NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Electrical System complaints
10 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Jul 18, 2022
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
?yrs.ago While backing out of parking space at Calaveras Lumber, after shifting into reverse, & removing my foot from the brake; the engine appeared to receive a huge burst of fuel which shot me backward like a rocket slamming my vehicle into and wedging it under the frame of a pickup truck parked in the same lot. I am glad I w…
Read full complaint
?yrs.ago While backing out of parking space at Calaveras Lumber, after shifting into reverse, & removing my foot from the brake; the engine appeared to receive a huge burst of fuel which shot me backward like a rocket slamming my vehicle into and wedging it under the frame of a pickup truck parked in the same lot. I am glad I was parked and had my foot on the brake prior to this unit or system malfunction otherwise the injuries could easily have been fatal on the highway. I think this defect may be a contributing factor to the car dying recently while on my way to a Wedding Reception in Roseville, which left me stranded after dark for 41/2hrs and 71/2hrs. 2days later. I have not been able to start vehicle since and mechanics unable to diagnose why the engine is fuel starved when system parts tested appear to be in good working order. Something seems to be shutting off power or preventing power to the fuel pump and it is not the inertia switch, relays, fuses etc.. Components have been previously inspected by numerous others including dealer. No Recognizable Alert/Warning Prior to Incidents!
NHTSA ODI #11474583
72,234 miles · Apr 5, 2018
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HAZARD LIGHTS, DAYTIME RUNNING LAMPS, LOW BEAM, AND HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO ILLUMINATE. THE FAILURE PROGRESSED WITHOUT WARNING. TWO DEALERS (POMPANO FORD LINCOLN, 2741 N FEDERAL HWY, POMPANO BEACH, FL 33064, (888) 718-9266 AND SCHUMACHER LINCOL…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HAZARD LIGHTS, DAYTIME RUNNING LAMPS, LOW BEAM, AND HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO ILLUMINATE. THE FAILURE PROGRESSED WITHOUT WARNING. TWO DEALERS (POMPANO FORD LINCOLN, 2741 N FEDERAL HWY, POMPANO BEACH, FL 33064, (888) 718-9266 AND SCHUMACHER LINCOLN OF DELRAY, 2102 S FEDERAL HWY, DELRAY BEACH, FL 33483, (561) 454-1800) WERE CONTACTED, BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THERE WERE FIVE TSBS FOR THE EXTERIOR LIGHTING, BUT NO RECALL WAS ISSUED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 72,234.
NHTSA ODI #11083428
118,575 miles · Aug 27, 2015
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
AFTER DRIVING TO MALL MY DAUGHTER REALIZED THAT MY HEAD LIGHTS WERE NOT ON. CHECKED ALL FUSE (UNDER DASH AND UNDER HOOD). NONE WERE BLOWN. REALIZED THAT HAD NO DOME LIGHT BUT DID HAVE MAP/READING LIGHTS. NO TAIL LIGHTS OR BRAKE LIGHTS EXCEPT THIRD BRAKE LIGHTS. HAD BRIGHTS IF I HELD HIGH BEAM LEVER. HAD CAR TOWED TO SHOP. WAS T…
Read full complaint
AFTER DRIVING TO MALL MY DAUGHTER REALIZED THAT MY HEAD LIGHTS WERE NOT ON. CHECKED ALL FUSE (UNDER DASH AND UNDER HOOD). NONE WERE BLOWN. REALIZED THAT HAD NO DOME LIGHT BUT DID HAVE MAP/READING LIGHTS. NO TAIL LIGHTS OR BRAKE LIGHTS EXCEPT THIRD BRAKE LIGHTS. HAD BRIGHTS IF I HELD HIGH BEAM LEVER. HAD CAR TOWED TO SHOP. WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS THE LIGHT CONTROL MODULE (LCM). WAS TOLD THAT FORD HAD AND EXTENDED WARRANTY ON THIS PART. TOOK IT TO FORD DEALER. THEY SAID THAT IT WAS ONLY FOR THE 2003-2005 MODELS AND THAT MY CAR WAS NOT COVERED. I THINK THEY SHOULD EXTEND THIS WARRANTY TO THE THE 2002 MODELS SEEING THAT THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH EARLIER MODELS AND NOT JUST THE 2003-2005 MODELS. IT IS PROBABLY THE SAME PART.
