IllustrationFAILURE OF REAR WHEEL BEARING AT 46,000 MILES. *TR
2005 Mercury Montego
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Limited comparison data
There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Montego 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
140–25K
1625–50K
3650–75K
2175–100K
25100–150K
11150K+
123 reports with mileage · 12 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.
- Power Train. Review the 49 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 27 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 24 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
10 crash reports2 fire reports5 injury reports
What owners actually said
135 reportsMY 2005 MERCURY MONTEGO WITH JUST OVER 18, 000 MILES SUDDENLY WENT DEAD, WHILE PARTIALLY PULLED OUT IN TRAFFIC. IT WAS TRACED TO THE CVT TRANSMISSION. NO HARM OCCURRED, BUT I AM GOING TO GET RID OF THE CAR. I ALSO NOTICED INFO ON THE INTERNET WITH CVT PROBLEMS. I SEE TOO THAT FORD PULLED OUT THE CVT TRANSMISSIONS ON ITS NEW MODE…
Read full complaint
MY 2005 MERCURY MONTEGO WITH JUST OVER 18, 000 MILES SUDDENLY WENT DEAD, WHILE PARTIALLY PULLED OUT IN TRAFFIC. IT WAS TRACED TO THE CVT TRANSMISSION. NO HARM OCCURRED, BUT I AM GOING TO GET RID OF THE CAR. I ALSO NOTICED INFO ON THE INTERNET WITH CVT PROBLEMS. I SEE TOO THAT FORD PULLED OUT THE CVT TRANSMISSIONS ON ITS NEW MODELS FOR THE SABLE (WHICH WAS THE MONTEGO) AND TAURUS. I HAD TO PAY JUST OVER $1900 ON THIS REPAIR--WHICH I DO NOT BELIEVE IS FAIR, AS IT APPEARS TO BE A DEFECT WITH THE CVT. *TR
WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE FREEWAY AT ABOUT 50 MPH I WENT TO ACCELERATE AND THE TRANSMISSION SPUTTERED AND THEN TRIED TO DOWNSHIFT BUT INSTEAD LOCKED UP AND CAUSED THE CARS FRONT TIRES TO SQUEAL AND A RAPID SLOW DOWN. THIS FAILURE OCCURS ANYTIME I TRY TO ACCELERATE TO PASS A VEHICLE. WITH CAREFUL DRIVING I CAN MINIMIZE IT BUT AM N…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE FREEWAY AT ABOUT 50 MPH I WENT TO ACCELERATE AND THE TRANSMISSION SPUTTERED AND THEN TRIED TO DOWNSHIFT BUT INSTEAD LOCKED UP AND CAUSED THE CARS FRONT TIRES TO SQUEAL AND A RAPID SLOW DOWN. THIS FAILURE OCCURS ANYTIME I TRY TO ACCELERATE TO PASS A VEHICLE. WITH CAREFUL DRIVING I CAN MINIMIZE IT BUT AM NOT ABLE TO ACCELERATE VERY WELL. DEALERSHIP HAS TOLD ME TO REPLACE THE TRANSMISSION AT MY COST. *TR
MY HUSBAND WAS DRIVING A 2005 MERCURY MONTEGO ON A HIGHWAY AT 55MPH WHEN A JEEP LIBERTY CROSSED THE MEDIAN AND IMPACTED HIS CAR. IT WAS A SHEARING IMPACT, NOT A SIDE IMPACT. OUR REAR DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR AND THAT QUARTER OF THE VEHICLE WAS RIPPED COMPLETELY OFF. THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR WAS BENT OVER DOUBLE WITH THE LIBERTY…
Read full complaint
