IllustrationTL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. WHILE EXAMINING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT NOTICED A CRACK EXTENDING FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE REAR GLASS TO THE BOTTOM OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALER. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 31,000.
2005 Mercury Mountaineer
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2005 Mercury Mountaineer do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 117.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Mountaineer 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
120–25K
2125–50K
1250–75K
775–100K
15100–150K
2150K+
69 reports with mileage · 13 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.
- Structure. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 19 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 13 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
6 crash reports0 fire reports1 injury reports
Structure complaints
26 reportsMY 2005 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER DEVELOPED A CRACK IN THE REAR LIFT GATE RIGHT AROUND THE MERCURY EMBLEM. I HAVE SEEN MANY MORE WITH THE SAME PROBLEM, BOTH FORD EXPLORERS AND THE MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. WHEN I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER THEY WERE LIKE TOO BAD SO SAD IT IS OUT OF WARRANTY EVEN THOUGH I BOUGHT A EXTENDED WARRANTY FROM FORD. I…
Read full complaint
MY 2005 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER DEVELOPED A CRACK IN THE REAR LIFT GATE RIGHT AROUND THE MERCURY EMBLEM. I HAVE SEEN MANY MORE WITH THE SAME PROBLEM, BOTH FORD EXPLORERS AND THE MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. WHEN I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER THEY WERE LIKE TOO BAD SO SAD IT IS OUT OF WARRANTY EVEN THOUGH I BOUGHT A EXTENDED WARRANTY FROM FORD. I HAVE BEEN LOOKING AROUND NOW AND I SEE LOTS OF THEM WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. I HAVE HEARD THAT FORD IS FIXING THE EXPLORERS IF IT IS UNDER 5 YEARS AND UNDER 75,000 MILES BUT THAT JUST SEEMS TO BE A DEALER THING, I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY OFFICIAL ACCOUNT OF THIS. *TR
I HAVE A 2005 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER WHICH HAS BEEN GARAGE KEPT AND ONLY 20,000 MILES. I NOTICED THE PAINT PEELING FROM THE ROOF OF THIS VEHICLE AND RETURNED IT TO THE DEALER WHO REFERRED ME TO THE FORD CUSTOMER CARE, WHO REFUSED TO HELP ME WITH THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE IT WAS OVER THE 36 MONTH WARRANTY. I TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL AUTO …
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2005 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER WHICH HAS BEEN GARAGE KEPT AND ONLY 20,000 MILES. I NOTICED THE PAINT PEELING FROM THE ROOF OF THIS VEHICLE AND RETURNED IT TO THE DEALER WHO REFERRED ME TO THE FORD CUSTOMER CARE, WHO REFUSED TO HELP ME WITH THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE IT WAS OVER THE 36 MONTH WARRANTY. I TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL AUTO SHOP WHO TOLD ME THIS IS A MAJOR ISSUE AND HE TOLD ME THE ENTIRE CARS PAINT CAN PEEL BECAUSE OF THE FAULTY WAY IT WAS PAINTED. HE SHOWED ME THE UNDERCOAT WAS NOT PREPARED PROPERLY AND THE PAINT IS JUST NOT ADHERING TO THE UNDERCOAT. I DID A SEARCH ON THE INTERNET AND NOW FIND THAT THIS WAS A KNOWN ISSUE AND AN EXPENSIVE FIX AS IT MEANS REMOVING THE PAINT AND UNDERCOAT AND REDOING THE ENTIRE VEHICLE. WHAT CAN I DO SHORT OF SEEKING LEGAL REMEDIES? *TR
THE BACK LIFTGATE HAS A CRACK AROUND THE CIRCULAR MERCURY EMBLEM. I NOTICED IT ON MINE, AND HAVE SEEN THE SAME THING ON OTHER MERCURY SUV'S. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN WRECKED, OR HAD ANYTHING HIT THE BACK LIFTGATE. PROBLEM WITH THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE PLASTIC USED IN THE LIFTGATE? *TR
I HAVE A 2005 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER THE SUV HAS 66,000 MILES ON IT AND THE ROOF HAS PAINT PEELING ON IT AND A LARGE RUST SPOT. I TOOK TO THE MERCURY DEALER AND THEY SAID IT WAS NOT RUSTED THROUGH THE BODY. I SAID NOT NOW BUT IT WILL THE SERVICE MANAGER REPLIED YES BUT HOPEFULLY IT WILL BE OUT OF WARRANTY BY THEN ( HE WAS SO HELPFU…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2005 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER THE SUV HAS 66,000 MILES ON IT AND THE ROOF HAS PAINT PEELING ON IT AND A LARGE RUST SPOT. I TOOK TO THE MERCURY DEALER AND THEY SAID IT WAS NOT RUSTED THROUGH THE BODY. I SAID NOT NOW BUT IT WILL THE SERVICE MANAGER REPLIED YES BUT HOPEFULLY IT WILL BE OUT OF WARRANTY BY THEN ( HE WAS SO HELPFUL ) THE FORD REP CAME TODAY AND REJECTED THE CLAIM DO TO HER BUYING THE SUV USED EVEN THROUGH SHE BROUGHT IT FROM THIS DEALER. I WILL TRY TO APPEAL IT WITH FORD LETS SEE WHAT HAPPENS ????? *TR
THE PAINT ON THE ROOF OF MY 2005 MOUNTAINEER IS CRACKING AND FLAKING OFF IN CHUNKS. WHEN I NOTICED, IT WAS 3 WEEKS OUT OF WARRANTY. FORD ADMITTED IT WAS DEFECTIVE PAINT, BUT WILL ONLY REPAINT THE ROOF. THIS WOULD BE FINE, BUT THE COST WILL BE $980 AND THEY WANT ME TO PAY $200 OF IT. WHILE THIS MAY NOT SEEM LIKE A BAD DEAL, THE P…
Read full complaint
THE PAINT ON THE ROOF OF MY 2005 MOUNTAINEER IS CRACKING AND FLAKING OFF IN CHUNKS. WHEN I NOTICED, IT WAS 3 WEEKS OUT OF WARRANTY. FORD ADMITTED IT WAS DEFECTIVE PAINT, BUT WILL ONLY REPAINT THE ROOF. THIS WOULD BE FINE, BUT THE COST WILL BE $980 AND THEY WANT ME TO PAY $200 OF IT. WHILE THIS MAY NOT SEEM LIKE A BAD DEAL, THE POINT IS THAT THE VEHICLE WAS BARELY OUT OF WARRANTY, I PAID FOR AN EXTENDED WARRANTY (DOES NOT COVER PAINT), THE PAINT WAS DEFECTIVE ON FORD'S PART, AND THIS PROBLEM DID NOT JUST HAPPEN WITHIN THE THREE WEEKS AFTER THE WARRANTY EXPIRED. IT WAS A PRE-EXISTING PROBLEM, BUT SINCE I'M SHORT, I DID NOT NOTICE THE ROOF OF MY VEHICLE. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE REST OF THE PAINT FLAKES OFF? FORD SAID IT WOULD HANDLE THAT IF IT HAPPENS. SO, I GUESS I JUST KEEP PAYING FOR A DEFECTIVE PAINT JOB OUT OF MY OWN POCKET BECAUSE FORD WILL NOT CORRECT ITS MISTAKES. KEEP IN MIND, THIS VEHICLE IS ONLY 3 YEARS OLD AND IS STORED IN A GARAGE BOTH AT HOME AND AT WORK. THIS IS RIDICULOUS AND VERY POOR CUSTOMER SUPPORT! *TR
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
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
1EA09013 · 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.