STEERING BECAME DIFFICULT, HARD OR CHUNKY STEERING WHILE DRIVING WHEN MAKING TURNS. FORD MADE NEEDED REPAIRS AND REPLACED UPPER STEERING SHAFT. I THOUGHT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED UNDER FORD RECALL # 13S08 OR 14S25
2006 Mercury Grand Marquis
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 78.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Grand Marquis years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
117 reports with mileage · 26 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Air Bags. Review the 37 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 37 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Seat Belts. Review the 22 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
143 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC BUT THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE DETERMINED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC BUT THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE DETERMINED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN.
WITH ONLY 30,000 MILES, THE FUEL RAIL ASSEMBLY CORRODED THROUGH, CREATED A PIN HOLE AND SPRAYED FUEL AGAINST THE HOOD ASSEMBLY AND OVER THE ENTIRE TOP OF THE ENGINE. THIS OCCURRED ONLY 2 DAYS AFTER THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN REPAIRED BY FORD FOR THE SAFETY STEERING RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND MECHANIC MENTIONED THAT HE HAS NE…
Read full complaint
WITH ONLY 30,000 MILES, THE FUEL RAIL ASSEMBLY CORRODED THROUGH, CREATED A PIN HOLE AND SPRAYED FUEL AGAINST THE HOOD ASSEMBLY AND OVER THE ENTIRE TOP OF THE ENGINE. THIS OCCURRED ONLY 2 DAYS AFTER THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN REPAIRED BY FORD FOR THE SAFETY STEERING RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND MECHANIC MENTIONED THAT HE HAS NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE AND THIS ASSEMBLY SHOULD NOT HAVE CORRODED.
MY 17 YEAR OLD SLID OFF ROAD IN SNOW STORM, HIT TREE HEAD ON, CENTER OF BUMPER CONTACT, BUMPER REINFORCEMENT BAR DRIVEN INTO RADIATOR, BOTH FRAME RAILS BENT, YET NO AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT TOOK PLACE.
A FEW MINUTES AFTER STARTING MY MERC GR MAR 2006 I GET A 5 PINGLING SINGNALS THAT CONTINUES FOR ABOUT 4 MINUTES, THEN STOPS, THE AIRBAG LIGHTS SHOWS ON THE DASHBOARD AFTER TURNING OFF MY CAR AND RESTARTING IT THE SAME PINGLING SOUNDS COMES ON AGAINI HAVE TAKING MY CAR TO THE FORD DEALER AND COULD GET NO REAL HELP, TOLD IT DID N…
Read full complaint
A FEW MINUTES AFTER STARTING MY MERC GR MAR 2006 I GET A 5 PINGLING SINGNALS THAT CONTINUES FOR ABOUT 4 MINUTES, THEN STOPS, THE AIRBAG LIGHTS SHOWS ON THE DASHBOARD AFTER TURNING OFF MY CAR AND RESTARTING IT THE SAME PINGLING SOUNDS COMES ON AGAINI HAVE TAKING MY CAR TO THE FORD DEALER AND COULD GET NO REAL HELP, TOLD IT DID NOT EFFECT MY DRIVING THE CAR, BUT WOULD HAVE TO SPEND ALMOST 1,000 FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST, WHY ITS NOT MY FAULT, THIS STARED ALREADY LATE 2013,, HAD NOT USED THE CAR FOR 4 MONTHS WHEN THIS OCCURRED, PLEASE HELP, MANUFACTURER HAS TO BE RESPONSIBLE TO CORRECT THIS, VERY ANNOYINGSOUND
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE FUEL STRAPS WERE PARTIALLY DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE.THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE FUEL STRAPS WERE CORRODED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE FUEL STRAPS WERE PARTIALLY DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE.THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE FUEL STRAPS WERE CORRODED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000. UPDATED 1/15/16 *CN *CN
