NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
198 reportsClear category filter15,743 miles · Nov 23, 2004
Engine And Engine CoolingFire
FIRST EVIDENCE OF NOISE REPORTED TO DEALER ON 7/22/98. THEY SAID THERE WAS NO PROBLEM. NOISE BECAME UNBEARABLE AND ENGINE BEGAN LOSSING POWER. TOOK IT TO DEALER ON1/2/01 AND FOUND OUT THE FRONT CAM TENSIONER DISINTEGRATED CAUSING SEVERE METALIC NOISES FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. BANKSTON FORD SUPPOSIDLY DID THE WELL KNOWN RECA…
Read full complaint
FIRST EVIDENCE OF NOISE REPORTED TO DEALER ON 7/22/98. THEY SAID THERE WAS NO PROBLEM. NOISE BECAME UNBEARABLE AND ENGINE BEGAN LOSSING POWER. TOOK IT TO DEALER ON1/2/01 AND FOUND OUT THE FRONT CAM TENSIONER DISINTEGRATED CAUSING SEVERE METALIC NOISES FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. BANKSTON FORD SUPPOSIDLY DID THE WELL KNOWN RECALL. MY PAPERWORK SHOWS THEY REPLACED THE TENSIONER CASSETTE AND CHANGED THE OIL. I OBTAINED THEIR OWN PROCEEDURES FOR THIS ISSUE BECAUSE MANY ENGINES HAVE HAD TO BE REPLACE DUE TO THE PIECES OF THE BROKEN TENSIONER CLOGGING OIL PASSAGES AND DESTROYING THE ENGINES. THE INSTRUCTIONS THEY SHOULD HAVE FOLLOWED INCLUDED INSPECTING THE HEADS FOR CLOGGED PASSAGES AND OTHER THINGS. I BELIEVE THEY SHOULD HAVE REPLACED THE ENGINE THEN, BUT THEY MADE ME TAKE IT. AS SOON AS I LEFT DEALER, THE NOISE WAS BACK. CALLED THEM AND THEY SAID TO GIVE IT A WEEK AND SEE IF IT GOES AWAY. IT GOT WORSE AND I BROUGHT IT BACK IN TO THE DEALER. THIS TIME THEY SAID IT WAS THE REAR TENSIONER (THE ONE NOT COVERERED BY THEIR RECALL SINCE IT REQUIRES REMOVING THE ENGINE. SAME PART- SAME DEFECT, BUT NOT COVERED DUE TO COST). SINCE FORD WAS LOSING TOO MUCH MONEY ON THEIR DEFECT REPLACING ENGINES, THEY STOPPED HELPING THEIR CUSTOMERS. THE DEALER OFFERED A $500 AND 75,000 MILE WARRANTEE DEALER CONCESSION, BUT I EXPECTED IT TO BE TAKEN CARE OF LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. THE DEFECTIVE PART RUINED THE ENGINE AND IT SHOULD BE REPLACED, OR AT LEAST REPAIRED PROPERLY. HAVE BEEN AT A STAND-STILL FOR ALMOST 2 YEARS NOW WITH A NON-FUNCIONING VEHICLE. FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE WILL NOT DO ANYTHING AND THE DEALER NOW WANTS $5000 FOR A NEW ENGINE.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10100420
100,000 miles · Sep 6, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY 1997 FORD EXPLORER HAS AN INTAKE MANIFOLD FAILURE. I UNDERSTAND BY READING MANY MESSAGE BOARDS AND OTHER COMPLAINTS ON THE INTERNET THAT FORD HAS RECALLED THIS ITEM ON SOME VEHICLES BUT NOT ALL. I REALLY CAN'T BELIEVE THAT FORD WOULD ACTUALLY USE A PLASTIC INTAKE ON ANYTHING. I BELIEVE IT IS A BREAK DOWN IN JUDGEMENT AND FORD…
Read full complaint
