NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Structure complaints
323 reportsClear category filter76,000 miles · Jul 15, 2013
StructureSuspension
I WAS HAVING PACIFICA SERVICED AT GOODYEAR STORE IN NEWPORT, KY PRIOR TO DRIVING TO FLORIDA. MECHANIC CALLED ME TO SERVICE AREA TO SEE SERIOUS RUST THROUGH ON FRONT FRAME RAILS AND ENGINE CRADLE. HE SAID "DO NOT DRIVE THE CAR TO FLORIDA. THE ENGINE COULD DROP IF FRAME BREAKS". I IMMEDIATELY WENT TO WYLER CHRYSLER AND HAD THE …
Read full complaint
I WAS HAVING PACIFICA SERVICED AT GOODYEAR STORE IN NEWPORT, KY PRIOR TO DRIVING TO FLORIDA. MECHANIC CALLED ME TO SERVICE AREA TO SEE SERIOUS RUST THROUGH ON FRONT FRAME RAILS AND ENGINE CRADLE. HE SAID "DO NOT DRIVE THE CAR TO FLORIDA. THE ENGINE COULD DROP IF FRAME BREAKS". I IMMEDIATELY WENT TO WYLER CHRYSLER AND HAD THE RUSTED FRAME REPLACED. I LATER FOUND THAT CHRYSLER HAD EXTENDED THEIR WARRANTY TO SPECIFICALLY COVER THIS PROBLEM. I DID FILE A CLAIM WITH CHRYSLER AND THEY DID REIMBURSE ME 80% OF THE REPAIR COST. I AM NOW SEEING, ON EDMUNDS.COM CHAT SITE THAT THERE ARE MANY MORE OWNERS HAVING THIS SAME RUST OUT PROBLEMS WITH THEIR PACIFICAS. A RUSTED FRAME BREAKING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS COULD BE DISASTROUS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10524961
154,000 miles · Jul 10, 2013
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT UPON INSPECTION, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE FRONT ENGINE CRADLE WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHERE THE FAILURE WAS CONFIRMED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 1…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT UPON INSPECTION, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE FRONT ENGINE CRADLE WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC WHERE THE FAILURE WAS CONFIRMED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 154,000.
NHTSA ODI #10524212
87,000 miles · Jul 9, 2013
Engine And Engine CoolingStructure
MY 2004 PACIFICA WITH A RUSTED THROUGH ENGINE CRADLE. THERE IS A SERVICE MEMO, CSC-10045080-7364, PERTAINING TO AN EXTENDED WARRANTY FOR THIS PART. CHRYSLER TELLS ME THAT IT DOESN'T APPLY IN MY CASE SINCE THE BUILD DATE OF MY VEHICLE PRECEDES THE BUILD DATES COVERED BY THE EXTENDED WARRANTY. I ONLY HAVE 85,000 MILES ON THE CA…
Read full complaint
MY 2004 PACIFICA WITH A RUSTED THROUGH ENGINE CRADLE. THERE IS A SERVICE MEMO, CSC-10045080-7364, PERTAINING TO AN EXTENDED WARRANTY FOR THIS PART. CHRYSLER TELLS ME THAT IT DOESN'T APPLY IN MY CASE SINCE THE BUILD DATE OF MY VEHICLE PRECEDES THE BUILD DATES COVERED BY THE EXTENDED WARRANTY. I ONLY HAVE 85,000 MILES ON THE CAR AND THE SUBFRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT EXTENDING THE EXTENDED WARRANTY BUILD DATE RANGE IS CALLED FOR. CERTAINLY THE FRAME OF AN AUTOMOBILE SHOULD LAST MORE THAN 87,000 MILES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523944
90,000 miles · Jul 6, 2013
Structure
THE CHASSIS IS STARTING TO ROT OUT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523468
82,000 miles · Jul 5, 2013
Electrical SystemSteeringStructure
I BOUGHT THIS 2004 PACIFICA FROM A DEALER ABOUT A MONTH AGO. TOOK IT TO THE SHOP TO GET MY SHOCKS LOOKED AT AND THEY TOLD ME THEY WOULDN'T DO ANY WORK ON IT BECAUSE THE SUB FRAME WAS ROTTED SO BADLY THEY ADVISED ME NOT TO DRIVE OR PUT ANY MONEY INTO THE VEHICLE BECAUSE IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE. ALSO THERE IS CLICKING COMING FROM THE…
