NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
17 reportsClear category filter132,208 miles · Apr 12, 2013
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE OVERHEATED WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH. THE CONTACT NOTICED FLUID LEAKING FROM UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS FOUND THAT THERE WAS A COOLANT LEAK. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THERE WERE THREE CRACKS…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE OVERHEATED WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH. THE CONTACT NOTICED FLUID LEAKING FROM UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS FOUND THAT THERE WAS A COOLANT LEAK. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THERE WERE THREE CRACKS ON THE INTAKE MANIFOLD. THE MECHANIC REPLACED THE INTAKE MANIFOLD. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 132, 208. UPDATED 05/29/13*LJ UPDATED 06/13/2013 *JS
NHTSA ODI #10508080
78,000 miles · Sep 16, 2012
Engine And Engine CoolingFuel/propulsion SystemStructure
PAINT IS PEELING, LIKE THERE WAS NEVER A PRIMER PUT ON THE VEHICLE. ALSO THE VEHICLE SURGES QUITE OFTEN. I HAVE REPLACED THE MANIFOLD SPARK PLUGS SEVERAL TIMES ALSO COILS. IS THERE A RECALL ON MERCURYS PAINT THAT I CAN GET SOME HELP WITH? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10475545
150,000 miles · Apr 20, 2012
Engine And Engine Cooling
I BOUGHT THIS CAR TO REPLACE MY CHEVROLET CAPRICE(GREAT CAR) ON 719 07 THIS CAR HAS MAJOR ISSUES THAT FORD MOTOR COMPANY REFUSES TO ADDRESS. JULY 2011 FUEL TANK FILLER NECK RUSTED CAUSING A FIRE HAZARD DEC20 11 REAR AXLE CONTROL ARM CRACKED CAUSING CAR TO SWAY FEB 2012 PLASTIC INTAKE CRACKED CAUSING COOLANT TO SPRAY A…
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT THIS CAR TO REPLACE MY CHEVROLET CAPRICE(GREAT CAR) ON 719 07 THIS CAR HAS MAJOR ISSUES THAT FORD MOTOR COMPANY REFUSES TO ADDRESS. JULY 2011 FUEL TANK FILLER NECK RUSTED CAUSING A FIRE HAZARD DEC20 11 REAR AXLE CONTROL ARM CRACKED CAUSING CAR TO SWAY FEB 2012 PLASTIC INTAKE CRACKED CAUSING COOLANT TO SPRAY ALL OVER ENGINE. FORD ISSUED A RECALL FOR THIS I CALLED THE LOCAL FORD DEALER ABOUT THIS THEY TOLD ME IT EXPIRED SO IM STUCK TO REPAIR THE CAR MYSELF FRONT END PARTS NOT SERVICEABLE AND WEAR OUT (NO GREASE FITTING TO LUBE) THIS HAS BEEN THE WORST CAR I HAVE EVER OWNED. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10455939
100,000 miles · Jun 15, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingFire
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THE HE SMELLED A BURNING ODOR. THE CONTACT LOOKED AT THE TEMPERATURE GAUGE WHICH INDICATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD OVERHEATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS MADE OF PLASTIC AND WAS LEAKING. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THE HE SMELLED A BURNING ODOR. THE CONTACT LOOKED AT THE TEMPERATURE GAUGE WHICH INDICATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD OVERHEATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS MADE OF PLASTIC AND WAS LEAKING. THE LEAK WAS SEALED, BUT THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE REPAIR MAY NOT HOLD UP FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 100,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 103,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10406925
90,700 miles · Jan 17, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF #8 CYLINDER WITHOUT WARNING MERGING ONTO HIGHWAY. IF THIS HAPPENS ON A DIFFERENT CYLINDER IT COULD PUNCTURE THE FUEL RAIL; ULTIMATELY CAUSING A FIRE FROM THE IGNITION COIL SPARK.
NHTSA ODI #10377752
87,000 miles · Dec 3, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
CAR STARTED RUNNING HOT ALL OF A SUDDEN..FOUND OUT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS CRACKED AND THE COOLANT WAS LEAKING ON SPARK PLUGS AND FUEL INJECTORS. CAUSING THE CAR TO MISFIRE AND SLOW TO PICK UP SPEED. TRIED TO GET FIXED BUT WAS TOLD THE EXP. DATE WAS IN 07.SO I HAVE TO PAY OUT OF POCKET..I FEEL A RECALL SHOULDN'T HAVE AN EXPIRATI…
Read full complaint
CAR STARTED RUNNING HOT ALL OF A SUDDEN..FOUND OUT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS CRACKED AND THE COOLANT WAS LEAKING ON SPARK PLUGS AND FUEL INJECTORS. CAUSING THE CAR TO MISFIRE AND SLOW TO PICK UP SPEED. TRIED TO GET FIXED BUT WAS TOLD THE EXP. DATE WAS IN 07.SO I HAVE TO PAY OUT OF POCKET..I FEEL A RECALL SHOULDN'T HAVE AN EXPIRATION DATE CAUSE IT TELLS YOU THAT ONE OF THESE DAYS THE PART ON THE CAR IS GOING TO NEED TO BE FIXED. I FEEL FORD SHOULD LIVE UP TO THEIR WORD AND FIX THE PROBLEM NO COST TO CUSTOMER... *TR
NHTSA ODI #10250679
95,175 miles · Nov 14, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