MY 1997 FORD EXPLORER HAS AN INTAKE MANIFOLD FAILURE. I UNDERSTAND BY READING MANY MESSAGE BOARDS AND OTHER COMPLAINTS ON THE INTERNET THAT FORD HAS RECALLED THIS ITEM ON SOME VEHICLES BUT NOT ALL. I REALLY CAN'T BELIEVE THAT FORD WOULD ACTUALLY USE A PLASTIC INTAKE ON ANYTHING. I BELIEVE IT IS A BREAK DOWN IN JUDGEMENT AND FORD SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THIS PART.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10090520
52,000 miles · Sep 2, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAVE HAD MY1997 FORD EXPLORER FOR TWO YEARS, THE SAME PROBLEM KEEPS RECURRING. IT BECOMES SULIGISH ON THE ON SET, THAN THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT COMES ON. 12 TIMES NOW I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE SPARK PLUGS, 3 TIMES I HAVE DONE FUEL ENJECTION CLEANS, 2 TIMES I HAVE CHANGED THE O2 SENSOR. I HAVE TALKED TO OTHER OWNERS THAT SPEAK O…
Read full complaint
I HAVE HAD MY1997 FORD EXPLORER FOR TWO YEARS, THE SAME PROBLEM KEEPS RECURRING. IT BECOMES SULIGISH ON THE ON SET, THAN THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT COMES ON. 12 TIMES NOW I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE SPARK PLUGS, 3 TIMES I HAVE DONE FUEL ENJECTION CLEANS, 2 TIMES I HAVE CHANGED THE O2 SENSOR. I HAVE TALKED TO OTHER OWNERS THAT SPEAK OF THE SAME PROBLEMS.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10089030
60,000 miles · Jul 27, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
1997 EXPLORER 4.0 SOHC PURCHASED IN 1999.MADE KNOCKING NOISE WENT TO DEALERSHIP SEVERAL TIMES UNDER WARRANTY AND WAS TOLD MY MOTOR WAS PULLED AND TENSIONER (PULLEY, CAM TENSIONER) WAS REPLACED.AFTER RECIEVING NOTIFICATION FROM FORD OF "IN WARRANTY" SERVICE BULLETIN,DIFFERENT DEALER SAID IT HADNT BEEN REPLACE OR DOCUMENTED BY PR…
Read full complaint
1997 EXPLORER 4.0 SOHC PURCHASED IN 1999.MADE KNOCKING NOISE WENT TO DEALERSHIP SEVERAL TIMES UNDER WARRANTY AND WAS TOLD MY MOTOR WAS PULLED AND TENSIONER (PULLEY, CAM TENSIONER) WAS REPLACED.AFTER RECIEVING NOTIFICATION FROM FORD OF "IN WARRANTY" SERVICE BULLETIN,DIFFERENT DEALER SAID IT HADNT BEEN REPLACE OR DOCUMENTED BY PREVIOUS SERVICE.SO,IT WAS SUPPOSEDLEY REPLACED AGAIN (2 TIME).STILL MAKING THE NOISE AFTER SO LONG, AND TOLD SEVERAL TIMES "WE CANT FIND ANYTHING WRONG" KEPT DRIVING.NOW, I AM IN DEALERSHIP FOR ABOUT 10TH TIME AND MY TESNIONERS,POSSIBLY MY TIMING CHAIN,AND POSSIBLE OTHER COMPONENTS (HOPEFULLY NOT MOTOR)NEED TO BE REPLACED AGAIN(3TIME,MORE DAMAGE)??!!THIS TIME THERES NO WARRANTY OR REASON WHY I SHOULDENT "HAVE TO PAY" SO IT IS COSTING ME $1600 SO FAR...POSSIBLY MORE IF THERE WAS MORE DAMAGE.THIS MUST BE DOCUMENTED BECAUSE I HAVE TRIED IN GOOD FAITH AND NUMEROUS,TIRING EFFORTS TO REPAIR THIS FROM DAY ONE!DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO REPLACE MOTOR IN NEAR FUTURE LIKE OTHERS.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10082788
