedy brackets may have been misinstalled. The incorrect bracket installations may limit the effectiveness of the service repair for NHTSA recalls 10V-385, 12V-193, and 12V-195.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the brackets were not installed properly, the rear axle may fracture, affecting the vehicle handling and increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the brackets to verify their proper installation. If a bracket is found to have been misinstalled, the rear axle will be replaced. These repairs will be performed free of charge. The began on October 21, 2015. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 15S27.
May 3, 2012
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1998-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM SEPTEMBER 1, 1997, THROUGH JULY 3, 2003, AND CURRENTLY REGISTERED OR ORIGINALLY SOLD IN VIRGINIA. OVER TIME, CORROSION CAN WEAKEN THE REAR AXLE MAKING IT SUSCEPTIBLE TO TORSIONAL STRESS. CORROSION AND STRESS CAN LEAD TO CRACKS WHICH, IF UNDETECTED, CAN INCREASE AND RESULT IN A COMPLETE FRACTURE OF THE AXLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A FRACTURED AXLE CAN AFFECT VEHICLE HANDLING AND INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL INSPECT AND INSTALL REAR AXLE REINFORCEMENT BRACKETS, OR REPLACE THE AXLES, AS NECESSARY. THIS SERVICE WILL BE PERFORMED FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 19, 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-866-436-7332.
May 3, 2012
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1999-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES ORIGINALLY SOLD IN OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIA. CORROSION-RELATED FRACTURES OF THE FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM REAR ATTACHING BRACKETS AND BODY MOUNT ATTACHMENTS MAY OCCUR.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A SEPARATION OF A FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM REAR ATTACHING BRACKET MAY RESULT IN A LOWER CONTROL ARM SEPARATION. A SEPARATION OF BOTH FRONT SUBFRAME REAR BODY MOUNTS MAY RESULT IN SEPARATION OF THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT. EITHER CONDITION COULD RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT BOTH FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM REAR ATTACHING BRACKETS AND BOTH BODY MOUNT ATTACHMENTS AT THE REAR OF THE FRONT SUBFRAME AND MAKE THE NECESSARY REPAIRS FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 18, 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-866-436-7332.
May 3, 2012
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1998-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM SEPTEMBER 1, 1997, THROUGH JULY 3, 2003, REGISTERED IN PUERTO RICO. DUE TO INCREASED STRESSES CAUSED BY HIGH CYCLES OF TORSIONAL LOADING, SPECIFIC TO THIS MARKET, THE REAR AXLE CAN CRACK.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A FRACTURED AXLE MAY RESULT IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL INSPECT AND INSTALL A REINFORCEMENT BRACKET ON THE REAR AXLE OR REPLACE THE AXLES, AS NECESSARY. THIS SERVICE WILL BE PROVIDED FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 1, 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.
Jan 26, 2011
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1999-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES ORIGINALLY SOLD IN OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE STATES OF CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, KENTUCKY, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, UTAH, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA, AND WISCONSIN. A SEPARATION OF A FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM REAR ATTACHING BRACKET MAY RESULT IN A LOWER CONTROL ARM SEPARATION. A SEPARATION OF BOTH FRONT SUBFRAME REAR BODY MOUNTS MAY RESULT IN SEPARATION OF THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN REDUCED STEERING CONTROL INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT BOTH FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM REAR ATTACHING BRACKETS, AND BOTH BODY MOUNT ATTACHMENTS AT THE REAR OF THE FRONT SUBFRAME, AND MAKE THE NECESSARY REPAIRS FREE OF CHARGE. IF REPAIRS CANNOT BE MADE TO A VEHICLE, FORD WILL OFFER TO REPURCHASE THE VEHICLE. THE SAFETY RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN ON OR BEFORE FEBRUARY 21, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-866-436-7332.
Aug 26, 2010
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1998-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM SEPTEMBER 1, 1997 THROUGH FEBRUARY 28, 2003 AND CURRENTLY REGISTERED OR ORIGINALLY SOLD IN CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, KENTUCKY, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA, AND WISCONSIN. AFTER MANY YEARS OF VEHICLE SERVICE IN THESE AREAS, CORROSION CAN WEAKEN THE REAR AXLE, MAKING IT SUSCEPTIBLE TO TORSIONAL STRESS. CORROSION AND STRESS CAN LEAD TO CRACKS WHICH IF UNDETECTED CAN PROPAGATE AND RESULT IN A COMPLETE FRACTURE OF THE AXLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A FRACTURED AXLE CAN AFFECT VEHICLE HANDLING AND INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: AS PARTS BECOME AVAILABLE, DEALERS WILL INSPECT AND IF NECESSARY INSTALL THE REAR AXLE REINFORCEMENT BRACKETS FREE OF CHARGE. THIS SERVICE WILL BE PERFORMED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON OCTOBER 20, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-866-436-7332.
Oct 13, 2009
FORD IS RECALLING MODEL YEARS 1995-2003 WINDSTAR, 2000-2003 EXCURSION DIESEL, 1993-1997 AND 1999-2003 F-250 SD THROUGH F-550 SD DIESEL, 1992-2003 E-150 THROUGH E-550, 1995-2002 EXPLORER, 1997 AND 2002 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER, 1995-1997 AND 2001-2003 RANGER, AND 1994 F53 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS). THE SCDS MAY LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A VEHICLE FIRE COULD OCCUR WITH OR WITHOUT THE ENGINE RUNNING.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS THAT DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS IN LINE WITH THE SCDS. ON 1999-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH A LEAKING SCDS, DEALERS WILL ALSO INSPECT THE ABS CONTROL MODULE CONNECTOR AND REPAIR AS NECESSARY. REPAIRS WILL BE COMPLETED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON OCTOBER 27, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
Aug 15, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MINI VANS. CONTAMINANTS SUCH AS WATER, SALT, AND WINDSHIELD WASHER SOLUTION CAN ENTER THE WIPER MOTOR COVER ASSEMBLY THROUGH PINHOLES ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE COVER THAT ARE USED IN THE MOLDING PROCESS. IN ADDITION, ON CERTAIN OF THE VEHICLES BUILT BETWEEN FEBRUARY AND AUGUST 2000, A SWITCH LOCATED IN THE PLASTIC COVER OF THE WIPER MOTOR GEAR CASE COULD MALFUNCTION AND OVERHEAT. EITHER OF THESE CONDITIONS COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT IN LOSS OF INTERMITTENT WIPER FUNCTION, LOSS OF WIPER PARK FUNCTION, COMPLETE LOSS OF WIPER FUNCTION, SMOKE, OR IGNITION OF THE PLASTIC COVER MATERIAL. CONTAMINANT ENTRY COULD ALSO RESULT IN UNINTENDED WIPER MOTOR OPERATION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: SWITCH MALFUNCTION IS MOST LIKELY TO OCCUR WHEN THE INTERMITTENT SETTING OF THE WIPERS IS BEING USED, OR WHEN SNOW OR ICE OBSTRUCTS THE BLADES FROM RETURNING TO THE "PARKED" POSITION AT THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDSHIELD. LOSS OF VISIBILITY WHILE DRIVING INCREASES THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A NEW WIPER COVER WITH IMPROVED SEALING AND WATER RESISTANCE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAIN AUGUST 27, 2001. 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 AT 1-866-436-7332.
