NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
65 reportsMileage unknown · Dec 11, 2004
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
WHEN BRAKE PEDAL IS DEPRESSED VERY HARD AND THE FOOT IS OVERHANGING THE BRAKE PEDAL (NOT ENTIRELY ON THE PEDAL) THE FOOT ALSO HITS THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE CAR IS THEN GIVEN GAS AND MOVES FORWARD AND THE HARDER YOU PRESS ON THE BRAKE, THE MORE THE ACCELERATOR IS DEPRESSED. IN OTHER WORDS, THE BRAKE PEDAL WILL DEPRESS LOWER…
Read full complaint
WHEN BRAKE PEDAL IS DEPRESSED VERY HARD AND THE FOOT IS OVERHANGING THE BRAKE PEDAL (NOT ENTIRELY ON THE PEDAL) THE FOOT ALSO HITS THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE CAR IS THEN GIVEN GAS AND MOVES FORWARD AND THE HARDER YOU PRESS ON THE BRAKE, THE MORE THE ACCELERATOR IS DEPRESSED. IN OTHER WORDS, THE BRAKE PEDAL WILL DEPRESS LOWER THAN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND OFTEN YOUR FOOT HITS BOTH. THIS HAS CAUSED ME TO PULL INTO TRAFFIC THREE TIMES WHEN STOPPED AT A LIGHT. VERY DANGEROUS. MY LOCAL DEALER SAYS THAT IS JUST THE WAY THE CAR IS MADE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10102710
7,000 miles · Nov 3, 2004
Vehicle Speed Control
THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE MANUFACTURER ATTACHED A RECORDER TO THE COMPUTER AND IT SHOWED NO DEFECTS. *JB THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AT FULL THROTTLE WHEN FIRST STARTING AND WOULD BE EXTREMELY HARD TO STOP. *SC
NHTSA ODI #10087977
9,650 miles · Oct 25, 2004
Air Bags
AT APPROX. 8 PM ON SAT. OCT.9 MY WIFE AND I WERE RETURNING HOME, TRAVELING ON RT. 95 NORTHBOUND IN THE CENTER LANE OF 3, GOING AT THE SPEED LIMIT OF 70 MPH. WITHOUT WARNING THE SIDE AIR BAG ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE DEPLOYED.LUCKILY THERE WERE NO CARS ON EITHER SIDE OF US,AND WE MANAGED TO GET THE CAR UNDER CONTROL AND OFF THE HIGHWA…
Read full complaint
AT APPROX. 8 PM ON SAT. OCT.9 MY WIFE AND I WERE RETURNING HOME, TRAVELING ON RT. 95 NORTHBOUND IN THE CENTER LANE OF 3, GOING AT THE SPEED LIMIT OF 70 MPH. WITHOUT WARNING THE SIDE AIR BAG ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE DEPLOYED.LUCKILY THERE WERE NO CARS ON EITHER SIDE OF US,AND WE MANAGED TO GET THE CAR UNDER CONTROL AND OFF THE HIGHWAY.WE INSPECTED THE CAR AND COULD NOT FIND ANY DAMAGE.ALTHOUGH WE WERE PRETTY SHOOK UP,WE WERE NOT INJURED(DUE TO THE LACK OF TRAFFIC).AFTER SEVERAL CALMING MINUTES WE CONTINUED TO OUR HOME.OUR CAR IS A 2002 LINCOLN TOWN CAR.WE TOOK THE CAR TO WHERE WE PURCHASED AND SERVICED THE CAR(WALLACE LINCOLN/MERCURY/VOLVO-3801 SE FEDERAL HIGHWAY,STUART FL 34997,772-283-6000)ON MONDAY(WE HAVE AN ORIGINAL AND EXTENDED WARRANTY CONTRACT).WALLACE GAVE US A RENTAL CAR AND SAID THEY WOULD CHECK IT OUT.THE NEXT DAY WALLACE SERVICE MGR.(RUSS ELLIS)REPORTED THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE CAR EXCEPT FOR THE UNEXPLAINED DEPLOYMENT OF THE AIRBAG.SINCE THE WARRANTY WAS WITH FORD,A FORD ENGINEER HAD TO COME TO INSPECT THE CAR.FINALLY ON OCT. 20 HE CAME AND REPORTED A SMALL DENT ON THE CAR UNDERSIDE WAS THE RESULT OF RUNNING OVER SOMETHING WHICH CAUSED THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE SIDE IMPACT AIRBAG.WALLACE THEREFORE STATED THEY WOULD NOT COVER REPAIRS BECAUSE OF FORD REPORT.WE VISITED WALLACE TO INSPECT "DENT",AND COULD NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THIS COULD RESULT IN DEPLOYMENT.COMPLAINED TO GM AND SERVICE ADVISOR WHO EXPRESSED SYMPATHY AND AGREED TO CONTACT FORD UPPER-LEVEL.NO REPLY AS YET,BUT WE BELIEVE IT WILL BE NEGATIVE.THIS IS CERTAINLY A SAFETY PROBLEM-DEPLOYMENT OF SIDE AIRBAGS WITHOUT A SIDE IMPACT IS DANGEROUS.UNDER CAR IMPACTS COULD CAUSE ACCIDENTS-EVEN DEATHS.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10096396
