NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
162 reportsMileage unknown · Mar 27, 2019
Steering
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT HEARD A SQUEAKING NOISE COMING FROM THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE SHOOK VIOLENTLY AND THE STEERING WHEEL VIBRATED. WHEN THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO MAKE A TURN, THE STEERING WOULD NOT ALIGN WITH THE TURN AND THE CONTACT HAD TO OVER COMP…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT HEARD A SQUEAKING NOISE COMING FROM THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE SHOOK VIOLENTLY AND THE STEERING WHEEL VIBRATED. WHEN THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO MAKE A TURN, THE STEERING WOULD NOT ALIGN WITH THE TURN AND THE CONTACT HAD TO OVER COMPENSATE TO COMPLETE THE TURN. CARRIAGE FORD INC (908 E LEWIS AND CLARK PKWY, CLARKSVILLE, IN 47129, (812) 284-4444) STATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL; THEREFORE, THEY COULD NOT ASSIST WITH THE REPAIRS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND CONFIRMED THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN.
NHTSA ODI #11191950
179,000 miles · Sep 15, 2018
Steering
"GRAND MARQUIS LS RECALL " STEERING IS BECOMING INCREASINGLY UNSTABLE.
NHTSA ODI #11129661
75,000 miles · Jul 24, 2018
Seat BeltsSteering
THE SEAT BELTS DO NOT RESTRAIN. ALSO, THE STEERING ROD WAS BROKEN AND FIXED AT THE LAST INSPECTION WHICH WAS 5/2018. WE WERE TOLD THAT THE SEAT BELTS WOULD COST $1500 OR MORE TO REPAIR. I SAW ON THIS WEBSITE THAT THERE WAS A RECALL ON SEAT BELTS NOT RESTRAINING.
NHTSA ODI #11113437
73,000 miles · May 23, 2018
Seat Belts
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER'S SEAT BELT FAILED TO LATCH INTO THE BUCKLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER OR INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING OR REPAIRS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 73,000. THE VIN …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER'S SEAT BELT FAILED TO LATCH INTO THE BUCKLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER OR INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING OR REPAIRS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 73,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #11097622
43,000 miles · Apr 24, 2018
Engine
I BELIEVE THIS ISSUE EFFECTS MILLIONS OF FORD AND MERCURY VEHICLES, MANY OF WHICH ARE TAXI, GOVERNMENT, AND POLICE CARS. APPARENTLY, THE COMPUTER (PCM) THAT CONTROLS THE ENGINE CAN SHUT THE ENGINE DOWN WHILE THE VEHICLE IS DRIVING WHEN CERTAIN SENSORS FAIL (AT LEAST 2 KNOWN SENSORS PER MY RESEARCH). I FOUND THIS OUT AT 65 MPH, 2…
Read full complaint
I BELIEVE THIS ISSUE EFFECTS MILLIONS OF FORD AND MERCURY VEHICLES, MANY OF WHICH ARE TAXI, GOVERNMENT, AND POLICE CARS. APPARENTLY, THE COMPUTER (PCM) THAT CONTROLS THE ENGINE CAN SHUT THE ENGINE DOWN WHILE THE VEHICLE IS DRIVING WHEN CERTAIN SENSORS FAIL (AT LEAST 2 KNOWN SENSORS PER MY RESEARCH). I FOUND THIS OUT AT 65 MPH, 2 HOURS FROM HOME. I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THERE ARE NO NEW PCMS MADE FOR MY 2000 CAR, AND THAT I HAD TO RELY ON A REBUILT AFTER MARKET PCM. THE AFTERMARKET SELLER RELATED THAT THESE COMPUTERS LAST APPROXIMATELY 10 YEARS. EVEN IF I REPLACE THIS PART, I BELIEVE THIS EFFECTIVELY MAKES MY (AND ANY SUCH) CAR A RISK TO DRIVE, AS MOST REBUILT AUTO PARTS ARE CREATED BY SIMPLY REPLACING ANY FAILED COMPONENTS OUT OF THE MANY COMPONENTS IN THE ASSEMBLY OF THE PART, AND LEAVING OTHERS STILL OLD AND WORN. WHEN WOULD THE OTHER PARTS FAIL, AND IF THE CAR IS OPERATING IS A HIGH RISK UNKNOWN. ON TOP OF THE FACT THAT THIS CREATES A SPECTACULAR HAZARD TO MOTORISTS, I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR TO CONSUMERS. I CAN DEMONSTRATE WHAT THIS CAR DOES, AND GO OVER THE OEM FACTORY MANUALS WHERE THEY CITE "REPLACE THE PCM". ALSO, WHY DO THESE SENSORS FAIL TO A VERY UNSAFE CONDITION, HAVE NO LOGIC CHECK (SUCH AS TESTING OTHER SENSORS TO SEE IF THEY CONCUR BEFORE AN ENGINE SHUT DOWN) AND WHY CAN'T THEY BE DISCONNECTED TO ALLOW THE ENGINE TO KEEP WORKING TILL YOU CAN GET TO THE REPAIR?
