NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
152 reports42,000 miles · Jan 10, 2011
Structure
THE BACK LIFT GATE IS CRACKED FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDOW, "THRU" THE MERCURY EMBLEM, AND ALL THE WAY DOWN. I'VE SEEN NEARLY IDENTICAL CRACKING ON MANY OTHER MOUNTAINEERS. I SEE A RATHER LARGE NUMBER OF THE SAME COMPLAINTS ON THE NHTSA WEBSITE. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A DEFECT THAT COULD RESULT IN INJURIES AND NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. …
Read full complaint
THE BACK LIFT GATE IS CRACKED FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDOW, "THRU" THE MERCURY EMBLEM, AND ALL THE WAY DOWN. I'VE SEEN NEARLY IDENTICAL CRACKING ON MANY OTHER MOUNTAINEERS. I SEE A RATHER LARGE NUMBER OF THE SAME COMPLAINTS ON THE NHTSA WEBSITE. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A DEFECT THAT COULD RESULT IN INJURIES AND NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10375435
52,000 miles · Jan 10, 2011
Structure
2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER CRACKED PANEL ON BACK LIFT GATE FROM WINDOW AROUND RIGHT SIDE OF ROUND EMBLEM TO BOTTOM. SECOND TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED. FIRST TIME VEHICLE WAS UNDER WARRANTY. 90% OF THESE VEHICLES I SEE ON ROAD ARE CRACKED. FORD /MERCURY NEEDS TO RECALL & FIX. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10375390
106,000 miles · Jan 3, 2011
Structure
THE BACK LIFT GATE IS CRACKED FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDOW, AROUND THE LEFT SIDE OF THE MERCURY EMBLEM, AND ALL THE WAY DOWN. I'VE NOTICED THE SAME CRACKING ON ALMOST EVERY OTHER MOUNTAINEER ON THE ROADS, AND I SEE A HUGE NUMBER OF THE SAME COMPLAINT ON THE NHTSA WEBSITE. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A DEFECT AND NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. *…
Read full complaint
THE BACK LIFT GATE IS CRACKED FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDOW, AROUND THE LEFT SIDE OF THE MERCURY EMBLEM, AND ALL THE WAY DOWN. I'VE NOTICED THE SAME CRACKING ON ALMOST EVERY OTHER MOUNTAINEER ON THE ROADS, AND I SEE A HUGE NUMBER OF THE SAME COMPLAINT ON THE NHTSA WEBSITE. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A DEFECT AND NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10374032
85,000 miles · Aug 18, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER THE CRUISE CONTROL ON THE STEERING COLUMN . THE OFF BUTTON DOES NOT WORK ,THE BRAKE PEDAL MUST BE APPLIED, AND THE BUTTON TO SLOW DOWN THE TRUCK ALSO DOES NOT WORK . NO SPECIFIC DATE ,A COMPLAINT WAS MADE TO FORD WHEN IT FIRST HAPPENED WHEN THE TRUCK WAS UNDER WARRANTY BUT THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT FIND …
Read full complaint
2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER THE CRUISE CONTROL ON THE STEERING COLUMN . THE OFF BUTTON DOES NOT WORK ,THE BRAKE PEDAL MUST BE APPLIED, AND THE BUTTON TO SLOW DOWN THE TRUCK ALSO DOES NOT WORK . NO SPECIFIC DATE ,A COMPLAINT WAS MADE TO FORD WHEN IT FIRST HAPPENED WHEN THE TRUCK WAS UNDER WARRANTY BUT THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG . *TR
NHTSA ODI #10350442
88,000 miles · Aug 3, 2010
Power TrainSteeringStructure
