← New search

2003 Ford Explorer Sport

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2003 Ford Explorer Sport do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 68.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected 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

60 reports with mileage · 5 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.

  • Structure. Review the 25 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Visibility. Review the 10 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Visibility/wiper. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

4 crash reports1 fire reports4 injury reports

What owners actually said

65 reports
132,650 miles · Dec 17, 2010
Visibility

WHILE PULLING OUT OF A PARKING LOT AT A SLOW SPEED THE BACK WINDOW ON MY FORD EXPLORER SPORT SHATTERED. THE GLASS WAS COMPLETELY GONE AND NUMEROUS PIECES ENDED UP INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO OBJECT FROM THE OUTSIDE THAT WOULD HAVE CAUSED THIS INCIDENT. THE LIFT GATE HAD NOT BEEN OPENED PRIOR TO THI…

Read full complaint

WHILE PULLING OUT OF A PARKING LOT AT A SLOW SPEED THE BACK WINDOW ON MY FORD EXPLORER SPORT SHATTERED. THE GLASS WAS COMPLETELY GONE AND NUMEROUS PIECES ENDED UP INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO OBJECT FROM THE OUTSIDE THAT WOULD HAVE CAUSED THIS INCIDENT. THE LIFT GATE HAD NOT BEEN OPENED PRIOR TO THIS EVENT. I BELIEVE IT WAS CAUSED BY THE HINGES AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY WERE DESIGNED TO ATTACH TO THE GLASS THAT TRIGGERED THIS EXPLOSION OF THE REAR WINDOW.

NHTSA ODI #10371724

104,000 miles · Dec 16, 2010
Power TrainWheels

2003 FORD EXPLORER XLS 4X4, FRONT AND REAR HUB BEARINGS GOING OUT ON A VEHICLE ESPECIALLY THE FRONT HUB BEARINGS. THE LEFT FRONT HUB BEARING WENT BAD AND LUCKILY WE WAS NOT GOING DOWN THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH OR HIGHER, WE WAS ONLY GOING ABOUT 25-30 MPH. THE LEFT FRONT HUB BEARING FROZE UP AND WE DID A "U" TURN AND NO ONE WAS HUR…

Read full complaint

2003 FORD EXPLORER XLS 4X4, FRONT AND REAR HUB BEARINGS GOING OUT ON A VEHICLE ESPECIALLY THE FRONT HUB BEARINGS. THE LEFT FRONT HUB BEARING WENT BAD AND LUCKILY WE WAS NOT GOING DOWN THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH OR HIGHER, WE WAS ONLY GOING ABOUT 25-30 MPH. THE LEFT FRONT HUB BEARING FROZE UP AND WE DID A "U" TURN AND NO ONE WAS HURT. I HAD IT TOWED TO A SERVICE SHOP AND THEY TOLD ME WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS,AND THEY TOLD ME THAT THIS IS A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH THIS TRUCK. I CONTACTED FORD ON THIS MATTER AND THEY TOLD ME I HAD TO PAY FOR THE REPAIR BY MYSELF,BUT IF THE SAME PROBLEM IS ON MANY,MANY TRUCKS THIS IS BAD AND NOT SAFE. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEAS? THE REPAIR SHOP CALLED ME AND TOLD ME WE SHOULD REPLACE THE TWO FRONT HUBS AND THE REAR AXLE BEARINGS ALSO,AND LOOKED AT THEM AFTER THE REPAIR AND THE OTHER ONES WERE WORN EXCESSIVE ALSO. THE REPAIR WORK FOR PARTS AND LABOR WAS $1488.00 WITH A LIMITED LIFE WARRANTY ON THE PARTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10370978

42,371 miles · Oct 6, 2010
Latches/locks/linkagesStructure

IN TRYING TO DETERMINE WHERE A NEW RATTLE WAS COMING I HEARD ON THE WAY HOME, I NOTICED THE REAR GATE GLASS HINGE HAD BROKEN OR BECAME DISLODGED. WHEN TRYING TO SECURE IT TO TAKE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR REPAIR, THE GLASS SLIPPED AND CUT DEEP GASHES INTO THE BODY. I HAD JUST RETURNED HOME AND HAD IT FALLEN OFF ON THE HIGHWAY IT…

