NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
93 reports95,265 miles · Sep 8, 2005
Electrical SystemInterior LightingLatches/locks/linkages
WE WERE FORCED TO TAKE THIS VEHICLE FROM HANSEL FORD IN SANTA ROSA WHEN THEY FELT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD THE 2004 FORD F-150 WE PURCHASED THEY HAD SOLD MY TRADE IN HADN'T MADE A DEAL WITH COMPANY FOR CONTRACT CAME A FEW DAY BEFORE FIRST PAYMENT DUE AND REPOED IT SINCE WE HAVE HAD CAR NIGHTMARES THE SEAT ON DRIVER SIDE BR…
Read full complaint
WE WERE FORCED TO TAKE THIS VEHICLE FROM HANSEL FORD IN SANTA ROSA WHEN THEY FELT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD THE 2004 FORD F-150 WE PURCHASED THEY HAD SOLD MY TRADE IN HADN'T MADE A DEAL WITH COMPANY FOR CONTRACT CAME A FEW DAY BEFORE FIRST PAYMENT DUE AND REPOED IT SINCE WE HAVE HAD CAR NIGHTMARES THE SEAT ON DRIVER SIDE BROKE JUST REGULAR TIME IT DOES A LOT OF JERKING AND SPUTTERING THE LIGHT WORK WHEN THEY WANT TO ETC..... PLEASE GET ME A DECENT VEHICLE FOR AFTER. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10135796
94,400 miles · Aug 15, 2005
Vehicle Speed Control
ON 08/11/05,I HAD A GENTLEMAN INTERESTED IN PURCHASING MY 1999 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. HE CAME TO LOOK AT IT, HE LOOKED UNDER THE HOOD & MENTIONED THAT FORD WAS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH CONNECTORS IN FRONT OF THE BRAKE FLUID RESERVOIR & THAT SOME VEHICLES HAD EVEN CAUGHT ON FIRE! HE SAID IT LOOKED AS THOUGH IT HAD ALREADY MELTED. VERY …
Read full complaint
ON 08/11/05,I HAD A GENTLEMAN INTERESTED IN PURCHASING MY 1999 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. HE CAME TO LOOK AT IT, HE LOOKED UNDER THE HOOD & MENTIONED THAT FORD WAS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH CONNECTORS IN FRONT OF THE BRAKE FLUID RESERVOIR & THAT SOME VEHICLES HAD EVEN CAUGHT ON FIRE! HE SAID IT LOOKED AS THOUGH IT HAD ALREADY MELTED. VERY CONCERNED, I MADE AN APPT FOR THE NEXT DAY. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO MOORE MOTOR SALES IN CARO, & HAD THE RECALL DONE. ON MY WAY HOME, I TRIED OUT THE CRUISE CONTROL - TO MY SURPRISE, IT DID NOT WORK! WHEN I RETURNED HOME, I LOOKED UNDER THE HOOD TO FIND THE PART THAT I THOUGHT WAS TO BE REPLACED WAS STILL THERE! SO, I CALLED MOORE MOTOR SALES AND SPOKE TO HEATH PETERS. I QUESTIONED HIM WHY THIS MELTED PART WAS NOT REPLACED AND HE SAID THAT THE ONLY THING ON THE RECALL FOR MY VEHICLE WAS THE CABLE, NOT THE SWITCH. I EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT I WAS CONCERNED FOR THE SAFETY OF MY 2 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER AND MYSELF AT 8 MONTHS PREGNANT AS PASSENGERS. HE IMMEDIATELY SCHEDULED ME FOR ANOTHER APPT ON 08/15/05(MONDAY). OVER THE WEEKEND I TOOK THE TIME TO RESEARCH THIS ISSUE FURTHER. I DISCOVERED THIS "SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH, " HAD BEEN RECALLED IN SOME FORD VEHICLES, UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR OTHERS & MY VEHICLE HAS THE SAME SWITCH AS THOSE UNDER THE RECALL. ON MONDAY, I WENT TO MY APPT AS SCHEDULED. I INFORMED HEATH THAT I WANTED TO BE THERE WHEN THEY LOOKED AT MY SUV. I SHOWED HIM & THE SERVICE TECH THE CHARRED SWITCH. THEY BOTH AGREED THAT THIS PART HAD MELTED. I WAS INFORMED HOWEVER THAT SINCE MY VEHICLE WAS NOT ON THE RECALL AS OF YET, I WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE COSTS TO FIX IT UP FRONT, WITH HOPES OF EVENTUALLY BEING REIMBURSED. