IllustrationA SPARK PLUG WAS EJECTED FROM MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION AND IS A KNOWN PROBLEM AND DEADLY SAFETY (FIRE) PROBLEM. *TR
2003 Ford Expedition
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Expedition years
Owner complaints for the 2003 Ford Expedition are substantially higher than the model-year median of 155.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Expedition 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
960–25K
5325–50K
6950–75K
7175–100K
105100–150K
69150K+
463 reports with mileage · 152 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.
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 127 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 104 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 61 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
57 crash reports36 fire reports39 injury reports
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
127 reportsOIL LEAKING FROM HEAD GASKET ON PASSENGER REAR OF HEAD..... LEAKS ONTO MANIFOLD WHERE A FIRE CAN START. FORD MECHANICS KNOW THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM. THE MECHANICS SAY THAT THERE IS A FLAW IN THE CASTING IN THE HEAD. THERE ARE NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS OF THIS HAPPENING. *TR
WENT OUT TO WARM UP OUR FORD EXPEDITION FOR WORK. UPON STARTING IT HEARD A LOUD BOOM AND THE ENGINE SOUNDED LOUD. HAD IT TOWED TO GARAGE. FOUND OUT THAT THE #7 SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT. FOR SAFETY SAKE, FORD SHOULD ADMIT TO THE DEFECT IN THE ENGINE, AND ISSUE A RECALL. *TR
ON 11/7/10 TRAVELING HOME WITH MY FAMILY IN MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION I HEARD A LOUD BANG THOUGHT I BLEW A TIRE. I STARTED SMELLING A STRONG ODOR OF GAS. THE CAR STARTED TO MISFIRE. I PULLED IT OVER TO MAKE SURE IT WASN'T ON FIRE. TURNS OUT A SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF THE ENGINE. FOUND OUT THREW SOME RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET THAT THI…
Read full complaint
ON 11/7/10 TRAVELING HOME WITH MY FAMILY IN MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION I HEARD A LOUD BANG THOUGHT I BLEW A TIRE. I STARTED SMELLING A STRONG ODOR OF GAS. THE CAR STARTED TO MISFIRE. I PULLED IT OVER TO MAKE SURE IT WASN'T ON FIRE. TURNS OUT A SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF THE ENGINE. FOUND OUT THREW SOME RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET THAT THIS IS A ON GOING PROBLEM WITH FORD. WHY ARE THEY NOT STANDING BEHIND THERE PRODUCT. I'VE HEARD IT IS A DESIGN FLAW WITH THE SPARK PLUGS NOT HAVING ENOUGH THREAD ON THEM. I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED. THIS IS GOING TO COST ME SOMEWHERE AROUND $3000.00 TO GET FIXED. I BOUGHT THIS TRUCK NEW FROM THE DEALER. I ONLY HAVE 58,000 MILES ON IT TO ME THIS IS STILL A NEW TRUCK SOMETHING HAS GOT TO BE DONE THEY DO KNOW THAT THERE WAS A DESIGN FLAW BECAUSE IN 2004 THEY CHANGED THE DESIGN. SHAME ON FORD. AN AMERICAN MADE VEHICLE .THIS SHOULD BE RECALLED AND FORD SHOULD MAKE GOOD ON THERE PRODUCT. *TR
2003 FORD EXPEDITION SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF HEAD AT 85K MILES. FORD DEALERSHIP ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IT SEES 2 SPARK PLUG BLOW OUTS A MONTH AND FORD IS AWARE OF THE PROBLEM IN 2003 EXPEDITIONS. REPAIRED WITH A FORD FIX - HELIACOIL OR LINER INSTALLED INTO HEAD FOR DAMAGED SPARK PLUG. FOR TRUE FIX, FORD NEEDS TO REPLACE THE HEAD AND S…
Read full complaint
2003 FORD EXPEDITION SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF HEAD AT 85K MILES. FORD DEALERSHIP ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IT SEES 2 SPARK PLUG BLOW OUTS A MONTH AND FORD IS AWARE OF THE PROBLEM IN 2003 EXPEDITIONS. REPAIRED WITH A FORD FIX - HELIACOIL OR LINER INSTALLED INTO HEAD FOR DAMAGED SPARK PLUG. FOR TRUE FIX, FORD NEEDS TO REPLACE THE HEAD AND SPARK PLUGS TO ENSURE THAT OTHER SPARK PLUGS DON'T COME UNTHREADED AS MILEAGE INCREASES. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT WAS TRAVELING 55 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PERFORMING NORMALLY. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO LOCATE A FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 113,…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT WAS TRAVELING 55 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PERFORMING NORMALLY. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO LOCATE A FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 113,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 117,000.
