IllustrationCRUISE CONTROL ON AND SET DO NOT WORK ON ANY ROAD. VEHICLE MOVING ON ANY ROAD OR STANDSTILL.
2001 Ford Explorer Sport
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Explorer Sport years
Owner complaints for the 2001 Ford Explorer Sport are substantially higher than the model-year median of 68.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Explorer Sport years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
100–25K
2225–50K
3150–75K
1975–100K
21100–150K
13150K+
116 reports with mileage · 72 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Suspension. Review the 33 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 30 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
18 crash reports11 fire reports16 injury reports
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
14 reportsMY WIFE WAS DRIVING ON A RESIDENTIAL ROAD AROUND 30 MPH WHEN SHE ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE. SHE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE BY BRAKING. SHE SAID THE TRUCK WAS BUCKING WILDLY AS THOUGH IT WAS ATTEMPTING TO MAINTAIN IT'S 30 MPH SPEED. SHE PUT IT IN NEUTRAL AND PULLED OVER YET THE TRUCK CONTINUED TO IDLE AS THOUGH IT WERE DRIVING 30 MI…
Read full complaint
MY WIFE WAS DRIVING ON A RESIDENTIAL ROAD AROUND 30 MPH WHEN SHE ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE. SHE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE BY BRAKING. SHE SAID THE TRUCK WAS BUCKING WILDLY AS THOUGH IT WAS ATTEMPTING TO MAINTAIN IT'S 30 MPH SPEED. SHE PUT IT IN NEUTRAL AND PULLED OVER YET THE TRUCK CONTINUED TO IDLE AS THOUGH IT WERE DRIVING 30 MILES PER HOUR. SHE TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF. I ARRIVED 15 MINUTES LATER AND WITHOUT TOUCHING THE GAS PEDAL TURNED THE VEHICLE ON AND IT IMMEDIATELY REV'D AS SHE DESCRIBED SO I SHUT IT OFF. I THEN PUMPED THE GAS PEDAL (WITH THE TRUCK IN THE OFF POSITION) ASSUMING IT MAY BE STUCK THEN RESTARTED THE VEHICLE. IT STARTED AND SUBSEQUENTLY DROVE NORMALLY. I TOOK IT TO MY MECHANIC AND HE DISCOVERED NOTHING. NOTHING IN THE COMPUTER HISTORY AND NOTHING WRONG WITH THE SPEED SYSTEM (PEDAL, CABLE, THROTTLE, THROTTLE BODY...) I DID SOME RESEARCH ON-LINE AND DISCOVERED AN NHTSA REPORT (NHTSA ACTION NUMBER : PE05037) OF A POSSIBLE BAD SPEED CONTROL CABLE FOR THIS VEHICLE WHERE THE TEFLON COVER COULD COMES OFF AND BIND AT THE GAS PEDAL HOLDING THE PEDAL OPEN AND UNABLE TO RETRACT. WE ATTEMPTED TO LOCATE THE REPLACEMENT CABLE ONLY TO FIND THAT FORD NO LONGER MAKES THE ORIGINAL OR THE REPLACEMENT WHICH WE FIND UTTERLY UNBELIEVABLE. NO MORE EXIST ANYWHERE IN THE US. I CAN FIND PARTS FOR MY 1992 FORD MUSTANG EASIER. NOT SURE WHY THEY STOPPED MAKING THE CABLE WHICH MAKES THIS MORE INTERESTING. MY NEXT STEP IS TO HAVE MY MECHANIC REMOVE THE CABLE TO SEE IF THERE IS A TEFLON BUILD UP NEAR THE GAS PEDAL. NOTE: WE HAVE NO CLEAR PROOF THAT THE CABLE IS THE ISSUE YET AT THIS POINT THE FACT THAT IT CLEARED WHEN I PUMPED THE GAS PEDAL WITH THE VEHICLE IN THE OFF POSITION LEAVES SUSPICION THAT THIS COULD BE THE SAME ISSUE NOTED IN THE NHTSA PE05037 REPORT. *TR
AS OF APRIL 2008, FORD STILL HAS NOT SHIPPED THE PARTS NEEDED FOR THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH RECALL. THE RECALL WAS SENT OUT IN AUGUST 2008! FIRST, I WAS TOLD THAT THE PARTS WOULD ARRIVE IN DECEMBER OF 2007. THEN IN DECEMBER 2007, I WAS TOLD IT WOULD BE NEXT APRIL. NOW I AM TOLD IT WILL BE JUNE 2008. *TR