Read full complaint

IN TRYING TO DETERMINE WHERE A NEW RATTLE WAS COMING I HEARD ON THE WAY HOME, I NOTICED THE REAR GATE GLASS HINGE HAD BROKEN OR BECAME DISLODGED. WHEN TRYING TO SECURE IT TO TAKE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR REPAIR, THE GLASS SLIPPED AND CUT DEEP GASHES INTO THE BODY. I HAD JUST RETURNED HOME AND HAD IT FALLEN OFF ON THE HIGHWAY IT GOOD HAVE CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. THE DEALERSHIP ATTRIBUTED IT TO WEAR AND TEAR EVEN THOUGH I HAD PREVIOUSLY ONLY OPENED THE GLASS LIFT GATE TWICE DURING THE LIFE OF THE CAR. I WAS CHARGED A FEE JUST TO REPLACE THE HINGE. I DID NOT GET HE BODY WORK REPAIRED. THERE WERE RECALLS FOR THIS PROBLEM ON OTHER EXPLORER'S MADE DURING THE SAME PERIOD MINE WAS MADE, BUT I WAS TOLD MY VIN WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE RECALL. (FORD RECALL NO. 04S20 AND A CAMPAIGN NUMBER 04V442000 AND SAFETY REPORT #10266375 AND #10266836). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10359425

132,012 miles · Jun 22, 2010
Parking BrakePower Train

MY CAR MOVE BACKWARDS WITH PARKING SHIFT,EMERGENCY AND ENGINE STOPS IN A RAMP DRIVING INTO MY GARAGE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10339445

80,000 miles · May 21, 2010
Suspension

I HAVE A 2003 FORD EXPLORER THAT I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE BOTH FRONT WHEEL BEARINGS AND NOW 1 OR BOTH OF THE REAR ONES ARE BAD. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10331507

78,796 miles · May 3, 2010
Structure

OPENED THE REAR WINDOW (HATCH) AND THE RIGHT SIDE FLEW UP - THE HINGE HAD DISENGAGED FROM THE BODY OF THE VEHICLE. LOCATED ON NHTSA.GOV #04V442000 WHICH COVERS THE SAME PROBLEM - WAS TOLD BY DEALER MY VEHICLE DID NOT FALL UNDER THIS RECALL (04S20) AND I WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THE REPAIR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10328674

120,000 miles · Mar 31, 2010
Structure

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE HINGE ON THE REAR LIFTGATE WAS DETACHED. THERE WAS A RECALL UNDER THE NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 04V442000 (STRUCTURE: BODY: HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE: HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS). AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WAS NOTIFIED AND INFORMED HER THAT T…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE HINGE ON THE REAR LIFTGATE WAS DETACHED. THERE WAS A RECALL UNDER THE NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 04V442000 (STRUCTURE: BODY: HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE: HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS). AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WAS NOTIFIED AND INFORMED HER THAT THE VIN WAS EXCLUDED FROM THE RECALL DEFECT. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 120,000.

NHTSA ODI #10323039

50,000 miles · Jan 25, 2010
Visibility

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED AND UNOCCUPIED THE REAR WINDOW WINDSHIELD SHATTERED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO STATED THAT IT DOES NOT SHATTER ON ITS OWN. THE MANUFACTURE ADVISED THE CONTACT TO FILE A COMPLAINT WITH NHTSA. THE VEHICLE WILL BE REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS NOT AV…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED AND UNOCCUPIED THE REAR WINDOW WINDSHIELD SHATTERED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO STATED THAT IT DOES NOT SHATTER ON ITS OWN. THE MANUFACTURE ADVISED THE CONTACT TO FILE A COMPLAINT WITH NHTSA. THE VEHICLE WILL BE REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 50,000.

NHTSA ODI #10302214

65,420 miles · Sep 30, 2009
Fuel System, Other

BOUGHT USED 2003 FORD EXPLORER SPORT XLT IN OCTOBER 2008. FIRST CAR I BOUGHT FROM DEALERSHIP. CAR STALLED PRIOR TO LEAVING LOT AND THE DEALERSHIP SERVICED IT CLAIMING IT NEEDED A CARBON CLEANUP. COME TO FIND THE FUEL RESET SWITCH'S CABLE CONNECTOR IS MELTED ON THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE AND CAUSES CAR TO SHUT OFF EVEN WHILE DRIVIN…

