NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
19 reportsClear category filter173,000 miles · Oct 3, 2018
Vehicle Speed Control
OPERATOR EXPERIENCED STUCK SPEED CONTROL BUTTON AND ACCELERATED COULDN�T STOP THE SPEED ACCELERATION WITH STEERING WHEEL SO OPERATOR HIT BREAKS. LOUD BANG SOUND FOLLOWED BY DRASTIC REDUCED SPEEDS. COULD CAUSE LOSS OF CONTROL. RESULTED IN SPEEDING TICKET DURING FAILURE SPEEDS ALMOST UP TO 100MPH DURING EMERGENCY EVENT MODE…
Read full complaint
OPERATOR EXPERIENCED STUCK SPEED CONTROL BUTTON AND ACCELERATED COULDN�T STOP THE SPEED ACCELERATION WITH STEERING WHEEL SO OPERATOR HIT BREAKS. LOUD BANG SOUND FOLLOWED BY DRASTIC REDUCED SPEEDS. COULD CAUSE LOSS OF CONTROL. RESULTED IN SPEEDING TICKET DURING FAILURE SPEEDS ALMOST UP TO 100MPH DURING EMERGENCY EVENT MODE.
NHTSA ODI #11133036
173,000 miles · Jul 18, 2018
Vehicle Speed Control
OPERATOR EXPERIENCED STUCK SPEED CONTROL BUTTON AND ACCELERATED COULDN'T STOP THE SPEED ACCELERATION WITH STEERING WHEEL SO OPERATOR HIT BREAKS. LOUD BANG SOUND FOLLOWED BY DRASTIC REDUCED SPEEDS. COULD CAUSE LOSS OF CONTROL.
NHTSA ODI #11112085
1,460,000 miles · Mar 31, 2015
Vehicle Speed Control
HEARD A POP AND CRUISE CONTROL LOST SPEED, AND THEN ACCELERATED HIGHER SPEED UNTIL I TURNED OFF SPEED CONTROL. SPEED CONTROL DOES NOT WORK ANY MORE. COST 112.00 TO FIND OUT WHAT PART IS NEEDED. 2. DRIVER SIDE MIRROR HAS STEADILY GETTING WORSE SINCE 2008. THE HEATING ELEMENT HAS DISTORTED MIRROR MAKING IT BRONZE. NEED TO RE…
Read full complaint
HEARD A POP AND CRUISE CONTROL LOST SPEED, AND THEN ACCELERATED HIGHER SPEED UNTIL I TURNED OFF SPEED CONTROL. SPEED CONTROL DOES NOT WORK ANY MORE. COST 112.00 TO FIND OUT WHAT PART IS NEEDED. 2. DRIVER SIDE MIRROR HAS STEADILY GETTING WORSE SINCE 2008. THE HEATING ELEMENT HAS DISTORTED MIRROR MAKING IT BRONZE. NEED TO REPLACE BUT FORD DOES NOT HAVE THE MIRROR. GARAGE SUGGESTED I FIND ONE IN A JUNK YARD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10703009
30,000 miles · Jul 27, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. THE CONTACT STATED HE WAS DRIVING AT 40 MPH WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO APPLY THE BRAKES. THE CONTACT'S FOOT BECAME LODGED BETWEEN THE ACCELERATOR AND BRAKE PEDAL. HE WAS ABLE TO DISLODGE HIS FOOT BUT WHEN DOING SO, THE BRAKE PEDAL COVER DETACHED FROM THE PEDAL ITSELF. THE DEALER WOULD NOT…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. THE CONTACT STATED HE WAS DRIVING AT 40 MPH WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO APPLY THE BRAKES. THE CONTACT'S FOOT BECAME LODGED BETWEEN THE ACCELERATOR AND BRAKE PEDAL. HE WAS ABLE TO DISLODGE HIS FOOT BUT WHEN DOING SO, THE BRAKE PEDAL COVER DETACHED FROM THE PEDAL ITSELF. THE DEALER WOULD NOT PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED OR DIAGNOSED FOR THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT STATED THE DESIGN OF THE ACCELERATOR AND BRAKE PEDALS WERE FAULTY. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE WAS TRADED BECAUSE HE DID NOT FEEL SAFE IN THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 30,000. UPDATED 10/01/10. *LJ UPDATED 10/04/10
NHTSA ODI #10345718
70,000 miles · Mar 19, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 25MPH, HE DEPRESSED THE BRAKE AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THE PASSENGER LOOKED DOWN TO SEE IF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STUCK AND IT WASN'T. THE CONTACT PUT BOTH FEET ON THE BRAKE AND ATTEMPTED TO PUT THE VEHICLE IN NEUTRAL, AFTER APPLYING EXTREME PRE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 25MPH, HE DEPRESSED THE BRAKE AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THE PASSENGER LOOKED DOWN TO SEE IF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STUCK AND IT WASN'T. THE CONTACT PUT BOTH FEET ON THE BRAKE AND ATTEMPTED TO PUT THE VEHICLE IN NEUTRAL, AFTER APPLYING EXTREME PRESSURE TO THE GEAR SHIFT HE WAS FINALLY ABLE TO PUT THE VEHICLE INTO NEUTRAL. THE CONTACT HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO THE DEALER. THE DEALER STATED THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO DULPICATE THE FAILURE. THE APRROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 70000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 70000.