Mileage unknown · Jul 13, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAD PURCHASED A 1997 FORD EXPLORER XLT FROM MK AUTO IN AUBURN, CA AND THE CAR FAX I RECIEVED SAID THERE HAD BEEN NO RECALLS AND NO ACCIDENTS ON THE VEHICLE. THE OWNER FROM MK AUTO ASSURED ME MANY TIMES THAT THE FEHICLE WAS IN GOOD RUNNING CONDITION. THE DAY AFTER I BAUGHT THE VEHICLE IT BROKE DOWN IN ME. MK AUTO TOOK IT BACK 3…
Read full complaint
I HAD PURCHASED A 1997 FORD EXPLORER XLT FROM MK AUTO IN AUBURN, CA AND THE CAR FAX I RECIEVED SAID THERE HAD BEEN NO RECALLS AND NO ACCIDENTS ON THE VEHICLE. THE OWNER FROM MK AUTO ASSURED ME MANY TIMES THAT THE FEHICLE WAS IN GOOD RUNNING CONDITION. THE DAY AFTER I BAUGHT THE VEHICLE IT BROKE DOWN IN ME. MK AUTO TOOK IT BACK 3 TIMES IN HOPES THEY COULD FIX IT, BUT NEVER DID. 10 MONTHS LATER THE CAM CHAIN GUID BROKE IN THE ENGINE. MY HUSBAND AND I LOOKED ON THE INTERNET AND FOUND THERE HAD BEEN 13 RECALLS ON MY VEHICLE I NEVER KNEW ABOUT. THIS CAR IN VERY UNSAFE FOR MY FAMILY AND I AM OUTRAGED I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED! I HAVE NOW TRIED TO BUY ANOTHER CAR, BUT THE FORD EXPLORER IS WORHT SO LITTLE AND NOW I HAVE SO MUCH NEGATIVE EQUATY ITS HARD.......I FINALLY FOUND A CAR, BUT AM PAYING DEARLY FOR IT BECAUSE OF THE EXPLORER WHICH HAS BEEN SITTING IN THE CAR LOT OF A FORD DEALERSHIP FOR OVER A MONTH!*AK
NHTSA ODI #10080973
86,000 miles · Apr 18, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
WITHOUT ANY WARNING, LOST ALL POWER, ENGINE TOTALLY SHUT OFF AT 45 MPH. HAD TOWED AND WAS TOLD CRANKSHAFT BROKE. FORD KNOWS OF PROBLEMS WITH THE CRANKSHAFT AND HAS ACTUALLY REPLACED SOME BUT AS MORE ARE BREAKING, REFUSES TO DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM. HAD THIS HAPPENED THE PREVIOUS WEEKEND WHILE TRAVELING RT. 95 THIS COULD HAVE HA…
Read full complaint
WITHOUT ANY WARNING, LOST ALL POWER, ENGINE TOTALLY SHUT OFF AT 45 MPH. HAD TOWED AND WAS TOLD CRANKSHAFT BROKE. FORD KNOWS OF PROBLEMS WITH THE CRANKSHAFT AND HAS ACTUALLY REPLACED SOME BUT AS MORE ARE BREAKING, REFUSES TO DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM. HAD THIS HAPPENED THE PREVIOUS WEEKEND WHILE TRAVELING RT. 95 THIS COULD HAVE HAD SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES. PLEASE LOOK INTO THE NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE 1997/1998 FORD EXPLORER CRANKSHAFT PROBLEMS. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10066424
118,000 miles · Apr 1, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY HEATER "SPLITTER DOOR" FAILED TO RELEASE HEAT ABOUT 4 MO. AGO AND IS STILL BRIKEN. I HAVEN'T HAD THE 700.OO TO FIX IT. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10064314
66,502 miles · Mar 20, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
EGR VALVE FAILED AT COST OF OVER $250. THIS IS PART OF THE EMISSIONS SYSTEM AND IS COVERED BY AN EXTENDED WARRANTY. I REQUESTED WARRANTY STATUS FOR THIS PART FROM FORD MOTOR CO. CUSTOMER RELATIONS CENTER IN LETTER OF 7/17/03 WITH 76,172 MILES ON VEHICLE. INITIAL "CHECK ENGINE LIGHT" FOR THIS FAILURE WAS AT ABOUT 66,000 ON 8/3…
Read full complaint
