IllustrationA CRACK IN MY EXHAUST MANIFOLD BEHIND THE ALTERNATOR CAUSING COOLANT TO SPRAY ALL OVER UNDER MY HOOD AND NOW MY ENGINE OVERHEATS..THANKS FOR USING PLASTIC PARTS FORD . *TR
1996 Mercury Grand Marquis
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Grand Marquis years
Owner complaints for the 1996 Mercury Grand Marquis are substantially higher than the model-year median of 78.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Grand Marquis years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
60–25K
625–50K
2050–75K
3375–100K
17100–150K
9150K+
91 reports with mileage · 148 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 85 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 23 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Fuel System, Gasoline. Review the 21 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
9 crash reports19 fire reports9 injury reports
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
85 reportsWHILE DRIVING MY VEHICLE HOME FROM WORK IN THE EVENING, THE CAR STARTED TO PUTTER, THEN SMOKE CAME POURING OUT FROM UNDER THE ENGINE HOOD BLOCKING MY VIEW FROM THE ROAD CAUSING CARS TO RACE AROUND ME AND ALMOST HAD AN ACCIDENT...ALSO STARTED COMING IN THE VENTS OF THE CAR, MAKING ME NAUSEA. EXTREME DANGER AND FEAR. I HAD TO H…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING MY VEHICLE HOME FROM WORK IN THE EVENING, THE CAR STARTED TO PUTTER, THEN SMOKE CAME POURING OUT FROM UNDER THE ENGINE HOOD BLOCKING MY VIEW FROM THE ROAD CAUSING CARS TO RACE AROUND ME AND ALMOST HAD AN ACCIDENT...ALSO STARTED COMING IN THE VENTS OF THE CAR, MAKING ME NAUSEA. EXTREME DANGER AND FEAR. I HAD TO HAVE THE CAR TOWED $65.00 AND THE REPAIR ESTIMATE CAME IN AT $900.00. CRACKED PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD. ??PLASTIC?? WHO DOES THAT? I HAVE BEEN UNEMPLOYED AND ONLY ABLE TO GET PART TIME EMPLOYMENT. I CAN'T AFFORD THIS REPAIR SO I HAD TO HAVE THE CAR TOWED BACK TO MY HOUSE...ANOTHER $65.00. THE CAR ONLY HAS 85,218 MILES ON IT AND HAS BEEN KEPT IMMACULATE. I CONTACTED MERCURY/FORD AND THEY SAID THERE IS NOTHING THEY CAN DO. IN RESEARCHING, I SPENT HOURS READING HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF POSTINGS REGARDING THE SAME SITUATION...AND ALSO, THE SAME CAR, FORD CROWN VICTORIA HAS THE EXACT SAME PROBLEM. I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS A "SILENT RECALL" WHERE ONLY GOVERNMENT FLEET/POLICE CARS WERE TAKEN CARE OF. HOW NICE! THE REPLACEMENT WAS WITH A METAL PART, WHICH IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FROM THE BEGINNING. THIS IS AN EXTREME NEGLECT ON FORD/MERCURY PART. I BELIEVE THAT THE INVESTIGATION AND ACTION SHOULD BE BASED ON THE QUANTITY OF BOTH THE CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS COMBINED, SINCE THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME CAR MANUFACTURED. PLEASE HELP! *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS STEAM EMITTING FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. A MECHANIC ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WAS A CRACK IN THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE CONTACT CALLED THE MANUFACTURER WHO OFFERED NO A…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS STEAM EMITTING FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. A MECHANIC ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WAS A CRACK IN THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE CONTACT CALLED THE MANUFACTURER WHO OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 85,000.
MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 1996 INTAKE MANIFOLD CRACKED AND HAD TO BE REPLACED, DID NOT KNOW THERE WAS A RECALL ON THE INTAKE MANIFOLD UNTIL WE HAD IT REPLACED. *TR
CAR CAUGHT FIRE HAD NO PROBLEMS WITH THE CAR IN THE PAST DROVE ABOUT 2 MILES PARKED AND TURNED CAR OFF AND THE ENGINE CAUGHT FIRE. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE PARKED IN THE RESIDENCE CARPORT, THE VEHICLE CAUGHT ON FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT EXTINGUISHED THE FLAMES. THE MASSIVE FIRE COMPLETELY DESTROYED THE VEHICLE AND CAUSED DAMAGES TO THE HOME. THERE WERE NO PERSONAL INJURIES. AT THIS TIME THE CAUSE OF FAILURE HAS NOT BEE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE PARKED IN THE RESIDENCE CARPORT, THE VEHICLE CAUGHT ON FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT EXTINGUISHED THE FLAMES. THE MASSIVE FIRE COMPLETELY DESTROYED THE VEHICLE AND CAUSED DAMAGES TO THE HOME. THERE WERE NO PERSONAL INJURIES. AT THIS TIME THE CAUSE OF FAILURE HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED. THE MANUFACTURER AND INSURANCE COMPANY WERE NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 96,000.
PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD ON A 1996 FORD GRAND MARQUIS 4.6 LITER V-8. APPARENTLY THERE WAS SOME SETTLEMENT OFFER FROM FORD TO REPLACE THIS PART WITH AN ALUMINUM INTAKE HOWEVER DUE TO THE CAR NOT BEING DRIVEN MUCH, 70,000 MILES IN 12 YEARS THE INTAKE MANIFOLD DID NOT FAIL UNTIL RECENTLY. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT OPTIONS I HAVE …
Read full complaint
PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD ON A 1996 FORD GRAND MARQUIS 4.6 LITER V-8. APPARENTLY THERE WAS SOME SETTLEMENT OFFER FROM FORD TO REPLACE THIS PART WITH AN ALUMINUM INTAKE HOWEVER DUE TO THE CAR NOT BEING DRIVEN MUCH, 70,000 MILES IN 12 YEARS THE INTAKE MANIFOLD DID NOT FAIL UNTIL RECENTLY. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT OPTIONS I HAVE IN FIXING THIS PART AND POSSIBLE REIMBURSEMENT OF THE $800 OR MORE IT WILL COST ME TO FIX IT. *TR
HAD JUST TURNED OFF FREEWAY WHEN WARNING CHIME FOR OVERHEATED ENGINE SOUNDED. STOPPED CAR WITHIN ONE BLOCK & TURNED OFF MOTOR. TOWED TO MECHANIC. TURNS OUT TO BE THE INTAKE MANIFOLD CATASTROPHIC FAILURE, COMMON TO FORDS (MINE IS 1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS, 71K MILES.) AM NOW RUNNING COMPRESSION TEST TO SEE IF ANY ENGINE DAMA…
Read full complaint
HAD JUST TURNED OFF FREEWAY WHEN WARNING CHIME FOR OVERHEATED ENGINE SOUNDED. STOPPED CAR WITHIN ONE BLOCK & TURNED OFF MOTOR. TOWED TO MECHANIC. TURNS OUT TO BE THE INTAKE MANIFOLD CATASTROPHIC FAILURE, COMMON TO FORDS (MINE IS 1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS, 71K MILES.) AM NOW RUNNING COMPRESSION TEST TO SEE IF ANY ENGINE DAMAGE, IF THERE IS NO DAMAGE THEN I WILL HAVE TO FIX MANIFOLD AT A COST OF APPROX. $1036. IF THERE IS ENGINE DAMAGE THEN I WILL HAVE TO JUNK A PERFECTLY FINE CAR IN EXCELLENT CONDITION (APART FROM THIS). FORD DOES NOT OFFER ANY REDRESS. I NEVER RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PROBLEM, NOR ABOUT THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS, AS I HAD JUST EXCITED A FREEWAY WHEN THE WARNING BEEP SOUNDED. I HAVE RECEIVED ALL OTHER RECALL INFO ON THIS VEHICLE AND HAVE COMPLIED W. RECALL. IN FACT VEHICLE HAD BEEN FULLY CHECKED BY DEALER ONLY 6 DAYS WHEN TAKEN IN FOR THE SECOND PART OF THE SWITCH RECALL ON THIS MODEL. DEALER NEVER INFORMED ME OF ANY POTENTIAL MANIFOLD PROBLEM. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AS WELL AS A DEFECTIVE PART ISSUE. AT THE VERY LEAST, OWNERS SHOULD BE NOTIFIED THAT THIS IS A COMMON CATASTROPHIC FAILURE. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. OCCASIONALLY, WHEN DRIVING 55-60 MPH, THE VEHICLE WOULD VIBRATE. THE VIBRATION ALSO OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING BETWEEN 35-40 MPH. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE HAD TO ADD WATER TO THE ANTIFREEZE RECEPTACLE EACH DAY BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WOULD OVERHEAT. WHILE MAKING A LEFT TURN, THE …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. OCCASIONALLY, WHEN DRIVING 55-60 MPH, THE VEHICLE WOULD VIBRATE. THE VIBRATION ALSO OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING BETWEEN 35-40 MPH. