IllustrationMileage unknown · Aug 20, 2025
Electrical SystemService BrakesStructureCrash
..
NHTSA ODI #11682007
2002 Ford Crown Victoria
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2002 Ford Crown Victoria do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 53.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Crown Victoria years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
80–25K
725–50K
350–75K
475–100K
7100–150K
2150K+
31 reports with mileage · 27 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Electrical System. Review the 9 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Fuel System, Gasoline. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
9 crash reports3 fire reports4 injury reports
Electrical System complaints
9 reports..
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A TURN, THE TURN SIGNALS AND HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO WORK, EXCEPT WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE CONTACT ALSO NOTICED THAT THE TAIL LIGHTS DID NOT WORK AND THE DASHBOARD WAS BLACKED OUT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOC…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A TURN, THE TURN SIGNALS AND HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO WORK, EXCEPT WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE CONTACT ALSO NOTICED THAT THE TAIL LIGHTS DID NOT WORK AND THE DASHBOARD WAS BLACKED OUT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL DEALER WHO WAS UNABLE TO SCHEDULE THE VEHICLE FOR A DIAGNOSTIC EVALUATION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURES AND STATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 38,000. UPDATED 10/06/16*LJ ** UPDATED 10/19/16*LJ *TR
I HAD DRIVEN UP A STEEP MOUNTAIN DIRT ROAD TO SERVE SOME LEGAL PAPERS, AFTER REACHING THE TOP, I CONTINUED DOWN THE OTHER SIDE TO THE ADDRESS I WAS LOOKING FOR. I THOUGHT I STARTED SMELLING SOMETHING BURNING, IT SMELLED ELECTRICAL. WHEN I ARRIVED AT THE ADDRESS, I STOPPED THE CAR AND SHUT IT OFF WHILE I WAS SPEAKING WITH THE RES…
Read full complaint
I HAD DRIVEN UP A STEEP MOUNTAIN DIRT ROAD TO SERVE SOME LEGAL PAPERS, AFTER REACHING THE TOP, I CONTINUED DOWN THE OTHER SIDE TO THE ADDRESS I WAS LOOKING FOR. I THOUGHT I STARTED SMELLING SOMETHING BURNING, IT SMELLED ELECTRICAL. WHEN I ARRIVED AT THE ADDRESS, I STOPPED THE CAR AND SHUT IT OFF WHILE I WAS SPEAKING WITH THE RESIDENT. MY WIFE YELLED AT ME THAT THE CAR WAS ON FIRE, IT STARTED FILLING UP WITH SMOKE FAST, MY WIFE AND DOGS WERE STILL IN THE CAR. I OPENED THE DRIVERS DOOR TO POP THE HOOD WHILE MY WIFE STARTED GETTING THE DOGS OUT, I THEN NOTICED IT WAS MY FLOOR THAT WAS BURNING, JUST ABOUT UNDER THE GAS PEDDLE, A HOLE HAD BURNED THROUGH AND THE METAL WAS GLOWING RED WHERE THE PADDING HAD BURNED AWAY. I POURED A CUP OF COFFEE TO PUT THE FIRE OUT WHILE THE RESIDENT GOT SOME WATER FOR ME. THE PADDING AND RUBBER MAT HAD BURNED AWAY AND A HOLE ABOUT 3 INCHES LONG HAD MELTED AWAY FROM THE FLOOR BOARD. THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER IS DIRECTLY BENEATH THE HOLE BUT THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY HOLES IN THE CONVERTER AND THERE IS A EMPTY SPACE ABOUT 1.5 - 2 INCHES FROM THE MELTED HOLE TO THE CONVERTER. WE LET EVERYTHING COOL DOWN BEFORE DRIVING HOME, HOWEVER THE ENTIRE WAY HOME, (49 MILES) WE WERE AFRAID THE CAR WAS GOING TO BURST INTO FLAMES. ONCE WE WERE BACK ON THE PAVED ROADS AND WERE ABLE TO DRIVE THE NORMAL SPEED LIMIT, THERE WERE NO MORE ISSUES NOR ANY FURTHER BURNING, JUST THE LINGERING SMELL. I LOOKED UP AND FOUND A RECALL FOR AN ISSUE IN THE SAME LOCATION HOWEVER THAT WAS FOR 2003 - 2005 VEHICLES. *JS
POWER WINDOWS FRONT ELECTRIC WHEN YOU TOUCH REAR WINDOW BUTTON THE DRIVERS WINDOW GOES DOWN. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 TO 50 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS PRESSURE WAS APPLIED TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE "ABS" WARNING LIGHT INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO COAST INTO THE EMERGENCY LANE. THE WARNING INDICATOR REMAINED ILLUMINAT…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 TO 50 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS PRESSURE WAS APPLIED TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE "ABS" WARNING LIGHT INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO COAST INTO THE EMERGENCY LANE. THE WARNING INDICATOR REMAINED ILLUMINATED UNTIL THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO CONFIRMED THAT THE FAILURE WAS RELATED TO THE REAR DRIVE SHAFT AXLE. NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 04V328000 (SUSPENSION;REAR) WAS RELATED TO THE FAILURE; HOWEVER, THE VIN WAS EXCLUDED FROM THE RECALL. THE VEHICLE IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REPAIRED. THERE WERE CONCERNS OF THE SAFETY RISK INVOLVED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 120,000.
