NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
61 reportsClear category filter150,000 miles · Apr 22, 2014
Service Brakes, HydraulicStructure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, DECELERATION BECAME VERY DIFFICULT. THE VEHICLE WAS EXAMINED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE BRAKES LINES HAD RUSTED. THE MECHANIC ALSO DISCOVERED THAT THE ROCKER PANELS AND FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE MANUFACTURE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, DECELERATION BECAME VERY DIFFICULT. THE VEHICLE WAS EXAMINED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE BRAKES LINES HAD RUSTED. THE MECHANIC ALSO DISCOVERED THAT THE ROCKER PANELS AND FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000. UPDATED 06/27/14*LJ
NHTSA ODI #10584189
18,535 miles · Feb 7, 2011
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE BRAKE PEDAL DROPPED TO THE FLOOR AND THE CONTACT EXPERIENCED A LOSS OF BRAKING CAPABILITY. THE CONTACT STATED HE CRASHED INTO A TREE STUMP AND SNOW ON THE GROUND AND THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. T…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE BRAKE PEDAL DROPPED TO THE FLOOR AND THE CONTACT EXPERIENCED A LOSS OF BRAKING CAPABILITY. THE CONTACT STATED HE CRASHED INTO A TREE STUMP AND SNOW ON THE GROUND AND THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 18,535. UPDATED 3/14/11 *CN IT WAS DETERMINED THE MASTER CYLINDER WAS LEAKING FLUID AND ULTIMATELY FAILED. UPDATED 05/04/11
NHTSA ODI #10380957
58,900 miles · Sep 1, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION EDDIE BAUER. UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE HE ATTEMPTED TO SHIFT IT OUT OF PARK AND THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED TO THE FLOOR. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE HE WAS INFORMED THE BRAKE LINES FOR THE FRONT BRAKES WERE RUSTED THROUGH. THOSE BRAKE LINES WERE REPAIRED. THE FAIL…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPEDITION EDDIE BAUER. UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE HE ATTEMPTED TO SHIFT IT OUT OF PARK AND THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED TO THE FLOOR. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE HE WAS INFORMED THE BRAKE LINES FOR THE FRONT BRAKES WERE RUSTED THROUGH. THOSE BRAKE LINES WERE REPAIRED. THE FAILURE HAS NOT RECURRED SINCE BUT HE EXAMINED HIS VEHICLE AND NOTICED THE BRAKE LINES FOR THE REAR BRAKES WERE VERY RUSTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO BE EXAMINED AND HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 58,900. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10353259
45,000 miles · May 4, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
BRAKE LINES RUSTED AND LEAKED CAUSING SUDDEN LOSS OF MOST BRAKING. I BOUGHT THIS FORD NEW IN JULY OF 2003. AFTER THE BRAKE FAILURE, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED. I HAD ALL BRAKE LINES REPLACED, AND STILL HAVE THE PIECE WHICH LEAKED. THE SHOP SAID IT IS BECAUSE THE BRAKE LINES ARE ROUTED ON TOP OF THE FRAME RAILS, AND SALT BUILDS UP…
Read full complaint