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE HAD TO ADD WATER TO THE ANTIFREEZE RECEPTACLE EACH DAY BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WOULD OVERHEAT. WHILE MAKING A LEFT TURN, THE CONTACT WOULD HEAR A RUSTLING SOUND AS IF SOMETHING WAS RUBBING TOGETHER. IN ADDITION, THE REAR WINDOWS WOULD NOT GO DOWN. THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE WINDOW WOULD GO DOWN, BUT WOULD NOT GO BACK UP. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FAILURE WAS ELECTRICAL. THE BLINKERS, BRAKE LIGHTS, AND CRUISE CONTROL HAVE FAILED. SHE ALSO RECEIVED A SAFETY RECALL NOTICE FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. THE POWERTRAIN AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 90,647 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 73,000.
SAME OLD STORY PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD CRACKED LOST ALL WATER COST 900.00 TO FIX WITH TOW. 92,000 MILES COME ON FORD GET REAL STEP UP AND FIX THIS. *TR
Official recalls
508V051000 · Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
Feb 4, 2008
FORD IS RECALLING 225,000 MY 1992-2003 ECONOLINE, MY 1993-1995 TAURUS SHO, MY 1992-1998 CROWN VICTORIA, MY 1993 BRONCO, F-SERIES, MY 1995-1997 F-SERIES SUPER DUTY STRIPPED CHASSIS, MY 1992-1998 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS, AND MY 1992-1995 LINCOLN TOWN CAR VEHICLES. THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE PREVIOUSLY REPAIRED USING A WIRING HARNESS THAT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE VEHICLE CIRCUIT POLARITY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AS A RESULT, THE FUSE IS LOCATED IN THE OUTPUT CIRCUIT RATHER THAN IN THE INTENDED INPUT POWER FEED CIRCUIT, AND MAY NOT OFFER THE INTENDED PROTECTION IN THE EVENT OF AN ELECTRICAL SHORT TO GROUND.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A NEW WIRING HARNESS, OR REPLACE THE MATING ELECTRICAL COMPONENT. THE RECALL BEGAN ON FEBRUARY 18, 2008. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
07V336000 · Vehicle Speed Control
Aug 3, 2007
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, PASSENGER VEHICLES, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND MOTOR HOMES CHASSIS, THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH MAY, UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN AN UNDERHOOD FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. OWNERS OF THE PASSENGER CARS INCLUDED IN THIS CAMPAIGN WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN THEIR VEHICLES TO THEIR DEALERS TO HAVE THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH DISCONNECTED AS AN INTERIM REPAIR. AS SOON AS REPAIR PARTS ARE AVAILABLE (EXPECTED OCTOBER 2007), OWNERS WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN TO THE DEALERS FOR INSTALLATION OF A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 13, 2007, AND MAILING COMPLETED BY SEPTEMBER 19, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
00V157001 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
Jun 12, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES USING AFTERMARKET DRIVER'S SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE SOLD BY FORD PARTS DEPARTMENTS FROM JANUARY 1, THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000. THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES." THE EQUIPMENT INVOLVED IS SERVICE STOCK SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES, MODEL NOS. H 9977, H 9979, T 9063, AND T 9217, BUILT BY TRW VEHICLE SAFETY SYSTEMS, INC. (TRW) MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 1998 THROUGH MAY 21, 2000. SOME OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AS SERVICE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT ON THE VEHICLES INVOLVED IN THE RECALL.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION, THESE SEAT BELTS MAY NOT RESTRAIN AN OCCUPANT INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THESE VEHICLES AND REPLACE THE SERVICE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE INSTALLED IN THESE VEHICLES FROM JANUARY 1 THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000.
