NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
18 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · May 7, 2022
SteeringSuspensionVehicle Speed Control
Rear end started a sudden howell and shaking and grinding and the Abs and traction control light came on and brakes and suspension did not want to function properly while driving in traffic as quick as I could I pulled over and it looked like one tire was sticking out of the axel way far So I just pulled over and called for my …
Read full complaint
Rear end started a sudden howell and shaking and grinding and the Abs and traction control light came on and brakes and suspension did not want to function properly while driving in traffic as quick as I could I pulled over and it looked like one tire was sticking out of the axel way far So I just pulled over and called for my AAA to to and got towed home thats it
NHTSA ODI #11463703
146,000 miles · Sep 25, 2018
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
WHILE DRIVING NORMALLY, THE ACCELERATOR STUCK OPEN CAUSING THE CAR TO GAIN AN EXCESS AMOUNT OF SPEED IN TRAFFIC. THE CAR WOULD NOT TURN OFF AND THE BREAKS WOULD NOT HOLD IT OR SLOW IT DOWN. IN THE END THE CAR WAS TOTALED AFTER HITTING 2 TREES AND A WALL.
NHTSA ODI #11131631
34,448 miles · Dec 16, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control
MERGING INTO TRAFFIC ON A INTERSTATE HIGHWAY I HAD TO ACCELERATE MY SPEED. VEHICLE SEEMED TO LOCK AT THIS HIGHER SPEED AND THE ONLY WAY I WAS TO RELEASE THIS CONDITION WAS TO SHIFT TO NEUTRAL AND SLOWLY BRAKE, THIS COULD HAVE EASILY BECOME UGLY.THIS TO ME WAS LIKE THE PROBLEM WITH THE UNEXPLAINED ACCELERATION WITH A GM. PRODU…
Read full complaint
MERGING INTO TRAFFIC ON A INTERSTATE HIGHWAY I HAD TO ACCELERATE MY SPEED. VEHICLE SEEMED TO LOCK AT THIS HIGHER SPEED AND THE ONLY WAY I WAS TO RELEASE THIS CONDITION WAS TO SHIFT TO NEUTRAL AND SLOWLY BRAKE, THIS COULD HAVE EASILY BECOME UGLY.THIS TO ME WAS LIKE THE PROBLEM WITH THE UNEXPLAINED ACCELERATION WITH A GM. PRODUCT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10664638
144,000 miles · Sep 3, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWNCAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SUN HAD CAUSED THE CONTROL BUTTONS ON THE STEERING WHEEL TO BECOME NON ADHESIVE CAUSING THE CRUISE CONTROL FEATURES TO MALFUNCTION. THE DEALER DIAGNOSED THAT THE STEERING WHEEL NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS N…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWNCAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SUN HAD CAUSED THE CONTROL BUTTONS ON THE STEERING WHEEL TO BECOME NON ADHESIVE CAUSING THE CRUISE CONTROL FEATURES TO MALFUNCTION. THE DEALER DIAGNOSED THAT THE STEERING WHEEL NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 144,000.
NHTSA ODI #10630311
121,000 miles · Sep 26, 2011
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
I WAS IN FRONT OF THE TOWNHOUSE WHERE I LIVE WAITING IN IDLE FOR AN ONCOMING CAR TO PASS SO I CAN PARK ON MY SPOT WHEN I HEARD THREE CLICKING SOUNDS BENEATH THE CAR AT THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE. SECONDS AFTER THAT THE CAR JERKED FORWARD AT AN INCREASING SPEED ,KNOCKED A NISSAN PATHFINDER AND CARRIED A MITSUBUSHI ECLIPSE ,FROM TH…
Read full complaint
I WAS IN FRONT OF THE TOWNHOUSE WHERE I LIVE WAITING IN IDLE FOR AN ONCOMING CAR TO PASS SO I CAN PARK ON MY SPOT WHEN I HEARD THREE CLICKING SOUNDS BENEATH THE CAR AT THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE. SECONDS AFTER THAT THE CAR JERKED FORWARD AT AN INCREASING SPEED ,KNOCKED A NISSAN PATHFINDER AND CARRIED A MITSUBUSHI ECLIPSE ,FROM THE PARKING LOT, OVER THE SIDEWALK TO THE GRASS WHILE THE CAR WAS STILL GAINING SPEED TOWARDS A LIVINGROOM WITH THE FAMILY IN THERE. I WAS ABLE TO STEER THE CAR AWAY FROM THE BUILDING, BETWEEN A BIG TREE WITH A SPACE THE SIZE OF THE CAR.AS I CAME OUT THROUGH THE TIGHT SPACE THE SPEED OF THE CAR WAS TOO FAST FOR ME TO NEGOTIATE IT BETWEEN THE NEXT SET OF TREES.THE CAR HIT A TREE AND CAME TO A STOP. THIS IS A COMMERCIAL VEHICLE ,REGISTERED FOR A LIMOUSINE SERVICE. I SENT THE CAR TO FIVE SHOPS AND THEY STILL CANNOT DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM. THIS IS THE REASON WHY I AM ASKING FOR HELP BECAUSE I KNOW THE PROBLEM IS STILL THERE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10427182
80,000 miles · Aug 10, 2011
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWNCAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN DEPRESSING THE BRAKES WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE WOULD SUDDENLY ACCELERATE. THE VEHICLE WOULD COME TO A STOP AFTER HEAVY PRESSURE WAS APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER, WHERE THEY WERE UNABLE TO DIAGNOS…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWNCAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN DEPRESSING THE BRAKES WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE WOULD SUDDENLY ACCELERATE. THE VEHICLE WOULD COME TO A STOP AFTER HEAVY PRESSURE WAS APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER, WHERE THEY WERE UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER HAD NOT BEEN NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 80,000.
