NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
164 reports108,000 miles · Dec 12, 2014
Engine And Engine CoolingVehicle Speed Control
MY CAR WAS IN DRIVE AT A BUSINESS TRAFFIC INTERSECTION DRIVE WAY ON A SLIGHT HILL WITH THE BRAKES ON WHEN THE ENGINE SURGED AND THE CAR STARTED TO REVERSE WHILE STILL IN DRIVE. I HAD TO PUT CONSIDERABLE PRESSURE ON THE BRAKES TO STOP IT. I CHECKED AND THE SHIFT LEVER WAS STILL IN DRIVE. MY CAR HAS BEEN PROPERLY MAINTAINED AND WA…
Read full complaint
MY CAR WAS IN DRIVE AT A BUSINESS TRAFFIC INTERSECTION DRIVE WAY ON A SLIGHT HILL WITH THE BRAKES ON WHEN THE ENGINE SURGED AND THE CAR STARTED TO REVERSE WHILE STILL IN DRIVE. I HAD TO PUT CONSIDERABLE PRESSURE ON THE BRAKES TO STOP IT. I CHECKED AND THE SHIFT LEVER WAS STILL IN DRIVE. MY CAR HAS BEEN PROPERLY MAINTAINED AND WAS RECENTLY SERVICED WITH ALL REQUIRED SERVICES DONE. THIS REALLY SCARED ME AND I WOULD HAVE CRASHED INTO A CAR IF IT WAS BEHIND ME. FORD SHOULD LOOK INTO THIS SAFETY PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10663813
Mileage unknown · Oct 2, 2014
Exterior Lighting
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE HEADLIGHTS SHUT OFF INDEPENDENTLY. THE HEADLIGHTS RE-ILLUMINATED AFTER ONE MINUTE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNAVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10640734
98,000 miles · Aug 25, 2014
Engine
DRIVING ON THE HWY AND THE CAR STARTED TO OVERHEAT WITH HOT STEAM SHOOTING OUT FROM THE ENGINE AND IT ALSO HAD A STRONG COOLANT SMELL. THE CAR COULD NOT BE DRIVEN UNTIL L IT HAD $1,500 IN REPAIRS FOR A KNOWN, LEAKING PLASTIC MANIFOLD ISSUE. THIS FAILED PART CRACKS AND LEAKS INTO THE HOT ENGINE AREA. AND, FORD HAD REDESIGNED THE …
Read full complaint
DRIVING ON THE HWY AND THE CAR STARTED TO OVERHEAT WITH HOT STEAM SHOOTING OUT FROM THE ENGINE AND IT ALSO HAD A STRONG COOLANT SMELL. THE CAR COULD NOT BE DRIVEN UNTIL L IT HAD $1,500 IN REPAIRS FOR A KNOWN, LEAKING PLASTIC MANIFOLD ISSUE. THIS FAILED PART CRACKS AND LEAKS INTO THE HOT ENGINE AREA. AND, FORD HAD REDESIGNED THE FAILED PART. ADDITIONALLY, FORD HAD ONCE OFFERED FREE FIXES FOR A FEW MONTHS FOR POLICE CARS AND TAXI CABS WITH THE SAME ENGINES UNDER A CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT BUT DIDN'T TELL THE OWNERS ABOUT. THOUSANDS OF CONSUMERS WERE RIPPED OFF BECAUSE FORD SHOULD HAVE FIXED THIS ISSUE UNDER THE CLASS ACTION RECALL. BUT THEY DIDN'T BOTHER NOTIFY ANYONE ABOUT THE THREE MONTH RECALL WINDOW. IN CHECKING THE NHTSA RECORDS, THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF US WITH THE SAME REPORTED PROBLEM. PLEASE TAKE SOME CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR US. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10628275
114,000 miles · Nov 21, 2013
Engine
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WATER WAS LEAKING FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE IT WAS FRACTURED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAIL…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WATER WAS LEAKING FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE IT WAS FRACTURED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 114,000.