00V157002 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
Jun 12, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES USING AFTERMARKET FRONT PASSENGER SIDE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE SOLD BY FORD PARTS DEPARTMENTS FROM JANUARY 1, THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000. THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES." THE EQUIPMENT INVOLVED IS SERVICE STOCK SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES, MODEL NOS. H 9977, H 9979, T 9063, AND T 9217, BUILT BY TRW VEHICLE SAFETY SYSTEMS, INC. (TRW) MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 1998 THROUGH MAY 21, 2000. SOME OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AS SERVICE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT ON THE VEHICLES INVOLVED IN THE RECALL.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION, THESE SEAT BELTS MAY NOT RESTRAIN AN OCCUPANT INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THESE VEHICLES AND REPLACE THE SERVICE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE INSTALLED IN THESE VEHICLES FROM JANUARY 1 THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000.
96V070000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Apr 22, 1996
WHEN IN THE SECONDARY LATCHED POSITION, THE DRIVER DOOR LATCHES MAY OPEN WHEN SUBJECTED TO TRANSVERSE LOADS LESS THAN THAT SPECIFIED IN FMVSS NO. 206, "DOOR LOCKS AND DOOR RETENTION COMPONENTS."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER'S DOOR, WHEN CLOSED ONLY TO THE SECONDARY LATCHED POSITION, MAY NOT SUSTAIN A 1,000 POUND TRANSVERSE LOAD.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE DRIVER DOOR LATCH.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
7EA03012 · Rear Brake Line Failure
Opened Jul 25, 2003 · Closed Apr 11, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2005, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM (FORD NO. 04B26) TO CORRECT A REAR BRAKE LINE CHAFING CONCERN IN APPROXIMATELY 44,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 1997 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS NON-FLEET VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONIC TRACTION CONTROL THAT WEREBUILT AFTER MARCH 19, 1997.THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REAR BRAKE LINE AND A MASTIC PATCH CAUSING REDUCED CLEARANCE FROM A STIFFENING RIB IN THE FLOOR PAN.ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THIS POPULATION THAN IN OTHER SUBJECT VEHICLES AND PEER MID-SIZED PASSENGER CARS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THE INVESTIGATION.VEHICLES INVOLVED IN FORD?S PROGRAM WILL HAVE THE REAR BRAKE LINES INSPECTED FOR CONTACT WITH THE FLOOR PAN STIFFING RIB.IF THERE IS CONTACT, BUT NO ABRASION OR LEAKAGE, THE BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPOSITIONED.IF THERE IS ABRASION OR A LEAK IS EVIDENT THE BRAKE LINE WILL BE REPAIRED.IF NECESSARY, BOTH OF THE REAR BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. THOUGH FORD DOES NOT ADMIT TO A SAFETY-DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE FACTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION SHOW OTHERWISE BECAUSE THE INSUFFICIENT CLEARANCE IN THE ROUTING OF THOSE BRAKE LINES MAY RESULT IN LEAKS IN THOSE LINES THAT MAY RESULT IN INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES.ODI IS DESIGNATING THE CAMPAIGN A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-086).BECAUSE OF THE LOW RATES OF BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLES, A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THOSE POPULATIONS AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS IN THOSE VEHICLES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid
IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2005, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM (FORD NO. 04B26) TO CORRECT A REAR BRAKE LINE CHAFING CONCERN IN APPROXIMATELY 44,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 1997 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS NON-FLEET VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONIC TRACTION CONTROL THAT WEREBUILT AFTER MARCH 19, 1997.THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REAR BRAKE LINE AND A MASTIC PATCH CAUSING REDUCED CLEARANCE FROM A STIFFENING RIB IN THE FLOOR PAN.ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THIS POPULATION THAN IN OTHER SUBJECT VEHICLES AND PEER MID-SIZED PASSENGER CARS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THE INVESTIGATION.VEHICLES INVOLVED IN FORD?S PROGRAM WILL HAVE THE REAR BRAKE LINES INSPECTED FOR CONTACT WITH THE FLOOR PAN STIFFING RIB.IF THERE IS CONTACT, BUT NO ABRASION OR LEAKAGE, THE BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPOSITIONED.IF THERE IS ABRASION OR A LEAK IS EVIDENT THE BRAKE LINE WILL BE REPAIRED.IF NECESSARY, BOTH OF THE REAR BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. THOUGH FORD DOES NOT ADMIT TO A SAFETY-DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE FACTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION SHOW OTHERWISE BECAUSE THE INSUFFICIENT CLEARANCE IN THE ROUTING OF THOSE BRAKE LINES MAY RESULT IN LEAKS IN THOSE LINES THAT MAY RESULT IN INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES.ODI IS DESIGNATING THE CAMPAIGN A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-086).BECAUSE OF THE LOW RATES OF BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLES, A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THOSE POPULATIONS AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS IN THOSE VEHICLES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2005, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM (FORD NO. 04B26) TO CORRECT A REAR BRAKE LINE CHAFING CONCERN IN APPROXIMATELY 44,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 1997 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS NON-FLEET VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONIC TRACTION CONTROL THAT WEREBUILT AFTER MARCH 19, 1997.THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REAR BRAKE LINE AND A MASTIC PATCH CAUSING REDUCED CLEARANCE FROM A STIFFENING RIB IN THE FLOOR PAN.ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THIS POPULATION THAN IN OTHER SUBJECT VEHICLES AND PEER MID-SIZED PASSENGER CARS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THE INVESTIGATION.VEHICLES INVOLVED IN FORD?S PROGRAM WILL HAVE THE REAR BRAKE LINES INSPECTED FOR CONTACT WITH THE FLOOR PAN STIFFING RIB.IF THERE IS CONTACT, BUT NO ABRASION OR LEAKAGE, THE BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPOSITIONED.IF THERE IS ABRASION OR A LEAK IS EVIDENT THE BRAKE LINE WILL BE REPAIRED.IF NECESSARY, BOTH OF THE REAR BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. THOUGH FORD DOES NOT ADMIT TO A SAFETY-DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE FACTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION SHOW OTHERWISE BECAUSE THE INSUFFICIENT CLEARANCE IN THE ROUTING OF THOSE BRAKE LINES MAY RESULT IN LEAKS IN THOSE LINES THAT MAY RESULT IN INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES.ODI IS DESIGNATING THE CAMPAIGN A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-086).BECAUSE OF THE LOW RATES OF BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLES, A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THOSE POPULATIONS AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS IN THOSE VEHICLES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2005, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM (FORD NO. 04B26) TO CORRECT A REAR BRAKE LINE CHAFING CONCERN IN APPROXIMATELY 44,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 1997 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS NON-FLEET VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONIC TRACTION CONTROL THAT WEREBUILT AFTER MARCH 19, 1997.THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REAR BRAKE LINE AND A MASTIC PATCH CAUSING REDUCED CLEARANCE FROM A STIFFENING RIB IN THE FLOOR PAN.ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THIS POPULATION THAN IN OTHER SUBJECT VEHICLES AND PEER MID-SIZED PASSENGER CARS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THE INVESTIGATION.VEHICLES INVOLVED IN FORD?S PROGRAM WILL HAVE THE REAR BRAKE LINES INSPECTED FOR CONTACT WITH THE FLOOR PAN STIFFING RIB.IF THERE IS CONTACT, BUT NO ABRASION OR LEAKAGE, THE BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPOSITIONED.IF THERE IS ABRASION OR A LEAK IS EVIDENT THE BRAKE LINE WILL BE REPAIRED.IF NECESSARY, BOTH OF THE REAR BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. THOUGH FORD DOES NOT ADMIT TO A SAFETY-DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE FACTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION SHOW OTHERWISE BECAUSE THE INSUFFICIENT CLEARANCE IN THE ROUTING OF THOSE BRAKE LINES MAY RESULT IN LEAKS IN THOSE LINES THAT MAY RESULT IN INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES.ODI IS DESIGNATING THE CAMPAIGN A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-086).BECAUSE OF THE LOW RATES OF BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLES, A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THOSE POPULATIONS AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS IN THOSE VEHICLES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
RQ03004 · Rear Brake Line Failure
Opened Mar 11, 2003 · Closed Jul 25, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
RQ03002 · Ball Joint Separation
Opened Jan 3, 2003 · Closed Jun 3, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:front:control Arm:lower Ball Joint
SEE ATTACHED REPORT.
EA02025 · Speed Control Deactivation Switch Fires
Opened Sep 6, 2002 · Closed Jun 30, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling
BASED ON THE LOW RATE OF FIRE INCIDENTS (2.5 INCIDENTS PER 100,000 VEHICLES SOLD) WHERE FAILURE OF THE SCDS IS INVOLVED AND THE AGE OF THE VEHICLES ? 7 TO 11 YEARS ? A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
DP02007 · FUEL-FED Fires
Opened Aug 22, 2002 · Closed Dec 4, 2002
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
THE FARS DATA SHOWS THAT THE RISK OF FIRE FROM IMPACT IN ALL DIRECTIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS THE SAME AS ALL OTHER SEDANS.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE NOT OVER REPRESENTED WITH RESPECT TO THE RISK OF FIRE IN REAL-WORLD HIGH-ENERGY CRASHES.A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RELATED TO POST CRASH FIRES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS SET OUT IN THE CLOSING REPORT FOR SQ 01-014 AND THAT REPORT IS IN THE DOCKET FOR THIS PETITION.AFTER REVIEWING THE PETITION AND ITS SUPPORTING MATERIALS, AS WELL AS INFORMATION FURNISHED BY FORD AND GM, AND INFORMATION WITHIN THE AGENCY'S POSSESSION FROM PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS AND OTHER RELATED ACTIONS,NHTSA HAS CONCLUDED THAT FUTHER INVESTIGATION CONCERNING POST-CRASH FIRES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS NOT LIKELY TO LEAD TO A DECISION THAT THE VEHICLES CONTAIN A SAFETY DEFECT.
SQ01014 · Post Rear End Collision Fires
Opened Nov 27, 2001 · Closed Oct 3, 2002
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage
There is no summary currently available
DP98007 · Improper Height For Head Restraints
Opened Jul 28, 1998 · Closed Sep 28, 1998
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats:front Assembly:head Restraint
NHTSA WAS PETITIONED TO COMMENCE A DEFECT INVESTIGATION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ON JULY 28, 1998.THE PETITION ALLEGES THAT THE DRIVER'S SEAT HEAD RESTRAINT WAS NOT HIGH ENOUGH AT ITS HIGHEST POSITION TO PROTECT HIM FROM NECK INJURIES SUSTAINED DURING A REAR IMPACT COLLISION.OTHER THAN THE SUBJECT PETITIN, ODI HAS RECEIVED NO OTHER COMPLAINTS OF INADEQUATE HEAD RESTRAINT HEIGHT FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.FORD MOTOR COMPANY'S COMPLIANCE DATA SHOWS THAT THE SUBJECT VEHICLES MET THE HEAD RESTRAINT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OF FMVSS NO. 202, HEAD RESTRAINTS. THEREFORE, THE PETITION IS DENIED.