NHTSA ODI #10418354
Mileage unknown · Aug 31, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
WITHIN THE PAST 8 MONTHS, I HAVE HAD THREE (3) INCIDENTS: TWO OF WHICH OCCURRED AFTER STOPPING AT A STOP SIGN; WHEN STARTING TO ACCELERATE, THE CAR SUDDENLY JUMPED INTO PASSING GEAR WITHOUT WARNING! ONE OF THOSE INCIDENTS ALMOST CAUSED ME TO REAR-END THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME. THE MOST RECENT OCCURRENCE HAPPENED AS I WAS PUTTING…
Read full complaint
WITHIN THE PAST 8 MONTHS, I HAVE HAD THREE (3) INCIDENTS: TWO OF WHICH OCCURRED AFTER STOPPING AT A STOP SIGN; WHEN STARTING TO ACCELERATE, THE CAR SUDDENLY JUMPED INTO PASSING GEAR WITHOUT WARNING! ONE OF THOSE INCIDENTS ALMOST CAUSED ME TO REAR-END THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME. THE MOST RECENT OCCURRENCE HAPPENED AS I WAS PUTTING THE CAR INTO MY GARAGE. AGAIN, IT RAPIDLY ACCELERATED, CAUSING ME TO RUN INTO THE BACK OF MY GARAGE (RESULTING IN MAJOR DAMAGE TO MY BRICK HOME)! AFTER THE SECOND OCCURRENCE, I TOOK THE CAR TO MY DEALER, WHERE THEY TOLD ME THERE HAD BEEN NO RECALLS; AT WHICH TIME THEY CHECKED IT OUT AND TOLD ME THEY HAD FOUND NOTHING WRONG. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10353124
60,000 miles · Jul 27, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH, HE ENGAGED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT FELL TO THE FLOORBOARD. THERE WAS AN ABNORMALLY HIGH INCREASE IN ENGINE RPMS AND THE VEHICLE THEN ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED REPEATEDLY BUT TO NO AVAIL. SUDDENLY, THE GEAR SELEC…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH, HE ENGAGED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT FELL TO THE FLOORBOARD. THERE WAS AN ABNORMALLY HIGH INCREASE IN ENGINE RPMS AND THE VEHICLE THEN ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED REPEATEDLY BUT TO NO AVAIL. SUDDENLY, THE GEAR SELECTOR WAS SHIFTED INTO THE NEUTRAL POSITION AND THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF. THE CONTACT RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND IT OPERATED NORMALLY. THE IDENTICAL FAILURE OCCURRED ON A SEPARATE OCCASION IN WHICH THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO THE PROCEEDING VEHICLE. THERE WERE NO DAMAGES OR PERSONAL INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED. THE CONTACT EXPRESSED SIGNIFICANT CONCERN OF A POTENTIAL SAFETY HAZARD. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,000.
NHTSA ODI #10345658
42,245 miles · Feb 24, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. HE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH AND APPLYING THE BRAKE PEDAL, WITHOUT A WARNING THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN . HE THEN TRIED TO APPLY THE BRAKES AND THEY DID NOT WORK UNTIL HE SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL GEAR. THE VEHICLE DECREASED IN SPEED AND BEGAN TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. THE VEHI…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. HE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH AND APPLYING THE BRAKE PEDAL, WITHOUT A WARNING THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN . HE THEN TRIED TO APPLY THE BRAKES AND THEY DID NOT WORK UNTIL HE SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL GEAR. THE VEHICLE DECREASED IN SPEED AND BEGAN TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO STATED THAT THEY COULDN'T DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM BUT REPROGRAMMED THE PCM. THE FAILURE OCCURRED TWICE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 41598. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 42245 UPDATED 3/30/10 *CN UPDATED 08/18/10*JB
NHTSA ODI #10313769
44,369 miles · Dec 2, 2008
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT EVERYTIME SHE ACTIVATED THE CRUISE CONTROL, THE SWITCH BECAME VERY HOT. SHE TRADITIONALLY ACTIVATES THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH AT APPROXIMATELY 70 MPH. SHE NEVER NOTICED ANY SMOKE OR WARNING INDICATORS PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. THE DEALER STATED THAT HER VEHICLE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT EVERYTIME SHE ACTIVATED THE CRUISE CONTROL, THE SWITCH BECAME VERY HOT. SHE TRADITIONALLY ACTIVATES THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH AT APPROXIMATELY 70 MPH. SHE NEVER NOTICED ANY SMOKE OR WARNING INDICATORS PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. THE DEALER STATED THAT HER VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 07V336000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL). THE TECHNICIAN DID NOT INSPECT THE VEHICLE TO DETERMINE IF THE COMPONENT WAS POTENTIALLY DEFECTIVE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 44,369 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 80,369.
NHTSA ODI #10250518
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