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT THIS 2004 PACIFICA FROM A DEALER ABOUT A MONTH AGO. TOOK IT TO THE SHOP TO GET MY SHOCKS LOOKED AT AND THEY TOLD ME THEY WOULDN'T DO ANY WORK ON IT BECAUSE THE SUB FRAME WAS ROTTED SO BADLY THEY ADVISED ME NOT TO DRIVE OR PUT ANY MONEY INTO THE VEHICLE BECAUSE IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE. ALSO THERE IS CLICKING COMING FROM THE STEERING WHEEL WHEN YOU TURN LEFT OR RIGHT. AND ALSO A WEEK AFTER I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE THE BLOWER MOTOR RESISTER IS BAD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523284
127,000 miles · Jun 24, 2013
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE TOOK HER VEHICLE TO A MECHANIC FOR A TUNE UP AND SHE WAS ADVISED THAT THE ENGINES SUB FRAME CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND CONFIRMED THAT THERE WERE NO RELATED RECALLS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE TOOK HER VEHICLE TO A MECHANIC FOR A TUNE UP AND SHE WAS ADVISED THAT THE ENGINES SUB FRAME CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND CONFIRMED THAT THERE WERE NO RELATED RECALLS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 127,000.
NHTSA ODI #10521407
53,109 miles · Jun 24, 2013
StructureSuspension
DEALER SERVICE DEPARTMENT CLAIMED THAT THE SUBFRAME IS ROTTING AND NEEDS REPLACEMENT (@$1890 + TAX). THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN REPORTED BY CONSUMERS NUMEROUS TIMES. CHRYSLER WILL COVER THE COSTS FOR SOME CARS -- THOSE BUILT IN WINDSOR, ONTARIO FROM 2/23/2004 THROUGH 3/31/2004, BUT MY VEHICLE WAS BUILT IN WINDSOR ON 6/2/2003 AND SO…
Read full complaint
DEALER SERVICE DEPARTMENT CLAIMED THAT THE SUBFRAME IS ROTTING AND NEEDS REPLACEMENT (@$1890 + TAX). THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN REPORTED BY CONSUMERS NUMEROUS TIMES. CHRYSLER WILL COVER THE COSTS FOR SOME CARS -- THOSE BUILT IN WINDSOR, ONTARIO FROM 2/23/2004 THROUGH 3/31/2004, BUT MY VEHICLE WAS BUILT IN WINDSOR ON 6/2/2003 AND SO IS NOT COVERED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10521368
104,368 miles · Jun 3, 2013
Engine And Engine CoolingStructure
BEING IN THE DIESEL /AUTOMOTIVE FIELD FOR MORE THAN 25 YEARS I WAS SHOCKED TO SEE THAT THE ENGINE CRADLE WAS ROTTING FROM THE INSIDE OUT. I DO ALL MY OWN SERVICE WORK ON ALL MY VEHICLES AND I HAVE NEVER SEEN THE SUB-FRAME ON ANY VEHICLE CORRODE THE WAY THIS VEHICLE HAD. LARGE RUSTED OUT HOLES IN THE CROSS MEMBERS AND SUB-FRAME. …
Read full complaint
BEING IN THE DIESEL /AUTOMOTIVE FIELD FOR MORE THAN 25 YEARS I WAS SHOCKED TO SEE THAT THE ENGINE CRADLE WAS ROTTING FROM THE INSIDE OUT. I DO ALL MY OWN SERVICE WORK ON ALL MY VEHICLES AND I HAVE NEVER SEEN THE SUB-FRAME ON ANY VEHICLE CORRODE THE WAY THIS VEHICLE HAD. LARGE RUSTED OUT HOLES IN THE CROSS MEMBERS AND SUB-FRAME. LIKE EVERYONE ELSE WITH THIS ISSUE, I DID A BUNCH OF RESEARCH BOTH ON THE INTERNET AND TALKING WITH THE DEALER AND FOUND OUT THAT CHRYSLER DID ISSUE A TSB ON THIS PROBLEM. THE TSB ONLY COVERS VEHICLES IN THE NORTH REGION AND ONLY IN SALT LADEN STATES. BUT WHAT REALLY BURNS ME IS THE BUILD DATES CHRYSLER ONLY WILL COVER. CHRYSLER WILL ONLY COVER VEHICLES BUILT FROM APPROXIMATELY FEBRUARY TO MARCH 2004, AND IF YOUR CAR IS OUTSIDE THAT WINDOW, TOO BAD. IN MY OPINION MY CAR IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE, SO NOW I HAVE A CAR THAT DECORATES MY DRIVEWAY. CHRYSLER WILL NOT COVER ANYTHING BECAUSE OF WHEN MY CAR WAS BUILT AS COMPARED TO THE BUILD WINDOW. THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT CHRYSLER HAS KNOWN ABOUT FOR A WHILE AND SHOULD STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT. I FEEL CHRYSLER IS GIVING THEIR CUSTOMERS THE SHAFT WITH A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE. WHY DO PEOPLE HAVE TO DIE OR GET SERIOUSLY INURED BEFORE OEM'S ACTUALLY TAKE CARE OF A SERIOUS ISSUE LIKE THIS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10514829