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO INVESTIGATE THIS MATTER FURTHER, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS THE SAME PART JUST IN A DIFFERENT VEHICLE. AND I HAVE PROOF THAT THIS IS DEFINITELY A DEFECTIVE PART NO MATTER WHAT VEHICLE THEY DECIDE TO PUT IT IN. I THANK GOD THAT NOTHING MORE HAPPEN IN MY CASE. I'M SURE OTHERS WON'T BE SO LUCKY. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10132963
Mileage unknown · Aug 3, 2005
Air Bags
WHILE DRIVING THE AIRBAG LIGHT LIGHTS UP WITHOUT ANY IMPACT. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10131337
Mileage unknown · Jul 25, 2005
Engine And Engine CoolingPower TrainSuspension
COMPLAINED OF LOUS RATTLING NOISE IN ENGINE ON 7/07/03, AND AGAIN ON 09/29/04 AT A DIFFERENT FORD DEALER. THERE ARE MAJOR MECHINICAL PROBLEMS WITH THIS VEHICLE IN CONCERN TO THE ENGINE CAM GUIDES, REAR DIFFERENTIAL AND LOWER BASLL JOINTS WORN, WHY WASN'T MY FORD EXPLORER SPORT RECALLED FOR THESE PROBLEMS OR GIVEN THE SAME TSB …
Read full complaint
COMPLAINED OF LOUS RATTLING NOISE IN ENGINE ON 7/07/03, AND AGAIN ON 09/29/04 AT A DIFFERENT FORD DEALER. THERE ARE MAJOR MECHINICAL PROBLEMS WITH THIS VEHICLE IN CONCERN TO THE ENGINE CAM GUIDES, REAR DIFFERENTIAL AND LOWER BASLL JOINTS WORN, WHY WASN'T MY FORD EXPLORER SPORT RECALLED FOR THESE PROBLEMS OR GIVEN THE SAME TSB AS THE 1999 FORD EXPLORER?
NHTSA ODI #10129939
75,000 miles · May 9, 2005
Vehicle Speed Control
DT: DRIVING WHEN HE FELT GAS PEDAL WENT DOWN, IT BEGAN TO ACCELERATE ALL ON ITS OWN IN BUSY TRAFFIC. HE WAS PRESSING BRAKE AT THE SAME TIME IN EFFORT TO STOP. COULD SMELL SOMETHING AS IF BURNING. JAMMED IGNITION INTO PARK AND PULLED KEYS OUT. VEHICLE STOPPED. CALLED TRIPLE A AND THE COPS, VEHICLE WAS TOWED. NO ACCIDENT. …
Read full complaint
DT: DRIVING WHEN HE FELT GAS PEDAL WENT DOWN, IT BEGAN TO ACCELERATE ALL ON ITS OWN IN BUSY TRAFFIC. HE WAS PRESSING BRAKE AT THE SAME TIME IN EFFORT TO STOP. COULD SMELL SOMETHING AS IF BURNING. JAMMED IGNITION INTO PARK AND PULLED KEYS OUT. VEHICLE STOPPED. CALLED TRIPLE A AND THE COPS, VEHICLE WAS TOWED. NO ACCIDENT. NO REPAIRS YET. TOW DRUCK DRIVER SUPSECTS SOMETHING WITH GAS PEDAL HAS BROKEN OFF.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10120298
70,000 miles · Apr 9, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
THE CRANKSHAFT SHEARED OFF DIRECTLY BEHIND THE HARMONIC BALANCER, THE TRUCK HAS ONLY 70,000 MILES, WILL REQUIRE MAJOR ENGINE WORK TO FIX. IT BROKE UNDER NORMAL ACCELERATION CONDITIONS.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10116650
34,000 miles · Mar 27, 2005
Power Train
WHEN STOPPED WITH FOOT ON BRAKE TRUCK SUDDENLY SURGES FORWARD.
