NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
440 reportsMileage unknown · Feb 23, 2016
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Fuel/propulsion System
MY CAR HAS BEEN A TERRIBLE LIABILITY SINCE DAY ONE,I AM AHNDICAPPED AND ON A PERMANENT BUDGET,,I NEED TO GET THIS LOOKED AT AND MY CAR TAKEN CARE OF SOON,IM SCARED I MAY SOON END UP ON FOOT IF THESE HORRID ISSUES RNT RECTIFIED,,I BOUGHT MY CAR FROM FIRST CLASS CARS IN SALT LAKE CITY UTAH,,IVE ASKED 4 TIMES TO GET IT TRADED IN,,M…
Read full complaint
MY CAR HAS BEEN A TERRIBLE LIABILITY SINCE DAY ONE,I AM AHNDICAPPED AND ON A PERMANENT BUDGET,,I NEED TO GET THIS LOOKED AT AND MY CAR TAKEN CARE OF SOON,IM SCARED I MAY SOON END UP ON FOOT IF THESE HORRID ISSUES RNT RECTIFIED,,I BOUGHT MY CAR FROM FIRST CLASS CARS IN SALT LAKE CITY UTAH,,IVE ASKED 4 TIMES TO GET IT TRADED IN,,MUCH TO MY SHOCK THEY WOULDNT EVEN TALK TO ME,,PLEASE HELP ME!MY CAR REVES AT TIMES THEN WHILE SITTING STIL IT WIL TRY TO DRIVE WITHOUT ME PUSHING THE EXCELIRATOR,,IM SCARED IT GONNA LEAP OUT AMY HANDS SOON,,IM TERIRFIED OF IT!!
NHTSA ODI #10837883
76,068 miles · Dec 8, 2015
Suspension
OUR 2002 SABLE WAS BROUGHT IN FOR AN EMERGENCY BRAKE CABLE ISSUE. WHILE WORKING ON THE REAR BRAKES, THE MECHANIC NOTICED THAT A REAR SUSPENSION SPRING WAS BROKEN. HE SAID WE WERE VERY LUCKY IT DID NOT RUPTURE THE TIRE. WE HAD BOTH REAR SPRINGS REPLACED, BECAUSE WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT CAUSED IT TO BREAK. AFTER THAT WORK WAS DON…
Read full complaint
OUR 2002 SABLE WAS BROUGHT IN FOR AN EMERGENCY BRAKE CABLE ISSUE. WHILE WORKING ON THE REAR BRAKES, THE MECHANIC NOTICED THAT A REAR SUSPENSION SPRING WAS BROKEN. HE SAID WE WERE VERY LUCKY IT DID NOT RUPTURE THE TIRE. WE HAD BOTH REAR SPRINGS REPLACED, BECAUSE WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT CAUSED IT TO BREAK. AFTER THAT WORK WAS DONE THE CAR NEEDED TO BE ALIGNED, AND THAT IS WHEN THEY NOTICED THAT A FRONT SUSPENSION SPRING WAS EVEN MORE SEVERELY BROKEN THAT IS WHEN WE SEARCHED FOR POSSIBLE BULLETINS OR RECALLS. THERE WERE MANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT 2002 SABLE SPRING BREAKAGE, AND SOME ACTUALLY RUPTURING TIRES. THERE IN FACT WAS A RECALL ISSUED FOR 2001 MERCURY SABLES WITH SPRING BREAKAGE PROBLEMS, BUT NOT FOR 2002S. WE KNOW IN FACT THAT THE SAME PART IS USED ON 2001 AND 2002S. SO, FOR SAFETY REASONS WE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO REPLACE BOTH FRONT SPRINGS. WE FEEL THAT THIS IS A SEVERE SAFETY ISSUE. WE WERE LUCKY THAT THE SPRINGS DID NOT BREAK AND RUPTURE TIRES WHEN WE WERE DRIVING AT A HIGH SPEED. WE BELIEVE THAT A BULLETIN SHOULD BE ISSUED TO NOTIFY OWNERS OF THIS SAFETY ISSUE, AND THAT REPAIRS SHOULD BE COVERED UNDER A RECALL. WE PUT OUT SOME $1200 TO REMEDY THE ISSUE. DO WE HAVE ANY CHANCE OF COMPENSATION FOR OUR EXPENSES? I DID CALL FORD AND MADE A COMPLAINT, AND HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED A CASE NUMBER #[XXX]. THANK YOU FOR ANY ASSISTANCE YOU CAN PROVIDE. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10808990
102,000 miles · Dec 7, 2015
Exterior Lighting
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. WHILE DRIVING 25 MPH, THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO REMAIN ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 04V106000 (EXTERIOR LIGHTING). THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 102,000.
