NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
10 reportsClear category filter84,799 miles · Mar 11, 2013
Power TrainService Brakes, Hydraulic
I TOOK MY 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR TO THE LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP BECAUSE I HEARD A NOISE IN THE REAR OF THE CAR. I WAS TOLD THAT THE REAR AXEL SEAL WAS BLOWN OUT AND THE AXEL ASSEMBLY WAS DAMAGED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CAR. IN ADDITION, THE BRAKES WERE RUINED BY THE AXEL FLUID THAT LEAKED OUT. I FOUND OUT THAT THERE WAS A RECALL F…
Read full complaint
I TOOK MY 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR TO THE LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP BECAUSE I HEARD A NOISE IN THE REAR OF THE CAR. I WAS TOLD THAT THE REAR AXEL SEAL WAS BLOWN OUT AND THE AXEL ASSEMBLY WAS DAMAGED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CAR. IN ADDITION, THE BRAKES WERE RUINED BY THE AXEL FLUID THAT LEAKED OUT. I FOUND OUT THAT THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THE REAR AXEL PROBLEM IN 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CARS FOR FLEET CARS ONLY. I CALLED THE FORD SERVICE CENTER AND ASKED THEM FOR HELP WITH MY EXPENSIVE REPAIR BILL. THEY SAID NO. IN ADDITION TO A VERY LARGE REPAIR BILL, MY CAR WAS UNSAFE DUE TO THE CONDITION OF THE AXEL YET I WAS NOT INFORMED OF THE SITUATION BECAUSE I DON'T OWN A FLEET CAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10502395
29,000 miles · Jan 14, 2009
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingService Brakes, Hydraulic
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. THE CONTACT HAS HAD TWO ALTERNATORS INSTALLED IN HER VEHICLE WITHIN THE LAST SIX MONTHS. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ONE THAT CAME WITH THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE. WHILE DRIVING 30 AND 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE WILL LOSE POWER AND THE ENGINE SHUTS OFF. IN ADDITION, THE POWER STEE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. THE CONTACT HAS HAD TWO ALTERNATORS INSTALLED IN HER VEHICLE WITHIN THE LAST SIX MONTHS. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ONE THAT CAME WITH THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE. WHILE DRIVING 30 AND 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE WILL LOSE POWER AND THE ENGINE SHUTS OFF. IN ADDITION, THE POWER STEERING AND BRAKES FAIL. ALL OF THE INSTRUMENT PANEL INDICATORS FLASH ON AND OFF AT THE TIME OF THE FAILURE. OCCASIONALLY, THE VEHICLE WILL TAKE A MINUTE BEFORE RESTARTING. THE VEHICLE IS CURRENTLY AT THE DEALER, BUT THEY COULD FIND NO FAILURES. THE CONTACT WOULD HAVE TO PAY $90 PER HOUR FOR A DIAGNOSTIC. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 29,000. UPDATED 03/09/09. *LJ THE ALTERNATOR WAS REPLACED DUE TO IT OVERCHARGING. THE BATTERY WAS REPLACED AS WELL. THE TRUNK WOULD NOT CLOSE PROPERLY. UPDATED 03/10/09. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10255016
51,863 miles · Jan 9, 2009
Service Brakes, HydraulicSuspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, THE CONTACT NOTICED A LEAK BEHIND THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN TO FIRESTONE AND THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE SEAL FAILED ON THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE. WHILE THE MECHANIC WAS REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, HE NOTICED THAT THE REAR WHEEL…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, THE CONTACT NOTICED A LEAK BEHIND THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN TO FIRESTONE AND THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE SEAL FAILED ON THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE. WHILE THE MECHANIC WAS REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, HE