136,822 miles · May 12, 2013
Structure
I TOOK MY PACIFICA FOR A FRONT END ALIGNMENT TO GET THE NEWS THAT MY SUBFRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH AND THAT THE CAR WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I THEN CALLED CHRYSLER TO ACT UPON A PARTS EXTENDED WARRANTY THAT WAS TO COVER THIS ISSUE, COME TO FIND OUT MY VIN NUMBER DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR THIS WARRANTY, MY CAR WAS MADE 3 MONTHS BEFORE THE WA…
Read full complaint
I TOOK MY PACIFICA FOR A FRONT END ALIGNMENT TO GET THE NEWS THAT MY SUBFRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH AND THAT THE CAR WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I THEN CALLED CHRYSLER TO ACT UPON A PARTS EXTENDED WARRANTY THAT WAS TO COVER THIS ISSUE, COME TO FIND OUT MY VIN NUMBER DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR THIS WARRANTY, MY CAR WAS MADE 3 MONTHS BEFORE THE WARRANTY WAS ISSUED FOR THIS MAKE AND MODEL. MY QUESTION IS.... IF THEY KNOW THAT THE SUBFRAME IS BAD ON THIS MAKE AND MODEL WHY DOESN'T EVERY 04/05 FALL UNDER THIS WARRANTY? THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS LOGIC. THE SUBFRAME IS BAD AND CHRYSLER NEEDS TO BACK UP THERE FAULTY PRODUCT. WE LOVE THIS CAR AND HOPED TO HAVE IT AROUND FOR A LONG TIME, BUT NOW IT IS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. I"M LIKE MOST AMERICAN'S THESE DAYS AND CANT AFFORD TO PAY 1200 DOLLARS OUT OF POCKET TO HAVE THIS DANGEROUS PROBLEM FIXED. SHAME ON YOU CHRYSLER FOR MAKING AN AMERICAN MADE PRODUCT UNSAFE, YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER AND STAND BY YOUR PRODUCT AND YOUR CONSUMER BY FIXING THESE UNSAFE VEHICLES TRANSPORTING FAMILIES ALL OVER THE ROADS. I HOPE THE NEXT TIME WE POST HERE IT WILL BE TO SAY THAT CHRYSLER STOOD BEHIND THEIR BRAND AND TOOK CARE OF THEIR CUSTOMERS THE WAY OTHER MANUFACTURES WOULD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10511565
106,793 miles · May 9, 2013
Structure
WHEN I GOT MY WHEELS FIXED I WAS LOOKING ON THE MY CAR AND ME AND THE MECHANIC NOTICED THAT THE SUBFRAME WAS RUSTY HE TOLD ME THAT IT WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE MY CAR CAUSE MY ENGINE CAN FALL OUT ANY MINUTES. WHEN I WAS DOING SOME RESEARCH I DISCOVERED DAD IS HIS OWN COMMON PROBLEM WITH CHRYSLER PACIFICAS. TO MY KNOWLEDGE THIS SHOULD …
Read full complaint
WHEN I GOT MY WHEELS FIXED I WAS LOOKING ON THE MY CAR AND ME AND THE MECHANIC NOTICED THAT THE SUBFRAME WAS RUSTY HE TOLD ME THAT IT WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE MY CAR CAUSE MY ENGINE CAN FALL OUT ANY MINUTES. WHEN I WAS DOING SOME RESEARCH I DISCOVERED DAD IS HIS OWN COMMON PROBLEM WITH CHRYSLER PACIFICAS. TO MY KNOWLEDGE THIS SHOULD NOT HAPPEN WITH A CAR FROM 2004 SO I'M WRITING THIS COMPLAINTS BECAUSE I THINK CHRYSLER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REPLACING THE SUBFRAME. THIS REPAIRIS GOING TO COST ME AT LEAST A THOUSAND DOLLARS NO I DON'T HAVE THAT MONEY AND I'M PAYING ON THE CAR SO PLEASE CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT'S I CAN DO. GIRLS I KNOW IF I'M NOT THE FIRST ONE WHO IS COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS. MY EMAIL IS [XXX] THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10511320