MY 2006 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS LS PREMIUM CAR HAS AN UNRESOLVED STALLING ISSUE. THE PROBLEM IS EXACERBATED WHEN THE CAR'S ENGINE WARMS UP, ESPECIALLY DURING WARMER WEATHER. IT TENDS TO STALL OUT AT EXTENDED STOPLIGHTS OR IF THE VEHICLE NEEDS TO BE STOPPED WITHIN A SHORT DISTANCE. MY CAR FIRST BEGAN STALLING AFTER I HAD IT …
Read full complaint
MY 2006 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS LS PREMIUM CAR HAS AN UNRESOLVED STALLING ISSUE. THE PROBLEM IS EXACERBATED WHEN THE CAR'S ENGINE WARMS UP, ESPECIALLY DURING WARMER WEATHER. IT TENDS TO STALL OUT AT EXTENDED STOPLIGHTS OR IF THE VEHICLE NEEDS TO BE STOPPED WITHIN A SHORT DISTANCE. MY CAR FIRST BEGAN STALLING AFTER I HAD IT WASHED IN GASOLINE STATION'S AUTOMATIC CAR WASH. SHORTLY AFTER IT WAS WASHED, THE ENGINE BEGAN RUNNING EXTREMELY ROUGH AND THEN FINALLY STALLED OUT WITH THE 'ENGINE' LIGHT ON YELLOW LIGHT ON THE DASHBOARD. THE FIRST TWO MASTER MECHANICS OF TWO DIFFERENT REPAIR FACILITIES SUGGESTED THAT THE ENGINE'S PCM WAS BAD AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AT A FORD DEALERSHIP. I TOOK MY CAR TO A THIRD REPAIR FACILITY AND THE MECHANIC SWAPPED OUT A USED PCM FOR A 4.6 L APPLICATION AND REPROGRAMMED IT FOR FORD'S MOST RECENTLY ISSUED SOFTWARE UPDATE. THE CAR CONTINUES TO STALL AFTER THE USED PCM WAS REPROGRAMMED AND THE MECHANIC CONCLUDED THAT HE WAS SURE THAT THE STALLING PROBLEM IS NOT RELATED TO THE ENGINE'S PCM! I'VE PAID APPROXIMATELY $874.00 AMONG THREE DIFFERENT AUTOMOBILE REPAIR FACILITIES AND ALL MASTER MECHANICS AMONG THESE THREE GARAGES COULD NOT PINPOINT WHY MY VEHICLE IS STALLING. FINALLY, A MASTER MECHANIC OF A VOLUNTEER CHURCH GARAGE ALSO COULD NOT PINPOINT WHY MY CAR CONTINUES TO STALL AND HE SUGGESTS THAT THE ONLY FIX IS TO SELL MY CAR. WHEN I CALLED A LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP TO SEE HOW THEY WOULD TRY TO FIX IT, THE SERVICE MANAGER EXPLAINED THAT THEY WOULD TRY TO REPLICATE THE CONDITIONS THAT MADE IT STALL IN THE FIRST PLACE. I EXPLAINED THAT THIS METHOD WAS TRIED BY ALL THREE REPAIR FACILITIES, ALL TO NO AVAIL, AND THAT I AM NOT INTERESTED IN PAYING ADDITIONAL FEES FOR FUTURE DIAGNOSTIC TESTS THAT CANNOT PINPOINT THE FAILURE. TO PREVENT STALLING AT STOPLIGHTS, I NEED TO USE BOTH THE GAS AND BRAKE PEDALS AT STOP LIGHTS!
START ENGINE, AIR BAG LIGHT ON DASH ILLUMINATES, BEEP ALARM SOUNDS FOR A SERIES OF FIVE BEEPS FOLLOWED BY 1 SECOND OF SILENCE, AND REPEATS FOR FIVE REPETITIONS OF THE SAME. LIGHT REMAINS ON AND AFTER 30 MINUTES OF DRIVING ON ROAD OPERATION, THE ALARM REPEATS FOR 5 REPETITIONS AS BEFORE. THIS CONTINUES AS LONG AS THE ENGINE IS OP…
Read full complaint
START ENGINE, AIR BAG LIGHT ON DASH ILLUMINATES, BEEP ALARM SOUNDS FOR A SERIES OF FIVE BEEPS FOLLOWED BY 1 SECOND OF SILENCE, AND REPEATS FOR FIVE REPETITIONS OF THE SAME. LIGHT REMAINS ON AND AFTER 30 MINUTES OF DRIVING ON ROAD OPERATION, THE ALARM REPEATS FOR 5 REPETITIONS AS BEFORE. THIS CONTINUES AS LONG AS THE ENGINE IS OPERATED WITHOUT TURNING OFF. WHEN SHUT OFF AND RESTARTED, THE ALARM STARTS ALL OVER FOR THE SERIES OF 5 BEEPS IN 5 REPETITIONS. MY DEALER SAYS THIS IS NOT A SAFETY ISSUE AND WANTS OVER $800.00 FOR A NEW COMPUTER MODULE. I HAVE NO WAY TO DOCUMENT COMPLAINT OR DEALER RESPONSE.
ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 I PURCHASED A USED 2006 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS LS. I WAS INFORMED THAT THE AIRBAG LIGHT WAS ON. I SUBSEQUENTLY FOUND THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOME MINOR DAMAGE TO THE LOWER FRONT OF THE VEHICLE, NOT RESULTING IN AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT. IN RESEARCHING THE PROBLEM AND TO DETERMINE IF THERE HAD BEEN AN AIRBAG RECALL BY …
Read full complaint
ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 I PURCHASED A USED 2006 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS LS. I WAS INFORMED THAT THE AIRBAG LIGHT WAS ON. I SUBSEQUENTLY FOUND THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOME MINOR DAMAGE TO THE LOWER FRONT OF THE VEHICLE, NOT RESULTING IN AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT. IN RESEARCHING THE PROBLEM AND TO DETERMINE IF THERE HAD BEEN AN AIRBAG RECALL BY THE NHTSA, I FOUND THAT THERE HAD BEEN 57 REGISTERED COMPLAINTS ON THE REPAIR PAL WEBSITE AND THAT A COMPLAINT HAD ALSO BEEN FILED WITH THE NHTSA.FOR THIS PROBLEM AND THAT THE PROBLEM WAS A RESULT OF DEFECTIVE SEAT-BELT ASSEMBLIES. THERE SHOULD BE A SAFETY RECALL ISSUED FOR THIS PROBLEM AS IT EFFECTS THE PROPER FUNCTIONALITY OF THE RESTRAINT SYSTEM IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION.
2006 MERCURY MARQUIS. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE POWER STEERING ISSUES. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED WHILE DRIVING, THE STEERING BECAME TIGHT. HE STATED IT FELT AS THOUGH HE WAS GOING TO LOOSE CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER REPLACED THE BATTERY HARNESS ASSEMBLY, DUE TO THE WIRING BEING CORRODED. *JB
Official recalls
214V704000 · Steering:rack And Pinion:pinion Shaft
Nov 5, 2014
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2005-2011 Ford Crown Victoria, 2005-2011 Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles manufactured March 23, 2004, to August 30, 2011, and 2005-2011 Lincoln Town Car vehicles manufactured March 8, 2004, to August 30, 2011, and on which the upper intermediate shaft was serviced during the course of safety recall 13V-385. The prior repairs may not have been correctly performed.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Improper servicing of the upper intermediate shaft could cause the shaft to separate, which can then result in a loss of steering control, and increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify the owners of vehicles whose repair records reflect that the upper intermediate steering shaft was repaired during the course of the prior recall 13V-385. Dealers will inspect and replace the upper immediate shaft if necessary free of charge. The recall began November 17, 2014. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 14S25.
13V385000 · Steering
Aug 29, 2013
Ford is recalling certain model year 2005-2011 Ford Crown Victoria (including Crown Victoria Police Interceptors), Mercury Grand Marquis, and Lincoln Town Car vehicles. The affected vehicles are currently registered or were originally sold in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Severe corrosion can seize the lower intermediate shaft which may cause the upper intermediate shaft to collapse and the steering column lower bearing to separate.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the lower bearing separates, the vehicle may experience a loss of steering, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners and dealers will replace the lower intermediate shaft, free of charge. The upper intermediate shaft and steering column lower bearing will be inspected to identify any damage that may have occurred as a result of lower intermediate shaft corrosion, and repaired or replaced as necessary. If the steering column lower bearing has separated, a retainer clip will be installed. The recall began on October 23, 2013. Owners may contact Ford at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's recall number is 13S08.