BRAKE LINES RUSTED AND LEAKED CAUSING SUDDEN LOSS OF MOST BRAKING. I BOUGHT THIS FORD NEW IN JULY OF 2003. AFTER THE BRAKE FAILURE, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED. I HAD ALL BRAKE LINES REPLACED, AND STILL HAVE THE PIECE WHICH LEAKED. THE SHOP SAID IT IS BECAUSE THE BRAKE LINES ARE ROUTED ON TOP OF THE FRAME RAILS, AND SALT BUILDS UP. BUT I'VE LIVED IN THIS AREA ALL MY LIFE (I'M 66) AND HAD MANY OLDER OR HIGHER MILEAGE VEHICLES, BUT NEVER HAD THIS HAPPEN BEFORE. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE INVESTIGATING CHEVY BRAKE LINE FAILURE, AND THINK YOU SHOULD INCLUDE FORDS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10328726
200,000 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
153,208 miles · Mar 7, 2008
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash
MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION HAD A SUDDEN BRAKE FAILURE WHILE MY SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING. LUCKILY SHE WAS NOT HURT WHEN THIS INCIDENT TOOK PLACE. I FOUND THE BRAKE RESERVOIR TO BE COMPLETELY EMPTY AND REFILLED IT IMMEDIATELY. THEN I DISCOVERED THE REAL PROBLEM. THE REAR FACTORY BRAKE LINES WERE CONSTANTLY RUBBING AGAI…
Read full complaint
MY 2003 FORD EXPEDITION HAD A SUDDEN BRAKE FAILURE WHILE MY SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING. LUCKILY SHE WAS NOT HURT WHEN THIS INCIDENT TOOK PLACE. I FOUND THE BRAKE RESERVOIR TO BE COMPLETELY EMPTY AND REFILLED IT IMMEDIATELY. THEN I DISCOVERED THE REAL PROBLEM. THE REAR FACTORY BRAKE LINES WERE CONSTANTLY RUBBING AGAINST THE REAR SPRINGS OF THE CAR , THUS WEARING A HOLE IN THE BRAKE LINE. THIS RESULTED IN RAPID LOSS OF BRAKE FLUID , WHICH ALSO LED TO SUDDEN BRAKE FAILURE. THIS WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE A MANUFACTURERS DEFECT AND I CANT IMAGINE WHY SOMEONE AT FORD DIDN'T SEE SUCH AN OBVIOUS PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10220394
Mileage unknown · Jan 12, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
ROTORS NEEDING TO BE REPLACED AT LOW MILEAGE ON FORD EXPEDITION 2003- OR NEWER AND 2004 FORD F150'S 2003 OR NEWER. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10178573
57,357 miles · Oct 26, 2006
Service Brakes, HydraulicSteering
ON AUGUST 26,2006 TOOK MY SUV TO DEALER TO HAVE IT CHECKED OUT BECAUSE THE FRONT END WAS SHAKING REALLY BAD. WAS TOLD THAT IT NEEDED TO HAVE FRONT AND REAR ROTORS REPLACED HAD ANOTHER DEALER CHECK OUT ONLY NEED FRONT ROTORS REPLACED HAD THEM REPLACED. ON SEPT 8, 2006 TOOK BACK TO DEALER BECAUSE I HEARD A WHINNING NOISE THOUGHT I…
Read full complaint
ON AUGUST 26,2006 TOOK MY SUV TO DEALER TO HAVE IT CHECKED OUT BECAUSE THE FRONT END WAS SHAKING REALLY BAD. WAS TOLD THAT IT NEEDED TO HAVE FRONT AND REAR ROTORS REPLACED HAD ANOTHER DEALER CHECK OUT ONLY NEED FRONT ROTORS REPLACED HAD THEM REPLACED. ON SEPT 8, 2006 TOOK BACK TO DEALER BECAUSE I HEARD A WHINNING NOISE THOUGHT IT WAS THE POWER STEERING FLUID LOW. IT CHECKED OUT OKAY DEALER CHECK IT AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE POWER STEERING PUMP WAS BAD HAD IT REPLACE. PICKED UP MY SUV AND IT WAS STILL MAKING THE SAME NOISE. WAS TOLD TO DRIVE FOR TWO WEEKS TO LET AIR BLEED OUT LINE AND BRING BACK IN TWO WEEKS CALL THEM TO LET THEM KNOW THAT THE NOISE WAS STILL THERE TOOK TO DEALER. NOTHING WAS DONE ABOUT IT. CALL THE FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE LINE AND MAILED THEM A LETTER ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON. THEY TOLD ME TO TAKE MY SUV TO ANOTHER FORD DEALER DID THAT WAS TOLD THAT THE POWER STEERING PUMP WAS BAD THAT I HAD PUT ON IN AUG. AND THAT SOMETHING WAS CAUSING THEM TO GO BAD. THE STEERING RACK IS THE PROBLEM. I CALL THE DEALER WHERE I'VE ALL OF MY WORK DONE ON MY SUV AND TALK TO THE GENERAL MANAGER. HE WAS RUDE AND HUNG UP IN MY FACE I CALL BACK I'M GOING TO TAKE MY SUV TO THEM TOMORROW OCT 27,2006 AND SEE IF WE CAN COME TO TERMS TO GET MY SUV FIX. BUT I'VE SEE MANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE SAME PROBLEM THAT 'M HAVING. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10171938
