NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Latches/locks/linkages complaints
11 reportsClear category filter200,000 miles · Jan 27, 2009
EquipmentExterior LightingLatches/locks/linkages
BRAKES NEED TO BE REPLACED CONSTANTLY. PADS WEAR VERY FAST. ROTORS WEAR EASILY AND NEED REPLACEMENT WITH PADS EACH TIME. WHEN BROUGHT TO HAVE ROTORS TURN, WAS TOLD THEY ARE MANUFACTURED WITH VERY LITTLE TOLERANCE AND COULD NOT BE TURNED EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS MINIMAL VISIBLE WEAR. WAS TOLD THEY DID NOT "MIC" WITH ENOUGH RANGE …
Read full complaint
BRAKES NEED TO BE REPLACED CONSTANTLY. PADS WEAR VERY FAST. ROTORS WEAR EASILY AND NEED REPLACEMENT WITH PADS EACH TIME. WHEN BROUGHT TO HAVE ROTORS TURN, WAS TOLD THEY ARE MANUFACTURED WITH VERY LITTLE TOLERANCE AND COULD NOT BE TURNED EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS MINIMAL VISIBLE WEAR. WAS TOLD THEY DID NOT "MIC" WITH ENOUGH RANGE TO TOLERATE THE CUT WHEN TURNING. ROTORS SHOULD NOT NEED REPLACEMENT WITH EACH BRAKE CHANGE. EXCESSIVE BRAKE DUST. BRAKE DUST HAS EATEN AWAY AT FINISH ON RIMS. AFTER LAST BRAKE REPAIR, FRONT END NOW HAS A CLICKING SOUND. BRAKE PEDAL HAS ALWAYS FELT SPONGY. ON TWO OCCASIONS WITH AGGRESSIVE BRAKING CONDITIONS, BRAKES LOCKED UP. TOLD DEALERSHIP WHO SAID THIS IS NORMAL WITH THE FORD BRAKING SYSTEMS. ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE HAD AN ONGOING PROBLEM WITH THE PASSENGER SIDE FOG LAMP NOT STAYING LIT AND THE METAL REFLECTOR PIECE IN THE FOG LAMPS COMING LOOSE. WE ARE NOW HAVING PROBLEMS WITH TWO (FRONT DRIVERS/REAR PASSENGERS) DOOR ELECTRIC LOCKS NOT UNLOCKING OR LOCKING THE DOORS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10256448
20,000 miles · Jul 25, 2008
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingInterior Lighting
FIRST, THE DOOR AJAR LIGHT CAME ON AND STAYED ON. I CONTINUED TO GO AROUND THE VEHICLE OPENING AND SHUTTING THE DOORS AND THE LIGHT REMAINED ON. CONSUMER COULD NOT START THE VEHICLE SINCE THE LIGHT CAME ON, AND HAD TO GET A JUMP TO START IT. AFTER A FEW DAYS OF THIS THE BATTERY WAS FINALLY RUINED, AND I WAS FORCED TO BUY A NEW …
Read full complaint
FIRST, THE DOOR AJAR LIGHT CAME ON AND STAYED ON. I CONTINUED TO GO AROUND THE VEHICLE OPENING AND SHUTTING THE DOORS AND THE LIGHT REMAINED ON. CONSUMER COULD NOT START THE VEHICLE SINCE THE LIGHT CAME ON, AND HAD TO GET A JUMP TO START IT. AFTER A FEW DAYS OF THIS THE BATTERY WAS FINALLY RUINED, AND I WAS FORCED TO BUY A NEW ONE. I USED LUBRICANTS TO TRY AND CLEAR DEBRIS FROM THE DOOR SENSORS AND THIS WORKED FOR 3 MONTHS. NOW IT WILL NOT WORK AT ALL. TALKED TO DEALER AND THEY WANT TO CHARGE 600 DOLLARS PER SENSORS. NOTHING WRONG WITH SENSOR ITS JUST DIRTY. SECOND, THE REAR AC IS MAKING A CLICKING NOISE AND WILL NOT CONTROL TEMPERATURE. I SENT IT UNDER WARRANTY TO THE DEALERSHIP AND REPLACED THE AC MECHANISM, STATED "THIS WAS A COMMON DEFECT WITH THE VEHICLE". 5 MONTHS LATER THIS PART WENT OUT AGAIN AND IT WAS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY AND THE DEALERSHIP WOULD NOT REPLACE THE PROBLEM AND WANTED TO CHARGE ME OVER 300 DOLLARS. THEY APPARENTLY REPLACED THE DEFECTIVE PART WITH THE SAME DEFECTIVE PART AND WOULD REPAIR IT AGAIN 5 MONTHS LATER!!!. THIRD, THE SIDE PANELS ON THE EXPEDITION EXTERIOR STARTED FADING AT ABOUT 20,000 MILES. THE DEALERSHIP REPLACED THEM UNDER WARRANTY. ABOUT 20,000 MILES LATER WE NOTICED THEY HAD FADED AGAIN. WE TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY WOULD NOT REPLACE THE DEFECTIVE PANELS THIS TIME BECAUSE IT WAS KNOW LONGER UNDER WARRANTY. EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ANOTHER DEFECT REPLACED WITH A DEFECTIVE PART. FORTH, THE REAR PASSENGER EXTERIOR DOOR/WINDOW TRIM IS BUBBLING AND PEELING OFF. THIS LOOKS HORRIBLE! FIFTH, THE FRONT PASSENGER AND FONT DRIVER WINDOW SWITCHES THAT ROLL DOWN THE WINDOWS ARE HAVING ISSUES. I HAD THE MOTOR REPLACED FOR THE PASSENGER WINDOW AND IT FIXED THE ISSUE FOR A LITTLE BIT. NOW THE PASSENGER CAN NOT ROLL DOWN THE WINDOW. HOWEVER THE DRIVER CAN??? PLEASE HELP! I NEED HELP WITH ANY OR ALL OF THESE ISSUES. I DON'T KNOW WHERE ELSE TO GO! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10235777