SUDDEN BACKFIRE RESULTING IN SPARK PLUG EJECTION. REPLACED WITH HELICOIL KIT. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AS IT OPERATED AS NORMAL. THE FAILURE RECURRED APPROXIMATELY 5 MONTHS LATER. WHILE ATTEMPTING A TURN AT APPROXIMATELY 20 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AS IT OPERATED AS NORMAL. THE FAILURE RECURRED APPROXIMATELY 5 MONTHS LATER. WHILE ATTEMPTING A TURN AT APPROXIMATELY 20 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AFTER TWENTY MINUTES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED AND THE MECHANIC WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE ANY FAILURE CODES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 127,000.
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 55 MPH THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SMOKE INSIDE OF THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT AND VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE ALSO MADE A LOUD NOISE AND WOULD STALL. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A FORD DEALER WHO STATED THAT A SPARK PLUG MELTED INTO THE ENGINE AND THAT T…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 55 MPH THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SMOKE INSIDE OF THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT AND VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE ALSO MADE A LOUD NOISE AND WOULD STALL. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A FORD DEALER WHO STATED THAT A SPARK PLUG MELTED INTO THE ENGINE AND THAT THE VEHICLE NEEDED A NEW ENGINE. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE CONTACT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPAIR COST. FORD MOTOR COMPANY STATED THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 88,546.
I WAS DRIVING MY 2003 EXPEDITION O THE HIGHWAY WITH MY FAMILY IN THE CAR, ALL OF A SUDDEN THE JEEP JUST CUT RIGHT OFF NO WARNING ANYTHING I HIT MY BLINKERS TO COME ON TRY AND CUT IT ON AGAIN AND IT DID BUT AGAIN CUT RIGHT BACK OFF. I HAD TO CONTINUE CUTTING ON AND CUTTING ON CONSTANTLY UNTIL I GOT IT TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. IT …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY 2003 EXPEDITION O THE HIGHWAY WITH MY FAMILY IN THE CAR, ALL OF A SUDDEN THE JEEP JUST CUT RIGHT OFF NO WARNING ANYTHING I HIT MY BLINKERS TO COME ON TRY AND CUT IT ON AGAIN AND IT DID BUT AGAIN CUT RIGHT BACK OFF. I HAD TO CONTINUE CUTTING ON AND CUTTING ON CONSTANTLY UNTIL I GOT IT TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. IT WAS THE SCARIEST MOMENT OF MY LIFE THIS COULD HAVE CAUSED A SERIOUS ACCIDENT INJURING NOT ONLY MY FAMILY BUT OTHER PEOPLE ON THE HIGHWAY. WHEN I TAKE THE JEEP TO THE MECHANIC HE STATES THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM A LOT OF PEOPLE COMPLAIN OF AND FORD WILL NO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT. FORD BUILD THIS JEEP THIS WAY SO PEOPLE CAN ONLY RETURN TO FORD FOR THE REPAIRS WHICH COST A LOT. THE COILS ON THE JEEP WERE WHITE AND RUSTED BECAUSE THE WAY THIS JEEP WAS BUT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO GET TO THEM A MECHANIC LITERALLY HAS TO MOVE THE MOTOR OR MOTOR PARTS TOGET TO IT. FORD HAS THIS PROBLEM AS A RECALL ON OTHER FORD VEHICLES BUT WILL NOT HONOR THIS AS A RECALL FOR THE 2003 EXPEDITIONS. *TR
Official recalls
103V094000 · Structure
Mar 7, 2003
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCK, VAN, AND MINI VAN CONVERSIONS EQUIPPED WITH SOUTHERN COMFORT BUILT RUNNING BOARDS THAT CONTAIN CERTAIN COURTESY LIGHTS MANUFACTURED BY AMERICAN TECHNOLOGY COMPONENTS, INC. THESE UNITS CONTAIN A COURTESY LIGHT OR LIGHTS THAT MIGHT OVERHEAT WHEN THE WIRE HARNESS IS EXPOSED TO EXCESSIVE MOISTURE AND ROAD SALT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS OVERHEATING CONDITION CAN CAUSE THE RUNNING BOARD TO MELT OR CAUSE A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE WIRING HARNESS ON THESE RUNNING BOARDS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN MARCH 7, 2003. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT SOUTHERN COMFORT AT 1-800-745-6096.
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
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.