EGR VALVE FAILED AT COST OF OVER $250. THIS IS PART OF THE EMISSIONS SYSTEM AND IS COVERED BY AN EXTENDED WARRANTY. I REQUESTED WARRANTY STATUS FOR THIS PART FROM FORD MOTOR CO. CUSTOMER RELATIONS CENTER IN LETTER OF 7/17/03 WITH 76,172 MILES ON VEHICLE. INITIAL "CHECK ENGINE LIGHT" FOR THIS FAILURE WAS AT ABOUT 66,000 ON 8/30/02. FORD DID NOT ANSWER MY INQUIRY, INSTEAD REFERRING ME TO THEIR CUSTOMER SERVICE REPS IN INDIA, AGAINST MY WISHES. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10062715
78,132 miles · Feb 12, 2004
Engine And Engine CoolingEquipmentStructure
CONSUMER IS A VICTIM OF ODOMETER FRAUD, ENCOUNTERING PROBLEMS WITH THE VEHICLE THAT'S UNCHARACTERISTIC FOR THE MILEAGE ON THE VEHICLE. (NAR) *PH EXHAUST SYSTEM, BALL JOINT, AND INSTRUMENT PANEL HAD TO BE REPLACED. *CB
NHTSA ODI #10058093
90,000 miles · Feb 8, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling
TYPE "E" MOTOR FAILURE AT ONLY 90,000 MILES RESULTING IN REPLACEMENT MOTOR. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10056767
Official recalls
7Oct 13, 2009
FORD IS RECALLING MODEL YEARS 1995-2003 WINDSTAR, 2000-2003 EXCURSION DIESEL, 1993-1997 AND 1999-2003 F-250 SD THROUGH F-550 SD DIESEL, 1992-2003 E-150 THROUGH E-550, 1995-2002 EXPLORER, 1997 AND 2002 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER, 1995-1997 AND 2001-2003 RANGER, AND 1994 F53 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS). THE SCDS MAY LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A VEHICLE FIRE COULD OCCUR WITH OR WITHOUT THE ENGINE RUNNING.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS THAT DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS IN LINE WITH THE SCDS. ON 1999-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH A LEAKING SCDS, DEALERS WILL ALSO INSPECT THE ABS CONTROL MODULE CONNECTOR AND REPAIR AS NECESSARY. REPAIRS WILL BE COMPLETED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON OCTOBER 27, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
Dec 27, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L SOHC ENGINES AND STILL RETAIN THE ORIGINAL THROTTLE BODY (PART NUMBERS 97JF-9E926AB OR 97JF-9E926-AC). SOME OF THE ORIGINAL THROTTLE BODIES INSTALLED ALLOWED A GAP BETWEEN THE PLATE AND BORE TO BE BUILT TOO NARROW. THIS REDUCED CLEARANCE ALLOWED THE ENGINE DEPOSITS NORMALLY PRESENT IN THE THROTTLE BODY TO CONTACT OR BRIDGE THE GAP. IF THE ENGINE DEPOSITS BRIDGED THE GAP BETWEEN THE THROTTLE PLATE AND BORE AND THEN HARDENED, ON THE INITIAL APPLICATION OF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AFTER THE ENGINE HAS COOLED, THE OPERATOR WOULD NEED TO APPLY ADDITIONAL FORCE TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL TO BREAK THE BRIDGE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN ENGINE SURGE WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BREAKS FREE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE ORIGINAL THROTTLE BODIES.