NOTICED THAT THE REAR WHEEL BEARING AND STUB AXLE WERE DEFECTIVE, WHICH WAS THE ACTUAL CAUSE OF THE SEAL FAILURE. AS A RESULT, THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL FLUID HAD TO BE REFILLED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND THE DEALER AND MECHANIC WERE NOT NOTIFIED. IN JANUARY OF 2009, WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE CONTACT NOTICED A CHIRPING NOISE WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN TO FIRESTONE FOR A BRAKE INSPECTION AND THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE BRAKE PADS AND ROTORS NEEDED TO BE CHANGED. WHEN THE MECHANIC REMOVED THE ROTORS, HE NOTICED THAT THE REAR BALL JOINTS WERE RUBBING AGAINST THE AXLES AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. BOTH OF THE REAR END AXLES AND BALL JOINTS WERE REPLACED. THE DEALER AND THE MANUFACTURER WERE NOTIFIED AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VIN WAS NOT RELATED TO ANY RECALLS. HE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPAIR COSTS. THE CONTACT HAS THE PARTS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IN HIS POSSESSION. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 81,131 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 51,863. UPDATED 2/5/09 *CN UPDATED 02/10/09. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10254402
66,745 miles · May 21, 2008
Service Brakes, HydraulicSuspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. THE CONTACT NOTICED GREASE ON THE WHEELS AND TIRES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A MECHANIC, WHO STATED THAT BEARINGS, AXLES, AND REAR BRAKES WERE NEEDED. THIS WAS THE THIRD TIME IN FOUR YEARS THAT THE FAILURE HAS OCCURRED. THE VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 04V32800…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. THE CONTACT NOTICED GREASE ON THE WHEELS AND TIRES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A MECHANIC, WHO STATED THAT BEARINGS, AXLES, AND REAR BRAKES WERE NEEDED. THIS WAS THE THIRD TIME IN FOUR YEARS THAT THE FAILURE HAS OCCURRED. THE VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 04V328000 (SUSPENSION:REAR). THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 66,745. UPDATED 06/09/08 *BF THE CONSUMER STATED THE REAR BRAKES WERE SOAKED WITH OIL. UPDATED 06/09/08
NHTSA ODI #10228546
135,223 miles · Jun 4, 2007
Service Brakes, HydraulicSuspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A GRINDING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE REAR AXLES, THE WHEEL BEARINGS, AXLE SEALS, AND BRAKE PADS ALL NEED REPLACING. THE MECHANIC MADE THE REPAIR AND NO OTHER FAILURES HAVE OCCURRED. THE CURRENT M…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A GRINDING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE REAR AXLES, THE WHEEL BEARINGS, AXLE SEALS, AND BRAKE PADS ALL NEED REPLACING. THE MECHANIC MADE THE REPAIR AND NO OTHER FAILURES HAVE OCCURRED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 135,300 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 135,223. UPDATED 07/06/07. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10192407
95,492 miles · Sep 29, 2006
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
MY 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR WAS SLOWING (FOOT OFF GAS, COASTING) DOWN OFF-RAMP FROM FREEWAY BECAUSE THE STOP LIGHT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE OFF-RAMP WAS RED. WHEN I BEGAN TO APPLY THE BRAKES TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP, THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD VIOLENTLY AS THE FRONT BRAKES LOCKED COMPLETELY, CAUSING THE CAR TO SLIDE TO A STOP. I COULD…
Read full complaint