1. WHILE DRIVING ,LED CIRCUITBOARD ,( UNDER DASHBOARD)BURNED UP EMITTING SMOKE INTO THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT. IT BURNED A ONE INCH HOLE IN THE CIRCUITBOARD PLASTIC COVER . 2. FAILURE,THE PART BURNED UP, IT MAY HAVE BURNED BEFORE ALSO,BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD A BURNING SMELL BEFORE. 3. CAR WAS PARKED,TURNED OFF FOR ABOUT ONE-HALF HO…
Read full complaint
1. WHILE DRIVING ,LED CIRCUITBOARD ,( UNDER DASHBOARD)BURNED UP EMITTING SMOKE INTO THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT. IT BURNED A ONE INCH HOLE IN THE CIRCUITBOARD PLASTIC COVER . 2. FAILURE,THE PART BURNED UP, IT MAY HAVE BURNED BEFORE ALSO,BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD A BURNING SMELL BEFORE. 3. CAR WAS PARKED,TURNED OFF FOR ABOUT ONE-HALF HOUR , THEN DRIVEN 6 MILES HOME.,NO ADDITIONAL SMOKE WAS SEEN AT THIS TIME. PART HAS BEEN REMOVED BY OWNER .OLD PART IS AVAILABLE,PART # F8VB-14A597-AB. FUSE DID NOT BLOW AND CAR IS DRIVABLE WITH PART REMOVED. I THINK THIS PART IS A COMPONENT OF THE FACTORY INSTALLED ALARM SYSTEM. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING BETWEEN 55-60 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO HESITATE AND VIBRATE. IN ADDITION, THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND REMAINED LIT UNTIL THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEAL…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA. WHILE DRIVING BETWEEN 55-60 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO HESITATE AND VIBRATE. IN ADDITION, THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND REMAINED LIT UNTIL THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING AND STATED THAT THERE WAS AN INTERNAL COIL SHORTAGE. THE MISFIRE CYLINDER 5, COIL PACK, AND SPARK PLUGS WERE REPLACED IN THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON A SEPARATE OCCASION FOR THE IDENTICAL FAILURE AND THE MISFIRE CYLINDER 7, COIL PACK, AND SPARK PLUGS WERE REPLACED AT THAT TIME. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 67,425 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 68,045. UPDATED 03-27-09 *BF UPDATED 03/31/09.*JB
WHILE VEHICLE WAS PARKED A FIRE STARTED UNDER THE HOOD. VEHICLE WAS TOTALED. DEALERSHIP WAS NOTIFIED, BUT DID NOT RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. *AK
REPLACED SPARK PLUGS AT 75000 MILES WITH BOSCH PREMIUM PLUGS. APPROXIMATELY 3 MONTHS LATER SPARK PLUG NUMBER 7 (3RD FROM FRONT ON PASSENGER SIDE) BLEW OUT, CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE CYLINDER THREADS. HELICOIL WAS INSTALLED AND NEW SPARK PLUG INSTALLED. APPROXIMATELY 3 MONTHS LATER SPARK PLUG NUMBER 6(SECOND FROM FRONT PASSENGER S…
Read full complaint
REPLACED SPARK PLUGS AT 75000 MILES WITH BOSCH PREMIUM PLUGS. APPROXIMATELY 3 MONTHS LATER SPARK PLUG NUMBER 7 (3RD FROM FRONT ON PASSENGER SIDE) BLEW OUT, CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE CYLINDER THREADS. HELICOIL WAS INSTALLED AND NEW SPARK PLUG INSTALLED. APPROXIMATELY 3 MONTHS LATER SPARK PLUG NUMBER 6(SECOND FROM FRONT PASSENGER SIDE) BLEW OUT CAUSING THE SAME DAMAGE.*AK
Official recalls
203V472000 · Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly
Nov 6, 2003
