NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Seat Belts complaints
14 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Jun 28, 2022
Air BagsSeat BeltsStructure
bought truck 3/2/22 from Gold cAuto In troy NY. 3/7/22 went to take kids to school 2.5 inches of water set in my weather guard mats. seats soaked console everything in front cab reversed to pull out spot and water starting pouring on my and my kids from sides in pass sides front and the front windshield area omgand the sun roo…
Read full complaint
bought truck 3/2/22 from Gold cAuto In troy NY. 3/7/22 went to take kids to school 2.5 inches of water set in my weather guard mats. seats soaked console everything in front cab reversed to pull out spot and water starting pouring on my and my kids from sides in pass sides front and the front windshield area omgand the sun roof was worst.kids had to go in myslef too it was snow still out.so that dayi oh sunroof needs to be blown out i said well that right frontdoor sounds open when its shut . same night i picked it up said all was good to go and his guy didn't hear any issues with door. the next snow it was worst this was about toward end of march. i called back around 3/15 said its still leaking dude i just want my money back for real and we are good, he said no doesnt work liek that said all his winshield guy he would take a lok at it and tell hijm ihe sent me. did that talked to the guy said he woudl call me the next day week went by so i called him back long story short he said he wasnt fixing it josh the dealer never pays him , i understood. called talked joshgoldstien told him he said well u just have to bring it in and let me have it for a few days he knows i could NOT NOT do that .leave because by now im having to leave apt and in hotel w/2 kids and im not even from here i know nobody. kids have to bev icked up ad dropped off no buses. i didnt and dont trust his people by this time so i didnt it comes out now the truck is dangerous the airbag on right side light has been von since i bought he said it was old truck it was fine no its busted the air bag. the right front seatbelt now is broke it would have to be completely replaced this in 2.5 months. then find truck is like flintstones the front cab from yrs i guess leaking is gone LITERALLY my 5 yr old fits the cab from underneath its should have never been inspec. the day i bought vthe refused to trade or give refund cussed and screamed at me whenever i came lights turnoff at night form damage nooil
NHTSA ODI #11471391
100,000 miles · May 4, 2015
Seat Belts
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SEAT BELT RECEIVER ON THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE WAS INOPERABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE RECEIVER NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE M…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SEAT BELT RECEIVER ON THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE WAS INOPERABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE RECEIVER NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 100,000.
NHTSA ODI #10714497
124,000 miles · Apr 18, 2014
Seat Belts
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE REAR PASSENGER SIDE SEAT BELT BOLT DISCONNECTED FROM THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 124,000 MILES.
NHTSA ODI #10583495
65,000 miles · Jan 18, 2011
Seat Belts
MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION SECOND ROW MIDDLE SEATBELT WILL NOT FASTEN. I HAVE TRIED SEVERAL TIMES AND CAN NOT GET IT TO WORK, MY 5YR. OLD CAN NOT BE BUCKLED. THEY SHOULD GIVE ME ANOTHER ONE ,BUT THE FORD DEALER WANTS TO CHARGE ME 150.00 BUCKS. WHAT SHOULD I DO? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10377126
62,000 miles · Oct 11, 2007
Air BagsSeat Belts
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE AIR BAG WARNING INDICATOR LIGHT BEGAN FLASHING. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FRONT AIR BAG SENSOR WAS CORRODED, BUT COULD NOT DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE DEALER REPLACED THE AIR BAG SENSOR AND THE WIRES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 62,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 63,300. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE AIR BAG WARNING INDICATOR LIGHT BEGAN FLASHING. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FRONT AIR BAG SENSOR WAS CORRODED, BUT COULD NOT DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE DEALER REPLACED THE AIR BAG SENSOR AND THE WIRES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 62,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 63,300. UPDATED 12/12/07 *BF THE DRIVER'S SEAT BELT WAS TWISTED. UPDATED.