MY 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR WAS SLOWING (FOOT OFF GAS, COASTING) DOWN OFF-RAMP FROM FREEWAY BECAUSE THE STOP LIGHT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE OFF-RAMP WAS RED. WHEN I BEGAN TO APPLY THE BRAKES TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP, THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD VIOLENTLY AS THE FRONT BRAKES LOCKED COMPLETELY, CAUSING THE CAR TO SLIDE TO A STOP. I COULD NOT MOVE THE CAR FORWARD OR BACKWARD IN GEAR, AND COULD NOT GET IT TO COAST IN NEUTRAL. THE CAR COULD NOT BE MANUALLY PUSHED FROM ITS RESTING SPOT AND I HAD TO HAVE IT WINCHED ONTO A FLATBED TOW TRUCK AND TAKEN TO THE LINCOLN DEALERSHIP. THE REPAIR MANAGER TOLD ME AFTER INVESTIGATION THAT THE LINING INSIDE THE BRAKE LINES LEADING TO THE CALIPERS HAD BEEN SLOWLY FLAKING OFF INTO THE BRAKE FLUID. WHEN SUFFICIENT AMOUNTS HAD COLLECTED IN THE FLUID THEY ACTED LIKE A CHECK-VALVE, ALLOWING FLUID INTO THE CALIPERS TO ACTUATE THE BRAKES BUT WOULD NOT ALLOW THE FLUID TO RETURN AND THE BRAKES COULD NOT RELEASE. THE REPAIR CONSISTED OF REPLACING BOTH FRONT BRAKE LINES AND BOTH CALIPER UNITS, COSTING OVER $600. ONLY MOMENTS BEFORE THE BRAKES LOCKED MY CAR HAD BEEN AT SPEEDS OF 55 - 65 MPH ON THE FREEWAY. HAD I NEEDED TO APPLY THE BREAKS WHILE AT THOSE SPEEDS, THE RESULTS WOULD HAVE BEEN DEVASTATING; MY CAR WOULD HAVE BEEN SLIDING OUT OF CONTROL IN HEAVY FREEWAY TRAFFIC AND LIKELY WOULD HAVE LED TO SEVERE INJURY OR DEATH OF MY FAMILY MEMBERS OR OTHER DRIVERS/PASSENGERS. THE LINCOLN DEALERSHIP SEARCHED FOR RECALL AND/OR SAFETY BULLETINS FROM THE MANUFACTURER AND COULD FIND NONE. I'M INFURIATED BY THIS ~ IT IS AN APPARENT DESIGN AND/OR MANUFACTURING DEFECT, ADMITTEDLY SEEN SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE OVER RECENT YEARS BY THE MECHANICS AT MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP, YET NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO ADDRESS IT. I SUSPECT THAT IT'S NOT A "SEVERE" ENOUGH SITUATION YET BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN NO DEATHS REPORTEDLY LINKED TO THE CATASTROPHIC FAILURE I SURVIVED. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10169609
Mileage unknown · Sep 9, 2005
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
DT: THE CONTACT COMPLAINED ABOUT SUDDEN ACCELERATION PROBLEMS. WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES VEHICLE DID NOT STOP BUT ACCELERATED 6-10 SECONDS. THIS WAS THE FOURTH INCIDENT. *AK THE THINKS IT IS A POSSIBILITY THE PEDALS ARE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10132216
153,600 miles · May 31, 2005
Electrical SystemExterior LightingService Brakes, Hydraulic
WHEN VEHICLE ENGINE IS RUNNING AND TURN SIGNALS ARE ACTUATED, THE DIGITAL DASH, TURN SIGNALS, AND AIR CONDITIONER CUTS OFF. ADDITIONALLY, STEERING EFFORT INCREASES SUBSTANTIALLY, ABS CYCLES OFF AND BACK ON WHEN THE POWER IS RESTORED. THE DURATION MAY BE MOMENTARY (LESS THAN 5 SECONDS) OR LAST FOR A MINUTE OR LONGER. FREQUENCY …
Read full complaint
WHEN VEHICLE ENGINE IS RUNNING AND TURN SIGNALS ARE ACTUATED, THE DIGITAL DASH, TURN SIGNALS, AND AIR CONDITIONER CUTS OFF. ADDITIONALLY, STEERING EFFORT INCREASES SUBSTANTIALLY, ABS CYCLES OFF AND BACK ON WHEN THE POWER IS RESTORED. THE DURATION MAY BE MOMENTARY (LESS THAN 5 SECONDS) OR LAST FOR A MINUTE OR LONGER. FREQUENCY IS 80+ PERCENT OF THE TIME WHEN THE TURN SIGNALS ARE ENGAGED (LEFT OR RIGHT). I HAVE HAD ANOTHER FORD VEHICLE WHICH GAVE PROBLEMS WITH THIS MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH ALSO. FORD HAS A POORLY DESIGNED TURN SIGNAL-WINDSHIELD WIPER-WASHER SWITCH COMPOUNDED BY THE FACT POWER IS SHUNTED THROUGH THIS SWITCH ALL THE TIME, CAUSING OVERHEATING AND PREMATURE FAILURES. THIS LINCOLN IS NOT AN INCOMPLETE VEHICLE. THE LAST LINE OF THE VEHICLE DETAILL FORM NEEDS A 2ND ALTERNATIVE OR WEBMASTER NEEDS TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEFAULT CHOICE (--).
