NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
78 reports111,050 miles · Sep 16, 2013
Steering
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED AS THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED A TURN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING AND THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE STEERING WHEEL WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED AS THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED A TURN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING AND THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE STEERING WHEEL WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 111,050. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 123,000.
NHTSA ODI #10543811
50,000 miles · Aug 10, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
LEAVING WORK, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET FROM PARKING PLACE TO PARKING LOT EXIT INTO ROAD. WHEN BRAKING TO STOP BEFORE ENTERING ROADWAY, VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD WITH ENGINE RACING AT A HIGH RPM. PUSHED INTO NEUTRAL UNTIL STOPPED THEN PARK WITH ENGINE STILL RACING. TURNED OFF AND SAT STILL FOR A MINUTE THEN RESTARTED WITH NO FURTHER …
Read full complaint
LEAVING WORK, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET FROM PARKING PLACE TO PARKING LOT EXIT INTO ROAD. WHEN BRAKING TO STOP BEFORE ENTERING ROADWAY, VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD WITH ENGINE RACING AT A HIGH RPM. PUSHED INTO NEUTRAL UNTIL STOPPED THEN PARK WITH ENGINE STILL RACING. TURNED OFF AND SAT STILL FOR A MINUTE THEN RESTARTED WITH NO FURTHER PROBLEM. MECHANIC CANNOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG. NOT THE FIRST TIME IT HAS HAPPENED BUT WAS THE WORST INCIDENT WITH ENGINE BEING UNCONTROLLABLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10534684
85,000 miles · Mar 29, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND THEY STATED THAT THE CRUISE CONTROL NEEDED TO BE DISCONNECTED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTI…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND THEY STATED THAT THE CRUISE CONTROL NEEDED TO BE DISCONNECTED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED BUT PROVIDED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 85,000. ..UPDATED 05/01/13 *BF UPDATED 05/06/13
NHTSA ODI #10504951
Mileage unknown · Aug 10, 2012
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHENEVER THE AIR CONDITIONER OR CRUISE CONTROL WAS RUNNING, THE VEHICLE WOULD HAVE SUDDEN ACCELERATION FAILURES. THE FAILURE ALSO OCCURRED WHEN BRAKING TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL IN ORDER TO STOP…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHENEVER THE AIR CONDITIONER OR CRUISE CONTROL WAS RUNNING, THE VEHICLE WOULD HAVE SUDDEN ACCELERATION FAILURES. THE FAILURE ALSO OCCURRED WHEN BRAKING TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL IN ORDER TO STOP THE VEHICLE BY APPLYING THE BRAKES. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A MECHANIC, BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 50,000 AND THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10470149
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
Mileage unknown · May 7, 2012
Air BagsCrashInjury
I SWERVED TO AVOID AN ANIMAL IN THE ROAD AND HIT A TELEPHONE POLE HEAD ON AT 35 MPH. MY AIR BAGS NEVER DEPLOYED. THE FRONT END OF THE CAR WAS CRUMPLED WELL INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE POLICE, FIRE DEPT AND EMT'S WERE ALL VERY SURPRISED THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. I HAVE SUSTAINED SOME INJURIES BUT NOTHING LIFE THREATENING.…
Read full complaint
I SWERVED TO AVOID AN ANIMAL IN THE ROAD AND HIT A TELEPHONE POLE HEAD ON AT 35 MPH. MY AIR BAGS NEVER DEPLOYED. THE FRONT END OF THE CAR WAS CRUMPLED WELL INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE POLICE, FIRE DEPT AND EMT'S WERE ALL VERY SURPRISED THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. I HAVE SUSTAINED SOME INJURIES BUT NOTHING LIFE THREATENING. (CRACKED RIBS, SOFT TISSUE DAMAGE, LOWER BACK INJURY). NO OTHER VEHICLES WERE INVOLVED IN THE ACCIDENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10457617
115,100 miles · May 3, 2012
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT WAS AT A COMPLETE STOP WHEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ABNORMALLY. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A WATER HEATER IN THE CONTACT'S GARAGE. THE CONTACT DID NOT SUSTAIN ANY INJURIES BUT THERE WERE MAJOR DAMAGES TO THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT WAS AT A COMPLETE STOP WHEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ABNORMALLY. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A WATER HEATER IN THE CONTACT'S GARAGE. THE CONTACT DID NOT SUSTAIN ANY INJURIES BUT THERE WERE MAJOR DAMAGES TO THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 115,100.