ON CERTAIN NATURAL GAS VEHICLES, IF A FLAME FROM A VEHICLE INTERIOR FIRE BECOMES LOCALLY DIRECTED AT THE NATURAL GAS FUEL TANK LOCATED IMMEDIATELY BEHIND THE REAR SEAT, THE FLAME COULD DAMAGE THE FIBERGLASS WRAP ON THE TANK WEAKENING THE TANK.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE STRENGTH OF THE TANK IS SIGNIFICANTLY COMPROMISED, IT COULD RUPTURE, INCREASING THE RISK OF A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL AN INSULATOR BEHIND THE CURRENT SEAT BACK. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON JANUARY 7, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
02V249000 · Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly
Sep 6, 2002
ON CERTAIN NATURAL GAS MODEL VEHICLES, A T-FITTING THAT CONNECTS FUEL TANKS #3 AND #4 CAN DEVELOP A LEAK WHEN THE SOLENOID VALVES ARE ENERGIZED, SUCH AS WHEN THE IGNITION SWITCH IS IN THE ON POSITION OR DURING REFUELING.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A GAS LEAK OF SUFFICIENT QUANTITY CONCENTRATED IN AN AREA TO CREATE A COMBUSTIBLE MIXTURE AND IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A REDESIGNED "T" FITTING ON #4 FUEL TANK AND TESTED FOR LEAKAGE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN SEPTEMBER 13, 2002. OWNERS WHO DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-866-436-7332.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
EA03001 · Cng Tank Explosion
Opened Jan 27, 2003 · Closed Nov 19, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly
IN SEPTEMBER 2002, A FUEL CYLINDER IN A NATURAL GAS POWERED VEHICLE (NGV) EXPLODED DURING A FIRE.FORD AND VRTC TEST ENGINEERS JOINTLY EXAMINED THE INCIDENT VEHICLE AND REVIEWED TESTING TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE (PRD) WAS PROPER.THE PURPOSE OF A PRD IS TO PROTECT A COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS TANK FROM OVERPRESSURE BY ALLOWING THE CNG TO VENT WHEN THE TEMPERATURE REACHES A SPECIFIC POINT.THE PRD WAS REMOVED FROM THE FAILED TANK AND SUBJECTED TO A YIELD TEMPERATURE DETERMINATION TEST. IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT A DIRECT FLAME (FROM THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE) ONTO THE CYLINDER (LOCATED BEHIND THE REAR SEAT IN THE TRUNK)COMPROMISED THE HOOP STRENGTH OF THE NATURAL GAS CYLINDER, THUS ALLOWING THE CYLINDER TO FAIL PRIOR TO THE PRD RELEASING AT ITSDESIGNED TEMPERATURE.AS A RESULT OF THIS TESTING AND REVIEW OF THE INVOLVED VEHICLE, FORD HAS DEVELOPED AN INSULATOR TO INSULATE THE NATURAL GAS FUEL TANK FROM A LOCALLY DIRECTED FLAME PROJECTING FROM THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE.INSULATORS WILL BE INSTALLED BEHIND THE BACK SEAT ON SUBJECT VEHICLES TO PREVENT FUTURE FAILURES OF THIS TYPE. FORD'S ACTION ADDRESSES THE CONCERNS OF ODI.THEREFORE, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
PE02071 · Cng Tank Exploding In A Fire
Opened Oct 1, 2002 · Closed Jan 27, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly
AN EXPLOSION OF A COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG) TANK SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OCCUR, AS THE TANK IS FITTED WITH A PRESSURE RELIEF DEVICE (PRD). THIS PRD SHOULD RELEASE THE CNG IN THE TANK, PRIOR TO THE PRESSURE REACHING THE TANK BURST PRESSURE.THE PRD DID NOT RELEASE IN THE SUBJECT WISCONSIN POLICE CRUISER EXPLOSION.NHTSA HAS RECOVERED THE PRD VALVE FROM THE TANK THAT EXPLODED AND TESTING WILL BE NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH WHY THIS TANK SAFETY VALVE DID NOT RELEASE IN THE VERY HIGH TEMPERATURE FIRE THAT OCCURRED IN THE POLICE CRUISER.THERE IS ONLY THE SINGLE KNOWN EVENT, BUT DUE TO THE CATASTROPIC FORCE OF SUCH AN EXPLOSION AND THE POTENTIAL FOR INJURY AND LOSS OF LIFE, THIS INVESTIGATION IS BEING UPGRADED.