NHTSA investigations
3EA06010 · Fuel Tank Punctures
Opened Jun 15, 2006 · Closed Oct 11, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage; Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly; Fuel System, Other:storage; Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Fuel System, Gasoline:storage
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
Fuel System, Other:storage
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly
EA06-010 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION GATHERED IN PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PE06-009.PE06-009 WAS OPENED BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED IN A PEER INFORMATION REQUEST AS PART OF A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE05-050) OF FUEL TANK PUNCTURE IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.IN JANUARY 2006, NISSAN SUBMITTED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT TO ODI THAT IDENTIFIED A DEFECT IN THE FUEL TANK SHIELDING IN APPROXIMATELY 209,000 MY 2003 THROUGH 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES.TO REMEDY THE PROBLEM, NISSAN INSTALLED SHIELDS ON THE EXPOSED FRONT SURFACES OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES.PEER DATA COLLECTED FOR MY 2004 THROUGH 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES DURING PE05-050 INCLUDED 120 FIELD REPORTS DOCUMENTING TANK REPLACEMENTS DUE TO PUNCTURE OR DAMAGE BY ROAD DEBRIS AS PART OF A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM CONDUCTED AT THE REQUEST OF THE TANK SUPPLIER (INERGY). ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CHRYSLER DURING PE05-050, PE06-009 AND EA06-010 SHOW THAT THE FRONT SURFACE OF THE FUEL TANKS IN THE SUBJECT PACIFICA VEHICLES IS NOT COMPLETELY PROTECTED FROMROAD DEBRIS BY THE FLOOR PAN OR OTHER BODY STRUCTURE.THE TANKS WERE COMPARED WITH PEER VEHICLES, INCLUDING SEVERAL IDENTIFIED BY CHRYSLER AS SHARING SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS (UNSHIELDED HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PLASTIC FUEL TANKS IN A SADDLEBAG CONFIGURATION).SOME OF THE PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI PACKAGED THE TANKS IN RECESSED CAVITIES IN THE FLOOR PAN OR USED SHIELDS TO PROTECT EXPOSED SURFACES ON THE FRONT OF THE TANK.IN GENERAL, THESE TANKS HAD THE LOWEST COMPLAINT RATES FOR TANK PUNCTURE BY ROAD DEBRIS. HOWEVER, OTHER PEER DESIGNS REVIEWED BY ODI HAD PACKAGING SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND SOME OF THESE ALSO HAD SOME COMPLAINTS OF TANK PUNCTURE.NONE OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED BY ODI HAD TANKS PUNCTURE DATA COMPARABLE TO CHRYSLER'S FIELD REPORTS FROM ITS PART RESTRICTION PROGRAMS, SO THAT DATA COULD NOT BE USED IN PEER COMPARISONS. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS THAT THE RATE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS ABOUT HALF THAT OBSERVED IN THE RECALLED MURANO VEHICLES AND NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN SOME OF THE PEER VEHICLES ANALYZED WITH SIMILAR DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS.TESTING BY THE NHTSA VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TESTING CENTER (VRTC) SHOWED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MURANO AND PACIFICA FUEL TANK PACKAGING AND EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEBRIS THROWN BY THE FRONT TIRES.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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.SEE DOCUMENT FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THIS RESUME.