NHTSA ODI #10321047
28,000 miles · Aug 26, 2008
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH INTO A GARAGE, THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE STOPPED. HE ATTEMPTED TO SHIFT INTO REVERSE AND THE VEHICLE AUTOMATICALLY SURGED FORWARD, CRASHING INTO THE FOUNDATION. THERE WERE NO WARNINGS PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE S…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH INTO A GARAGE, THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE STOPPED. HE ATTEMPTED TO SHIFT INTO REVERSE AND THE VEHICLE AUTOMATICALLY SURGED FORWARD, CRASHING INTO THE FOUNDATION. THERE WERE NO WARNINGS PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE SUSTAINED MINOR DAMAGES. THE CONTACT WAS WAITING ON A RESPONSE FROM THE INSURANCE COMPANY REGARDING THE DAMAGES. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 28,000. UPDATED 11-25-08 *BF UPDATED 11/25/08. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10239773
32,000 miles · Aug 16, 2007
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO 90 MPH ON ITS OWN. THE CONTACT SLAMMED ON THE BRAKES AND THE CRUISE CONTROL DISENGAGED. THE VEHICLE DECELERATED TO ITS REGULAR SPEED. SHE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THEY COULD…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO 90 MPH ON ITS OWN. THE CONTACT SLAMMED ON THE BRAKES AND THE CRUISE CONTROL DISENGAGED. THE VEHICLE DECELERATED TO ITS REGULAR SPEED. SHE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THEY COULD NOT REPAIR THE VEHICLE ON THEIR OWN. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT FORD MOTORS WOULD SEND HER A RECALL LETTER, HOWEVER, IT HAS NOT YET BEEN RECEIVED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 32,000. UPDATED 02-04-08. *KB THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED A RECALL HAD BEEN ISSUED, HOWEVER THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. UPDATED
NHTSA ODI #10199762
18,163 miles · Aug 16, 2006
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR'S BRAKES FAILED. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP WHICH RESULTED IN AN ACCIDENT. *KB NOT ONLY DID THE VEHICLE NOT STOP BUT IT ALSO ACCELERATED WHILE THE CONSUMER'S FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE. THE CONSUMER'S VEHICLE HIT THE VEHICLE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF HERS PUSHING THAT VEHICLE OFF THE ROAD. THE CONSUMER CONTINUED …
Read full complaint
2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR'S BRAKES FAILED. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP WHICH RESULTED IN AN ACCIDENT. *KB NOT ONLY DID THE VEHICLE NOT STOP BUT IT ALSO ACCELERATED WHILE THE CONSUMER'S FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE. THE CONSUMER'S VEHICLE HIT THE VEHICLE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF HERS PUSHING THAT VEHICLE OFF THE ROAD. THE CONSUMER CONTINUED TRYING TO GET HE VEHICLE TO STOP. SHE PUT THE GEAR SHIFT IN PARK AND TURNED OFF THE IGNITION BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP. THE CONSUMER ATTEMPTED TO MANEUVER THE VEHICLE AWAY FROM OTHER VEHICLES BUT EVENTUALLY HAD NO OTHER CHOICE BUT TO RUN INTO A PARKED VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE ROLLED OVER THREE TIMES BEFORE COMING TO REST UPRIGHT ON ALL FOUR WHEELS. THE VEHICLE WAS STILL ACCELERATING AND HIT THE WALL OF A BUILDING THEN STOPPED. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10165881
3,500 miles · Oct 6, 2005
Vehicle Speed Control
DT: THE CONSUMER STATES THAT 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR WAS HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL NOT HOLDING SPEED WHEN DESCENDING A HILL. THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL HOLD THE SPEED WHEN ON FLAT GROUND AND WHEN GOING UP A HILL. THIS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM FOR THE CONSUMER FOR ABOUT SEVEN MONTHS. THE CONSUMER HAD NOT NOTICED THE PROBLEM…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONSUMER STATES THAT 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR WAS HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL NOT HOLDING SPEED WHEN DESCENDING A HILL. THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL HOLD THE SPEED WHEN ON FLAT GROUND AND WHEN GOING UP A HILL. THIS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM FOR THE CONSUMER FOR ABOUT SEVEN MONTHS. THE CONSUMER HAD NOT NOTICED THE PROBLEM BEFORE THIS DUE TO THE FACT THAT HE LIVED ON FLAT GROUND. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION ,AND THEY TOLD HIM TO STAY OUT OF THE MOUNTAINS. THE CONSUMER ALSO CONTACTED FORD ABOUT THE MATTER. THE PERSON THAT THE CONSUMER SPOKE WITH TOLD HIM THAT WAS THE WAY IT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL. THE CRUISE CONTROL WAS SET EVERY TIME THAT THIS HAPPENED TO THE CONSUMER. *AK *NM
NHTSA ODI #10136187
Mileage unknown · May 23, 2005
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed ControlCrash
THE VEHICLE WAS IN BUMPER TO BUMPER TRAFFIC WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT SURGED FORWARD ON ITS OWN WHEN THE BRAKE WAS APPLIED. THE CONSUMER REAR ENDED ANOTHER VEHICLE. *SC THE DEALER CONCLUDED THAT THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDAL WERE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER, SO THEY RAISED THE PEDAL.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10117293
NHTSA investigations
1DP05005 · 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.
Illustration