48,500 miles · Sep 14, 2004
Structure
I HAVE A 2002 LINCOLN TOWNCAR AT 51200 MILE I DISCOVERED THAT THE DOOR HING ON THE DRIVERS DOOR CAUSED THE DOOR TO MAKE NOISE WHEN YOU OPENED AND CLOSED IT.I DISCOVERED THE THE DOOR HING WAS DEFECTIVE. I FEAR THAT THE DOOR MAY COME OPEN IF I HIT A BUMP. THE CAR HAS NEVER BEEN WRECKED OR MISTREATED. THIS IS CLEARLY A FACTORY DEF…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2002 LINCOLN TOWNCAR AT 51200 MILE I DISCOVERED THAT THE DOOR HING ON THE DRIVERS DOOR CAUSED THE DOOR TO MAKE NOISE WHEN YOU OPENED AND CLOSED IT.I DISCOVERED THE THE DOOR HING WAS DEFECTIVE. I FEAR THAT THE DOOR MAY COME OPEN IF I HIT A BUMP. THE CAR HAS NEVER BEEN WRECKED OR MISTREATED. THIS IS CLEARLY A FACTORY DEFECT AND LINCOLN SAID THEY WILL DO NOTHING ABOUT IT.
NHTSA ODI #10091000
Mileage unknown · Jul 9, 2004
Vehicle Speed Control
CONSUMER STATED THAT HE HAD A VEHICLE THAT WAS A POTENTIAL DANGER. VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD WHEN COMING TO A STOP OR SLOWING DOWN TO A STOP. BECAUSE OF THIS BEHAVIOR OF VEHICLE CONSUMER ALMOST HIT A PEDESTRIAN THE OTHER DAY JUST AS VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP, A LADY STEPPED OFF THE CURB, AND THAT MOMENT, VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD. …
Read full complaint
CONSUMER STATED THAT HE HAD A VEHICLE THAT WAS A POTENTIAL DANGER. VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD WHEN COMING TO A STOP OR SLOWING DOWN TO A STOP. BECAUSE OF THIS BEHAVIOR OF VEHICLE CONSUMER ALMOST HIT A PEDESTRIAN THE OTHER DAY JUST AS VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP, A LADY STEPPED OFF THE CURB, AND THAT MOMENT, VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD. VEHICLE MIGHT GO FOR A WEEK OR MORE AND NOT DO IT. THEN, ALL OF A SUDDEN START AGAIN. WHEN THIS HAPPENED VEHICLE RACED, AND CONSUMER HAD TO CUT THE VEHICLE OFF SO THAT IT WILL NOT RUN AWAY. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10081652
22,231 miles · May 5, 2004
Suspension
WHILE DRIVING FOOT PEDAL/FRONT SEAT VIBRATED. DEALERSHIP WAS NOTIFIED, BUT DID NOT RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10072156
Mileage unknown · Apr 8, 2004
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
THE CONSUMER HAD DIFFICULTY GETTING THE VEHICLE REPAIRED AFTER HER BROTHER HAD AN ACCIDENT IN THE VEHICLE. *PH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WOULD STICK. THIS PROBLEM CAUSED THE ACCIDENT IN WHICH THE CONSUMER'S BROTHER TURNED THE STEERING WHEEL AND THE GAS PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR AND ACCELERATED AT A HIGH SPEED AND RAN INTO ANOT…
Read full complaint
THE CONSUMER HAD DIFFICULTY GETTING THE VEHICLE REPAIRED AFTER HER BROTHER HAD AN ACCIDENT IN THE VEHICLE. *PH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WOULD STICK. THIS PROBLEM CAUSED THE ACCIDENT IN WHICH THE CONSUMER'S BROTHER TURNED THE STEERING WHEEL AND THE GAS PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR AND ACCELERATED AT A HIGH SPEED AND RAN INTO ANOTHER DRIVER. *SC *JB
NHTSA ODI #10066949
Mileage unknown · Mar 26, 2004
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
GAS PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR AND ACCELERATED AT A HIGH RATE. *LA VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT DUE TO PROBLEMS WITH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND HIGH RATE ACCELERATION. *MR
NHTSA ODI #10065299
35,424 miles · Mar 14, 2004
Air BagsCrashInjury