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
1PE14021 · Steering Column Shaft Obstruction
Opened Jul 7, 2014 · Closed Nov 21, 2014
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling:exhaust System; Steering
On July 7, 2014 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a preliminary evaluation based on five complaints (VOQs) alleging incidents ofinterference between dislodged exhaust manifold heat shields and the lower steering shaft/knuckle, including one alleging the interference resulted in a crash on a highway entrance ramp. Since opening this investigation, ODI has received four additional owner complaints.One indicated that the shield was removed before binding could occur.The other three occurred at low speed and produced some momentary steering binding that was overcome by the driver when additional steering effort was applied.Once the shield was repaired or removed, the steering returned to normal.The single incident ODI identified as a possible crash (VOQ No. 10578715) related to this condition could not be verified and the description of the crash in the complaint was not supported by the police accident report.No additional crash allegations have been identified related to the alleged defect condition.Information provided by Ford in its September 10, 2014 response to ODI's information request letter identified 10 additional incidents resulting in a low rate of 1.6 incidents per 100,000 vehicles sold in vehicles ranging from 7 to 11 years in service.Six of these incidents were reported by a single source, a state police fleet that corrected the problems in March 2011 and has not reported any additional failures since.Ford also reported 5 warranty claims, but these incidents occurred at very low mileages and appeared to be caused by loose or missing heat shield attachment hardware rather than the corrosion condition that was the cause of the more recent incidents and the focus of this investigation.This investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency will continue to monitor complaints and other information relating to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles and take further action in the future if warranted.The following VOQs are associated with this investigation:10643753, 10615584, 10611362, 10610451, 10578715, 10479681, 10471833, 10317493.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Engine And Engine Cooling:exhaust System
On July 7, 2014 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a preliminary evaluation based on five complaints (VOQs) alleging incidents ofinterference between dislodged exhaust manifold heat shields and the lower steering shaft/knuckle, including one alleging the interference resulted in a crash on a highway entrance ramp. Since opening this investigation, ODI has received four additional owner complaints.One indicated that the shield was removed before binding could occur.The other three occurred at low speed and produced some momentary steering binding that was overcome by the driver when additional steering effort was applied.Once the shield was repaired or removed, the steering returned to normal.The single incident ODI identified as a possible crash (VOQ No. 10578715) related to this condition could not be verified and the description of the crash in the complaint was not supported by the police accident report.No additional crash allegations have been identified related to the alleged defect condition.Information provided by Ford in its September 10, 2014 response to ODI's information request letter identified 10 additional incidents resulting in a low rate of 1.6 incidents per 100,000 vehicles sold in vehicles ranging from 7 to 11 years in service.Six of these incidents were reported by a single source, a state police fleet that corrected the problems in March 2011 and has not reported any additional failures since.Ford also reported 5 warranty claims, but these incidents occurred at very low mileages and appeared to be caused by loose or missing heat shield attachment hardware rather than the corrosion condition that was the cause of the more recent incidents and the focus of this investigation.This investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency will continue to monitor complaints and other information relating to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles and take further action in the future if warranted.The following VOQs are associated with this investigation:10643753, 10615584, 10611362, 10610451, 10578715, 10479681, 10471833, 10317493.
Steering
On July 7, 2014 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a preliminary evaluation based on five complaints (VOQs) alleging incidents ofinterference between dislodged exhaust manifold heat shields and the lower steering shaft/knuckle, including one alleging the interference resulted in a crash on a highway entrance ramp. Since opening this investigation, ODI has received four additional owner complaints.One indicated that the shield was removed before binding could occur.The other three occurred at low speed and produced some momentary steering binding that was overcome by the driver when additional steering effort was applied.Once the shield was repaired or removed, the steering returned to normal.The single incident ODI identified as a possible crash (VOQ No. 10578715) related to this condition could not be verified and the description of the crash in the complaint was not supported by the police accident report.No additional crash allegations have been identified related to the alleged defect condition.Information provided by Ford in its September 10, 2014 response to ODI's information request letter identified 10 additional incidents resulting in a low rate of 1.6 incidents per 100,000 vehicles sold in vehicles ranging from 7 to 11 years in service.Six of these incidents were reported by a single source, a state police fleet that corrected the problems in March 2011 and has not reported any additional failures since.Ford also reported 5 warranty claims, but these incidents occurred at very low mileages and appeared to be caused by loose or missing heat shield attachment hardware rather than the corrosion condition that was the cause of the more recent incidents and the focus of this investigation.This investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency will continue to monitor complaints and other information relating to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles and take further action in the future if warranted.The following VOQs are associated with this investigation:10643753, 10615584, 10611362, 10610451, 10578715, 10479681, 10471833, 10317493.
Illustration