Read full complaint

BOUGHT USED 2003 FORD EXPLORER SPORT XLT IN OCTOBER 2008. FIRST CAR I BOUGHT FROM DEALERSHIP. CAR STALLED PRIOR TO LEAVING LOT AND THE DEALERSHIP SERVICED IT CLAIMING IT NEEDED A CARBON CLEANUP. COME TO FIND THE FUEL RESET SWITCH'S CABLE CONNECTOR IS MELTED ON THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE AND CAUSES CAR TO SHUT OFF EVEN WHILE DRIVING AT HIGH SPEEDS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10285804

97,200 miles · Apr 27, 2009
Structure

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. WHEN ATTEMPTING TO OPEN THE REAR LIFTGATE, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE GLASS WAS LOOSE AND THE HINGE WAS FAILING. HE WAS ABLE TO SAFELY CATCH THE GLASS BEFORE IT STRUCK THE GROUND OR HIMSELF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THERE WAS NO CURRENT RECALL R…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 FORD EXPLORER SPORT. WHEN ATTEMPTING TO OPEN THE REAR LIFTGATE, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE GLASS WAS LOOSE AND THE HINGE WAS FAILING. HE WAS ABLE TO SAFELY CATCH THE GLASS BEFORE IT STRUCK THE GROUND OR HIMSELF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THERE WAS NO CURRENT RECALL REGARDING THE FAILURE AND THE CONTACT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPAIR COST. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT NO COMPENSATION WOULD BE PROVIDED BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN A RECALL. UPON FURTHER INVESTIGATION, THE CONTACT FOUND NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 04V442000 (STRUCTURE:BODY:HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS) FOR THE SAME FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 97,200 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 97,250.

NHTSA ODI #10266836

Official recalls

0

No recalls in this snapshot.

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

2

PE09020 · Vehicle Rollaway Allegations

Opened Apr 21, 2009 · Closed Aug 19, 2009

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device

IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED CONSUMER REPORTS OF HIGHER THAN EXPECTED EFFORTS WHEN SHIFTING INTO AND OUT OF PARK COULD BE A RESULT OF A GROOVE BEING WORN INTO THE SWING ARM RAMP OF THE STEERING COLUMN. THE SWING ARM IS A COMPONENT BOLTED TO THE STEERING COLUMN THAT ASSISTS IN SHIFTING THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION GEARS.AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY FORD OF RETURNED STEERING COLUMNS FOUND THE GROOVE COULD BE CREATED OVER TIME IF CONSUMER SHIFT MORE QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVE OR REVERSE TO PARK THAN THE BRAKE SHIFT INTERLOCK (BSI) SOLENOID PIN RETRACTS AFTER THE BRAKE PEDAL IS APPLIED. IN NOVEMBER OF 2004, FORD RELEASED A REDESIGNED BSI SOLENOID WITH A SHORTER PIN RETRACTING TIME AS A SERVICEABLE COMPONENT. FORD HAS NOTED THE SHORTER RETRACTION TIME SIGNIFICANTLY LESSENS THE LIKELIHOOD OF BSI SOLENOID PIN TO SWING ARM CONTACT EVEN WITH RAPID CONSUMER SHIFTS.FORD ALSO ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TSB 04-22-12, TO INSTRUCT SERVICE TECHNICIANS ON THE PROPER DIAGNOSIS AND VEHICLE REPAIR. REVIEWING COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 200 ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AFTER CONSUMERS BELIEVE THEY HAVE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE INTO PARK, RESULTING IN 85 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 32 ALLEGED INJURIES.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ODI HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED 883 REPORTS OF CONSUMERS ALLEGING DIFFICULTY OR THE INABILITY TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-013) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.

Additional source detail variants (3)

Steering:column

IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED CONSUMER REPORTS OF HIGHER THAN EXPECTED EFFORTS WHEN SHIFTING INTO AND OUT OF PARK COULD BE A RESULT OF A GROOVE BEING WORN INTO THE SWING ARM RAMP OF THE STEERING COLUMN. THE SWING ARM IS A COMPONENT BOLTED TO THE STEERING COLUMN THAT ASSISTS IN SHIFTING THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION GEARS.AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY FORD OF RETURNED STEERING COLUMNS FOUND THE GROOVE COULD BE CREATED OVER TIME IF CONSUMER SHIFT MORE QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVE OR REVERSE TO PARK THAN THE BRAKE SHIFT INTERLOCK (BSI) SOLENOID PIN RETRACTS AFTER THE BRAKE PEDAL IS APPLIED. IN NOVEMBER OF 2004, FORD RELEASED A REDESIGNED BSI SOLENOID WITH A SHORTER PIN RETRACTING TIME AS A SERVICEABLE COMPONENT. FORD HAS NOTED THE SHORTER RETRACTION TIME SIGNIFICANTLY LESSENS THE LIKELIHOOD OF BSI SOLENOID PIN TO SWING ARM CONTACT EVEN WITH RAPID CONSUMER SHIFTS.FORD ALSO ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TSB 04-22-12, TO INSTRUCT SERVICE TECHNICIANS ON THE PROPER DIAGNOSIS AND VEHICLE REPAIR. REVIEWING COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 200 ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AFTER CONSUMERS BELIEVE THEY HAVE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE INTO PARK, RESULTING IN 85 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 32 ALLEGED INJURIES.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ODI HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED 883 REPORTS OF CONSUMERS ALLEGING DIFFICULTY OR THE INABILITY TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-013) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.

Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device

IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED CONSUMER REPORTS OF HIGHER THAN EXPECTED EFFORTS WHEN SHIFTING INTO AND OUT OF PARK COULD BE A RESULT OF A GROOVE BEING WORN INTO THE SWING ARM RAMP OF THE STEERING COLUMN. THE SWING ARM IS A COMPONENT BOLTED TO THE STEERING COLUMN THAT ASSISTS IN SHIFTING THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION GEARS.AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY FORD OF RETURNED STEERING COLUMNS FOUND THE GROOVE COULD BE CREATED OVER TIME IF CONSUMER SHIFT MORE QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVE OR REVERSE TO PARK THAN THE BRAKE SHIFT INTERLOCK (BSI) SOLENOID PIN RETRACTS AFTER THE BRAKE PEDAL IS APPLIED. IN NOVEMBER OF 2004, FORD RELEASED A REDESIGNED BSI SOLENOID WITH A SHORTER PIN RETRACTING TIME AS A SERVICEABLE COMPONENT. FORD HAS NOTED THE SHORTER RETRACTION TIME SIGNIFICANTLY LESSENS THE LIKELIHOOD OF BSI SOLENOID PIN TO SWING ARM CONTACT EVEN WITH RAPID CONSUMER SHIFTS.FORD ALSO ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TSB 04-22-12, TO INSTRUCT SERVICE TECHNICIANS ON THE PROPER DIAGNOSIS AND VEHICLE REPAIR. REVIEWING COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 200 ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AFTER CONSUMERS BELIEVE THEY HAVE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE INTO PARK, RESULTING IN 85 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 32 ALLEGED INJURIES.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ODI HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED 883 REPORTS OF CONSUMERS ALLEGING DIFFICULTY OR THE INABILITY TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-013) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.

Steering

IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED CONSUMER REPORTS OF HIGHER THAN EXPECTED EFFORTS WHEN SHIFTING INTO AND OUT OF PARK COULD BE A RESULT OF A GROOVE BEING WORN INTO THE SWING ARM RAMP OF THE STEERING COLUMN. THE SWING ARM IS A COMPONENT BOLTED TO THE STEERING COLUMN THAT ASSISTS IN SHIFTING THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION GEARS.AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY FORD OF RETURNED STEERING COLUMNS FOUND THE GROOVE COULD BE CREATED OVER TIME IF CONSUMER SHIFT MORE QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVE OR REVERSE TO PARK THAN THE BRAKE SHIFT INTERLOCK (BSI) SOLENOID PIN RETRACTS AFTER THE BRAKE PEDAL IS APPLIED. IN NOVEMBER OF 2004, FORD RELEASED A REDESIGNED BSI SOLENOID WITH A SHORTER PIN RETRACTING TIME AS A SERVICEABLE COMPONENT. FORD HAS NOTED THE SHORTER RETRACTION TIME SIGNIFICANTLY LESSENS THE LIKELIHOOD OF BSI SOLENOID PIN TO SWING ARM CONTACT EVEN WITH RAPID CONSUMER SHIFTS.FORD ALSO ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TSB 04-22-12, TO INSTRUCT SERVICE TECHNICIANS ON THE PROPER DIAGNOSIS AND VEHICLE REPAIR. REVIEWING COMPLAINTS TO ODI AND DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 200 ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AFTER CONSUMERS BELIEVE THEY HAVE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE INTO PARK, RESULTING IN 85 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 32 ALLEGED INJURIES.IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ODI HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED 883 REPORTS OF CONSUMERS ALLEGING DIFFICULTY OR THE INABILITY TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE INTO PARK.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-013) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.

DP05005 · 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.