NHTSA ODI #10808810
39,000 miles · Nov 16, 2015
SuspensionVehicle Speed ControlWheels
APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MILES. NO RUST CAR. RUBBING NOISE AND ALL TIRES WITH HISTORY OF LOSING AIR. WHILE REPLACING ALL TIRES, WHEEL TECH NOTICED RIGHT REAR COIL SPRING WAS FRACTURED AND COMPLETELY WORE OFF INTERIOR TIRE RIDGE. PLACED DOUGHNUT TIRE ON AND ADVISED I TAKE TO MECHANIC TO HAVE ALL SPRINGS FULLY CHECKED. CAR CURRENTLYA…
Read full complaint
APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MILES. NO RUST CAR. RUBBING NOISE AND ALL TIRES WITH HISTORY OF LOSING AIR. WHILE REPLACING ALL TIRES, WHEEL TECH NOTICED RIGHT REAR COIL SPRING WAS FRACTURED AND COMPLETELY WORE OFF INTERIOR TIRE RIDGE. PLACED DOUGHNUT TIRE ON AND ADVISED I TAKE TO MECHANIC TO HAVE ALL SPRINGS FULLY CHECKED. CAR CURRENTLYAT MECHANIC SHOP THIS EVENING. RIGHT REAR COIL SPRING DEFINITELY FRACTURED. SEEMS MANY REPORTS OF SAME NATURE ON THIS MODEL. WHY NO RECALL ON REAR COIL SPRINGS WITH SO MANY COMPLAINTS? RUBBING SOUND FROM BENEATH CAR HAS BEEN NOTED AND TIRES CONSTANTLY NEEDED AIR. OTHER ISSUE(S): 1) IGNITION EXTREMELY HARD TO TURN.2) ACCELERATOR SEEMS TO STICK UPON ATTEMPTING TO DECELERATE BY LETTING UP FOOT PRESSURE. I INHERITED THIS CAR FROM MY DECEASED FATHER. I WAS ALWAYS CONCERNED THAT HE ACCELERATED TOO QUICKLY FROM A STOPPED POSITION. FATHER TOOK DOWN A LARGE CONCRETE PLANTER DUE TO THIS TYPE OF CAR JERKING, YET I THOUGHT IT WAS DUE TO HIS PUTTING TOO MUCH PRESSURE UPON THE ACCELERATOR. NOW THAT I AM DRIVING THE CAR, I NOTE THAT CAR DOES NOT SLOW WHEN I LET UP ON THE ACCELERATOR, LEADING ME TO BELIEVE THAT THE ACCIDENT WAS NOT DUE TO FATHER'S DRIVING. THIS WAS NEVER A PROBLEM WITH HIS FORMER CAR. 3) DRIVER'S DOOR MAKES LOUD CLUNK UPON OPENING AND CLOSING. ARE THESE KNOWN PROBLEMS?
NHTSA ODI #10790799
168,000 miles · Sep 22, 2015
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BRAKE LIGHTS REMAINED ILLUMINATED AND CAUSED THE BATTERY TO DRAIN. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE BRAKE LIGHTS DIMMED WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BRAKE LIGHTS REMAINED ILLUMINATED AND CAUSED THE BATTERY TO DRAIN. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE BRAKE LIGHTS DIMMED WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 168,000.
NHTSA ODI #10767317
119,000 miles · Aug 11, 2015
Vehicle Speed Control
SPEED CONTROL CABLE CRACKED AND DISLODGED HOLDING THROTTLE OPEN... FORD HAD A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM FOR THIS.. 13B04. HOWEVER IT WAS NEVER DONE, NEVER GOT ANY LETTERS AND HAS NOW EXPIRED... FORD REFUSES TO PAY FOR A CLIP AND CABLE(NEEDS NOW) AND SINCE THIS NEVER WAS A "RECALL" PER SAY IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE. HOW CAN I…
Read full complaint
SPEED CONTROL CABLE CRACKED AND DISLODGED HOLDING THROTTLE OPEN... FORD HAD A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM FOR THIS.. 13B04. HOWEVER IT WAS NEVER DONE, NEVER GOT ANY LETTERS AND HAS NOW EXPIRED... FORD REFUSES TO PAY FOR A CLIP AND CABLE(NEEDS NOW) AND SINCE THIS NEVER WAS A "RECALL" PER SAY IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE. HOW CAN I GET FORD TO PAY FOR THIS?