Aug 15, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MINI VANS EQUIPPED WITH AUXILIARY REAR AIR-CONDITIONING. IF THE AUXILIARY AIR-CONDITIONING BLOWER MOTOR STOPS TURNING WHILE IN THE MEDIUM-LOW BLOWER SPEED SETTING, THERE IS THE POTENTIAL THAT THE RESISTOR MAY BECOME HOT AND SMOKE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE MOTOR COULD POTENTIALLY CATCH ON FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A JUMPER WIRE THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE MEDIUM-LOW BLOWER SPEED SETTING IS PROTECTED BY THE THERMAL LIMITER. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN AUGSUT 27, 2001. 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 AT 1-866-436-7332.
Oct 30, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MINIVANS BUILT WITH INSTRUMENT CLUSTERS WITHOUT THE MESSAGE CENTER, FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF STANDARD NO. 118, "POWER-OPERATED WINDOW, PARTITION, AND ROOF PANEL SYSTEMS." THE POWER WINDOWS MAY BE OPERABLE AFTER THE IGNITION HAS BEEN TURNED TO THE "OFF" POSITION AND THE FRONT DOORS ARE OPENED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE STANDARD REQUIRES THAT POWER OPERATED WINDOWS MAY BE CLOSED ONLY WHEN THE KEY IS IN THE "ON," "START," OR "ACCESSORY" POSITIONS, OR DURING THE INTERVAL BETWEEN THE TIME THE KEY IS TURNED OFF, AND THE OPENING OF EITHER OF THE VEHICLE'S FRONT DOORS.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL RECONFIGURE THE VEHICLE FRONT END ELECTRONIC MODULE.
Jun 14, 1999
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MINIVANS. THE BRAKE FLUID MASTER CYLINDER IS RECESSED AND ORIENTED IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT SO THAT THE BRAKE FLUID WARNING STATEMENT EMBOSSED ON BOTH THE TOP OF THE FILLER CAP AND THE SIDE OF THE RESERVOIR BODY ARE NOT ENTIRELY VISIBLE BY DIRECT VIEW. THESE VEHICLES MAY NOT FULLY COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 135, "PASSENGER CAR BRAKE SYSTEMS."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Not supplied
Remedy: OWNERS WILL BE PROVIDED WITH NEW LABELS AND INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS.
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
8EA10007 · Front Subframe Corrosion Failures
Opened Dec 20, 2010 · Closed Mar 17, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:frame And Members; Suspension
In a January 26, 2011 Defect Information Report, Ford Motor Company (Ford) notified the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that it will conduct a safety recall to address corrosion related fractures in the front lower control arm rear attaching brackets and body mount attachments at the rear of the front subframe in approximately 425,288 model year (MY) 1999 through 2003 Ford Windstar vehicles manufactured from April 1998 to July 2003 and either sold or currently registered in the following high corrosion (Salt-Belt) states:Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin (NHTSA Recall No. 11V-030, Ford Recall No. 11S16).According to Ford, separation of a front lower control arm rear attaching bracket may result in a lower control arm separation and separations of both front subframe rear body mounts may result in separation of the steering intermediate shaft.Either condition could result in diminished vehicle directional control, increasing the risk of a crash.Dealers will inspect the lower control arm rear attachment flanges and the rear body mount sections of the subframe on the right (passenger) and left (driver) sides of the vehicle.Owners of vehicles that pass the inspection will be notified when to return for installation of reinforcement brackets to extend the durability of the front subframe assembly in affected areas in the presence of corrosion.Owners of vehicles that do not pass inspection, but can be repaired, will be offered transportation until parts become available.Repurchase offers will be extended to owners of vehicles that cannot be repaired with the reinforcement brackets.This investigation is closed.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Structure:frame And Members
In a January 26, 2011 Defect Information Report, Ford Motor Company (Ford) notified the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that it will conduct a safety recall to address corrosion related fractures in the front lower control arm rear attaching brackets and body mount attachments at the rear of the front subframe in approximately 425,288 model year (MY) 1999 through 2003 Ford Windstar vehicles manufactured from April 1998 to July 2003 and either sold or currently registered in the following high corrosion (Salt-Belt) states:Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin (NHTSA Recall No. 11V-030, Ford Recall No. 11S16).According to Ford, separation of a front lower control arm rear attaching bracket may result in a lower control arm separation and separations of both front subframe rear body mounts may result in separation of the steering intermediate shaft.Either condition could result in diminished vehicle directional control, increasing the risk of a crash.Dealers will inspect the lower control arm rear attachment flanges and the rear body mount sections of the subframe on the right (passenger) and left (driver) sides of the vehicle.Owners of vehicles that pass the inspection will be notified when to return for installation of reinforcement brackets to extend the durability of the front subframe assembly in affected areas in the presence of corrosion.Owners of vehicles that do not pass inspection, but can be repaired, will be offered transportation until parts become available.Repurchase offers will be extended to owners of vehicles that cannot be repaired with the reinforcement brackets.This investigation is closed.
Suspension
In a January 26, 2011 Defect Information Report, Ford Motor Company (Ford) notified the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that it will conduct a safety recall to address corrosion related fractures in the front lower control arm rear attaching brackets and body mount attachments at the rear of the front subframe in approximately 425,288 model year (MY) 1999 through 2003 Ford Windstar vehicles manufactured from April 1998 to July 2003 and either sold or currently registered in the following high corrosion (Salt-Belt) states:Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin (NHTSA Recall No. 11V-030, Ford Recall No. 11S16).According to Ford, separation of a front lower control arm rear attaching bracket may result in a lower control arm separation and separations of both front subframe rear body mounts may result in separation of the steering intermediate shaft.Either condition could result in diminished vehicle directional control, increasing the risk of a crash.Dealers will inspect the lower control arm rear attachment flanges and the rear body mount sections of the subframe on the right (passenger) and left (driver) sides of the vehicle.Owners of vehicles that pass the inspection will be notified when to return for installation of reinforcement brackets to extend the durability of the front subframe assembly in affected areas in the presence of corrosion.Owners of vehicles that do not pass inspection, but can be repaired, will be offered transportation until parts become available.Repurchase offers will be extended to owners of vehicles that cannot be repaired with the reinforcement brackets.This investigation is closed.
