NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
896 reports80,000 miles · Aug 16, 2010
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT WAS ATTEMPTING A TURN WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKES WHEN THERE WAS AN ABNORMAL THUMP FROM THE FRONT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE WELDING OF THE SUB FRAME WAS FRACTURED AND SEVERELY RUSTED. THE AUTHORIZED DEALER ALSO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT WAS ATTEMPTING A TURN WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKES WHEN THERE WAS AN ABNORMAL THUMP FROM THE FRONT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE WELDING OF THE SUB FRAME WAS FRACTURED AND SEVERELY RUSTED. THE AUTHORIZED DEALER ALSO SPECULATED THAT THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE ENGINE COULD FALL OUT FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 80,000. UPDATED 11/19/10. *LJ THE CONSUMER STATED WHEN THE FRAME WAS REMOVED, THE STEEL WAS VERY THIN AND SOME OF THE STEEL HAD COMPLETELY RUSTED AWAY. UPDATED 11/26/10*JB
NHTSA ODI #10349536
81,499 miles · Aug 11, 2010
Structure
2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA SUB-FRAME IS COMPLETELY RUSTED THROUGH ON THE RIGHT SIDE IN FRONT. WAS TOLD BY DEALERSHIP THAT THE VEHICLE IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. CHRYSLER NEEDS TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS MAJOR ISSUE. I AM NOT THE ONLY OWNER WHO IS EXPERIENCING THIS PROBLEM, SOMETHING IS DRASTICALLY WRONG! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10348812
76,400 miles · Aug 11, 2010
Structure
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME (ENGINE CRADLE) WAS RUSTED THROUGH WHICH COULD HAVE CAUSED THE ENGINE TO FALL OUT. HE NOTICED THE RUST WHEN HE WAS CHECKING THE VEHICLE HIMSELF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALERSHIP WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED ACCORDING TO THE EXTENDE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME (ENGINE CRADLE) WAS RUSTED THROUGH WHICH COULD HAVE CAUSED THE ENGINE TO FALL OUT. HE NOTICED THE RUST WHEN HE WAS CHECKING THE VEHICLE HIMSELF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALERSHIP WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED ACCORDING TO THE EXTENDED WARRANTY. THE CONTACT HAD NOT SPOKEN WITH THE MANUFACTURER AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 76,503. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 76,400.
NHTSA ODI #10348664
85,000 miles · Aug 4, 2010
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WHEN THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE SUB-FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED AND CORRODED. THE DEALER PROVIDED PICTURES OF THE FAILURE TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE CONTACT WAS AWAITING A RESPONSE FROM THE MANUFACTURER TO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WHEN THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE SUB-FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED AND CORRODED. THE DEALER PROVIDED PICTURES OF THE FAILURE TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE CONTACT WAS AWAITING A RESPONSE FROM THE MANUFACTURER TO DETERMINE HOW TO PROCEED WITH REPAIRS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 85,000.
NHTSA ODI #10347227
80,000 miles · Jul 30, 2010
Structure
FRONT SUBFRAME OF OUR CHRYSLER PACIFICA IS RUSTED ALL THE WAY THROUGH CAR IS MAKING A CLANK NOISE AND IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE WITH 80,000 MILES HAVE HEARD OF MANY MANY CASES OF THIS, THE SUSPENSION CALL BREAK OFF THE CAR OR THE MOTOR CAN FALL DOWN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10346435
95,000 miles · Jul 30, 2010
Electrical SystemPower TrainSteering
AFTER TURNING RIGHT AT STOP LIGHT AND PROCEEDING SLOWLY WITH ACCELERATION, A LOUD/SHAKING NOISE WAS HEARD FROM 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA (SIMILAR TO A CELL PHONE PLACED ON VIBRATE INSTEAD OF RINGING WHEN A CALL IS RECEIVED). WITHIN SECONDS, VEHICLE UNINTENTIONALLY ACCELERATED AND I WAS UNABLE TO STOP IT, EVEN AFTER PRESSING ON BR…