NHTSA ODI #10747928
94,000 miles · Jul 2, 2015
Suspension
AS I WAS BACKING MY CAR OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, I HEARD A NOISE AND THEN A HISS. THEN THE CAR RESISTED FURTHER MOTION. THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE WAS COMPLETELY FLAT. I TRIED TO REINFLATE IT BUT COULD NOT. I REMOVED THE FRONT WHEEL AND MOUNTED THE MINI SPARE TIRE. THERE WAS A COMPLETE CIRCUMFERENTIAL TEAR OF THE TIRE SIDEWALL NEAR THE TR…
Read full complaint
AS I WAS BACKING MY CAR OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, I HEARD A NOISE AND THEN A HISS. THEN THE CAR RESISTED FURTHER MOTION. THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE WAS COMPLETELY FLAT. I TRIED TO REINFLATE IT BUT COULD NOT. I REMOVED THE FRONT WHEEL AND MOUNTED THE MINI SPARE TIRE. THERE WAS A COMPLETE CIRCUMFERENTIAL TEAR OF THE TIRE SIDEWALL NEAR THE TREAD. I ASSUMED IT WAS A SPONTANEOUS FAILURE OF THE TIRE. WHEN I BOUGHT NEW TIRES TODAY AT COSTCO, THE MECHANIC SAID HE COULD NOT PUT THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL ON THE CAR BECAUSE A PIECE OF BROKEN SPRING WAS PROJECTING OUTBOARD AND HITTING THE SIDEWALL OF THE NEW TIRE. INSPECTION SHOWED THE LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING WAS ALSO BROKEN BUT THE POINTED END WAS AIMED INWARD. THE INFERIOR COIL WAS BROKEN OFF AND WAS LOOSE BUT COULD NOT BE EASILY REMOVED FROM THE STRUT. I TOLD THE MECHANIC TO REMOUNT THE MINI-SPARE ON THE RIGHT FRONT. UNTIL I LOOKED ON THE INTERNET I HAD NO IDEA THIS WAS A COMMON FAILURE THAT FOMOCO HAD PARTIALLY ADDRESSED YEARS AGO IN OTHER MODEL YEARS BUT NOT 2002. IT SEEMS THAT MANY OF THESE FAILURES HAVE OCCURRED AT REST OR SLOW SPEEDS, BUT I ALSO THINK THIS IS A FUNCTION OF THE FACT THAT CARS SIT MOST OF THEIR LIVES. THERE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL DAMAGE TO OWNERS FOR TIRES AND REPAIRS, BUT LUCKILY THERE HAVE BEEN NO SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES. BECAUSE THE FAILURES ARE SUDDEN AND CATASTROPHIC, THERE IS CERTAIN TO BE A SERIOUS AND PERHAPS FATAL INCIDENT IN THE FUTURE. FOMOCO AND THE US GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE SUBJECTING THE UNKNOWING AND TRUSTING PUBLIC TO THE RISKS OF LUCK, BECAUSE IT WILL EVENTUALLY TURN BAD. APPARENTLY FOMOCO DOES NOT CARE ENOUGH ABOUT ITS DRIVERS TO REPAIR THE DEFECT, OR MITIGATE THE DANGER AND DAMAGE, OR EVEN INFORM OWNERS OF THE DANGER. NHTSA ACT NOW, DO YOUR JOB, AND PROTECT US FROM THOSE WHO BUILD AUTOMOBILES, BUT DON'T CARE.
NHTSA ODI #10731848
Mileage unknown · Mar 1, 2015
Child Seat
I PURCHASED THE GRACO COMFORT SPORT CONVERTIBLE CAR SEAT FOR MY 8 MONTH OLD. APPEARS TO BE A GREAT SEAT UNTIL YOU TRY TO INSTALL IT TO A VEHICLE. I HAVE TRIED PUTTING INTO TWO DIFFERENT CARS, I HAVE TRIED USING THE LATCH SYSTEM AND THEN TRIED THE REGULAR SEAT BELT, NO MATTER WHAT I DO THE SEAT FLOPS AROUND THE BACKSEAT LIKE A DE…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED THE GRACO COMFORT SPORT CONVERTIBLE CAR SEAT FOR MY 8 MONTH OLD. APPEARS TO BE A GREAT SEAT UNTIL YOU TRY TO INSTALL IT TO A VEHICLE. I HAVE TRIED PUTTING INTO TWO DIFFERENT CARS, I HAVE TRIED USING THE LATCH SYSTEM AND THEN TRIED THE REGULAR SEAT BELT, NO MATTER WHAT I DO THE SEAT FLOPS AROUND THE BACKSEAT LIKE A DEAD FISH. THE PART WHERE THE TETHER STRAP GOES THROUGH IS AS TIGHT AS IT CAN GET AND THE TOP OF THE CAR SEAT STILL MOVES 5-10 INCHES SIDE TO SIDE. SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE TRIED TO INSTALL THIS SEAT AND NONE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL. THIS SEAT NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. (RELATED VEHICLE INFORMATION: MODEL YEAR=2002, MAKE=MERCURY, MODEL=SABLE). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10691298
100,000 miles · Jan 16, 2015
Suspension
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, A TIRE BECAME FLAT WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT DID NOT SPECIFY WHICH TIRE BECAME FLAT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER AND DRIVER SIDE COIL SPRING WAS FRACTURED A…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, A TIRE BECAME FLAT WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT DID NOT SPECIFY WHICH TIRE BECAME FLAT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER AND DRIVER SIDE COIL SPRING WAS FRACTURED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 100,000.