PE10026 · Front Subframe Corrosion Failures
Opened Jul 20, 2010 · Closed Dec 20, 2010
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:frame And Members; Suspension
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has identified 346 complaints to ODI and Ford alleging fracture, cracking and or excessive corrosion of the front subframes in model year (MY) 1999 through 2003 Ford Windstar vehicles.Approximately 97 percent of these complaints (334) involve vehicles that have been operated in Salt Belt states, which make up approximately 60 percent of the subject vehicle sales in the United States.The front subframe, sometimes referred to as the engine cradle, is a structural component of the Windstar vehicles that carries the engine, transaxle, steering rack and certain front suspension components (e.g., lower control arm).For complaints with sufficient information to identify the location of the failure, most describe problems with the rear mounting bracket for the front passenger-side lower control arm with some related to the rear body mount attachment located in the same general area of the subframe (right-rear section near the front passenger wheel).The remainder of the reports allege fracture of the front subframe at other or, most often, unspecified locations.Almost all of the complaints that specified the side of the vehicle indicated that the problem occurred on the right/passenger side (106), with only a few indicating the left/driver side (2) or both sides (3) were affected.Ford and several complainants attributed the right-side failures to the routing of the air-conditioning lines above the front subframe on that side of the vehicle, further noting that condensation has been observed dripping onto the front subframe in the area of the affected components (the A/C drain tube is also located on the right side, near the front subframe).ODI has identified 93 complaints related to lower control arm attachments, including 80 that appear to involve complete separations.All but one of these involved vehicles from Salt Belt states.All three crash incidents appear to be related to lower control arm separations, including one road departure into a road-side sign resulting in a totalled vehicle and a lane departure into another vehicle.Almost half of the ODI complaints related to control arm separation occurred at speeds greater than 20 mph and about a quarter occurred at highway speeds.Three-quarters of these complaints allege experiencing difficulty controlling the vehicle and about 40 percent appear to have resulted in departures from the intended lane of travel.Testing by both Ford and NHTSA have demonstrated that lower control arm separation from the rear attachment bracket results in significant toe out of the affected wheel, which affects the driver's ability to control vehicle direction.According to Ford, moderate braking improved vehicle controllability by reducing the amount of toe out, possibly explaining incidents that did not allege a loss of control.ODI's analysis of complaints related to the rear body mount identified 41 complaints (ODI only).These complaints generally report experiencing progressively worsening noise concerns when turning, accelerating or braking.Although, some of the complaints that appeared to involve a complete separation of the body mount alleged difficulty steering, the effects on vehicle control from this failure mode do not appear to be as great as those resulting from control arm separation.However, ODI is seeking more information regarding two complaints which alleged that body mount failure resulted in disconnection of the steering wheel from the steering rack (one occurred during vehicle service).This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA10-007) for subject vehicles sold or currently re
Additional source detail variants (2)
Structure:frame And Members
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has identified 346 complaints to ODI and Ford alleging fracture, cracking and or excessive corrosion of the front subframes in model year (MY) 1999 through 2003 Ford Windstar vehicles.Approximately 97 percent of these complaints (334) involve vehicles that have been operated in Salt Belt states, which make up approximately 60 percent of the subject vehicle sales in the United States.The front subframe, sometimes referred to as the engine cradle, is a structural component of the Windstar vehicles that carries the engine, transaxle, steering rack and certain front suspension components (e.g., lower control arm).For complaints with sufficient information to identify the location of the failure, most describe problems with the rear mounting bracket for the front passenger-side lower control arm with some related to the rear body mount attachment located in the same general area of the subframe (right-rear section near the front passenger wheel).The remainder of the reports allege fracture of the front subframe at other or, most often, unspecified locations.Almost all of the complaints that specified the side of the vehicle indicated that the problem occurred on the right/passenger side (106), with only a few indicating the left/driver side (2) or both sides (3) were affected.Ford and several complainants attributed the right-side failures to the routing of the air-conditioning lines above the front subframe on that side of the vehicle, further noting that condensation has been observed dripping onto the front subframe in the area of the affected components (the A/C drain tube is also located on the right side, near the front subframe).ODI has identified 93 complaints related to lower control arm attachments, including 80 that appear to involve complete separations.All but one of these involved vehicles from Salt Belt states.All three crash incidents appear to be related to lower control arm separations, including one road departure into a road-side sign resulting in a totalled vehicle and a lane departure into another vehicle.Almost half of the ODI complaints related to control arm separation occurred at speeds greater than 20 mph and about a quarter occurred at highway speeds.Three-quarters of these complaints allege experiencing difficulty controlling the vehicle and about 40 percent appear to have resulted in departures from the intended lane of travel.Testing by both Ford and NHTSA have demonstrated that lower control arm separation from the rear attachment bracket results in significant toe out of the affected wheel, which affects the driver's ability to control vehicle direction.According to Ford, moderate braking improved vehicle controllability by reducing the amount of toe out, possibly explaining incidents that did not allege a loss of control.ODI's analysis of complaints related to the rear body mount identified 41 complaints (ODI only).These complaints generally report experiencing progressively worsening noise concerns when turning, accelerating or braking.Although, some of the complaints that appeared to involve a complete separation of the body mount alleged difficulty steering, the effects on vehicle control from this failure mode do not appear to be as great as those resulting from control arm separation.However, ODI is seeking more information regarding two complaints which alleged that body mount failure resulted in disconnection of the steering wheel from the steering rack (one occurred during vehicle service).This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA10-007) for subject vehicles sold or currently re
Suspension
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has identified 346 complaints to ODI and Ford alleging fracture, cracking and or excessive corrosion of the front subframes in model year (MY) 1999 through 2003 Ford Windstar vehicles.Approximately 97 percent of these complaints (334) involve vehicles that have been operated in Salt Belt states, which make up approximately 60 percent of the subject vehicle sales in the United States.The front subframe, sometimes referred to as the engine cradle, is a structural component of the Windstar vehicles that carries the engine, transaxle, steering rack and certain front suspension components (e.g., lower control arm).For complaints with sufficient information to identify the location of the failure, most describe problems with the rear mounting bracket for the front passenger-side lower control arm with some related to the rear body mount attachment located in the same general area of the subframe (right-rear section near the front passenger wheel).The remainder of the reports allege fracture of the front subframe at other or, most often, unspecified locations.Almost all of the complaints that specified the side of the vehicle indicated that the problem occurred on the right/passenger side (106), with only a few indicating the left/driver side (2) or both sides (3) were affected.Ford and several complainants attributed the right-side failures to the routing of the air-conditioning lines above the front subframe on that side of the vehicle, further noting that condensation has been observed dripping onto the front subframe in the area of the affected components (the A/C drain tube is also located on the right side, near the front subframe).ODI has identified 93 complaints related to lower control arm attachments, including 80 that appear to involve complete separations.All but one of these involved vehicles from Salt Belt states.All three crash incidents appear to be related to lower control arm separations, including one road departure into a road-side sign resulting in a totalled vehicle and a lane departure into another vehicle.Almost half of the ODI complaints related to control arm separation occurred at speeds greater than 20 mph and about a quarter occurred at highway speeds.Three-quarters of these complaints allege experiencing difficulty controlling the vehicle and about 40 percent appear to have resulted in departures from the intended lane of travel.Testing by both Ford and NHTSA have demonstrated that lower control arm separation from the rear attachment bracket results in significant toe out of the affected wheel, which affects the driver's ability to control vehicle direction.According to Ford, moderate braking improved vehicle controllability by reducing the amount of toe out, possibly explaining incidents that did not allege a loss of control.ODI's analysis of complaints related to the rear body mount identified 41 complaints (ODI only).These complaints generally report experiencing progressively worsening noise concerns when turning, accelerating or braking.Although, some of the complaints that appeared to involve a complete separation of the body mount alleged difficulty steering, the effects on vehicle control from this failure mode do not appear to be as great as those resulting from control arm separation.However, ODI is seeking more information regarding two complaints which alleged that body mount failure resulted in disconnection of the steering wheel from the steering rack (one occurred during vehicle service).This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA10-007) for subject vehicles sold or currently re
PE10016 · Rear Axle Cracking
Opened May 13, 2010 · Closed Sep 22, 2010
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension
In a letter dated August 26, 2010, Ford Motor Company (Ford) submitted a Defect Information Report notifying NHTSA that it will conduct a safety recall (NHTSA Recall No. 10V-385) to address a rear axle defect in model year (MY) 1998 through 2003 Ford Windstar vehicles built at the Oakville assembly plant from September 1, 1997 through February 28, 2003 and either sold or currently registered in high corrosion (Salt-Belt) states where the use of salt and other corrosive chemicals may be used to treat snow/ice covered roads.The following states are included in Ford's recall:Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin. The subject vehicles utilize a Stamped/Formed axle assembly manufactured by Benteler automotive Corporation of Galesburg, MI.According to Ford, after many years of vehicle service in the Salt-Belt states, corrosion can weaken the rear axle, making it susceptible to torsional stress.There is a risk that the combined effects of corrosion and stress can lead to cracks which, if undetected, can propagate and result in a complete fracture of the axle.A completely fractured axle can affect vehicle handling and increase the risk of a crash.To correct the safety defect, Ford will initially inspect all of the subject vehicles brought into Ford/Lincoln-Mercury dealerships for possible cracked axles.Owners of vehicles without cracked axles will be notified when to return for the installation of reinforcement brackets to extend the axle durability in the presence of corrosion.Owners who have vehicles with cracked axles will either be offered a repair or alternative transportation until parts become available. On May 13, 2010, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE10-016 to investigate complaints of rear axle cracking in MY 1999 through 2003 Ford Windstar minivans.Combining ODI and Ford complaint data, ODI is aware of a total 891 complaints alleging rear axle cracking in the subject vehicles.Over a third of the complaints (334) allege that the cracking progressed to a complete fracture of the rear axle, including 8 allegations of crashes resulting in 3 injuries. Approximately 57 percent of the subject vehicles (524,661) were sold in Salt-Belt states covered by Ford's recall and Ford estimates that approximately 463,000 of these remain in service.Ninety-six percent of the complaints (858) and all of the complaints alleging complete fracture were from the recall region.The action taken by Ford is sufficient to resolve the issues raised by this investigation.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.