Read full complaint
AFTER TURNING RIGHT AT STOP LIGHT AND PROCEEDING SLOWLY WITH ACCELERATION, A LOUD/SHAKING NOISE WAS HEARD FROM 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA (SIMILAR TO A CELL PHONE PLACED ON VIBRATE INSTEAD OF RINGING WHEN A CALL IS RECEIVED). WITHIN SECONDS, VEHICLE UNINTENTIONALLY ACCELERATED AND I WAS UNABLE TO STOP IT, EVEN AFTER PRESSING ON BRAKES. I WAS A BLOCK AWAY FROM WHERE I HAD TO TURN TO ENTER OUR SUBDIVISION, TRAVELING DOWN A TWO-LANE ROAD. THANKFULLY, NO CARS WERE TRAVELING IN OPPOSITE DIRECTION, OR COMING OUT OF OUR SUBDIVISION, SO I WAS ABLE TO TURN LEFT TO ENTER OUR SUBDIVISION. TO TRY TO SLOW CAR DOWN, I HAD TO PRESS DOWN ON BRAKES AS HARD AS I COULD WHILE TURNING THE WHEEL, WHICH CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO SWERVE, ALMOST HITTING A LIGHT POLE. AFTER TURNING AND STOPPING THE SWERVE, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED EVEN FURTHER, REACHING THE '4' ON THE TACHOMETER (BEFORE THE TURN, IT HAD BEEN AT A '3'). AS I APPROACHED THE FOUR-WAY STOP IN OUR SUBDIVISION, I AGAIN STEPPED ON THE BRAKES AS HARD AS I COULD, BUT IT HAD NO EFFECT. THE TACHOMETER READ '4', BUT THE SPEEDOMETER SHOWED 30 MPH, REGARDLESS OF HOW HARD I PRESSED ON BRAKES. I COULD NOT BRAKE AT ALL, AND WAS LOSING THE ABILITY TO STEER AS I APPROACHED THE SIGN. THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THE VEHICLE WAS TO PLACE IT IN 'PARK'(WHICH MADE THE TACHOMETER GO EVEN HIGHER) AND REMOVE THE KEYS TO TURN OFF THE CAR AS QUICKLY AS I COULD. THIS STOPPED THE CAR RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE STOP SIGN. I WAITED ABOUT 30 SECONDS AND ATTEMPTED TO RESTART CAR, BUT AFTER IGNITION KEY WAS TURNED, TACHOMETER REVVED UP AGAIN TO '4', THOUGH SPEEDOMETER READ '0'. HUSBAND MANEUVERED CAR THE ONE BLOCK HOME BY PLACING IT IN 'NEUTRAL'. THIS IS THE FIRST INCIDENT OF THIS NATURE. CHRYSLER TO BE NOTIFIED IN MORNING, AS I CALLED AFTER BUSINESS HOURS (7:41 PM CST). MYSELF, TWO KIDS, AND TWO DOGS WERE IN THE CAR DRIVING DOWN WHAT IS NORMALLY A BUSY TWO-LANE ROAD AND INTO SUBDIVISION FULL OF PLAYING CHILDREN, TRULY A MIRACLE NO ONE WAS INJURED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10346243
102,000 miles · Jul 28, 2010
Power Train
MY PACIFICA JUST STOPPED RUNNING WHILE I WAS ON A BUSY INTERSECTION IN MY CITY. I LOST ALL POWER BRAKES, STEERING, AND POWER. I HAD MY CHILDREN IN THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME. I DID MANAGE TO GET THE CAR INTO A PARKING LOT, (MY SON AND HIS FRIEND PUSHED IT FROM THE ROAD). THE PACIFICA WOULD NOT RESPOND TO ANYTHING, AND COULD NOT…
Read full complaint
MY PACIFICA JUST STOPPED RUNNING WHILE I WAS ON A BUSY INTERSECTION IN MY CITY. I LOST ALL POWER BRAKES, STEERING, AND POWER. I HAD MY CHILDREN IN THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME. I DID MANAGE TO GET THE CAR INTO A PARKING LOT, (MY SON AND HIS FRIEND PUSHED IT FROM THE ROAD). THE PACIFICA WOULD NOT RESPOND TO ANYTHING, AND COULD NOT BE JUMP STARTED. MY HUSBAND PURCHASED A NEW BATTERY TO SEE IF THAT WOULD HELP, IT DID NOT. IT WAS TOWED TO AN ELECTRICAL SERVICE, THAT TOOK TWO DAYS TO LET ME KNOW THAT THEY COULD NOT HELP ME. IT THAN HAD TO BE TOWED TO A DEALER, WHICH ALSO TOOK TWO DAYS TO DIAGNOSE. IT CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT I NEEDED TO REPLACE THE PCM. I FOUND THAT THE 2004 PACIFICA HAD A RECALL ON JUST THAT PROBLEM. I CONTACTED CHRYSLER, AND THEY ARE STATING THAT MY VEHICLE IS NOT PART OF THAT RECALL. NOT TO MENTION THAT I HAVE TOO MANY MILES FOR THE WARRANTY. ALSO THAT I AM THE SECOND OWNER, (I AM ACTUALLY THE FIRST OWNER, THE CAR WAS A PROGRAM VEHICLE THAT WAS DRIVEN BY AN EXECUTIVE OF CHRYSLER). I ASKED WHY MY CAR WAS NOT INCLUDED, BECAUSE THIS WAS THE ISSUE WITH MY VEHICLE, SHE STATED THAT THERE WERE MORE COMPLAINTS WITH THE SAME THING (VEHICLES WITH PCM REPLACEMENT, NOT ON THE RECALL) WITHIN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND IF ANYTHING TRANSPIRED, THAT THEY WOULD LET ME KNOW BY MAIL. THIS IS NOT A MAINTENANCE ISSUE, BUT A SAFETY ISSUE, THAT I HAD NO WARNING OR SIGNS OF BEFORE IT HAPPENED. I AM VERY CONCERNED OVER THIS. HOW MANY OWNERS NEED TO EXPERIENCE THIS OR EVEN BE SEVERELY INJURED BEFORE THIS PROBLEM IS RESOLVED? THE CASE MANAGER AT CHRYSLER THAN STATED THAT MY CASE WOULD BE CLOSED! I AM VERY UPSET WITH THIS WHOLE ISSUE. I DID NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT THE INTERMITTENT A/C, THE POWER SEATS THAT RARELY WORK, THE BACK HATCH THAT HAS A MIND OF IT'S OWN, OR THE GAS GAUGE THAT DOES ITS OWN THING. BUT MY CHILDREN'S SAFETY WAS PLACED IN JEOPARDY! IT WAS STATED THAT MORE COMPLAINTS WERE COMING IN ON THIS ISSUE, ARE THEY GOING TO WAIT FOR LOSS OF LIFE? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10345946
104,000 miles · Jul 26, 2010
Fuel System, Gasoline
AFTER DRIVING APPROX 200 MILES ON A FULL TANK OF GAS THE GAS GAUGE DROPS TO NEAR EMPTY AND THE ENGINE STALLS OR NEARLY STALLS ON LEFT HAND TURNS. THIS REPEATED NUMEROUS TIMES ON A CROSS COUNTRY TRIP. ALSO FILLING THIS HALF FULL TANK WAS DIFFICULT. THE FUEL WOULD ENTER THE TANK SUFFICIENTLY AFTER THE FIRST 3-4 GALLONS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10345428
Mileage unknown · Jul 25, 2010
Structure
LOUD NOISES HEARD IN THE FRONT OF OUR 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. WENT TO OUR DEALERSHIP TO HAVE THE NOISE INVESTIGATED AND LEARNED THAT OUR SUBFRAME HAD RUSTED OUT. THE COST TO REPAIR WOULD BE NEARLY $3500. CHRYSLER WAS CONTACTED,BUT REFUSED TO FIX THE PROBLEM,SAYING THE MANUFACTURERS WARRANTY HAD RUN OUT. I AM STUCK WITH A CAR THA…
Read full complaint
LOUD NOISES HEARD IN THE FRONT OF OUR 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA. WENT TO OUR DEALERSHIP TO HAVE THE NOISE INVESTIGATED AND LEARNED THAT OUR SUBFRAME HAD RUSTED OUT. THE COST TO REPAIR WOULD BE NEARLY $3500. CHRYSLER WAS CONTACTED,BUT REFUSED TO FIX THE PROBLEM,SAYING THE MANUFACTURERS WARRANTY HAD RUN OUT. I AM STUCK WITH A CAR THAT IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE,AND NO RECOURSE. I KNOW I AM NOT ALONE, THAT THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM FOR MANY OTHER 2004 PACIFICA OWNERS AS WELL. THE SUBFRAME OF A CAR THAT IS 6 YEARS OLD SHOULD NOT BE RUSTED THROUGH. MY FATHER DABBLES IN OLD CAR RESTORATION,AND HIS 40-50 YEAR OLD CARS DO NOT HAVE THE RUST ISSUES I HAVE! CHRYSLER NEEDS TO ACKNOWLEDGES THIS DEFECT, AND FIX IT BEFORE SOMEONE IS SERIOUSLY HURT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10345192
85,000 miles · Jul 23, 2010
Structure
TOOK MY 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA TO THE INSPECTION POINT FOR INSPECTION AND REREGISTRATION. THE INSPECTOR PULLED THE VEHICLE OVER THE PIT AND SAID WE'VE GOT A MAJOR PROBLEM, THE FRONT END SUB-FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH AND THE VEHICLE IS "UNSAFE TO OPERATE". I WENT INTO THE PIT SO THE INSPECTOR COULD SHOW ME THE PROBLEM AND THE WHO…
Read full complaint
TOOK MY 2004 CHRYSLER PACIFICA TO THE INSPECTION POINT FOR INSPECTION AND REREGISTRATION. THE INSPECTOR PULLED THE VEHICLE OVER THE PIT AND SAID WE'VE GOT A MAJOR PROBLEM, THE FRONT END SUB-FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH AND THE VEHICLE IS "UNSAFE TO OPERATE". I WENT INTO THE PIT SO THE INSPECTOR COULD SHOW ME THE PROBLEM AND THE WHOLE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE SUB-FRAME BEAM HAD RUSTED THROUGH. THE INSPECTOR STATED THAT THE PIECE HELD THE ENGINE AND FRONT END TO THE VEHICLE AND IF IT BROKE I'D LOSE IT ALL. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE CHRYSLER DEALER AND GOT THE WORD BACK THIS MORNING THAT NEITHER CHRYSLER NOR THE MILITARY EXCHANGE NEW CAR SALES WOULD COVER THE REPAIRS SINCE THE CAR WAS ALMOST 6 YEARS OLD (CURRENT MILEAGE: 85600). NO SIGN OF DAMAGE OR RUST WAS REPORTED AT THE INSPECTION TWO YEARS AGO. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10344830
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