RECALL BY FORD ON SPEED CONTROL. SAFETY RECALL 05S28. OCT OF 2007 GOT SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATED BY FORD. WAS TOLD PART WOULD BE IN NOV 07 AND AGAIN TOLD IT WILL BE DEC 07 IN DEC 07 WAS TOLD MARCH 07. TODAY MARCH 18TH CALLED FOR PART WAS TOLD PART IS NOT IN YET TO CALL AGAIN IN APRIL. (5 MONTHS) IS REALLY A LONG TIME TO GO…
Read full complaint
RECALL BY FORD ON SPEED CONTROL. SAFETY RECALL 05S28. OCT OF 2007 GOT SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATED BY FORD. WAS TOLD PART WOULD BE IN NOV 07 AND AGAIN TOLD IT WILL BE DEC 07 IN DEC 07 WAS TOLD MARCH 07. TODAY MARCH 18TH CALLED FOR PART WAS TOLD PART IS NOT IN YET TO CALL AGAIN IN APRIL. (5 MONTHS) IS REALLY A LONG TIME TO GO WITH OUT SPEED CONTROL. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 07V336000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL). THE PART FOR THE RECALL REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE DEACTIVATION SWITCH WAS NOT DISCONNECTED B UPDATED 02-25-08 *BFECAUSE HE IS HANDICAPPED. THERE HAD BEEN NO FAILURE TO DATE. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 07V336000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL). THE PART FOR THE RECALL REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE DEACTIVATION SWITCH WAS NOT DISCONNECTED B UPDATED 02-25-08 *BFECAUSE HE IS HANDICAPPED. THERE HAD BEEN NO FAILURE TO DATE. . THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 105,000.
2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT SPONTANEOUSLY CAUGHT FIRE IN ENGINE COMPARTMENT WHILE PARKED IN GARAGE ATTACHED TO MY HOME. VEHICLE WAS MOVED TO DRIVEWAY AND FIRE EXTINGUISHED. FORD DEALER ADMITTED TO RECALL OF DEFECTIVE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH WHICH WAS THE ORIGINATION POINT OF FIRE. WAS ADVISED TO FILE CLAIM WITH MY AUTO INSURANCE C…
Read full complaint
2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT SPONTANEOUSLY CAUGHT FIRE IN ENGINE COMPARTMENT WHILE PARKED IN GARAGE ATTACHED TO MY HOME. VEHICLE WAS MOVED TO DRIVEWAY AND FIRE EXTINGUISHED. FORD DEALER ADMITTED TO RECALL OF DEFECTIVE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH WHICH WAS THE ORIGINATION POINT OF FIRE. WAS ADVISED TO FILE CLAIM WITH MY AUTO INSURANCE COMPANY TO SPEED UP REPAIRS AND ENSURE THAT CLAIM WAS SUBROGATION TO FORD FOR REIMBURSEMENT. VEHICLE REPAIRED, NOW FORD WILL NOT TAKE CLAIM WITHOUT PROOF OF CAUSE OF FIRE. THIS WOULD REQUIRE MY INSURANCE COMPANY TO HIRE AN ENGINEER. NOT COST EFFECTIVE FOR INSURANCE COMPANY, NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED OVER 3 MONTHS AGO. I AM OUT MY DEDUCTIBLE AND MY INSURANCE COMPANY IS OUT THE REMAINDER OF THE REPAIRS, EVEN THOUGH FORD KNOWS THIS WAS A FAULTY PART. *TR
DEFECT WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL. MY CRUISE CONTROL WAS DE-ACTIVATED ON 9/13/07, AND MY DEALERSHIP REPORTS THEY ARE STILL WAITING FOR THE REPAIR PART FROM FORD. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MY CRUISE CONTROL REPAIRED IMMEDIATELY - I HAVE BEEN DRIVING FOR 4 MONTHS WITHOUT CRUISE CONTROL. *TR
2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT SPEED CONTROL SWITCH RECALL. CONSUMER STATES THAT THE DEALER STATED THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE ANY MORE PARTS BUT WOULD CALL AND DISCONNECTED THE SPEED CONTROL. SHE HAS YET TO HEAR FROM THE DEALER. *KB RECALL 07V336000. *JB