MY HUSBAND WAS DRIVING A 2005 MERCURY MONTEGO ON A HIGHWAY AT 55MPH WHEN A JEEP LIBERTY CROSSED THE MEDIAN AND IMPACTED HIS CAR. IT WAS A SHEARING IMPACT, NOT A SIDE IMPACT. OUR REAR DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR AND THAT QUARTER OF THE VEHICLE WAS RIPPED COMPLETELY OFF. THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR WAS BENT OVER DOUBLE WITH THE LIBERTY'S LICENSE PLATE WEDGED IN THE MIDDLE. OUR ONE MONTH OLD SON'S CAR SEAT BASE WAS LOCATED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE REAR SEAT AND THERE WERE TIRE TRACKS WHERE HIS HEAD WOULD HAVE BEEN HAD HE BEEN IN THE CAR. THE ONLY PASSENGER WAS MY HUSBAND IN THE DRIVER'S POSITION. HE HAS MUSCULOSKELETAL INJURIES AND A BROKEN FINGER, BUT ANYONE IN THE BACK SEAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MASSACRED AND KILLED. WE WERE STUNNED BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THE MONTEGO WAS A RELATIVELY SAFE VEHICLE. *TR
MERCURY MONTEGO WITH BRAKE PROBLEMS. CONSUMER STATES THAT THE REAR BRAKES WERE REPLACED AFTER 16,000 MILES, AND THE FRONT BRAKES WERE REPLACED AFTER 26,000 MILES. SHE BELIEVES THERE IS A DEFECT WITH THE TYPE OF METAL THAT IS BEING USED. *KB
IN THE 86K MILES MY MERCURY MONTEGO HAS BEEN DRIVEN THE REAR BRAKES HAVE BEEN REPLACED 3 TIMES. JUST THIS WEEK THE PASSENGER SIDE REAR BRAKE CALIPER HAD TO BE COMPLETELY REPLACED. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 MERCURY MONTEGO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY RECALL FOR THE BRAKE PADS. MOISTURE WOULD ENTER INTO THE BRAKE PADS AND THE MANUFACTURER INSTALLED NEW ROTORS IN THE BRAKE ASSEMBLY. FOUR WEEKS LATER, THE AFTERMARKET BRAKE ROTORS WERE RUSTED EXCESSIVELY. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT TH…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 MERCURY MONTEGO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY RECALL FOR THE BRAKE PADS. MOISTURE WOULD ENTER INTO THE BRAKE PADS AND THE MANUFACTURER INSTALLED NEW ROTORS IN THE BRAKE ASSEMBLY. FOUR WEEKS LATER, THE AFTERMARKET BRAKE ROTORS WERE RUSTED EXCESSIVELY. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THE FEATURE WAS COSMETIC AND PROVIDED NO FURTHER ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 32,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 33,000.
I NOTICED A LOT OF DUST FROM THE BRAKES ESPECIALLY ON THE REAR, AT 42,533, I HAD TO REPLACE THE BRAKES AND THE ROTORS RE-SURFACED. *TR
PREMATURE BRAKE PAD DEPLETED TOTALLY BY 18750 MILES RESULTING IN NO REAR BRAKING ACTION. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 MERCURY MONTEGO. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE'S STOPPING DISTANCE HAD INCREASED WHEN BRAKING. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE BRAKES NEEDED IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. THE CONTACT DID NOT ALLOW THE DEALER TO…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 MERCURY MONTEGO. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE'S STOPPING DISTANCE HAD INCREASED WHEN BRAKING. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE BRAKES NEEDED IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. THE CONTACT DID NOT ALLOW THE DEALER TO INSPECT ANY FURTHER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO ANOTHER MECHANIC WHO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE NEEDED NEW BRAKE PADS. THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 21,700 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 21,000.
