NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Electrical System complaints
104 reportsClear category filter74,776 miles · Aug 23, 2007
Electrical System
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE ENTIRE VEHICLE BEGAN TO JERK AND RIDE ROUGHLY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. SHE PULLED OVER AND TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE. SHE RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DROVE TO THE FORD DEALER. THE DEALER PERFORMED AN IDS DIAGNOSTIC AND PIN…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE ENTIRE VEHICLE BEGAN TO JERK AND RIDE ROUGHLY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. SHE PULLED OVER AND TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE. SHE RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DROVE TO THE FORD DEALER. THE DEALER PERFORMED AN IDS DIAGNOSTIC AND PINPOINT TEST AND DISCOVERED THAT A CYLINDER MISFIRED ON CYLINDER NUMBER 4. THE DEALER REPLACED THE IGNITION COIL AND SPARK PLUG ASSEMBLY. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 74,800 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 74,776.
NHTSA ODI #10200593
81,175 miles · Jun 18, 2007
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine Cooling
VEHICLE UNDERWENT NORMAL DRIVING. 2. SUDDENLY UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE A LOUD POPPING NOISE FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT WAS HEARD. THERE WAS LOSS OF POWER, AND WOULD CONTINUE WHENEVER THE ENGINE STARTED. THE ODOR OF GASOLINE AND OIL WAS EMITTED INTO THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE IMMEDIATELY BROUGHT INTO A FORD DEALERSH…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE UNDERWENT NORMAL DRIVING. 2. SUDDENLY UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE A LOUD POPPING NOISE FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT WAS HEARD. THERE WAS LOSS OF POWER, AND WOULD CONTINUE WHENEVER THE ENGINE STARTED. THE ODOR OF GASOLINE AND OIL WAS EMITTED INTO THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE IMMEDIATELY BROUGHT INTO A FORD DEALERSHIP. INSTEAD OF REPLACING THE ENTIRE HEAD AS REQUIRED BY FORD , HELICOIL, SPARK PLUG, AND IGNITION COIL HAD TO BE INSTALLED BY THE DEALERSHIP. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10193667
55,000 miles · May 4, 2007
Electrical System
ALTERNATOR FAILED AT 55,000 MILES, SEEMS A BIT EARLY FOR THIS TO HAPPEN. REPLACED WITH NEW, BATTERY LIGHT AND CHECK CHARGING SYSTEM WARNING WILL NOT GO OFF. BOTH ALT AND BATTERY TESTED FINE ON ANALYZER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10189729
47,500 miles · Mar 10, 2007
Electrical System
THE VEHICLE WOULD RANDOMLY FAIL TO START OVER A PERIOD OF 2 MONTHS, USUALLY IN THE MORNING. ALL LIGHTS, GAUGES, RADIO, AND HEATER WOULD WORK, BUT THE ENGINE WOULD NOT CRANK. AFTER TURNING THE KEY 4-5 TIMES, IT WOULD EVENTUALLY START. ONE TIME, NOTHING WORKED AND HAD TO JUMP START THE BATTERY. I REPLACED THE BATTERY AND 1 WEE…
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE WOULD RANDOMLY FAIL TO START OVER A PERIOD OF 2 MONTHS, USUALLY IN THE MORNING. ALL LIGHTS, GAUGES, RADIO, AND HEATER WOULD WORK, BUT THE ENGINE WOULD NOT CRANK. AFTER TURNING THE KEY 4-5 TIMES, IT WOULD EVENTUALLY START. ONE TIME, NOTHING WORKED AND HAD TO JUMP START THE BATTERY. I REPLACED THE BATTERY AND 1 WEEK LATER, IT DID NOT TURN OVER AGAIN AT ALL, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE WAS WORKING. I LET IT SIT, AND TRIED IT LATER IN THE DAY, OF WHICH IT STARTED RIGHT AWAY. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND THEY TESTED IT. THEY HAD THE PROBLEM HAPPEN TWICE ON THE FIRST DAY AND DETERMINED THE CAUSE TO BE THE STARTER TERMINAL WIRING PIGTAIL WAS CORRODED, AND THEY REPLACED IT WITH A NEW ONE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10184706
20,800 miles · Dec 28, 2006
Electrical SystemInterior LightingLatches/locks/linkages