NHTSA ODI #10205418
55,000 miles · Sep 18, 2007
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrashInjury
A LADY PULLED OUT IN FRONT OF OUR 2003 FORD EXPEDITION CAUSING AN AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT. THE DAY WAS CLEAR, THE WEATHER WAS WARM. MY WIFE HIT HER MONTE CARLO DOING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH. AFTER HITTING THE LADIES CAR, BOTH VEHICLES WENT OFF THE ROAD INTO THE TREES. OUR CAR HIT A RATHER LARGE PINE TREE. WITH BOTH OF THESE MAJOR …
Read full complaint
A LADY PULLED OUT IN FRONT OF OUR 2003 FORD EXPEDITION CAUSING AN AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT. THE DAY WAS CLEAR, THE WEATHER WAS WARM. MY WIFE HIT HER MONTE CARLO DOING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH. AFTER HITTING THE LADIES CAR, BOTH VEHICLES WENT OFF THE ROAD INTO THE TREES. OUR CAR HIT A RATHER LARGE PINE TREE. WITH BOTH OF THESE MAJOR IMPACTS, TOTALING BOTH CARS, NONE OF THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED, AND MY WIFE'S SEAT BELT FAILED TO LOCK. THE FRONT OF OUR CAR WAS HIT ON BOTH THE FRONT RIGHT AND FRONT LEFT CORNERS. WE ARE DEPENDING AND PAYING FOR THESE SAFETY, IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE THAT THEY DON'T OPERATE WHEN NEEDED. PHOTOS ARE AVAILABLE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10203334
63,323 miles · Mar 6, 2006
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrashInjury
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH IN SNOW, WHILE CHANGING LANES THE VEHICLE HIT A TREE HEAD ON, THE FRONTAL AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY AND THE FRONT AND REAR SEAT BELTS FAILED. THIS OCCURRED WITHOUT WARNING AND PICTURES WERE TAKEN AT THE SCENE. THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER RECEIVED MINOR INJURIES AND A POLICE REPORT WAS NO…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH IN SNOW, WHILE CHANGING LANES THE VEHICLE HIT A TREE HEAD ON, THE FRONTAL AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY AND THE FRONT AND REAR SEAT BELTS FAILED. THIS OCCURRED WITHOUT WARNING AND PICTURES WERE TAKEN AT THE SCENE. THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER RECEIVED MINOR INJURIES AND A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED. THE VEHICLE SUSTAINED BODY DAMAGE AND WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP HOWEVER NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED. CONTACT WAS SEEKING FROM FORD THE REASSURANCE OF SAFETY . HE WANTS FORD TO TON INSPECT THE VEHICLE AND DETERMINE WHY THE AIR BAGS DID NOT WORK. THE IMPACT WA SHARD ENOUGH TO TRIGGER THEM. THE REASON GIVEN TO THE CONSUMER WAS THAT THE SENSOR WAS NOT HIT HARD ENOUGH. WANTS THE DEALER TO BE MORE FORTHRIGHT WITH CONTACT AND TELL HIM THE TRUTH. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10151988
Mileage unknown · Aug 24, 2004
Seat Belts
CONSUMER STATED THAT THE SEAT BELT ON THE THIRD ROW/MIDDLE LOCKED. HIS 4 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WAS SEATED THERE. THE SEAT BELT WOULD NOT RELEASE THE CHILD. INSTEAD OF THE SEAT TIGHTENED UP. CONSUMER HAD TO GO TO THE DEALER AND HAVE THE SEAT BELT CUT OFF HIS CHILD. IT WAS VERY FRIGHTENING TO HIM , HIS WIFE, AND THE CHILD. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10089647