EA08021 · Engine Compartment Fires
Opened Sep 17, 2008 · Closed Oct 14, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System; Electrical System:wiring; Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module ; Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
EA08-021 IS CLOSED WITH FORD'S ACTIONS IN RECALL 09V-399 RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 4.5 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).WITH THIS RECALL FORD HAS NOW RECALLED ALL OF THE APPROXIMATE 16 MILLION FORD MODEL VEHICLES THAT WERE MANUFACTURED FROM MY 1992 THROUGH 2003 WITH A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SCDS.NHTSA WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE RECALLED VEHICLES TO ENSURE REMEDIES INSTALLED BY FORD TOMITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SCDS RELATED FIRES ARE EFFECTIVE.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Additional source detail variants (7)
Electrical System
EA08-021 IS CLOSED WITH FORD'S ACTIONS IN RECALL 09V-399 RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 4.5 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).WITH THIS RECALL FORD HAS NOW RECALLED ALL OF THE APPROXIMATE 16 MILLION FORD MODEL VEHICLES THAT WERE MANUFACTURED FROM MY 1992 THROUGH 2003 WITH A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SCDS.NHTSA WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE RECALLED VEHICLES TO ENSURE REMEDIES INSTALLED BY FORD TOMITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SCDS RELATED FIRES ARE EFFECTIVE.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Electrical System:wiring
EA08-021 IS CLOSED WITH FORD'S ACTIONS IN RECALL 09V-399 RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 4.5 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).WITH THIS RECALL FORD HAS NOW RECALLED ALL OF THE APPROXIMATE 16 MILLION FORD MODEL VEHICLES THAT WERE MANUFACTURED FROM MY 1992 THROUGH 2003 WITH A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SCDS.NHTSA WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE RECALLED VEHICLES TO ENSURE REMEDIES INSTALLED BY FORD TOMITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SCDS RELATED FIRES ARE EFFECTIVE.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module
EA08-021 IS CLOSED WITH FORD'S ACTIONS IN RECALL 09V-399 RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 4.5 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).WITH THIS RECALL FORD HAS NOW RECALLED ALL OF THE APPROXIMATE 16 MILLION FORD MODEL VEHICLES THAT WERE MANUFACTURED FROM MY 1992 THROUGH 2003 WITH A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SCDS.NHTSA WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE RECALLED VEHICLES TO ENSURE REMEDIES INSTALLED BY FORD TOMITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SCDS RELATED FIRES ARE EFFECTIVE.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip
EA08-021 IS CLOSED WITH FORD'S ACTIONS IN RECALL 09V-399 RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 4.5 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).WITH THIS RECALL FORD HAS NOW RECALLED ALL OF THE APPROXIMATE 16 MILLION FORD MODEL VEHICLES THAT WERE MANUFACTURED FROM MY 1992 THROUGH 2003 WITH A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SCDS.NHTSA WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE RECALLED VEHICLES TO ENSURE REMEDIES INSTALLED BY FORD TOMITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SCDS RELATED FIRES ARE EFFECTIVE.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
EA08-021 IS CLOSED WITH FORD'S ACTIONS IN RECALL 09V-399 RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 4.5 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).WITH THIS RECALL FORD HAS NOW RECALLED ALL OF THE APPROXIMATE 16 MILLION FORD MODEL VEHICLES THAT WERE MANUFACTURED FROM MY 1992 THROUGH 2003 WITH A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SCDS.NHTSA WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE RECALLED VEHICLES TO ENSURE REMEDIES INSTALLED BY FORD TOMITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SCDS RELATED FIRES ARE EFFECTIVE.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
EA08-021 IS CLOSED WITH FORD'S ACTIONS IN RECALL 09V-399 RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 4.5 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).WITH THIS RECALL FORD HAS NOW RECALLED ALL OF THE APPROXIMATE 16 MILLION FORD MODEL VEHICLES THAT WERE MANUFACTURED FROM MY 1992 THROUGH 2003 WITH A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SCDS.NHTSA WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE RECALLED VEHICLES TO ENSURE REMEDIES INSTALLED BY FORD TOMITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SCDS RELATED FIRES ARE EFFECTIVE.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Vehicle Speed Control
EA08-021 IS CLOSED WITH FORD'S ACTIONS IN RECALL 09V-399 RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 4.5 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).WITH THIS RECALL FORD HAS NOW RECALLED ALL OF THE APPROXIMATE 16 MILLION FORD MODEL VEHICLES THAT WERE MANUFACTURED FROM MY 1992 THROUGH 2003 WITH A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SCDS.NHTSA WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE RECALLED VEHICLES TO ENSURE REMEDIES INSTALLED BY FORD TOMITIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SCDS RELATED FIRES ARE EFFECTIVE.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
PE08035 · Engine Compartment Fires
Opened May 13, 2008 · Closed Sep 17, 2008
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System; Electrical System:wiring; Vehicle Speed Control
ODI HAS RECEIVED 134 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, 285 MANUFACTURER COMPLAINTS, AND 137 MANUFACTURER WARRANTY CLAIMS ALLEGING INCIDENTS OF ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1995 THRU 2003 FORD WINDSTAR VEHICLES.TWO OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THE FIRES CAUSED STRUCTURAL DAMAGE TO THE COMPLAINANT'S HOME.OF THE 134 ODI COMPLAINTS, 36 ALLEGE THE FIRE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, 72 ALLEGE THE FIRE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS RUNNING AND 26 OF THE COMPLAINTS DO NOT SPECIFY IF THE VEHICLE WAS RUNNING OR NOT.FURTHER REVIEW OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS SHOWS THAT 72 ALLEGE THAT THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS) CAUSED THE FIRE AND 10 ALLEGE THAT THE SCDS LEAKED BRAKE FLUID ON TO THE ABS MODULE RESULTING IN THE FIRE.THERE WERE 52 THAT DID NOT IDENTIFY A CAUSE OR THAT IDENTIFIED MISCELLANEOUS OTHER CAUSES.ODI HAS ALSO RECEIVED 89 COMPLAINTS ( NOT COUNTED IN THIS RESUME) ALLEGING THAT THE SCDS DEVELOPED A BRAKE FLUID LEAK.THIRTEEN OF THESE COMPLAINTS SAY THAT THE LEAK AT THE SCDS RESULTED IN BRAKED FLUID REACHING THE ABS MODULE.THIS PE HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA) TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRES AND ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY, AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Electrical System
ODI HAS RECEIVED 134 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, 285 MANUFACTURER COMPLAINTS, AND 137 MANUFACTURER WARRANTY CLAIMS ALLEGING INCIDENTS OF ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1995 THRU 2003 FORD WINDSTAR VEHICLES.TWO OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THE FIRES CAUSED STRUCTURAL DAMAGE TO THE COMPLAINANT'S HOME.OF THE 134 ODI COMPLAINTS, 36 ALLEGE THE FIRE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, 72 ALLEGE THE FIRE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS RUNNING AND 26 OF THE COMPLAINTS DO NOT SPECIFY IF THE VEHICLE WAS RUNNING OR NOT.FURTHER REVIEW OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS SHOWS THAT 72 ALLEGE THAT THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS) CAUSED THE FIRE AND 10 ALLEGE THAT THE SCDS LEAKED BRAKE FLUID ON TO THE ABS MODULE RESULTING IN THE FIRE.THERE WERE 52 THAT DID NOT IDENTIFY A CAUSE OR THAT IDENTIFIED MISCELLANEOUS OTHER CAUSES.ODI HAS ALSO RECEIVED 89 COMPLAINTS ( NOT COUNTED IN THIS RESUME) ALLEGING THAT THE SCDS DEVELOPED A BRAKE FLUID LEAK.THIRTEEN OF THESE COMPLAINTS SAY THAT THE LEAK AT THE SCDS RESULTED IN BRAKED FLUID REACHING THE ABS MODULE.THIS PE HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA) TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRES AND ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY, AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.