NHTSA ODI #10759856
1,000 miles · Jun 19, 2012
Electrical SystemSuspension
SHORTLY AFTER PURCHASE WE WENT BACK TO DEALER TO COMPLAIN ABOUT BOUNCY SUSPENSION THAT MADE THE CAR GO SIDEWAYS ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN GOING OVER BUMPS WHILE IN MILD TURNS (JUST HIGHWAY DIRECTION CHANGES NOT GETTING OFF/ON, ETC.). DEALER LOOKED INTO PROBLEM VIA FMC AND SAID THE 02 SUSPENSION HAD BEEN CHANGED TO IMPROVE ITS RIDE (H…
Read full complaint
SHORTLY AFTER PURCHASE WE WENT BACK TO DEALER TO COMPLAIN ABOUT BOUNCY SUSPENSION THAT MADE THE CAR GO SIDEWAYS ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN GOING OVER BUMPS WHILE IN MILD TURNS (JUST HIGHWAY DIRECTION CHANGES NOT GETTING OFF/ON, ETC.). DEALER LOOKED INTO PROBLEM VIA FMC AND SAID THE 02 SUSPENSION HAD BEEN CHANGED TO IMPROVE ITS RIDE (HA). THE CHANGES WERE TOO GREAT TO BE ABLE TO CHANGE COMPONENTS TO GET THE RIDE BACK TO WHAT IT WAS IN EARLIER YEARS. ONLY CHANGES WE COULD DO TO IMPROVE IT WERE TO GET 4 NEW HIGH PRESSURE (FAST RESPONDING) KB SHOCKS AND GOODYEAR ASSURANCE TOURING (MORE FLEX IN SIDEWALL) TIRES TO REDUCE THE IMPACT. NOW THE CAR DOES NOT LATERALLY JUMP FEET BUT RATHER INCHES DURING HIGHWAY DRIVING AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. ALSO: STARTING RELAY WAS REPLACED TWICE AND HARNESS CONTACTS IN LOWER STEERING COLUMN DEVELOPED POOR CONNECTIONS AND HAD TO BE SPRAYED WITH HIGH COST CAIG CONTACT IMPROVER TO GET CAR TO START CONSISTENTLY. ALSO: BRAKE PEDAL RAISE/LOWER MOTOR BURNED OUT DUE TO GEAR SEIZING UP IN THAT AREA AND HAD TO BE REPLACED WITH GREAT DIFFICULTY FINDING A REPLACEMENT ACROSS COUNTRY SINCE FMC DOESN'T MAKE PARTS ANYMORE (> 7 YRS I GUESS). ALSO: ALL 8 INDIVIDUAL CYLINDER SPARK COILS WERE REPLACED WITH HIGH PERFORMANCE AFTERMARKET ONES AFTER TWO OF FORDS COILS FAILED, ONE AT A TIME. ALL IN ALL NOT A GREAT CAR. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10462251
112,000 miles · Oct 16, 2011
Electrical System
DURING HEIGHT OF THE RUSH HOUR AT 4:00 PM I WAS TRAVELING ON NJ TURNPIKE AT 65 MPH IN THE MIDDLE LANE, STARTED TO HEAR A CLICKING SOUND. ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR'S ENGINE STOPPED, HAD NO POWER STEERING AND THE ENTIRE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILED, (THE CAR'S BATTERY WAS REPLACED IN 12/2010) . DIRECTIONAL SIGNALS, AND EMERGENCY FLAS…
Read full complaint
DURING HEIGHT OF THE RUSH HOUR AT 4:00 PM I WAS TRAVELING ON NJ TURNPIKE AT 65 MPH IN THE MIDDLE LANE, STARTED TO HEAR A CLICKING SOUND. ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR'S ENGINE STOPPED, HAD NO POWER STEERING AND THE ENTIRE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILED, (THE CAR'S BATTERY WAS REPLACED IN 12/2010) . DIRECTIONAL SIGNALS, AND EMERGENCY FLASHER DID NOT WORK, NOR COULD I LOWER THE WINDOWS. I WAS ABLE TO COAST TO THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD WHEN A SLOW MOVING TRUCK WAS COMING UP ON THE RIGHT SIDE. NO CLICKING SOUND WAS HEARD TRYING TO RESTART THE CAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10430392
24,998 miles · Dec 28, 2005
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE DID NOT ALWAYS START. WHEN IT DID START THE ENGINE STALLED WHILE IDLING. TO ALLEVIATE STALLING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL MUST BE PUMPED HARD WHILE STARTING THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TO THE DEALERSHIP MULTIPLE TIMES AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE IAC VALVE WAS REPLACE…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE DID NOT ALWAYS START. WHEN IT DID START THE ENGINE STALLED WHILE IDLING. TO ALLEVIATE STALLING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL MUST BE PUMPED HARD WHILE STARTING THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TO THE DEALERSHIP MULTIPLE TIMES AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE IAC VALVE WAS REPLACED, AND THE COMPUTER WAS REPROGRAMMED. NEITHER OF THESE EFFORTS REPAIRED THE PROBLEM. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10146217
50,000 miles · Apr 25, 2005