Official recalls
206V383000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Oct 5, 2006
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING STATES: ALASKA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, IDAHO, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, KANSAS, KENTUCKY, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, MONTANA, NEBRASKA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, NORTH DAKOTA, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, SOUTH DAKOTA, UTAH, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA, WISCONSIN, AND WYOMING. THE SIDE DOOR LATCH MECHANISMS MAY EXPERIENCE WATER INTRUSION ALLOWING THE LATCH MECHANISM TO FREEZE IN COLD WEATHER.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AS A RESULT, THE DOOR LATCH PAWL MAY NOT RETURN TO THE LATCH POSITION WHEN THE DOOR IS CLOSED, AND THE DOOR COULD OPEN WHILE THE VEHICLE IS MOVING.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A SHIELD OVER THE FRONT LATCHES; SEAL A DRAIN HOLE IN THE REAR WINDOW TRIM MOLDING ON THE FREESTYLE REAR SIDE DOORS; AND APPLY GREASE TO ALL FRONT AND REAR SIDE-DOOR LATCH MECHANISMS FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 8, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
05V515000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly:mounting
Nov 9, 2005
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES, THE STRAPS THAT SECURE THE FUEL TANK TO THE VEHICLE BODY MAY BREAK, CAUSING THE FUEL TANK AND FUEL TANK HEAT SHIELD TO DROP ON THE DRIVESHAFT (ALL WHEEL DRIVE VEHICLES) OR EXHAUST SYSTEM (FRONT WHEEL DRIVE VEHICLES).
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS HAPPENS, DRIVERS MAY NOTICE A NOISE OR A FUEL LEAK. A FUEL LEAK IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE BOTH FUEL TANK STRAPS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON DECEMBER 1, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
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
1PE11018 · Idle Instability
Opened May 11, 2011 · Closed Feb 7, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
On November 29, 2012, Ford Motor Company (Ford) initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 12N03 to extend warranty coverage terms for repair of engine idle RPM surge caused by throttle body deposits in all model year (MY) 2005 through 2007 Ford Freestyle, Five Hundred and Mercury Montego vehicles.The program extends the coverage for up to 10 years of service or 150,000 miles from the warranty start date of the vehicle (all vehicles are eligible for the program through May 31, 2013, regardless of mileage).Dealers will repair vehicles exhibiting the condition by removing and cleaning the throttle body and reprogramming the PCM with software containing an updated idle speed control strategy.According to Ford, some of the affected vehicles may experience momentary, intermittent engine idle RPM surge (idle flare) when stopped or during low speed driving maneuvers such as in a parking lot or driveway.Unstable idle speed control (dips and flares) around the target engine speed (700 rpm) can occur in vehicles with deposit build-up in the throttle body when the system adjusts engine speed in response to changes in engine load, typically from power steering application or air-conditioner compressor cycling.Idle speed control logic is only active at vehicle speeds below 3.5 mph and when the accelerator pedal is not applied.Ford testing of a vehicle with a worst case throttle body measured a maximum idle flare of 1360 RPM lasting approximately 1 second, which Ford indicated was consistent with system design to limit vehicle speed and acceleration in idle control mode.Ford indicated that the test vehicle was held in place with normal brake effort and that vehicle speed remained under 4 mph without the brake pedal applied.In addition to throttle body deposit accumulation, symptoms associated with the condition may include Check Engine lamp illumination and diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) P0505, P0506 or P061B.Ford attributed the surge condition to changes in idle air flow resulting from the progressive buildup of deposits in the throttle body from normal Positive Crankcase Ventilation (PCV) system operation.This condition was not adequately compensated for in the original Powertrain Control Module (PCM) calibration.Ford issued a technical service bulletin on August 15, 2011 (TSB 11-8-5), releasing an updated powertrain control calibration for vehicles with CVT transmissions.On October 19, 2011, Ford issued a second bulletin (TSB 11-10-21) superseding TSB 11-8-5 and including updated powertrain control calibration for vehicles with 6-speed transmissions.Prior to Ford issuing the TSB?s, owner?s experiencing the alleged defect either received no repairs, if dealers could not duplicate the condition, or had the throttle body cleaned or replaced, which only provided temporary correction until the throttle deposit build-up returned.Ford?s revised powertrain calibrations appear to be effective remedies for the idle instability caused by build-up of throttle body deposits.However, even after the TSB?s were released, many owners experiencing the condition continued to have difficulty with proper diagnosis and repair as dealers were often either unable to duplicate the condition or were unfamiliar with the new repair procedures.Ford's new program addresses those concerns.NHTSA's testing and complaint analysis indicate that the idle speed control issue in the subject vehicles can only occur at very low speeds, are very brief events, are easily controlled by moderate brake pedal forces and result in minor increases in vehicle speed even with no braking.This investigation is closed.The closing of this in