FRONTAL COLLISION 50MPH, NONE OF THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED ON MY 2002 LINCOLN TOWNCAR. MY INSURANCE CO. SAID CAR IS TOTAL LOSS ACCIDENT & NOT REPAIRABLE, WHEN I CONTACTED TO MY LOCAL FORD/LINCOLN DEALER & THE COMPANY ITSELF, I ASK MY CAR IS TOTAL LOSS & NONE OF THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED, THEY SAID SOMEONE WILL GET BACK TO YOU SOON, AFTE…
Read full complaint
FRONTAL COLLISION 50MPH, NONE OF THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED ON MY 2002 LINCOLN TOWNCAR. MY INSURANCE CO. SAID CAR IS TOTAL LOSS ACCIDENT & NOT REPAIRABLE, WHEN I CONTACTED TO MY LOCAL FORD/LINCOLN DEALER & THE COMPANY ITSELF, I ASK MY CAR IS TOTAL LOSS & NONE OF THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED, THEY SAID SOMEONE WILL GET BACK TO YOU SOON, AFTER 6 MONTHS NO ONE GET BACK TO ME, BUT INSURANCE CO PAID THE CAR. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10062157
11,000 miles · Feb 26, 2004
Latches/locks/linkages
UPON STARTING AND PUTTING VEHICLE INTO DRIVE, THE AUTOMATIC DOOR LOCKS ENGAGED AND LOCKED ALL 4 DOORS. UPON STOPPING AND PUTTING VEHICLE INTO PARK AUTOMATIC DOORS LOCKED, ONLY UNLOCKED FRONT DOORS. REAR DOORS HAD TO BE UNLOCKED MANUALLY BY THE DRIVER. *AK *JB
NHTSA ODI #10057722
NHTSA investigations
3DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
EA03014 · Inadvertent Side Air Bag Deployment
Opened Aug 22, 2003 · Closed Aug 12, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:side/window
THIS INVESTIGATION IDENTIFIED A TOTAL OF 182 REPORTS ALLEGING INADVERTENT OR NON-CRASH DEPLOYMENT OF THE SIDE AIR BAGS.THE DATA EXAMINED DURING THE INVESTIGATION SUGGEST THAT THE SIDE AIR BAG CRASH SENSING SYSTEM'S ALGORITHM MAY RECOGNIZE CERTAIN NON-CRASH INCIDENTS AS DEPLOYABLE EVENTS.ODI HAS NOT, HOWEVER, IDENTIFIED ANY FAILED COMPONENT THAT RELATES TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ALSO, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY TREND IN THE MANUFACTURE DATES OF COMPLAINT VEHICLES THAT MAY INDICATE A COMPONENT OR VEHICLE-MANUFACTURING PROBLEM.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME.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 TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY REPORT.
PE03011 · Inadvertent Side Air Bag Deployment
Opened Mar 14, 2003 · Closed Aug 22, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:side/window
ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 173 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING INADVERTENT OR NON-CRASH DEPLOYMENT OF SIDE AIR BAGS ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 1999-2003 LINCOLN TOWN CARS.MOST OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THAT ONE OF THE SIDE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED WHILE DRIVING WITHOUT ANY IMPACT.ANALYSIS SHOWED THAT MY 2001 THROUGH EARLY MY 2003 TOWN CARS HAVE MUCH HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM RATES (138 COMPLAINTS AND 120 WARRANTY CLAIMS) THAN THE REMAINING VEHICLES (35 COMPLAINTS AND 32 WARRANTY CLAIMS).FORD CHANGED ITS SUPPLIER OF THE SIDE CRASH SENSORS FOR THE MY 2001 TOWN CARS.FORD STATES THAT THE ALGORITHM IN THE MY 2001 TOWN CARS IS DIFFERENT FROM THE PREVIOUS MODEL YEAR'S DESIGN, AND THAT IT IS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE IMPROVED OCCUPANT PROTECTION IN MODERATE SPEED SIDE POLE IMPACTS.IN DECEMBER 2002 (I.E., EARLY MY 2003 VEHICLE PRODUCTION), THE CRASH SENSORS WERE MOVED FROM THE FLOOR OF VEHICLE TO NEAR THE BASE OF B-PILLARS IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE INCIDENTS OF INADVERTENT SIDE AIR BAG DEPLOYMENTS.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA03-014) FOR MY 2001-2003 TOWN CARS BUILT BEFORE DECEMBER 2002.
Illustration