NHTSA ODI #10553218
191,800 miles · Sep 26, 2013
Engine
PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD ON 4.6 LITER ENGINE FOUND TO BE CRACKED AND LEAKING COOLANT. THE LOSS OF COOLANT RESULTS IN THE VEHICLE BECOMING DISABLED AND/OR UNSAFE TO DRIVE. LEAKING COOLANT IS ALSO TOXIC TO CHILDREN AND ANIMALS, AS THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE IN CONTACT WITH COOLANT ON THE GROUND OR GARAGE FLOOR. THIS DEFECTIVE P…
Read full complaint
PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD ON 4.6 LITER ENGINE FOUND TO BE CRACKED AND LEAKING COOLANT. THE LOSS OF COOLANT RESULTS IN THE VEHICLE BECOMING DISABLED AND/OR UNSAFE TO DRIVE. LEAKING COOLANT IS ALSO TOXIC TO CHILDREN AND ANIMALS, AS THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE IN CONTACT WITH COOLANT ON THE GROUND OR GARAGE FLOOR. THIS DEFECTIVE PART (PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD) WAS IDENTIFIED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AS DEFECTIVE AND QUIETLY SETTLED IN A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT. REPLACEMENT PARTS HAVE BEEN REDESIGNED. HOWEVER, FORD DID NOT CONTACT CUSTOMERS WITH THIS MODEL CAR TO NOTIFY THEM OF THE DEFECTIVE PART OR TO OFFER RESOLUTION. EARLIER MODELS OF THIS ENGINE (AND ALL OTHER ENGINES) USED A METAL INTAKE MANIFOLD. THESE WERE NOT PROBLEMATIC. INTAKE MANIFOLDS ARE NOT A MOVING PART OF THE VEHICLE ENGINE, AND ARE NOT SUBJECT TO WARE. THE PLASTIC MATERIAL USED IN THE PROBLEM MANIFOLDS ARE NOT ABLE TO WITHSTAND THE NORMAL TEMPERATURE FLUCTUATIONS OF A VEHICLE ENGINE AND ARE THEREFORE PRONE TO FAILURE. FORD HAS BEEN CONTACTED IN AN ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE, BUT THE COMPANY HAS DECLINED TO OFFER ANY RESOLUTION WHATSOEVER. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10545549
Mileage unknown · Feb 12, 2013
Electrical System
1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO DEFECTIVE ALTERNATOR. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED ON MAY 29, 2012, HE PURCHASED A RE-BUILT ALTERNATOR FROM A LOCAL PARTS STORE AND INSTALLED IT HIMSELF. THE ALTERNATOR FAILED ON JULY 16, 2012, WHILE IN A PARKING LOT. THE CONSUMER STATED THE STARTED SOLENOID CLICKED, BUT …
Read full complaint
1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO DEFECTIVE ALTERNATOR. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED ON MAY 29, 2012, HE PURCHASED A RE-BUILT ALTERNATOR FROM A LOCAL PARTS STORE AND INSTALLED IT HIMSELF. THE ALTERNATOR FAILED ON JULY 16, 2012, WHILE IN A PARKING LOT. THE CONSUMER STATED THE STARTED SOLENOID CLICKED, BUT THE ENGINE WOULD NOT TURN OVER. AFTER GETTING A JUMP, THE VEHICLE WOULD RUN FOR ABOUT 30 SECONDS AFTER THE CABLE WAS DISCONNECTED. THE CONSUMER RETURNED THE ALTERNATOR TO THE PARTS STORE TO HAVE IT TESTED, IN WHICH IT DID FAIL. THE CONSUMER PURCHASED ANOTHER ALTERNATOR AND ONCE IT WAS INSTALLED, THE VEHICLE RAN FOR ONLY 30 SECONDS AFTER THE JUMPER CABLES WERE DISCONNECTED, AS THE PREVIOUS ALTERNATOR. THE CONSUMER THEN PURCHASED A VOLTAGE METER AND THE ALTERNATOR WAS PUTTING OUT 11 VOLTS, INSTEAD OF 14 VOLTS, WHICH WAS NORMAL.
NHTSA ODI #10497521
120,000 miles · Jul 23, 2012
Power Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE STARTED STALLING WITH THE ILLUMINATION OF THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING LIGHT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE TRANSMISSION WOULD NEED REPLACING. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND STATED T…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE STARTED STALLING WITH THE ILLUMINATION OF THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING LIGHT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE TRANSMISSION WOULD NEED REPLACING. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT UNDER RECALL. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 126,000.