NHTSA ODI #10457405
130,000 miles · Nov 23, 2011
Air BagsCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED HE WAS INVOLVED A ROLLOVER CRASH AND THE DRIVERS AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. THE ROLLOVER WAS CAUSED BY THE VEHICLE BEING DRIVEN OFF OF THE ROADWAY. THE CONTACT DID NOT KNOW THE SPEED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING AT. THE VEHICLE WAS DETERMINED TO BE DESTROYED. …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2002 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED HE WAS INVOLVED A ROLLOVER CRASH AND THE DRIVERS AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. THE ROLLOVER WAS CAUSED BY THE VEHICLE BEING DRIVEN OFF OF THE ROADWAY. THE CONTACT DID NOT KNOW THE SPEED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING AT. THE VEHICLE WAS DETERMINED TO BE DESTROYED. THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT APPEARED ON THE SCENE AND CUT THE CONTACT OUT OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INSPECTED TO DETERMINE WHY THE DRIVERS AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY EVEN THOUGH THE PASSENGER AIR BAG DEPLOYED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 130,000. UPDATED 01/05/12*LJ UPDATED 01/12/12
NHTSA ODI #10436844
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
27,100 miles · May 10, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingCrash
I WAS LEAVING A SHOPPING CENTER PARKING LOT WHEN I STARTED THE CAR UP AND EVERYTHING WAS OKAY. I SHIFTED THE CAR INTO REVERSE AND IMMEDIATELY THE ENGINE STARTED TO RACE EXTREMELY FAST CAUSING THE CAR TO MOVE BACKWARDS WITH MY FOOT STILL ON THE BRAKE. I TRIED TO TURN OFF THE IGNITION, BUT I WAS TOO CLOSE TO THE CAR BEHIND ME AN…
Read full complaint
I WAS LEAVING A SHOPPING CENTER PARKING LOT WHEN I STARTED THE CAR UP AND EVERYTHING WAS OKAY. I SHIFTED THE CAR INTO REVERSE AND IMMEDIATELY THE ENGINE STARTED TO RACE EXTREMELY FAST CAUSING THE CAR TO MOVE BACKWARDS WITH MY FOOT STILL ON THE BRAKE. I TRIED TO TURN OFF THE IGNITION, BUT I WAS TOO CLOSE TO THE CAR BEHIND ME AND I HIT IT. I WAS MOVING ABOUT 10 TO 20 MILES PER HOUR WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE WHICH FAILED TO STOP THE VEHICLE. AFTER THE ACCIDENT, THE CAR RAN OKAY. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE SOUTH HILLS LINCOLN DEALERSHIP WHERE IT HAD BEEN PURCHASED. THEY CLAIM THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE CAR. I HAVE ONLY 27,100 MILES ON THE CAR. IT IS A 2002 MODEL AND I HAVE OWNED IT SINCE IT WAS NEW. I CALLED FORD TO TRY TO GET HELP BUT THEY SAID THERE IS NOTHING THEY CAN DO. THE DEALER HAD THE CAR FOR FOUR DAYS AND COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT. I NOW HAVE A CAR WITH JUST OVER 27,000 MILES AND AM CONCERNED ABOUT DRIVING IT. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO AND FORD COULD NOT CARE LESS. I DID HAVE OTHER INSTANCES (ABOUT SIX) WHEN ON STARTUP THE ENGINE WOULD BEGIN TO RACE. I WOULD IMMEDIATELY TURN THE ENGINE OFF AND RESTART IT AND THEN IT WOULD BE OKAY. IN SEPTEMBER, 2010, I DID TAKE THE CAR TO A DIFFERENT REPAIR SHOP AND THEY REPLACED THE IDLE CONTROL VALVE, BUT THIS DID NOT DO ANY GOOD. THE CAR MIGHT GO A MONTH OR TWO WITHOUT A PROBLEM. THE ACCIDENT WAS THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED WHEN THE CAR WAS IN GEAR. OTHER THAN THIS, THE CAR IS IN PERFECT CONDITION AND I CANNOT AFFORD TO REPLACE THIS CAR WITH ONLY 27,000 MILES ON IT.
NHTSA ODI #10400456
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