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. AFTER BEING PARKED FOR A WEEK, THE VEHICLE CAUGHT FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT EXTINGUISHED THE FIRE. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN INSPECTED TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY AND BURNED THE HOUSE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 100,000.…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. AFTER BEING PARKED FOR A WEEK, THE VEHICLE CAUGHT FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT EXTINGUISHED THE FIRE. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN INSPECTED TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY AND BURNED THE HOUSE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 100,000. THE CONSUMER PROVIDED A DOCUMENT THAT STATED THE DEALER PERFORMED THE RECALL PRIOR TO PURCHASE. THE CONSUMER PROVIDED A COPY OF THE FIRE INCIDENT REPORT AND PHOTOS OF THE DAMAGED VEHICLE. UPDATED 10/11/07 *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. THE CONTACT CALLED TWO DEALERS TO SCHEDULE A REPAIR APPOINTMENT REGARDING NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 07V336000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL). BOTH DEALERS FAILED TO PROVIDE HIM WITH THE OPTION TO BRING THE VEHICLE IN AND HAVE THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH DEACTIVATED. THEY ALSO STATED THAT…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. THE CONTACT CALLED TWO DEALERS TO SCHEDULE A REPAIR APPOINTMENT REGARDING NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 07V336000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL). BOTH DEALERS FAILED TO PROVIDE HIM WITH THE OPTION TO BRING THE VEHICLE IN AND HAVE THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH DEACTIVATED. THEY ALSO STATED THAT THE PARTS WOULD BE UNAVAILABLE UNTIL DECEMBER OF 2007. THERE HAD BEEN NO FAILURE TO DATE. THE PURCHASE DATE WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 40,000.
Official recalls
507V336000 · Vehicle Speed Control
Aug 3, 2007
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, PASSENGER VEHICLES, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND MOTOR HOMES CHASSIS, THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH MAY, UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN AN UNDERHOOD FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. OWNERS OF THE PASSENGER CARS INCLUDED IN THIS CAMPAIGN WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN THEIR VEHICLES TO THEIR DEALERS TO HAVE THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH DISCONNECTED AS AN INTERIM REPAIR. AS SOON AS REPAIR PARTS ARE AVAILABLE (EXPECTED OCTOBER 2007), OWNERS WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN TO THE DEALERS FOR INSTALLATION OF A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 13, 2007, AND MAILING COMPLETED BY SEPTEMBER 19, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
06V114000 · Seats:front Assembly:recliner
Apr 10, 2006
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH HIGH BACK SEATS, THE UPPER BOLT ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE HIGH BACK SEAT THAT ATTACHES THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM TO THE SEAT BACK FRAME, COULD FRACTURE. IF THE BOLT FRACTURES, THE SEAT BACK MAY RECLINE UNTIL IT MAKES CONTACT WITH AN OBJECT BEHIND THE SEAT, SUCH AS THE SECOND ROW SEAT CUSHION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER COULD POTENTIALLY LOSE CONTACT WITH THE STEERING WHEEL OR FOOT PEDALS DURING SUCH AN EVENT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE DRIVER SEAT UPPER BOLT WITH A METAL SPACER AND BOLT. IN ADDITION, SEATS WITH TUBULAR BACK FRAMES WILL HAVE THE FULLY THREADED LOWER RECLINER BOLT REPLACED WITH A PARTIALLY THREADED BOLT. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 10, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673. THIS IS A SUPPLEMENT TO A PREVIOUS RECALL CAMPAIGN (03V281).