NHTSA ODI #11089850
258,000 miles · Jan 26, 2018
Fuel/propulsion SystemSteering
"TAKATA RECALL" WHEN PUTTING GAS IN MY CAR THE FUEL LEAKS OUT BEFORE THE GAS GETS INTO THE TANK BY FUEL FILTER. AND THE STEERING COLUMN MAKES A POPPING AND WINDING SOUND WHEN STEERING WHEEL IS IN USE DRIVING THE CAR.
NHTSA ODI #11065328
57,000 miles · Dec 14, 2017
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS UNDERGOING ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THE INDEPENDENT MECHANIC DISCOVERED THAT THE ENTIRE SUBFRAME WAS RUSTED AND CORRODED. THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND DID NOT ASSIST. THE LOCAL DEALER WAS NOT NOTIFIED…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS UNDERGOING ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THE INDEPENDENT MECHANIC DISCOVERED THAT THE ENTIRE SUBFRAME WAS RUSTED AND CORRODED. THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND DID NOT ASSIST. THE LOCAL DEALER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 57,000.
NHTSA ODI #11054783
124,000 miles · Sep 29, 2017
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE STATIONARY, THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT START WHEN PROMPTED. UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE, A CLICKING NOISE OCCURRED AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE HEADLAMP MODULE WAS FAULTY AND DRAINED THE BATTERY.…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE STATIONARY, THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT START WHEN PROMPTED. UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE, A CLICKING NOISE OCCURRED AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE HEADLAMP MODULE WAS FAULTY AND DRAINED THE BATTERY. THE DEALER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE AND STATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL AND REFERRED THE CONTACT TO NHTSA. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 124,000. UPDATED 11/07/17*LJ UPDATED 11/13/2017*JS
NHTSA ODI #11030509
120,000 miles · Jul 31, 2017
Exterior Lighting
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE HEADLIGHTS SHUT OFF WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE OCCURRED TWICE SINCE APRIL OF 2017. IN ADDITION, THE LIGHTING CONTROL MODULE FAILED. A DEALER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE AND ST…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE HEADLIGHTS SHUT OFF WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE OCCURRED TWICE SINCE APRIL OF 2017. IN ADDITION, THE LIGHTING CONTROL MODULE FAILED. A DEALER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE AND STATED THAT NO ASSISTANCE COULD BE PROVIDED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO RECALL ON THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 120,000.
NHTSA ODI #11011668
136,000 miles · Apr 19, 2017
Unknown Or OtherFire
VEHICLE HAD BEEN DRIVEN LESS THAN ONE MILE TO WORK, SAT FOR APPROXIMATELY 10 HOURS AND WAS DRIVEN BACK HOME (LESS THAN ONE MILE). THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN SITTING IN THE DRIVEWAY, TURNED OFF, FOR APPROXIMATELY 30 MINUTES WHEN IT CAUGHT FIRE AND BURNED.
NHTSA ODI #10979292
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