82,000 miles · Jul 1, 2008
Latches/locks/linkages
MY LOCKS HAVE FAILED ON MY VEHICLE DUE TO WATER INTRUSION INTO THE FUSE MODULE. THE PASSENGER DOOR LOCKS WILL NOT ENGAGE AND THE REAR HATCH AND WINDOW LOCKS WILL NOT DISENGAGE. DEALER SERVICE HAS INDICATED THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT OCCURS 2-3 TIMES A YEAR WITH MY MAKE AND MODEL VEHICLE. DURING A CRASH THE DOORS TO MY VEHICLE COU…
Read full complaint
MY LOCKS HAVE FAILED ON MY VEHICLE DUE TO WATER INTRUSION INTO THE FUSE MODULE. THE PASSENGER DOOR LOCKS WILL NOT ENGAGE AND THE REAR HATCH AND WINDOW LOCKS WILL NOT DISENGAGE. DEALER SERVICE HAS INDICATED THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT OCCURS 2-3 TIMES A YEAR WITH MY MAKE AND MODEL VEHICLE. DURING A CRASH THE DOORS TO MY VEHICLE COULD OPEN AND SUBJECT THE OCCUPANT TO INJURY. ALL TOLD THIS REPAIR WILL COST OVER $1000. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10232967
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
65,000 miles · Jul 11, 2006
Latches/locks/linkages
WE OWN A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CHILD-LOCK ON DRIVER SIDE STAYS IN THE LOCKED POSITION AND THE DOOR HAS TO BE MANUALLY OPENED FROM EXTERIOR. THE SAME DOOR WILL ONLY LOCK MANUALLY AND NOT BY AUTOMATION. CAUSING MY CHILDREN NOT TO WANT TO SIT BY THAT DOOR OUT OF FEAR OF NOT BEING ABLE TO GET OUT IN AN EMERGENCY. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10162150
58,500 miles · Mar 30, 2006
Electrical SystemLatches/locks/linkages
I OWN A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION THAT HAS BEEN GIVING ME PROBLEMS SINCE DAY ONE. I HAVE HAD SEVERAL ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS WITH THE VEHICLE CAUSING THE LIGHTS TO REMAIN ON AT ALL TIMES AND MY BATTERY TO RUN DOWN TWICE. THE DOORS ALL SEEM TO LOCK AND UNLOCK ONLY WHEN THEY WANT TO AND THE MOST RECENT OF MY COMPLAINTS IS THE REAR PASSEN…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION THAT HAS BEEN GIVING ME PROBLEMS SINCE DAY ONE. I HAVE HAD SEVERAL ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS WITH THE VEHICLE CAUSING THE LIGHTS TO REMAIN ON AT ALL TIMES AND MY BATTERY TO RUN DOWN TWICE. THE DOORS ALL SEEM TO LOCK AND UNLOCK ONLY WHEN THEY WANT TO AND THE MOST RECENT OF MY COMPLAINTS IS THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR HAS BEGUN OPENING ON ITS OWN WHILE BEING DRIVEN. MY 10 MONTH OLD DAUGHTER AND I WERE OUT SHOPPING AT A LOCAL SHOPPING CENTER A FEW WEEKS AGO AND WHILE MAKING A TURN AND PREPARING TO PARK IN A SPACE THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR FLUNG COMPLETELY OPEN. I WAS STUNNED. MY DAUGHTER LUCKILY WAS SAFELY BELTED IN HER CAR SEAT IN THE MIDDLE SEAT. I SHUDDER TO THINK WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED IF MY OTHER TWO CHILDREN HAD OF BEEN WITH ME AT THE TIME AND HAD BEEN SITTING BY THAT DOOR WHICH MY 5 YEAR OLD USUALLY DOES ON A DAILY BASIS. I CONTACTED FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND THEY TOLD ME TO HAVE IT EVALUATED BY A FORD DEALERSHIP WHICH I DID AND IT WAS PROVEN TO BE A FAULTY LATCH AND SWITCH. I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS NO MORE WARRANTY ON THE VEHICLE AND THAT NO EXTENDED WARRANTY WOULD COVER IT. IT IS CONSIDERED TO BE NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR. I HAVE OWNED THE VEHICLE LESS THAN 3 YEARS AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW A FAULTY LATCH AND SWITCH COULD END UP BEING MY FAULT. I HAVE AUTHORIZED THE DEALERSHIP TO REPAIR NEEDLESS TO SAY IT IS NOT WORTH THE SAFETY OF MY CHILDREN, BUT I AM STILL UNSURE HOW A FAULTY PART IS DEEMED THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONSUMER. I HAVE HAD SEVERAL SWITCHES FIXED FOR TWO OTHER DOORS WHILE UNDER WARRANTY BUT THE PROBLEM JUST SEEMS TO BE CONTINUING. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE REPAIR WILL RUN ME $257.00. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10154241