ENGINE FAILURE DUE TO A DEFECTIVE PLASTIC ENGINE INTAKE MANIFOLD. 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS BEGAN TO HESITATE; THE DEALER SAID IT WAS CAUSED BY A DEFECTIVE NYLON INTAKE MANIFOLD, AND THEY WOULD NOT COVER THE COST OF REPAIRS. FORD HAS HAD MANY COMPLAINTS ON THIS DEFECT. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10173465
57,000 miles · Oct 25, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS ENGINE SHUT DOWN CAUSING CONSUMER TO LOSE POWER BRAKES AND STEERING. THIS WAS CAUSED BY A SHORT IN SPARK PLUG. *TS THE SHORT OCCURRED IN THE SPARK PLUG ON THE #4 CYLINDER. THIS CONFUSED THE POWER CONTROL MODULE WITH SIGNALS IT WAS RECEIVING FROM THE ENGINE AND TRIED TO COMPENSATE WHICH AFFECTED OTH…
Read full complaint
2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS ENGINE SHUT DOWN CAUSING CONSUMER TO LOSE POWER BRAKES AND STEERING. THIS WAS CAUSED BY A SHORT IN SPARK PLUG. *TS THE SHORT OCCURRED IN THE SPARK PLUG ON THE #4 CYLINDER. THIS CONFUSED THE POWER CONTROL MODULE WITH SIGNALS IT WAS RECEIVING FROM THE ENGINE AND TRIED TO COMPENSATE WHICH AFFECTED OTHER SYSTEMS AND A SORT OF CHAIN REACTION OCCURRED. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10141074
52,584 miles · Aug 22, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
THE CARS STARTED MISSING AND RUNNING ROUGH EVEN AFTER HAVING A COMPLETE TUNE-UP AND AFTER ABOUT WEEK LATER IT STARTED ALL OVER AND WAS TAKEN INTO THE MERCURY DEALERSHIP THAT FOUND THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS CRACKED AND HAD TO BE REPLACED AT OUR EXPENSE, WHICH WE JUST RECEIVED A LETTER IN THE MAIL REGARDING A CLASS-ACTION LAWSU…
Read full complaint
THE CARS STARTED MISSING AND RUNNING ROUGH EVEN AFTER HAVING A COMPLETE TUNE-UP AND AFTER ABOUT WEEK LATER IT STARTED ALL OVER AND WAS TAKEN INTO THE MERCURY DEALERSHIP THAT FOUND THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS CRACKED AND HAD TO BE REPLACED AT OUR EXPENSE, WHICH WE JUST RECEIVED A LETTER IN THE MAIL REGARDING A CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST FORD FOR THE SAME PROBLEM. I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE FOLLOWED UP AND FORD NEEDS TO REFUND ALL EXPENSES DUE TO THE CUSTOMERS. PLEASE CHECK INTO THIS SITUATION, WE ALSO HAVE A FRIEND WHO HAS HAD THE SAME PROBLEM AND HAD TO HAVE HIS REPLACED. THANK YOU
NHTSA ODI #10133842
20,000 miles · Mar 28, 2005
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine Cooling
VEHICLE WAS GOING ABOUT 35 MPH WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT STARTED SHAKING. THEN, LOST ITS TRACTION CONTROL, AND CAUSED THE LIGHTS IN THE DASHBOARD TO TURN OFF. THIS EVENTUALLY LED THE ENGINE TO SHUT OFF, AND THE DRIVER LOST STEERING. TAKEN TO DEALER FOR A CHECKUP, BUT THE RESULTS SHOWED THAT THE CAUSE WAS UNDETERMINED.*AK CAR…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE WAS GOING ABOUT 35 MPH WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT STARTED SHAKING. THEN, LOST ITS TRACTION CONTROL, AND CAUSED THE LIGHTS IN THE DASHBOARD TO TURN OFF. THIS EVENTUALLY LED THE ENGINE TO SHUT OFF, AND THE DRIVER LOST STEERING. TAKEN TO DEALER FOR A CHECKUP, BUT THE RESULTS SHOWED THAT THE CAUSE WAS UNDETERMINED.*AK CAR SHUDDERED, FOLLOWED BY ENGINE SHUT DOWN RESULTING IN LOSS OF POWER BRAKES AND STEERING. *BF *NM
NHTSA ODI #10113321
Official recalls
6Jul 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.
May 17, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: A WINDSHIELD WIPER CONTROL MODULE MAY NOT BE CAPABLE OF CARRYING THE CURRENT REQUIRED DURING HIGH LOAD CONDITIONS ON THE WIPERS (I.E., ICE, SNOW, OR OTHER DEBRIS).
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS CONDITION COULD RESULT IN INOPERATIVE WIPERS WITH NO ADVANCE WARNING.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE WIPER CONTROL MODULES AND REPLACE IF NECESSARY.
Mar 20, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THESE VEHICLES MAY HAVE BEEN BUILT WITH THE LEFT REAR SEAT BELT RETRACTOR ATTACHING BOLTS INCORRECTLY TIGHTENED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH, THE VEHICLE OCCUPANT MAY NOT BE PROPERLY RESTRAINED, INCREASING THE RISK OF PERSONAL INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL TIGHTEN THE RETRACTOR MOUNTING BOLTS TO THE SPECIFIED TORQUE.
Feb 17, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THESE VEHICLES MAY HAVE BEEN BUILT WITH LOWER THAN THE INTENDED LEVEL OF TORQUE ON THE BOLTS THAT ATTACH THE AIR BAG ELECTRONIC CRASH SENSOR MODULE TO THE VEHICLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A LOOSE MODULE COULD RESULT IN A DELAYED AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT IN THE EVENT OF A VEHICLE CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL TIGHTEN THE AIR BAG ELECTRONIC CRASH SENSOR ATTACHING BOLTS.
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