Electrical System:wiring
ODI HAS RECEIVED 134 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, 285 MANUFACTURER COMPLAINTS, AND 137 MANUFACTURER WARRANTY CLAIMS ALLEGING INCIDENTS OF ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1995 THRU 2003 FORD WINDSTAR VEHICLES.TWO OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THE FIRES CAUSED STRUCTURAL DAMAGE TO THE COMPLAINANT'S HOME.OF THE 134 ODI COMPLAINTS, 36 ALLEGE THE FIRE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, 72 ALLEGE THE FIRE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS RUNNING AND 26 OF THE COMPLAINTS DO NOT SPECIFY IF THE VEHICLE WAS RUNNING OR NOT.FURTHER REVIEW OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS SHOWS THAT 72 ALLEGE THAT THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS) CAUSED THE FIRE AND 10 ALLEGE THAT THE SCDS LEAKED BRAKE FLUID ON TO THE ABS MODULE RESULTING IN THE FIRE.THERE WERE 52 THAT DID NOT IDENTIFY A CAUSE OR THAT IDENTIFIED MISCELLANEOUS OTHER CAUSES.ODI HAS ALSO RECEIVED 89 COMPLAINTS ( NOT COUNTED IN THIS RESUME) ALLEGING THAT THE SCDS DEVELOPED A BRAKE FLUID LEAK.THIRTEEN OF THESE COMPLAINTS SAY THAT THE LEAK AT THE SCDS RESULTED IN BRAKED FLUID REACHING THE ABS MODULE.THIS PE HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA) TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRES AND ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY, AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.
Vehicle Speed Control
ODI HAS RECEIVED 134 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, 285 MANUFACTURER COMPLAINTS, AND 137 MANUFACTURER WARRANTY CLAIMS ALLEGING INCIDENTS OF ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1995 THRU 2003 FORD WINDSTAR VEHICLES.TWO OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THE FIRES CAUSED STRUCTURAL DAMAGE TO THE COMPLAINANT'S HOME.OF THE 134 ODI COMPLAINTS, 36 ALLEGE THE FIRE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, 72 ALLEGE THE FIRE OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS RUNNING AND 26 OF THE COMPLAINTS DO NOT SPECIFY IF THE VEHICLE WAS RUNNING OR NOT.FURTHER REVIEW OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS SHOWS THAT 72 ALLEGE THAT THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS) CAUSED THE FIRE AND 10 ALLEGE THAT THE SCDS LEAKED BRAKE FLUID ON TO THE ABS MODULE RESULTING IN THE FIRE.THERE WERE 52 THAT DID NOT IDENTIFY A CAUSE OR THAT IDENTIFIED MISCELLANEOUS OTHER CAUSES.ODI HAS ALSO RECEIVED 89 COMPLAINTS ( NOT COUNTED IN THIS RESUME) ALLEGING THAT THE SCDS DEVELOPED A BRAKE FLUID LEAK.THIRTEEN OF THESE COMPLAINTS SAY THAT THE LEAK AT THE SCDS RESULTED IN BRAKED FLUID REACHING THE ABS MODULE.THIS PE HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA) TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRES AND ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY, AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.
PE04022 · Power Sliding Door Opening
Opened Mar 3, 2004 · Closed Jul 1, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:door ; Structure:body:door:hinge And Attachments
THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH SINGLE OR DUAL POWER SLIDING DOORS (PSD).APPROXIMATELY 111,000 VEHICLES HAVE DUAL POWER SLIDING DOORS.THE PSD IS OPENED BY ANY OF 5 METHODS, THE INSIDE OR OUTSIDE MANUAL DOOR HANDLE, THE KEY FOB, THE OVERHEAD CONSOLE SWITCH AND THE B-PILLAR SWITCH.THE DOOR MAY BE OPENED ONLY UNDER THESE CONDITIONS: IGNITION KEY IS IN OFF/ACCESSORIES/ON/START POSITION, GEAR SELECTOR IN PARK, VEHICLE SPEED LESS THAN 6 MPH, AND DOOR UNLOCKED.THE PSD LATCH IS LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE DOOR AND HAS A SECONDARY AND PRIMARY LATCH POSITION.FULL AND PROPER CLOSURE ENGAGES BOTH THE SECONDARY AND PRIMARY LATCH.WITH THE IGNITION IN THE ON POSITION, AS THE GEAR SELECTOR IS MOVED OUT OF PARK THE DOOR AUTOMATICALLY LOCKS AND THAT ACTION MECHANICALLY ISOLATES THE LATCH, SECONDARY AND PRIMARY, FROM ALL LATCH RELEASE CONNECTIONS.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS ALLEGING DOOR OPENING WHILE DRIVING, FORD HAS RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY 5,700 REPORTS THAT ALLEGE THE DOOR DOES NOT CLOSE PROPERLY OR POPS OPEN WITH NO MENTION OF WHILE DRIVING.FORD'S INVESTIGATION INTO THESE REPORT INCLUDED OWNER INTERVIEWS, VEHICLE BY-BACKS AND TESTING OF CONSUMER VEHICLES.IT FOUND THAT ALLEGATIONS OF DOOR OPENING WHILE DRIVING WERE IN FACT REPORTS OF DOORS NOT BEING PROPERLY CLOSED INITIALLY AND SUBSEQUENTLY OPENING TO THE SECONDARY LATCH POSITION AS A RESULT OF VEHICLE VIBRATIONS OR DRIVING MANEUVERS.FORD'S TESTING OF CONSUMER VEHICLES DID NOT RESULT IN ANY RECURRENCE OF PSD OPENING WHILE BEING DRIVEN.ODI INTERVIEWS WITH OWNERS AFFIRMED THE ALLEGATIONS OF PSD OPENING WHILE DRIVING; HOWEVER OWNERS INDICATED THE EVENT IS NOT A REGULAR OCCURRENCE (I.E.,IT OCCURRED ONLY ONCE OR HAS NOT OCCURRED RECENTLY) AND THAT THE UNINTENDED PSD OPENING MAY NOT BE ABLE TO BE DUPLICATED.IN CONTRAST, THE IMPROPER CLOSING OF THE PSD (LATCHING ON THE SECONDARY BUT NOT THE PRIMARY LATCH) CAN BE DUPLICATED, AND ODI VERIFIED THIS DURING AN INSPECTION OF A CONSUMER VEHICLE.IN THIS CONDITION (SECONDARY BUT NO PRIMARY LATCH), WHEN THE VEHICLE'S GEAR SELECTOR IS MOVED OUT OF PARK POSITION, A WARNING CHIME SOUNDS AND WARNING MESSAGE APPEARS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL.MOST REPORTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS WERE FILED IN THE EARLY SERVICE-LIFE OF THE VEHICLE AND PEAKED AROUND THE 18-MONTH IN-SERVICE TIME PERIOD.ODI AND MFR COMPLAINT TRENDS ARE DECLINING OVER THE LAST 8 QUARTERS.THERE IS NO ALLEGED INJURY ASSOCIATED WITH OCCUPANT FALLING OUT WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION.NO FAILURE MODE CAUSING FULL DOOR OPENING WHILE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION HAS BEEN VERIFIED (REPRODUCED BY ODI OR BY TRAINED SERVICE TECHNICIANS AT DEALERSHIPS) DURING THIS INVESTIGATION.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 MONITOR THIS ISSUE AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Structure:body:door
THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH SINGLE OR DUAL POWER SLIDING DOORS (PSD).APPROXIMATELY 111,000 VEHICLES HAVE DUAL POWER SLIDING DOORS.THE PSD IS OPENED BY ANY OF 5 METHODS, THE INSIDE OR OUTSIDE MANUAL DOOR HANDLE, THE KEY FOB, THE OVERHEAD CONSOLE SWITCH AND THE B-PILLAR SWITCH.THE DOOR MAY BE OPENED ONLY UNDER THESE CONDITIONS: IGNITION KEY IS IN OFF/ACCESSORIES/ON/START POSITION, GEAR SELECTOR IN PARK, VEHICLE SPEED LESS THAN 6 MPH, AND DOOR UNLOCKED.THE PSD LATCH IS LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE DOOR AND HAS A SECONDARY AND PRIMARY LATCH POSITION.FULL AND PROPER CLOSURE ENGAGES BOTH THE SECONDARY AND PRIMARY LATCH.WITH THE IGNITION IN THE ON POSITION, AS THE GEAR SELECTOR IS MOVED OUT OF PARK THE DOOR AUTOMATICALLY LOCKS AND THAT ACTION MECHANICALLY ISOLATES THE LATCH, SECONDARY AND PRIMARY, FROM ALL LATCH RELEASE CONNECTIONS.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS ALLEGING DOOR OPENING WHILE DRIVING, FORD HAS RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY 5,700 REPORTS THAT ALLEGE THE DOOR DOES NOT CLOSE PROPERLY OR POPS OPEN WITH NO MENTION OF WHILE DRIVING.FORD'S INVESTIGATION INTO THESE REPORT INCLUDED OWNER INTERVIEWS, VEHICLE BY-BACKS AND TESTING OF CONSUMER VEHICLES.IT FOUND THAT ALLEGATIONS OF DOOR OPENING WHILE DRIVING WERE IN FACT REPORTS OF DOORS NOT BEING PROPERLY CLOSED INITIALLY AND SUBSEQUENTLY OPENING TO THE SECONDARY LATCH POSITION AS A RESULT OF VEHICLE VIBRATIONS OR DRIVING MANEUVERS.FORD'S TESTING OF CONSUMER VEHICLES DID NOT RESULT IN ANY RECURRENCE OF PSD OPENING WHILE BEING DRIVEN.ODI INTERVIEWS WITH OWNERS AFFIRMED THE ALLEGATIONS OF PSD OPENING WHILE DRIVING; HOWEVER OWNERS INDICATED THE EVENT IS NOT A REGULAR OCCURRENCE (I.E.,IT OCCURRED ONLY ONCE OR HAS NOT OCCURRED RECENTLY) AND THAT THE UNINTENDED PSD OPENING MAY NOT BE ABLE TO BE DUPLICATED.IN CONTRAST, THE IMPROPER CLOSING OF THE PSD (LATCHING ON THE SECONDARY BUT NOT THE PRIMARY LATCH) CAN BE DUPLICATED, AND ODI VERIFIED THIS DURING AN INSPECTION OF A CONSUMER VEHICLE.IN THIS CONDITION (SECONDARY BUT NO PRIMARY LATCH), WHEN THE VEHICLE'S GEAR SELECTOR IS MOVED OUT OF PARK POSITION, A WARNING CHIME SOUNDS AND WARNING MESSAGE APPEARS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL.MOST REPORTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS WERE FILED IN THE EARLY SERVICE-LIFE OF THE VEHICLE AND PEAKED AROUND THE 18-MONTH IN-SERVICE TIME PERIOD.ODI AND MFR COMPLAINT TRENDS ARE DECLINING OVER THE LAST 8 QUARTERS.THERE IS NO ALLEGED INJURY ASSOCIATED WITH OCCUPANT FALLING OUT WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION.NO FAILURE MODE CAUSING FULL DOOR OPENING WHILE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION HAS BEEN VERIFIED (REPRODUCED BY ODI OR BY TRAINED SERVICE TECHNICIANS AT DEALERSHIPS) DURING THIS INVESTIGATION.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 MONITOR THIS ISSUE AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Structure:body:door:hinge And Attachments
THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH SINGLE OR DUAL POWER SLIDING DOORS (PSD).APPROXIMATELY 111,000 VEHICLES HAVE DUAL POWER SLIDING DOORS.THE PSD IS OPENED BY ANY OF 5 METHODS, THE INSIDE OR OUTSIDE MANUAL DOOR HANDLE, THE KEY FOB, THE OVERHEAD CONSOLE SWITCH AND THE B-PILLAR SWITCH.THE DOOR MAY BE OPENED ONLY UNDER THESE CONDITIONS: IGNITION KEY IS IN OFF/ACCESSORIES/ON/START POSITION, GEAR SELECTOR IN PARK, VEHICLE SPEED LESS THAN 6 MPH, AND DOOR UNLOCKED.THE PSD LATCH IS LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE DOOR AND HAS A SECONDARY AND PRIMARY LATCH POSITION.FULL AND PROPER CLOSURE ENGAGES BOTH THE SECONDARY AND PRIMARY LATCH.WITH THE IGNITION IN THE ON POSITION, AS THE GEAR SELECTOR IS MOVED OUT OF PARK THE DOOR AUTOMATICALLY LOCKS AND THAT ACTION MECHANICALLY ISOLATES THE LATCH, SECONDARY AND PRIMARY, FROM ALL LATCH RELEASE CONNECTIONS.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS ALLEGING DOOR OPENING WHILE DRIVING, FORD HAS RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY 5,700 REPORTS THAT ALLEGE THE DOOR DOES NOT CLOSE PROPERLY OR POPS OPEN WITH NO MENTION OF WHILE DRIVING.FORD'S INVESTIGATION INTO THESE REPORT INCLUDED OWNER INTERVIEWS, VEHICLE BY-BACKS AND TESTING OF CONSUMER VEHICLES.IT FOUND THAT ALLEGATIONS OF DOOR OPENING WHILE DRIVING WERE IN FACT REPORTS OF DOORS NOT BEING PROPERLY CLOSED INITIALLY AND SUBSEQUENTLY OPENING TO THE SECONDARY LATCH POSITION AS A RESULT OF VEHICLE VIBRATIONS OR DRIVING MANEUVERS.FORD'S TESTING OF CONSUMER VEHICLES DID NOT RESULT IN ANY RECURRENCE OF PSD OPENING WHILE BEING DRIVEN.ODI INTERVIEWS WITH OWNERS AFFIRMED THE ALLEGATIONS OF PSD OPENING WHILE DRIVING; HOWEVER OWNERS INDICATED THE EVENT IS NOT A REGULAR OCCURRENCE (I.E.,IT OCCURRED ONLY ONCE OR HAS NOT OCCURRED RECENTLY) AND THAT THE UNINTENDED PSD OPENING MAY NOT BE ABLE TO BE DUPLICATED.IN CONTRAST, THE IMPROPER CLOSING OF THE PSD (LATCHING ON THE SECONDARY BUT NOT THE PRIMARY LATCH) CAN BE DUPLICATED, AND ODI VERIFIED THIS DURING AN INSPECTION OF A CONSUMER VEHICLE.IN THIS CONDITION (SECONDARY BUT NO PRIMARY LATCH), WHEN THE VEHICLE'S GEAR SELECTOR IS MOVED OUT OF PARK POSITION, A WARNING CHIME SOUNDS AND WARNING MESSAGE APPEARS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL.MOST REPORTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS WERE FILED IN THE EARLY SERVICE-LIFE OF THE VEHICLE AND PEAKED AROUND THE 18-MONTH IN-SERVICE TIME PERIOD.ODI AND MFR COMPLAINT TRENDS ARE DECLINING OVER THE LAST 8 QUARTERS.THERE IS NO ALLEGED INJURY ASSOCIATED WITH OCCUPANT FALLING OUT WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION.NO FAILURE MODE CAUSING FULL DOOR OPENING WHILE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION HAS BEEN VERIFIED (REPRODUCED BY ODI OR BY TRAINED SERVICE TECHNICIANS AT DEALERSHIPS) DURING THIS INVESTIGATION.