58,000 miles · Feb 10, 2006
Latches/locks/linkagesSeats
HAVE A FORD EXPEDITION. THE 2ND ROW, MIDDLE SEAT WILL NOT STAY IN A LOCKED UPRIGHT POSITION. NOTIFIED FORD, AS THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY INFRACTION. ANY CHILD OR ADULT COULD BE SERIOUSLY HARMED IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT, AS THE SEAT WOULD COLLAPSE FORWARD. FORD CLAIMS THE PART WHICH CONTROLS THE LATCHING OF THE SEAT INTO AN…
Read full complaint
HAVE A FORD EXPEDITION. THE 2ND ROW, MIDDLE SEAT WILL NOT STAY IN A LOCKED UPRIGHT POSITION. NOTIFIED FORD, AS THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY INFRACTION. ANY CHILD OR ADULT COULD BE SERIOUSLY HARMED IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT, AS THE SEAT WOULD COLLAPSE FORWARD. FORD CLAIMS THE PART WHICH CONTROLS THE LATCHING OF THE SEAT INTO AN UPRIGHT POSITION (KNOWN AS A SEAT HANDLE RELEASE) IS TRIM AND THEREFORE UNCOVERED BY WARRANTY. THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE OF FIXING A DOOR HANDLE OR A CRACKED PIECE OF PLASTIC, BUT TO CORRECT A SAFETY CONCERN THAT COULD CAUSE DAMAGE IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT. REPEATED PHONE CALLS TO FORD HAS YIELDED NO RESULTS AND WHILE THE FORD EMPLOYEES I SPOKE WITH CONCUR THAT THE ISSUE IS A SAFETY CONCERN, THEY ARE UNWILLING TO RE-CATEGORIZE THE PART OR ALLOW THE PART TO BE COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10149935
45,000 miles · Jul 21, 2005
Latches/locks/linkagesInjury
2003 EXPEDITION XLT FRONT DOOR LOCKS, PINCH THE MY ARM , WITH MY ARM RESTING ON THE WINDOW LEDGE, THE DOOR LOCKS ENGAGE AS THE VEHICLE BEGINS TO MOVE.......THE PINCH IS SO SEVERE THAT IS LEAVES A BRUISE FOR SEVERAL DAYS
NHTSA ODI #10129525
12,000 miles · Jul 6, 2004
Latches/locks/linkagesSeatsService Brakes, Hydraulic
CONSUMER COMPLAINED ABOUT FRONT BRAKE ROTORS. THE FRONT BRAKE ROTORS WERE CHECKED ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS BUT PROBLEM RECURRED. *AK THE DEALER TOLD THE CONSUMER THE PROBLEM WAS DUE TO DUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO TWO OUTSIDE SOURCES WHO CONCLUDED THAT THE BRAKES WERE BAD AND THAT THE ROTORS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE …
Read full complaint
CONSUMER COMPLAINED ABOUT FRONT BRAKE ROTORS. THE FRONT BRAKE ROTORS WERE CHECKED ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS BUT PROBLEM RECURRED. *AK THE DEALER TOLD THE CONSUMER THE PROBLEM WAS DUE TO DUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO TWO OUTSIDE SOURCES WHO CONCLUDED THAT THE BRAKES WERE BAD AND THAT THE ROTORS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE CONSUMER HAS ALSO REPLACED THE STEERING RACK, SEAT MOTOR AND AUTOMATIC DOOR LOCK. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10075542
Mileage unknown · Apr 29, 2004
Latches/locks/linkages
WHEN DOOR LOCK SWITCH IS DEPRESSED THE LOCKS FAIL TO RESPOND. CONSUMER MUST PUSH THE DOOR LOCK DOWN MANUALLY FOR SYSTEM TO ENGAGE. MANUALLY LOCKING DOORS WOULD CAUSE THE LOCKING SYSTEM TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT A DOOR IS OPEN. THE SWITCH HAS BEEN REPLACED THREE TIMES. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10071823
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