Mileage unknown · Apr 22, 2004
EquipmentSeat BeltsVisibility
PURCHASED 2003 EXPEDITION XLT IN 9/03 AND HAD THE FOLLOWING PROBLEMS WITHIN ONE WEEK OF PURCHASE: A/C NOISE & DECREASED VOLUME WHEN MAX A/C IS ON; RATTLING NOISE FROM SIDE PANELS (WHICH ALSO SHOWED FADING WITHIN 3 MONTHS AND WERE REPLACED); WASHER FLUID LIGHT SHOWED LOW WHEN FULL; FOAM LOOSE AROUND DEFROSTER. BY 12/03, STEREO S…
Read full complaint
PURCHASED 2003 EXPEDITION XLT IN 9/03 AND HAD THE FOLLOWING PROBLEMS WITHIN ONE WEEK OF PURCHASE: A/C NOISE & DECREASED VOLUME WHEN MAX A/C IS ON; RATTLING NOISE FROM SIDE PANELS (WHICH ALSO SHOWED FADING WITHIN 3 MONTHS AND WERE REPLACED); WASHER FLUID LIGHT SHOWED LOW WHEN FULL; FOAM LOOSE AROUND DEFROSTER. BY 12/03, STEREO SYSTEM REPLACED DUE TO LOUD WHINING NOISE; HAS BEEN REPLACED 3 TIMES (PROBLEM STILL RECURRING); 2/04 SUN ROOF LEAKING PROFUSELY INTO 2ND ROW SEAT AREA (SAME PROBLEM OCCURRED A MONTH LATER THOUGH REPAIRED). WHEN DEALER'S SUBCONTRACTOR REPAIRED MOONROOF THE SECOND TIME, THE TECHNICAN NEGLECTED TO SCREW REAR SEATBELT BOLT TIGHTLY BACK TO SIDE PANEL. SEATBELT BOLT BROKE AWAY FROM SIDE PANEL WHILE CHILD WAS SITTING IN SEAT! DEALER REPAIRED AND CHECKED ALL SEAT BELT ATTACHMENTS AT MY REQUEST BUT DID NOT OFFER TO DETERMINE SOURCE OF PROBLEM UNTIL I INSISTED. SERVICE MGR INITIALLY REPORTED HE THOUGHT IT WAS A FACTORY DEFECT, UNTIL THEY RESEARCHED THE PROBLEM IN DETAIL. I STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT FORD HAVE A POLICY THAT ANY SAFETY DEVICES REMOVED OR TAMPERED WITH DURING ANY REPAIR SHOULD BE DOUBLE CHECKED FOR PROPER OPERATION PRIOR TO RETURNING VEHICLE TO OWNER. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10067688
Mileage unknown · Sep 8, 2003
Electrical SystemParking BrakePower Train
THERE IS A RATTLING NOISE IN PASSENGER SIDE DOOR. AND AT TIME IT IS HARD TO CLOSE. WHEN THE VEHICLE REACHED 43 MPH A HUMMING NOISE COULD BE HEARD. THE HUMMING CONTINUED WHEN THE VEHICLE REACHED 59-72 MPH. THE TECHNICIANS REPLACED THE DRIVE SHAFT TWICE BUT THE NOISE CONTINUED. THERE WAS A ROARING NOISE WHICH CAME FROM THE WHE…
Read full complaint
THERE IS A RATTLING NOISE IN PASSENGER SIDE DOOR. AND AT TIME IT IS HARD TO CLOSE. WHEN THE VEHICLE REACHED 43 MPH A HUMMING NOISE COULD BE HEARD. THE HUMMING CONTINUED WHEN THE VEHICLE REACHED 59-72 MPH. THE TECHNICIANS REPLACED THE DRIVE SHAFT TWICE BUT THE NOISE CONTINUED. THERE WAS A ROARING NOISE WHICH CAME FROM THE WHEEL AREA. THE DEALER ADJUSTED THE PARK BRAKE SHOES. THE WAS NOISE THE STEERING WHEEL WAS TURN RIGHT OR LEFT. THE TECHNICIAN ADDED A WHEEL ADDITIVE. THE PASSENGER DOOR WAS DIFFICULT TO CLOSE. THE DEALER ADJUSTED THE STRIKER. THE FRONT WINDSHIELD WEATHER STRIP WAS LOOSE. THE DEALER RESEALED IT. THE WAS RATTLING IN THE CENTER OF THE DASH. THE DEALER REMOVED AND REINSTALLED A CLUSTER AND REINSTALLED THE INSULATION. THE DRIVER SIDE SEAT BELT TWISTED. *NLM
NHTSA ODI #10039747
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