NHTSA ODI #10122533
1,300 miles · Mar 27, 2003
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
THE BRAKES FAILED WITHOUT WARNING. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10014595
1,000 miles · Mar 14, 2003
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash
WHEN THE DRIVER'S LEFT FOOT WAS QUICKLY MOVED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL FROM ITS RESTING POSITION, IT ENCOUNTERED AN OBJECT ABOVE IT THAT GAVE THE IMPRESSION THE FOOT DID NOT REACH THE BRAKE PEDAL, WHICH RESULTED IN USING THE RIGHT FOOT WHICH CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. THE CONDITION WORSENED WITH THE BRAKE AND GAS PEDAL IN THE FULL DOWN POS…
Read full complaint
WHEN THE DRIVER'S LEFT FOOT WAS QUICKLY MOVED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL FROM ITS RESTING POSITION, IT ENCOUNTERED AN OBJECT ABOVE IT THAT GAVE THE IMPRESSION THE FOOT DID NOT REACH THE BRAKE PEDAL, WHICH RESULTED IN USING THE RIGHT FOOT WHICH CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. THE CONDITION WORSENED WITH THE BRAKE AND GAS PEDAL IN THE FULL DOWN POSITION THEN THE LEFT KNEE ENCOUNTERED THE STEERING WHEEL, WHICH GAVE THE IMPRESSION THE PEDAL WAS NOT REACHED. DEALERSHIP WAS NOT WILLING TO DO ANYTHING BUT ADVISED TO HAVE VEHICLE MODIFIED. CONSUMER IS 5-9 IN HEIGHT AND WEIGHTS 180 LBS. INSTEAD, CONSUMER REPOSITIONED THE PLASTIC PANEL 14"X14" ABOVE THE DRIVER'S LEFT FOOT AND TIED UP THE SMALL LIGHT NORMALLY INSTALLED IN THE PANEL. AND MOVED THE MOVABLE BRAKE/GAS PEDAL FORWARD AND KEPT THE STEERING WHEEL FULLY UPWARD. THIS MADE THE VEHICLE SAFE TO DRIVE. *TT *JB
NHTSA ODI #10009715
NHTSA investigations
4DP05005 · 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.
PE04010 · Rear Axle Fracture
Opened Jan 22, 2004 · Closed Jul 8, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:axle Assembly:axle Shaft
THIS PE WAS OPENED AFTER ODI BECAME AWARE OF TWO ALLEGATIONS CONCERNING REAR AXLE FRACTURE AND PARTIAL WHEEL SEPARATION INVOLVING MY 2003 FORD CROWN VICTORIA POLICE INTERCEPTORS (CVPI).INITIALLY, THE PE'S SCOPE INVOLVED ALL MY 2003 GRAND MARQUIS, CROWN VICTORIA, AND LINCOLN TOWN CARS (I.E., PANTHER PLATFORM) PRODUCED THROUGH JANUARY 2003.WHILE GATHERING INFORMATION ABOUT THIS ISSUE, IT BECAME EVIDENT THAT THE FAILURES WERE CONFINED TO LONG-WHEELBASE LINCOLN TOWN CARS AND THE CVPI'S DUE TO THEIR UNIQUE WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION AND USAGE PROFILES.FORD'S RECALL ADDRESSES THESE VEHICLES.BOTH THE COMPANY AND ODI ARE CONTINUING TO MONITOR THE FIELD PERFORMANCE OF THE AXLES AND WILL TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AS REQUIRED.
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