NHTSA ODI #10467050
Mileage unknown · May 5, 2012
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash
I WAS COMING TO A STOP WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL STARTED VIBRATING AND GOING LOWER AND LOWER TO THE FLOOR AND THE CAR DID NOT STOP RESULTING IN AN ACCIDENT. I WAS TOLD BY THE FORD MECHANIC THAT THE COMPUTER TESTS DID NOT SHOW ANY PROBLEM WITH THE ANTILOCK SYSTEM BUT I THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM WHEN YOU APPLY YOUR BRAKES AND THE CAR D…
Read full complaint
I WAS COMING TO A STOP WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL STARTED VIBRATING AND GOING LOWER AND LOWER TO THE FLOOR AND THE CAR DID NOT STOP RESULTING IN AN ACCIDENT. I WAS TOLD BY THE FORD MECHANIC THAT THE COMPUTER TESTS DID NOT SHOW ANY PROBLEM WITH THE ANTILOCK SYSTEM BUT I THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM WHEN YOU APPLY YOUR BRAKES AND THE CAR DOES NOT STOP. I HAVE ALSO TALKED TO A NUMBER OF PEOPLE SOME OF THEM WHO WORK ON CARS ETC..AND FOUND OUT THAT THIS IS NOT AN UNCOMMON PROBLEM. FURTHERMORE, IT HAPPENS A LOT AND ON ALL TYPES OF VEHICLES WITH ANTILOCK SYSTEMS. I WAS TOLD THAT THIS CAN HAPPEN ON AND OFF WHICH IS WHY IT IS HARD TO DETECT. I WAS LUCKY IN THE FACT THAT I WAS GOING SLOW AND NOBODY WAS HURT, BUT WHAT IF THAT HAD BEEN A DIFFERENT ENDING AND IT HAD BEEN A SERIOUS ACCIDENT? I HAVE NEVER BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT BEFORE AND I RESENT THE FACT THAT I WAS NOT AT FAULT FOR THIS ONE, THE BRAKES DID NOT WORK!!!!! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10457575
90,200 miles · Dec 15, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD STALL SPORADICALLY AND WITHOUT WARNING. A LOCAL MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED, BUT DENIED ANY ASSISTANCE WITH REPAIRS TO THE DEFECT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD STALL SPORADICALLY AND WITHOUT WARNING. A LOCAL MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED, BUT DENIED ANY ASSISTANCE WITH REPAIRS TO THE DEFECT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,200 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 91,000.
NHTSA ODI #10440044
80,000 miles · Oct 3, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingPower TrainTires
VEHICLE WOULD SHAKE VIOLENTLY AT ANY SPEED FROM 45-80MPH. TOOK TO A MECHANIC SAID THE FRONT END NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. $800.00 LATER IT STILL DID IT, THEN TOOK BACK SAID THE TIRES NEEDED TO BE REPLACED ALTHOUGH WE HAD 80,000 MILE TIRES, AND ONLY HAD 35,000 MILES PUT ON THEM. REPLACED THE TIRES FOR $600.00. STILL SHOOK, TOOK TO A…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE WOULD SHAKE VIOLENTLY AT ANY SPEED FROM 45-80MPH. TOOK TO A MECHANIC SAID THE FRONT END NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. $800.00 LATER IT STILL DID IT, THEN TOOK BACK SAID THE TIRES NEEDED TO BE REPLACED ALTHOUGH WE HAD 80,000 MILE TIRES, AND ONLY HAD 35,000 MILES PUT ON THEM. REPLACED THE TIRES FOR $600.00. STILL SHOOK, TOOK TO A DIFFERENT MECHANIC SAID IT WAS THE TRANSMISSION FAILING. DURING SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE FOUND CRACKED INTAKE MANIFOLD, ANTIFREEZE AND OIL IN SPARK PLUGS, CLEANED OUT CHANGED SPARK PLUGS, RAN FINE UNTIL THE MANIFOLD LEAKED MORE COOLANT INTO THE SPARK PLUGS AND NOW WE ARE AT SQUARE ONE. RESEARCHED ONLINE FOUND A BUNCH OF PLACES SAYING IT WAS RECALLED, WHEN I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP THEY SAID NO RECALLS. PRICE OF REPLACING THE PART WAS $615.00 IF I HAD ONE ALTERNATOR, OR $650.00 IF I HAD ANOTHER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10428282
Official recalls
3Jul 18, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THESE VEHICLES HAVE JACKING INSTRUCTIONS WHICH, IF FOLLOWED, COULD CAUSE THE VEHICLE OPERATOR TO PLACE THE JACK ON A FRAME WELD WHEN ATTEMPTING TO RAISE A REAR WHEEL. IF THE VEHICLE IS JACKED UP WITH THE JACK PLACED ON THE FRAME WELD AND IF THE VEHICLE IS FREE TO ROLL (WHEELS NOT BLOCKED OR CHOCKED), THE JACK COULD YIELD AND THE VEHICLE MAY DROP SUDDENLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS AND ANY PORTION OF THE OPERATOR'S BODY IS UNDER THE VEHICLE, THE POTENTIAL FOR PERSONAL INJURY EXISTS.
Remedy: OWNERS WILL BE PROVIDED WITH A REVISED JACK INSTRUCTION AND STOWAGE CARD AND JACK WARNING LABEL, AS WELL AS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE OWNER GUIDE.
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.
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.
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
3DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
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
Illustration