REAR VIEW MIRRORS FAIL TO RETURN TO CORRECT POSITION AFTER BACKING UP CAUSING A DRIVING HAZARD. THIS HAS BEEN AN ON-GOING PROBLEMS SINCE PURCHASING THIS VEHICLE - NEW IN 2003. DEALER HAS LOOKED AT IT AND STATED THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND NO SERVICE BULLETINS EXISTED AS OF MARCH 2006. OTHER INTERMITTENT ELECTRI…
Read full complaint
REAR VIEW MIRRORS FAIL TO RETURN TO CORRECT POSITION AFTER BACKING UP CAUSING A DRIVING HAZARD. THIS HAS BEEN AN ON-GOING PROBLEMS SINCE PURCHASING THIS VEHICLE - NEW IN 2003. DEALER HAS LOOKED AT IT AND STATED THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND NO SERVICE BULLETINS EXISTED AS OF MARCH 2006. OTHER INTERMITTENT ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS EXIST - 1. PASSENGER SIDE REAR DOOR - AUTOMATIC LOCK DOESN'T ALWAYS OPERATE. 2. INTERIOR LIGHTS STAY ON AS IF A DOOR HAS BEEN LEFT OPEN, EVEN WHEN ALL DOORS AND HATCHES HAVE BEEN CHECKED TO ENSURE THEY ARE COMPLETELY CLOSED. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10177218
Mileage unknown · Nov 2, 2006
Electrical System
2003 FORD EXPEDITION LOST ALL POWER AND ALMOST GOT REAR ENDED. *KB ***NAR*** THE VEHICLE CROSSED INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC AND WAS ALMOST INVOLVED IN A HEAD ON COLLISION. THE VEHICLE FINALLY STOPPED AND WAS ABLE TO BE RESTARTED AND DRIVEN TO THE CONSUMER'S HOME. THE NEXT DAY THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER. THE DEALER WAS UNAB…
Read full complaint
2003 FORD EXPEDITION LOST ALL POWER AND ALMOST GOT REAR ENDED. *KB ***NAR*** THE VEHICLE CROSSED INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC AND WAS ALMOST INVOLVED IN A HEAD ON COLLISION. THE VEHICLE FINALLY STOPPED AND WAS ABLE TO BE RESTARTED AND DRIVEN TO THE CONSUMER'S HOME. THE NEXT DAY THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND RETURNED THE VEHICLE TO THE CONSUMER. ABOUT A WEEK LATER THE VEHICLE STALLED AGAIN WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER A LEFT FOR A FEW DAYS SO THEY COULD TRY TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. UNFORTUNATELY THEY WERE UNABLE TO AND THE VEHICLE WAS AGAIN RETURNED TO THE CONSUMER. THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE NO LONGER FELT SAFE DRIVING THE CAR ESPECIALLY SINCE SHE TRANSPORTED HER CHILDREN IN IT. THE CONSUMER READ SOMEWHERE THAT THE WIRING HARNESS WAS THE CAUSED OF THE PROBLEM. THE CONSUMER TOLD THE DEALER OF HIS FINDINGS BUT THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED. THEY TOLD HIM THAT THE COULD NOT FIX IT UNLESS THEY FOUND THE PROBLEM. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10173284
56,672 miles · Oct 19, 2006
Electrical System
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE COMPLETELY STALLED WITHOUT WARNING AND THERE WERE NO LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. EACH TIME THE VEHICLE WAS RESTARTED, IT STALLED AGAIN. AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WAS CONTACTED, AND DETERMINED THE BATTERY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. BECAUSE THE ALTERNATOR WAS NOT CHARGING THE BATTERY,…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE COMPLETELY STALLED WITHOUT WARNING AND THERE WERE NO LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. EACH TIME THE VEHICLE WAS RESTARTED, IT STALLED AGAIN. AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WAS CONTACTED, AND DETERMINED THE BATTERY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. BECAUSE THE ALTERNATOR WAS NOT CHARGING THE BATTERY, THE ALTERNATOR HAD TO BE REPLACED. AFTER BOTH REPLACEMENTS, AND CHECKING THE FUSES, THE BATTERY LIGHT ILLUMINATED INDICATING THE PROBLEM WAS REPAIRED. NOT TOO LONG AFTER, THE PROBLEM RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE SERVICE DEALER, WHO DETERMINED THAT THE WIRING HARNESS WAS CORRODED. THE PART WAS UNAVAILABLE AT THE DEALER THEREFORE THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO ANOTHER SERVICE DEALER WHO INSTALLED A NEW WIRING HARNESS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED.