REAR BACK HATCH CRACKED WHEN PURCHASED, PROMISED TO BE FIXED BY DEALERSHIP, BUT THEY NEVER HONORED THEIR PROMISE. I HAVE SINCE SEEN SEVERAL MERCURY MOUNTAINEERS WITH THE REAR BACK HATCH CRACKED AS WELL, WONDERING WHY THEIR WASN'T A RECALL?? ALSO TRANSMISSION PROBLEMS, ALREADY REPLACED TRANSFER CASE AND NOW POWER STEERING IS LE…
Read full complaint
REAR BACK HATCH CRACKED WHEN PURCHASED, PROMISED TO BE FIXED BY DEALERSHIP, BUT THEY NEVER HONORED THEIR PROMISE. I HAVE SINCE SEEN SEVERAL MERCURY MOUNTAINEERS WITH THE REAR BACK HATCH CRACKED AS WELL, WONDERING WHY THEIR WASN'T A RECALL?? ALSO TRANSMISSION PROBLEMS, ALREADY REPLACED TRANSFER CASE AND NOW POWER STEERING IS LEAKING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10347101
65,000 miles · Aug 3, 2010
Power Train
TRANSMISSION FAILURE ON A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. THE TRANSMISSION FAILED OCCURRED WHILE TRAVELING ON THE HEAVILY TRAVELED INTERSTATE 295 IN NJ. THE FAILURE OCCURRED WITH NO WARNING WHAT SO EVER. AFTER TAKING THE CAR TO MULTIPLE REPAIR SHOPS WHICH INCLUDED A FORD DEALER, I WAS INFORMED THAT THIS IS A COMMON AND KNOWN PROBLEM …
Read full complaint
TRANSMISSION FAILURE ON A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. THE TRANSMISSION FAILED OCCURRED WHILE TRAVELING ON THE HEAVILY TRAVELED INTERSTATE 295 IN NJ. THE FAILURE OCCURRED WITH NO WARNING WHAT SO EVER. AFTER TAKING THE CAR TO MULTIPLE REPAIR SHOPS WHICH INCLUDED A FORD DEALER, I WAS INFORMED THAT THIS IS A COMMON AND KNOWN PROBLEM FOR THIS TYPE OF VEHICLES AND ALSO THE FORD EXPLORER. I DEPEND ON MY CAR TO GO TO WORK AND I SERVICE THE CAR AS RECOMMENDED BY FORD. NOW I AM IN THE PROCESS OF REPAIRING THE CAR AND MEANWHILE I HAD TO RENT A CAR FOR A WEEK. IF I WAS NOT AN ALERT DRIVER, THAT FAILURE COULD HAVE CAUSED AN ACCIDENT AND SERIOUS INJURIES AND OR DEATH TO ME AND OTHER MOTORISTS. I THINK FORD SHOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AND TRY TO RECTIFY THE PROBLEM BEFORE SOMEONE GET KILLED AND WITH THE VERY HIGH STICKER PRICE THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THESE KIND OF SUV THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE SAFE AND RELIABLE. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10346972
36,000 miles · Jul 14, 2010
Structure
I AM HAVING AN ISSUE WITH MY HATCHBACK. THE EMBLEM HAS A LONG AND LARGE CRACK ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE EMBLEM. I HAVE NOTICED THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL 2003 MOUNTAINEERS WITH THE SAME ISSUE. I AM AFRAID THAT THE CRACK WILL CAUSE THE GLASS TO BREAK. I NOTICED WHEN I BOUGHT THE VEHICLE THE DEALERSHIP TRIED TO REPAIR THE ISSUE ONCE THE…
Read full complaint
I AM HAVING AN ISSUE WITH MY HATCHBACK. THE EMBLEM HAS A LONG AND LARGE CRACK ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE EMBLEM. I HAVE NOTICED THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL 2003 MOUNTAINEERS WITH THE SAME ISSUE. I AM AFRAID THAT THE CRACK WILL CAUSE THE GLASS TO BREAK. I NOTICED WHEN I BOUGHT THE VEHICLE THE DEALERSHIP TRIED TO REPAIR THE ISSUE ONCE THEREFORE I FELT THAT I SHOULD ADVISE/COMPLAIN ABOUT THE FAILURE TO SEE IF A RECALL OR A BULLETIN WOULD BE PLACED ON THE VEHICLE TO REPAIR THE ISSUE WITH NO RECOURSE OR RECURRING ISSUE. I AM NOT SURE WHY THIS ISSUE IS OCCURRING BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR THIS ISSUE TO BE REPAIRED AT NOT COST TO ME BECAUSE AGAIN I HAVE FOUND MANY MOUNTAINEERS WITH THE SAME ISSUE AND ALL HAVE BEEN 2003 SO FAR. PLEASE INVESTIGATE AND ASSIST FORD/MERCURY TO PRODUCE A SOLUTION TO THE ISSUE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10343348