Mileage unknown · Jun 24, 2006
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
MY BRAKES BEGAN TO SQUEAL AROUND 50K. THIS IS THE FIRST BRAKE SERVICING REQUIRED ON THIS VEHICLE. I WAS TOLD BY A NUMBER OF MECHANICS THAT THE FRONT ROTORS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE THEY WERE WORN DOWN TOO MUCH. I WAS SURPRISED ABOUT THIS AND FOUND THAT THIS IS A VERY WELL KNOWN AND COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE 2003 FORD EXPED…
Read full complaint
MY BRAKES BEGAN TO SQUEAL AROUND 50K. THIS IS THE FIRST BRAKE SERVICING REQUIRED ON THIS VEHICLE. I WAS TOLD BY A NUMBER OF MECHANICS THAT THE FRONT ROTORS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE THEY WERE WORN DOWN TOO MUCH. I WAS SURPRISED ABOUT THIS AND FOUND THAT THIS IS A VERY WELL KNOWN AND COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE 2003 FORD EXPEDITIONS. APPARENTLY, THESE ROTORS ARE NOT "DEFECTIVE" IN MATERIAL OR WORKMANSHIP OTHERWISE THERE WOULD BE A RECALL. THIS IS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF POOR DESIGN AND ENGINEERING. IT IS COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS TO EXPECT ANYONE TO BELIEVE IT IS NORMAL TO REPLACE BRAKE ROTORS ON EACH BRAKE PAD CHANGE. I HAVE BOUGHT AMERICAN MADE VEHICLES MY ENTIRE LIFE. I WAS ALWAYS TOLD THAT THE FOREIGN CARS WERE JUNK AND COST A LOT OF MONEY TO MAINTAIN. OVER THE YEARS I HAVE SPENT MUCH MONEY AND TIME REPAIRING MY AMERICAN MADE CARS. I HAD BOUGHT THE CHEAPEST CAR I COULD FIND BACK IN 2000. A HYUNDAI ELANTRA. I HAVE HAD ZERO PROBLEMS. NOT A SINGLE ONE. THE MILEAGE IS OVER 100K AND I HAVEN'T EVEN NEEDED TO CHANGE THE BRAKE PADS. THIS CAR WAS THE ABSOLUTE CHEAPEST CAR I COULD FIND ON THE MARKET IN 2000. I WILL TAKE THIS AS AN ILLUSTRATION OF HOW POORLY THE FORD LINE OF PRODUCTS ARE EITHER DESIGNED OR BACKED UP BY THE MANUFACTURER. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10160667
2,474 miles · May 11, 2006
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
THE BRAKES ON THE 2003 EXPEDITION ISN'T DESIGNED TO HOLD THE HEAVY WEIGHT OF THE EXPEDITION. THIS CAUSE THE BRAKES TO NEED TO BE REPLACED NUMEROUS TIMES. FORD NEEDS TO RECALL THE BRAKES AND PUT BIGGER BRAKE PADS IN THEM. I HAVE HAD TO EVEN REPLACE THEM METAL TO METAL IN THE FRONT 7 TIMES IN 3 YEARS AND UNDER 45,000 MILES. I EVEN…
Read full complaint
THE BRAKES ON THE 2003 EXPEDITION ISN'T DESIGNED TO HOLD THE HEAVY WEIGHT OF THE EXPEDITION. THIS CAUSE THE BRAKES TO NEED TO BE REPLACED NUMEROUS TIMES. FORD NEEDS TO RECALL THE BRAKES AND PUT BIGGER BRAKE PADS IN THEM. I HAVE HAD TO EVEN REPLACE THEM METAL TO METAL IN THE FRONT 7 TIMES IN 3 YEARS AND UNDER 45,000 MILES. I EVEN HAD TO REPLACE THE MASTER CYLINDER DUE TO LEAKAGE AT 45,000 MILES. ALSO DUE TO ELECTRONIC PROBLEMS I HAVE HAD I WAS UNABLE TO LOCK THE SUV AND HAD THE ALARM SOUND BECAUSE OF IT AND WINDOWS DON'T GO UP AND DOWN CORRECTLY. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10157378
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