RQ06002 · Engine Stalling
Opened Feb 27, 2006 · Closed Jun 22, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Fuel System, Gasoline; Vehicle Speed Control
ON FEBRUARY 27, 2006 RQ06-002 WAS OPENED IN RESPONSE TO 60 COMPLAINTS OF ENGINE STALL, MOSTLY DURING LEFT-HAND TURNS, IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2006 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 04V-113.IN MARCH 2004, DAIMLERCHRYSLER INITIATED RECALL 04V-113 ON 34,561 MY 2004 PACIFICA VEHICLES TO CORRECT A CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL WHILE MAKING A LEFT-HAND TURN AFTER A COLD-START.DURING RQ06-002 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RECALL 04V-113 DID CORRECT THE SPECIFIC CAUSE OF THE ENGINE STALLING CONDITION FOR THAT SPECIFIC POPULATION.HOWEVER, TWO OTHER CONDITIONS WERE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD ALSO CAUSE ENGINE STALLING DURING TURNING MANEUVERS:(1) AN ISSUE WITH MISBUILT FUEL PUMPS THAT PRIMARILY AFFECTED ABOUT 17,000 MY 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT DURING AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2004; AND (2) A SOFTWARE CONDITION AFFECTING VAPOR PURGE IN ABOUT 131,000 MY 2005-06 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT FROM JULY 2004 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2005. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, EA06-013, HAS BEEN OPENED TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THESE CONDITIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON FEBRUARY 27, 2006 RQ06-002 WAS OPENED IN RESPONSE TO 60 COMPLAINTS OF ENGINE STALL, MOSTLY DURING LEFT-HAND TURNS, IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2006 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 04V-113.IN MARCH 2004, DAIMLERCHRYSLER INITIATED RECALL 04V-113 ON 34,561 MY 2004 PACIFICA VEHICLES TO CORRECT A CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL WHILE MAKING A LEFT-HAND TURN AFTER A COLD-START.DURING RQ06-002 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RECALL 04V-113 DID CORRECT THE SPECIFIC CAUSE OF THE ENGINE STALLING CONDITION FOR THAT SPECIFIC POPULATION.HOWEVER, TWO OTHER CONDITIONS WERE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD ALSO CAUSE ENGINE STALLING DURING TURNING MANEUVERS:(1) AN ISSUE WITH MISBUILT FUEL PUMPS THAT PRIMARILY AFFECTED ABOUT 17,000 MY 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT DURING AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2004; AND (2) A SOFTWARE CONDITION AFFECTING VAPOR PURGE IN ABOUT 131,000 MY 2005-06 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT FROM JULY 2004 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2005. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, EA06-013, HAS BEEN OPENED TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THESE CONDITIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Fuel System, Gasoline
ON FEBRUARY 27, 2006 RQ06-002 WAS OPENED IN RESPONSE TO 60 COMPLAINTS OF ENGINE STALL, MOSTLY DURING LEFT-HAND TURNS, IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2006 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 04V-113.IN MARCH 2004, DAIMLERCHRYSLER INITIATED RECALL 04V-113 ON 34,561 MY 2004 PACIFICA VEHICLES TO CORRECT A CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL WHILE MAKING A LEFT-HAND TURN AFTER A COLD-START.DURING RQ06-002 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RECALL 04V-113 DID CORRECT THE SPECIFIC CAUSE OF THE ENGINE STALLING CONDITION FOR THAT SPECIFIC