Electrical SystemFireInjury
SLIGHT WHITE SMOKE APPEARING THROUGH VENTS IN AUTO. THEN WHEN WE PARKED IT EXTREME SMOKE CAME INTO VENTS FILLING PASSANGER COMPARTMENT. ALSO EXTREME WHITE SMOKE MIXED WITH BLACK CAME THROUGH VENTS BETWEEN HOOD AND WINDSHIELD. I OPENED HOOD AND IT WAS APPARENTLY BETWEEN FIREWALL & DASH. HAD TERRIBLE SMELL LIKE ROTTED TUNA. WIFE …
Read full complaint
SLIGHT WHITE SMOKE APPEARING THROUGH VENTS IN AUTO. THEN WHEN WE PARKED IT EXTREME SMOKE CAME INTO VENTS FILLING PASSANGER COMPARTMENT. ALSO EXTREME WHITE SMOKE MIXED WITH BLACK CAME THROUGH VENTS BETWEEN HOOD AND WINDSHIELD. I OPENED HOOD AND IT WAS APPARENTLY BETWEEN FIREWALL & DASH. HAD TERRIBLE SMELL LIKE ROTTED TUNA. WIFE STILL HAVING BREATING PROBLEMS FROM INHALATION. HAD CAR TOWED TO DEALERSHIP.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10118362
15,213 miles · Apr 9, 2004
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
PROBLEMS WITH MY WIFE'S 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS LS NOT CRANKING AT ODD TIMES. I HAVE CRANKED UP THE CAR, AND DRIVEN IT INTO THE GARAGE, THEN GO BACK OUT A COUPLE MINUTE LATER - 15-30 MINUTES - AND THE CAR WOULD NOT CRANK. THE LAST TIME I PULLED THE CAR INTO THE GARAGE ONE EVENING AND WHEN MY WIFE WENT TO GO TO WORK THE NEXT …
Read full complaint
PROBLEMS WITH MY WIFE'S 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS LS NOT CRANKING AT ODD TIMES. I HAVE CRANKED UP THE CAR, AND DRIVEN IT INTO THE GARAGE, THEN GO BACK OUT A COUPLE MINUTE LATER - 15-30 MINUTES - AND THE CAR WOULD NOT CRANK. THE LAST TIME I PULLED THE CAR INTO THE GARAGE ONE EVENING AND WHEN MY WIFE WENT TO GO TO WORK THE NEXT MORNING IT WOULD NOT CRANK. THE DEALER'S SERVICE DEPARTMENT CAN NOT FIND A PROBLEM. HOWEVER, THE LEFT TURN SIGNAL WENT OUT ABOUT A YEAR AGO, REQUIRING A MODULE BE REPLACED. AFTER THAT WE NOTICED THE FOOT PEDAL ADJUSTMENT DIID NOT WORK AND A LOOSE CONNECTION WAS FOUND TO BE THE PROBLEM. THE STARTING PROBLEMS DID NOT START UNTIL AFTER THE TURN SIGNAL MODULE WAS REPLACED. I HAVE FOUND OTHER INCIDENTS OF PROBLEMS WITH THE IGNITION SWITCH FOR THIS MODEL MERCURY. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10065824
Mileage unknown · Jul 7, 2003
Electrical SystemSuspensionUnknown Or Other
THIS IS A CONCERN AND I AM WONDERING, IF IT SHOULD IN FACT BE A COMPLAINT. I PURCHASED A 2002 MERCURY MARQUIS ON JUNE 12TH OF 2003. I WAS ASSURED THIS, AS OTHER AUTOS HAD BEEN CHECKED OUT AND IN GOOD ORDER. I AM NOW NOTICING THE IGNITION KEY SOMETIMES DOES NOT TURN WHEN I AM TRYING TO START THE CAR. EQUALLY IMPORTANT, I RAN A CA…
Read full complaint
THIS IS A CONCERN AND I AM WONDERING, IF IT SHOULD IN FACT BE A COMPLAINT. I PURCHASED A 2002 MERCURY MARQUIS ON JUNE 12TH OF 2003. I WAS ASSURED THIS, AS OTHER AUTOS HAD BEEN CHECKED OUT AND IN GOOD ORDER. I AM NOW NOTICING THE IGNITION KEY SOMETIMES DOES NOT TURN WHEN I AM TRYING TO START THE CAR. EQUALLY IMPORTANT, I RAN A CARFAX REPORT AND DISCOVERED ON 11/18/02 THIS CAR HAD 27,262 MILES. WHEN I PURCHASED IT, AND BECAUSE OF THE MILEAGE, WHICH AT THAT TIME WAS 27,279 I WAS ASSURED THIS WAS A GOOD CAR. I FIND NOW, THAT IT WAS NOT THE RETIRED, SENIOR CITIZEN WHO WANTED A NEW AUTO TRADE IN, BUT THIS WAS A RENTAL CAR FROM BURLINGGAME, CA. NOW I AM WONDERING IF I SHOULD BE CONCERNED THIS CAR WAS SITTING FOR 8 MONTHS AND THUS ONLY HAD 17 MILES MORE IN JUNE THAN IN NOVEMBER? OR BE SUSPECT ABOUT THE ODOMETER BEING ROLLED BACK? IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM ACCURATE A 2002 WOULD ONLY HAVE 17 MILES MORE IN 8 MONTHS FROM NOV. 2002 TO JUNE 12, 2003.THANK YOU.
NHTSA ODI #10025559
4,093 miles · Jul 3, 2003
Electrical SystemService Brakes, Hydraulic
WHEN THE CONSUMER APPLIED THE BRAKE HIS FOOT ALSO HIT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WHICH CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO ACCELERATE SUDDENLY. THE VEHICLE TURN SIGNAL WERE INOPERATIVE AND THE IGNITION KEY WAS HARD TO TURN AT TIMES. *JB *CB *NLM
NHTSA ODI #10020198
NHTSA investigations
1DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Illustration