NHTSA ODI #10114815
50,000 miles · Mar 21, 2005
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingPower Train
@ 50,000 MILES RADIATOR WENT OUT AND WE REPLACED W/ NEW RADIATOR/ HEADS IN THE MOTOR HAD TO BE REPLACED / ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS / RE-BUILT TRANSMISSION PUT IN / DRIVER'S SEAT RECLINER FAILURE . *AK
NHTSA ODI #10114413
Mileage unknown · Feb 16, 2005
SeatsInjury
THIS REPORT CONCERNS A 1999 FORD EXPLORER SPORT 2DR 4X4. VEHICLE HAS 144,000 PLUS MILES. SPECIFICALLY THIS PERTAINS TO THE FRONT DRIVER?S SEAT (NON-POWER MODEL). OVER THE LAST 5 YEARS I HAVE REPLACED THE FRONT DRIVERS SEAT (BOTTOM FRAME) THREE TIMES. EACH TIME THE SEAT FRAME HAS BROKEN IN THE SAME MANNER. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE…
Read full complaint
THIS REPORT CONCERNS A 1999 FORD EXPLORER SPORT 2DR 4X4. VEHICLE HAS 144,000 PLUS MILES. SPECIFICALLY THIS PERTAINS TO THE FRONT DRIVER?S SEAT (NON-POWER MODEL). OVER THE LAST 5 YEARS I HAVE REPLACED THE FRONT DRIVERS SEAT (BOTTOM FRAME) THREE TIMES. EACH TIME THE SEAT FRAME HAS BROKEN IN THE SAME MANNER. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE FRAME METAL RIPS/TEARS AT THE LOCATION OF THE MOUNTING BOLT FOR THE RECLINE LEVER. THIS TEARING CAUSES THE SEAT BACK TO RECLINE WITHOUT WARNING ON THE LEFT SIDE CAUSING THE DRIVER TO FALL BACKWARDS AWAY FROM THE STEERING WHEEL. FORD HAS STATED THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY INFO ON THIS. THIS IS SOMEWHAT STRANGE AS THEY APPARENTLY DIRECTED DEALERSHIPS APPROXIMATELY 2 YRS AGO TO REPLACE THIS FRAME ON ALL AFFECTED VEHICLES. THE PROBLEM IS VERY APPARENT AND A VERY EASY FIX. THE TEARING OCCURS JUST TO THE FRONT OF THE (FRONT) BOLT HOLE ABOUT 1/8 INCH FROM THE HOLE. THERE IS A LARGE SPOT WELDED PLATE INSIDE THE FRAME WHERE THE BOLTS FOR THE RECLINE LEVER INSERT INTO THE FRAME. IF THIS PLATE WAS EXTENDED ABOUT 4 INCHES OR MORE PAST THE FRAME HOLES THIS PROBLEM WOULD NOT OCCUR. I HAVE DETAILED PHOTOS OF THIS FRAME AND PROBLEM AREA AVAILABLE FOR USE TO YOUR OFFICE AS WELL AS THE FRAME ITSELF.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10110623
30,000 miles · Oct 26, 2004
Electrical SystemInterior LightingVisibility
RECALL 00V072000 CONCERNING ELECTRONIC FUNCTIONS. WINDSHIELD WIPERS WERE INOPERATIVE. ALSO, INTERIOR LIGHTS, AND THE 4X4 CONTROL WORKED INTERMITTENTLY. DEALER WAS NOTIFIED. DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER THAT THIS VEHICLE WAS NOT COVERED UNDER THE RECALL. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10097775
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