03V280000 · Vehicle Speed Control:cables
Aug 5, 2003
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH SPEED CONTROL AND 4.0L SOHC ENGINES, IF THE STRAND COVER ON THE SPEED CONTROL CABLE BECOMES FLARED AT THE END, THE SPEED CONTROL CABLE MAY BIND WHEN THE SPEED CONTROL IS ACTIVATED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE THROTTLE RETURN SPRING FORCE MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE BINDING CONDITION WHEN THE SPEED CONTROL IS DISENGAGED. BRAKING FUNCTION WOULD BE MAINTAINED THOUGH STOPPING DISTANCES MAY BE INCREASED.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE SPEED CONTROL CABLE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE IT. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN AUGUST 29, 2003. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
03V281000 · Seats:front Assembly:recliner
Aug 5, 2003
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH HIGH BACK SEATS, THE UPPER BOLT ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE HIGH BACK SEAT, THAT ATTACHES THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM TO THE SEAT BACK FRAME, COULD FRACTURE. IF THE BOLT FRACTURES AND DOES NOT JAM IN THE SEAT BACK FRAME, THE SEAT BACK MAY RECLINE UNTIL IT MAKES CONTACT WITH AN OBJECT BEHIND THE SEAT, SUCH AS THE SECOND ROW SEAT CUSHION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER COULD POTENTIALLY LOSE CONTACT WITH THE STEERING WHEEL OR FOOT PEDALS DURING SUCH AN EVENT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE DRIVER SEAT UPPER BOLT WITH A METAL SPACER AND BOLT. IN ADDITION, SEATS WITH TUBULAR BACK FRAMES WILL HAVE THE FULLY THREADED LOWER RECLINER BOLT REPLACED WITH A PARTIALLY THREADED BOLT. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON AUGUST 29, 2003. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
00V394000 · Structure:body:hood:hinge And Attachments
Nov 28, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES WITH STEEL HOODS AND CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH SHEET MOLDING COMPOUND HOODS. A WIRE FORMED HOOD STRIKER COULD BE SUSCEPTIBLE TO FATIGUE FRACTURES. IF THE HOOD STRIKER FRACTURES, THE HOOD COULD FLY OPEN WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A HOOD FLY-UP WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING OPERATED COULD RESULT IN REDUCED DRIVER VISIBILITY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE HOOD STRIKER.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
2DP05005 · 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.
PE03020 · Front Seat Back Recliner Attachment
Opened May 21, 2003 · Closed Sep 5, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats:front Assembly:recliner
BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 4, 2003, FORD NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 03V281) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1998-2001 FORD EXPLORER / MERCURY MOUNTAINEER 4-DOOR, MY 1998-2000 FORD EXPLORER 2-DOOR AND MY 2001-2002 FORD EXPLORER SPORT AND SPORT TRAC VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH HIGH BACK SEATS.COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THAT THE DRIVER'S SEAT BACK RECLINED WITHOUT WARNING.A BOLT BETWEEN THE UPPER SEAT RECLINER ATTACHMENT AND THE SEAT BACK FRAME MAY FRACTURE.FORD WILL REPLACE THE BOLT THAT ATTACHES THE SEAT RECLINER MECHANISM TO THE SEAT BACK FRAME ON THE DRIVER SIDE SEAT.BASED ON FORD'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.