NHTSA ODI #10672948
112,867 miles · Dec 10, 2014
SuspensionWheels
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. WHILE DRIVING IN REVERSE. THE FRONT PASSENGER SPRING AND STRUT FRACTURED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER WHEEL WAS DAMAGED DUE TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE TECHNICIAN VERIFIED THE FAILURE OF THE FRONT PASSENGER SPRING AND STRUT. T…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. WHILE DRIVING IN REVERSE. THE FRONT PASSENGER SPRING AND STRUT FRACTURED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER WHEEL WAS DAMAGED DUE TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE TECHNICIAN VERIFIED THE FAILURE OF THE FRONT PASSENGER SPRING AND STRUT. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 112,867.
NHTSA ODI #10663406
NHTSA investigations
4PE12033 · Speed Control Cable Damage
Opened Oct 24, 2012 · Closed Jun 26, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:cables; Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Vehicle Speed Control:cables
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Vehicle Speed Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
EA08018 · Front Suspension Coil Spring Fracture
Opened Aug 28, 2008 · Closed Jun 30, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:front:springs:coil Springs
To date, ODI is aware of 2,401 non-duplicative complaints related to the alleged defect. In addition, ODI is aware of 1,411 subject vehicles with one or more warranty claims related to the alleged defect. In total, ODI is aware of 3,645 unique subject vehicles that have experienced one or more front suspension coil spring fractures. ODI is also aware of four minor crashes related to the alleged defect resulting in one minor injury.With greater than eight years of exposure, a large subject vehicle population and approximately 2,052 reported front tire punctures caused by fractured coil springs (at all speeds), there have been no reported severe crashes, deaths or injuries related to the alleged defect. The real world consequences of these defective coil springs have been a small number of minor control problems that resulted in minor damage; suggesting that the effect of the defect on vehicle control is minor.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted. 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. The agency will continue to monitor this issue and will take further action if warranted by the circumstances. See the EA08-018 Engineering Analysis Closing Report for more details.
RP03001 · Brake/accelerator Pedal Application
Opened Oct 31, 2003 · Closed Mar 23, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages
MS. RODMAN REPORTED THAT AFTER HER VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED FOR THE RECALL, HER MOTHER EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN ACCELERATION AND CRASHED THE SABLE INTO A LIGHT POLE.PREVIOUSLY NHTSA HAD CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION FOR THIS ISSUE (PE02-035) THAT RESULTED IN THE RECALL (02V-266) OF 369,000 MY 2000-2002 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS TO INSURE THAT THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE PEDALS WAS AT LEAST 50MM..A REVIEW OF ODI'S DATABASE FOR COMPLAINTS REGARDING RECALL 02V-266 DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY RECALL REMEDY COMPLAINTS OTHER THAN THE PETITIONER'S.MS. RODMAN?S VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY ODI USING FORD?S SPECIAL TOOL AND HER VEHICLE WAS FOUND TO EXCEED 50MM.ALSO, THE LATERAL MOVEMENT OF THE PEDALS WAS FOUND NOT TO BE EXCESSIVE RELATIVE TO OTHER COMPARABLE TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES.THEREFORE, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER REQUIRING FORD TO PROVIDE A DIFFERENT REMEDY FOR THIS DEFECT.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.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS ANALYSIS, PLEASE REFER TO THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE DATED MARCH 23, 2004 (VOL 69, NO 56, PAGES 13619-13620).
RQ03008 · Brake Light Switch Failure
Opened Oct 23, 2003 · Closed Mar 5, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Additional source detail variants (5)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Illustration