POPULATION.HOWEVER, TWO OTHER CONDITIONS WERE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD ALSO CAUSE ENGINE STALLING DURING TURNING MANEUVERS:(1) AN ISSUE WITH MISBUILT FUEL PUMPS THAT PRIMARILY AFFECTED ABOUT 17,000 MY 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT DURING AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2004; AND (2) A SOFTWARE CONDITION AFFECTING VAPOR PURGE IN ABOUT 131,000 MY 2005-06 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT FROM JULY 2004 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2005. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, EA06-013, HAS BEEN OPENED TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THESE CONDITIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Vehicle Speed Control
ON FEBRUARY 27, 2006 RQ06-002 WAS OPENED IN RESPONSE TO 60 COMPLAINTS OF ENGINE STALL, MOSTLY DURING LEFT-HAND TURNS, IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2006 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 04V-113.IN MARCH 2004, DAIMLERCHRYSLER INITIATED RECALL 04V-113 ON 34,561 MY 2004 PACIFICA VEHICLES TO CORRECT A CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL WHILE MAKING A LEFT-HAND TURN AFTER A COLD-START.DURING RQ06-002 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RECALL 04V-113 DID CORRECT THE SPECIFIC CAUSE OF THE ENGINE STALLING CONDITION FOR THAT SPECIFIC POPULATION.HOWEVER, TWO OTHER CONDITIONS WERE IDENTIFIED THAT COULD ALSO CAUSE ENGINE STALLING DURING TURNING MANEUVERS:(1) AN ISSUE WITH MISBUILT FUEL PUMPS THAT PRIMARILY AFFECTED ABOUT 17,000 MY 2005 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT DURING AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2004; AND (2) A SOFTWARE CONDITION AFFECTING VAPOR PURGE IN ABOUT 131,000 MY 2005-06 PACIFICA VEHICLES BUILT FROM JULY 2004 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2005. AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, EA06-013, HAS BEEN OPENED TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THESE CONDITIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
PE06009 · Fuel Tank Punctures
Opened Feb 22, 2006 · Closed Jun 15, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly
ON FEBRUARY 22, 2006, ODI OPENED PE06-009 TO INVESTIGATE REPORTS THAT THE FUEL TANKS ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 TO 2005 CHRYSLER PACIFICA VEHICLES MAY BE PUNCTURED BY CONTACT WITH ROAD DEBRIS.THE NUMBER OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY CHRYSLER WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THOSE SUBMITTED BY OTHER MANUFACTURERS WHO WERE REQUESTED TO SUBMIT DATA AS PART OF INVESTIGATION PE05-050 INTO MY 2003 TO 2006 NISSAN MURANO VEHICLES THAT MAY HAVE HAD INSUFFICIENT SHIELDING OF THE FUEL TANK TO PREVENT PUNCTURES AFTER CONTACT WITH ROAD DEBRIS.NISSAN ISSUED RECALL 06V-003 INVOLVING INCREASING THE SHIELDING OF THE FUEL TANKS TO REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF TANK PUNCTURES. CHRYSLER HAS NOTED THAT THEY HAD IN PLACE FROM JANUARY 2003 TO JUNE 2005 A PARTS RESTRICTION PROGRAM ON PACIFICA FUEL TANK REPLACEMENTS WHICH MAY HAVE MADE THE NUMBER OF REPORTS ARTIFICIALLY HIGH IN COMPARISON TO MANUFACTURERS WHICH DID NOT HAVE A SIMILAR PROGRAM IN EFFECT.CHRYSLER ALSO QUESTIONED WHETHER MANY OF THE FIELD REPORTS OF FUEL TANKS REPLACED DUE TO DAMAGE FROM UNKNOWN CAUSE WERE ACTUALLY PUNCTURED. THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA06-010) TO GATHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.
Illustration