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 MONITOR THIS ISSUE AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
EA03004 · Wheel Stud Fracture
Opened Apr 10, 2003 · Closed Aug 30, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Wheels; Wheels:lugs/nuts/bolts/studs
THE SUBJECT VEHICLES RANGE IN AGE FROM 4?7 YEARS IN SERVICE, WITH AVERAGE MILEAGES ESTIMATED TO RANGE FROM 50 TO 100 THOUSAND MILES.AT THESE MILEAGES, THE SUBJECT WHEELS ARE LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND REINSTALLED MULTIPLE TIMES FOR VARIOUS SERVICE PROCEDURES.ODI IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE HIGH WHEEL SEPARATION RATES IN THE MY 1997-98 WINDSTAR VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ALUMINUM ALLOY WHEELS.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF FAILURE DATA INDICATES THAT MOST OF THE INCIDENTS IN THAT POPULATION OF VEHICLES OCCUR AFTER THE VEHICLES HAD ACCUMULATED 30 THOUSAND MILES OF SERVICE. THE FACTORS THAT INCREASE THE RISK THAT INADEQUATE CLAMP LOADS MAY BE ACHIEVED DURING SERVICE-RELATED WHEEL INSTALLATION ARE NOT UNIQUE TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.TESTING CONDUCTED BY FORD AND VRTC INDICATE THAT THE MY 1998 WINDSTAR ALUMINUM WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEM PERFORMS SIMILAR TO THE WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEMS ON PEER MINIVANS.NO DESIGN OR MANUFACTURING DEFECTS WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEMS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES. FORD WILL SEND A MAILING TO OWNERS OF WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH ALUMINUM WHEELS THAT HAVE HIGH WHEEL SEPARATION RATES THAT REVIEWS THE APPROPRIATE WHEEL FASTENING PROCEDURES AND STATES THAT THE WHEEL NUTS SHOULD BE TIGHTENED TO THE NOMINAL TORQUE, 100 FT-LBS (136 NM), AND RE-TIGHTENED TO THE SAME TORQUE AFTER 500 MILES.FORD?S LETTER ALSO STATES THAT IT IS ?A GOOD PRACTICE TO BE SURE THAT BEFORE INSTALLING THE WHEEL THE ALUMINUM WHEEL MOUNTING SURFACE, WHEEL LUG NUT AREA, AND THE MOUNTING FLANGE ARE FREE FROM DIRT, DEBRIS, AND LOOSE RUST TO ENSURE THE WHEEL IS SEATED CORRECTLY AND THE WHEEL LUG NUTS REMAIN FULLY TIGHTENED.? ODI WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE INCIDENCE OF WHEEL FASTENER FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.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 TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Wheels
THE SUBJECT VEHICLES RANGE IN AGE FROM 4?7 YEARS IN SERVICE, WITH AVERAGE MILEAGES ESTIMATED TO RANGE FROM 50 TO 100 THOUSAND MILES.AT THESE MILEAGES, THE SUBJECT WHEELS ARE LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND REINSTALLED MULTIPLE TIMES FOR VARIOUS SERVICE PROCEDURES.ODI IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE HIGH WHEEL SEPARATION RATES IN THE MY 1997-98 WINDSTAR VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ALUMINUM ALLOY WHEELS.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF FAILURE DATA INDICATES THAT MOST OF THE INCIDENTS IN THAT POPULATION OF VEHICLES OCCUR AFTER THE VEHICLES HAD ACCUMULATED 30 THOUSAND MILES OF SERVICE. THE FACTORS THAT INCREASE THE RISK THAT INADEQUATE CLAMP LOADS MAY BE ACHIEVED DURING SERVICE-RELATED WHEEL INSTALLATION ARE NOT UNIQUE TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.TESTING CONDUCTED BY FORD AND VRTC INDICATE THAT THE MY 1998 WINDSTAR ALUMINUM WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEM PERFORMS SIMILAR TO THE WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEMS ON PEER MINIVANS.NO DESIGN OR MANUFACTURING DEFECTS WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEMS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES. FORD WILL SEND A MAILING TO OWNERS OF WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH ALUMINUM WHEELS THAT HAVE HIGH WHEEL SEPARATION RATES THAT REVIEWS THE APPROPRIATE WHEEL FASTENING PROCEDURES AND STATES THAT THE WHEEL NUTS SHOULD BE TIGHTENED TO THE NOMINAL TORQUE, 100 FT-LBS (136 NM), AND RE-TIGHTENED TO THE SAME TORQUE AFTER 500 MILES.FORD?S LETTER ALSO STATES THAT IT IS ?A GOOD PRACTICE TO BE SURE THAT BEFORE INSTALLING THE WHEEL THE ALUMINUM WHEEL MOUNTING SURFACE, WHEEL LUG NUT AREA, AND THE MOUNTING FLANGE ARE FREE FROM DIRT, DEBRIS, AND LOOSE RUST TO ENSURE THE WHEEL IS SEATED CORRECTLY AND THE WHEEL LUG NUTS REMAIN FULLY TIGHTENED.? ODI WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE INCIDENCE OF WHEEL FASTENER FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.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 TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
Wheels:lugs/nuts/bolts/studs