NHTSA ODI #10171346
59,751 miles · May 4, 2006
Electrical System
2003 EXPEDITION RELAY JUNCTION BOX BURNED. *TS ***NAR*** THE VEHICLE STALLED WHILE BEING DRIVEN. THE PROBLEM WAS DIAGNOSED AS A RELAY PROBLEM AND REPLACED THE RELAY. AFTER REPAIR THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SHIFT INTO OVERDRIVE. THE DEALER PERFORMED DIAGNOSTIC TEST WHICH DETERMINED THAT THE JUNCTION HAD MELTED. THE JUNCTION BOX W…
Read full complaint
2003 EXPEDITION RELAY JUNCTION BOX BURNED. *TS ***NAR*** THE VEHICLE STALLED WHILE BEING DRIVEN. THE PROBLEM WAS DIAGNOSED AS A RELAY PROBLEM AND REPLACED THE RELAY. AFTER REPAIR THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SHIFT INTO OVERDRIVE. THE DEALER PERFORMED DIAGNOSTIC TEST WHICH DETERMINED THAT THE JUNCTION HAD MELTED. THE JUNCTION BOX WAS REPLACED BUT THE VEHICLE STILL HAD NO OVERDRIVE NOR THIRD GEAR. THE DEALER REMOVED THE TRANSMISSION PAN AND FOUND INTERNAL TRANSMISSION DAMAGE. THE CONSUMER FEELS THAT THE TRANSMISSION WAS DESTROY WHEN THE JUNCTION BOX BURNED OUT. THE CONSUMER HAS THE BURNED JUNCTION BOX IN HIS POSSESSION. PRIOR TO THIS FAILED THE VEHICLE ALTERNATOR HAD TO BE REPLACED. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10157360
35,800 miles · Apr 11, 2006
Electrical System
COIL PACK WENT OUT ON MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION @ 36,200 MILES, 200 MILES OUT OF WARRANTY. DEALER WOULD NOT MAKE EXCEPTION AND COVER. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10155011
53,700 miles · Apr 9, 2006
Electrical System
WHILE TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, THE ENGINE WOULD QUIT WITH NO PROCEEDING SYMPTOMS OR INDICATIONS. SHIFTING TO NEUTRAL AND TRYING TO RE-START WOULD NOT WORK. SHIFTING TO NEUTRAL, TURNING OFF THE IGNITION AND THEN TURNING THE KEY TO START DID CAUSE A RE-START. THIS PROBLEM CAUSES THE "SERVICE ENGINE SOON" LIGHT ON THE DASH T…
Read full complaint
WHILE TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, THE ENGINE WOULD QUIT WITH NO PROCEEDING SYMPTOMS OR INDICATIONS. SHIFTING TO NEUTRAL AND TRYING TO RE-START WOULD NOT WORK. SHIFTING TO NEUTRAL, TURNING OFF THE IGNITION AND THEN TURNING THE KEY TO START DID CAUSE A RE-START. THIS PROBLEM CAUSES THE "SERVICE ENGINE SOON" LIGHT ON THE DASH TO LIGHT, SO A CODE IS BEING GENERATED. FORD IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM, SINCE IT HAS ISSUED A NOTICE (NOT A RECALL) TO IT'S SERVICE DEPARTMENTS. THE REPAIR IS THE REPLACEMENT OF A WIRING HARNESS AND REPROGRAMMING OF THE PROCESSOR. FORD HAS NOT ISSUED A RECALL FOR THIS VERY UNSAFE PROBLEM, SO THE CHARGE FOR THE WORK IS $ 358.18. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10154887
NHTSA investigations
1DP05005 · 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.
Illustration