80,000 miles · Jul 13, 2010
Power Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH, THE OVERDRIVE OFF WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED. THE CONTACT SHUT OFF THE ENGINE AND WHEN RESTARTING THE LIGHT WAS NO LONGER ILLUMINATED. WITHIN SECONDS, THE WARNING LIGHT HAD RE-ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR FACILI…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH, THE OVERDRIVE OFF WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED. THE CONTACT SHUT OFF THE ENGINE AND WHEN RESTARTING THE LIGHT WAS NO LONGER ILLUMINATED. WITHIN SECONDS, THE WARNING LIGHT HAD RE-ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR FACILITY WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE SECOND AND FOURTH GEARS WERE NOT FUNCTIONING CORRECTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SERVICED FOR THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 80,000.
NHTSA ODI #10342888
93,000 miles · Jun 28, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
DRIVING ON HIGHWAY AND TRIED TO STOP FOR RED LIGHT. CRUISE CONTROL HAD BEEN ON BUT WHEN BRAKES WERE PRESSED VEHICLE WAS NOT SLOWING DOWN. AS I GOT CLOSER TO THE STOPPED CARS I PUT TRANSMISSION INTO NEUTRAL AND RPMS WENT WAY UP. I PULLED OVER AND SHUT OFF. HAD CAR TOWED AND REPAIRED. IT HAPPENED AGAIN ON INTERSTATE NEXT DAY. BROU…
Read full complaint
DRIVING ON HIGHWAY AND TRIED TO STOP FOR RED LIGHT. CRUISE CONTROL HAD BEEN ON BUT WHEN BRAKES WERE PRESSED VEHICLE WAS NOT SLOWING DOWN. AS I GOT CLOSER TO THE STOPPED CARS I PUT TRANSMISSION INTO NEUTRAL AND RPMS WENT WAY UP. I PULLED OVER AND SHUT OFF. HAD CAR TOWED AND REPAIRED. IT HAPPENED AGAIN ON INTERSTATE NEXT DAY. BROUGHT TO FORD DEALER AND TOLD IT WAS CRUISE CONTROL CABLE. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10340506
87,000 miles · Jun 17, 2010
Electrical System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. WHILE DRIVING LESS THAN 40 MPH, THE DASHBOARD ILLUMINATED AND THE VEHICLE LOST ALL POWER. THE CONTACT HAD NOT SPOKEN WITH THE MANUFACTURER NOR THE DEALER FOR REPAIRS, DIAGNOSTIC TESTING NOR TO REPORT THE FAILURE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 87,700.
NHTSA ODI #10336777
NHTSA investigations
2EA09013 · Vehicle Rollaway Allegations
Opened Aug 18, 2009 · Closed Feb 12, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission:gear Position Indication (prndl); Power Train:automatic Transmission:lever And Linkage:column Shift; Steering; Steering:column; Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device
This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.
Additional source detail variants (5)
Power Train:automatic Transmission:gear Position Indication (prndl)
This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.
Power Train:automatic Transmission:lever And Linkage:column Shift
This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.
Steering:column
This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.
Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device
This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.
Steering
This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.
DP05005 · 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.