THE SUBJECT VEHICLES RANGE IN AGE FROM 4?7 YEARS IN SERVICE, WITH AVERAGE MILEAGES ESTIMATED TO RANGE FROM 50 TO 100 THOUSAND MILES.AT THESE MILEAGES, THE SUBJECT WHEELS ARE LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND REINSTALLED MULTIPLE TIMES FOR VARIOUS SERVICE PROCEDURES.ODI IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE HIGH WHEEL SEPARATION RATES IN THE MY 1997-98 WINDSTAR VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ALUMINUM ALLOY WHEELS.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF FAILURE DATA INDICATES THAT MOST OF THE INCIDENTS IN THAT POPULATION OF VEHICLES OCCUR AFTER THE VEHICLES HAD ACCUMULATED 30 THOUSAND MILES OF SERVICE. THE FACTORS THAT INCREASE THE RISK THAT INADEQUATE CLAMP LOADS MAY BE ACHIEVED DURING SERVICE-RELATED WHEEL INSTALLATION ARE NOT UNIQUE TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.TESTING CONDUCTED BY FORD AND VRTC INDICATE THAT THE MY 1998 WINDSTAR ALUMINUM WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEM PERFORMS SIMILAR TO THE WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEMS ON PEER MINIVANS.NO DESIGN OR MANUFACTURING DEFECTS WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE WHEEL FASTENING SYSTEMS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES. FORD WILL SEND A MAILING TO OWNERS OF WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH ALUMINUM WHEELS THAT HAVE HIGH WHEEL SEPARATION RATES THAT REVIEWS THE APPROPRIATE WHEEL FASTENING PROCEDURES AND STATES THAT THE WHEEL NUTS SHOULD BE TIGHTENED TO THE NOMINAL TORQUE, 100 FT-LBS (136 NM), AND RE-TIGHTENED TO THE SAME TORQUE AFTER 500 MILES.FORD?S LETTER ALSO STATES THAT IT IS ?A GOOD PRACTICE TO BE SURE THAT BEFORE INSTALLING THE WHEEL THE ALUMINUM WHEEL MOUNTING SURFACE, WHEEL LUG NUT AREA, AND THE MOUNTING FLANGE ARE FREE FROM DIRT, DEBRIS, AND LOOSE RUST TO ENSURE THE WHEEL IS SEATED CORRECTLY AND THE WHEEL LUG NUTS REMAIN FULLY TIGHTENED.? ODI WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE INCIDENCE OF WHEEL FASTENER FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.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 TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
PE02085 · Wheel Stud Fracture
Opened Nov 18, 2002 · Closed Apr 10, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Wheels; Wheels:lugs/nuts/bolts/studs
ANALYSIS OF ODI AND FORD DATA HAS IDENTIFIED 1619 INCIDENTS OF WHEEL STUD FRACTURE IN MY 1998 THROUGH 2000 FORD WINDSTAR VEHICLES, INCLUDING 69 WHEEL SEPARATIONS AND 11 CRASHES.FORD HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO IDENTIFY ANY DESIGN OR MANUFACTURING DEFECTS IN ITS ANALYZIS OF THE PROBLEM.FORD MAINTAINS THAT THE FAILURES ARE CAUSED BY EITHER:(1) INADVERTENT OVERTORQUING OF LUG NUTS DURING REMOVAL OR INSTALLATION; OR (2) FATIGUE DUE TO INSUFFICIENT CLAMP LOAD BETWEEN THE WHEEL AND THE BRAKE ROTOR OR DRUM AND HUB ASSEMBLY.ACCORDING TO FORD, CORROSION, DIRT, OR DAMAGE PRESENT ON THE ROAD WHEEL AT THE NUT INTEFACE COULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE LATTER CONDITION. ANALYSIS OF ODI COMPLAINT DATA INDICATES THAT THE SUBJECT VEHICLES EXPERIENCE WHEEL STUD FAILURES AT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER RATES THAN PEER MINIVANS.THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO FURTHER ASSESS THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND TREND OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION IN MY 1997 THROUGH 2000 WINDSTAR MINIVANS.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Wheels
ANALYSIS OF ODI AND FORD DATA HAS IDENTIFIED 1619 INCIDENTS OF WHEEL STUD FRACTURE IN MY 1998 THROUGH 2000 FORD WINDSTAR VEHICLES, INCLUDING 69 WHEEL SEPARATIONS AND 11 CRASHES.FORD HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO IDENTIFY ANY DESIGN OR MANUFACTURING DEFECTS IN ITS ANALYZIS OF THE PROBLEM.FORD MAINTAINS THAT THE FAILURES ARE CAUSED BY EITHER:(1) INADVERTENT OVERTORQUING OF LUG NUTS DURING REMOVAL OR INSTALLATION; OR (2) FATIGUE DUE TO INSUFFICIENT CLAMP LOAD BETWEEN THE WHEEL AND THE BRAKE ROTOR OR DRUM AND HUB ASSEMBLY.ACCORDING TO FORD, CORROSION, DIRT, OR DAMAGE PRESENT ON THE ROAD WHEEL AT THE NUT INTEFACE COULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE LATTER CONDITION. ANALYSIS OF ODI COMPLAINT DATA INDICATES THAT THE SUBJECT VEHICLES EXPERIENCE WHEEL STUD FAILURES AT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER RATES THAN PEER MINIVANS.THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO FURTHER ASSESS THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND TREND OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION IN MY 1997 THROUGH 2000 WINDSTAR MINIVANS.
Wheels:lugs/nuts/bolts/studs
ANALYSIS OF ODI AND FORD DATA HAS IDENTIFIED 1619 INCIDENTS OF WHEEL STUD FRACTURE IN MY 1998 THROUGH 2000 FORD WINDSTAR VEHICLES, INCLUDING 69 WHEEL SEPARATIONS AND 11 CRASHES.FORD HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO IDENTIFY ANY DESIGN OR MANUFACTURING DEFECTS IN ITS ANALYZIS OF THE PROBLEM.FORD MAINTAINS THAT THE FAILURES ARE CAUSED BY EITHER:(1) INADVERTENT OVERTORQUING OF LUG NUTS DURING REMOVAL OR INSTALLATION; OR (2) FATIGUE DUE TO INSUFFICIENT CLAMP LOAD BETWEEN THE WHEEL AND THE BRAKE ROTOR OR DRUM AND HUB ASSEMBLY.ACCORDING TO FORD, CORROSION, DIRT, OR DAMAGE PRESENT ON THE ROAD WHEEL AT THE NUT INTEFACE COULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE LATTER CONDITION. ANALYSIS OF ODI COMPLAINT DATA INDICATES THAT THE SUBJECT VEHICLES EXPERIENCE WHEEL STUD FAILURES AT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER RATES THAN PEER MINIVANS.THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO FURTHER ASSESS THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND TREND OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION IN MY 1997 THROUGH 2000 WINDSTAR MINIVANS.
Illustration