Nov 28, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, A FRONT SWAY BAR LINK CAN FRACTURE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: VEHICLE HANDLING COULD BE AFFECTED, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT FRONT SWAY BAR LINKS.
Jun 19, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MINI VANS, LIGHT PICKUP TRUCKS, AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. OFF LEASE CANADIAN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS WHICH MEET CANADIAN REQUIREMENTS AND NOT THE PHOTOMETRIC REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." ACCORDING TO FORD, THE VEHICLES WERE IMPORTED INTO THE U.S. ERRONEOUSLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE LIGHT GIVEN OFF FROM THE DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IS BRIGHTER THAN ALLOWED BY U.S. STANDARDS.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL BE ADVISED TO DEACTIVATE THE RUNNING LIGHT FUNCTION AND TO COMPLETE ANY OUTSTANDING SAFETY RECALLS ON THESE VEHICLES.
Mar 30, 1999
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN 1997-1999 RHD EXPLORER EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L OHV/SOHC ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MAY 29, 1996 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1998-1999 EXPLORER/MOUNTAINEERS EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L OHV/SOHC OR 5.0L ENGINES OR 1998-1999 RANGERS EQUIPPED WITH 2.5L, 3.0L FFV/EFI OR 4.0L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM JANUARY 5, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1998-1999 MUSTANGS EQUIPPED WITH 3.8L, 4.6L 2-VALVE OR 4-VALVE ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; 1999 F250/F350/F450/F550 (OVER 8,500 LBS.) TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH 5.4L OR 6.8L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999; AND 1999 F-53 STRIPPED CHASSIS EQUIPPED WITH 5.4L OR 6.8L ENGINES AND CRUISE CONTROL BUILT FROM MARCH 2, 1998 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1999. A CRUISE CONTROL CABLE CAN INTERFERE WITH THE SPEED CONTROL SERVO PULLEY AND NOT ALLOW THE THROTTLE TO RETURN TO IDLE WHEN DISENGAGING THE CRUISE CONTROL.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE CRUISE CONTROL IS USED AND THIS CONDITION IS PRESENT, A STUCK THROTTLE COULD RESULT, WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT IN A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE CRUISE CONTROL CABLES. AT THE PRESENT TIME, THE REPLACEMENT CABLES ARE NOT AVAILABLE. CUSTOMERS ARE BEING ADVISED NOT TO USE THE CRUISE CONTROL SYSTEM UNTIL A REPLACEMENT CAN BE MADE.
Mar 19, 1998
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MULTI-PURPOSE PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 4.0L SINGLE OVERHEAD CAM ENGINES. THE ENGINE FUEL LINES CAN BE DAMAGED IF THE VEHICLE IS JUMP STARTED AND THE GROUND CABLE IS ATTACHED TO THE FUEL LINE BRACKET THAT IS LOCATED NEAR THE BATTERY. SINCE THE BRACKET IS NOT GROUNDED, THE STAINLESS STEEL FUEL LINE BRAID COULD ACT AS A GROUND POTENTIALLY OVERHEATING THE PTFE INNER LINER OF THE FUEL LINE RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO THE FUEL LINE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE FUEL LINES CAN LEAK, AND IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, A FIRE COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A WARNING LABEL ON THE FUEL LINE BRACKET ADVISING OWNERS NOT TO USE IT FOR A JUMP START GROUND. ALSO A REVISED BOLT WILL BE INSTALLED IN THE ALTERNATOR BRACKET TO PROVIDE A CONVENIENT JUMP START GROUND LOCATION.
Apr 30, 1997
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: MULTI-PURPOSE PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 5.0L ENGINES ORIGINALLY SOLD OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE STATES OF ALASKA, IDAHO, IOWA, MAINE, MICHIGAN (UPPER PENINSULA ONLY), MINNESOTA, MONTANA, NEBRASKA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW YORK, NORTH DAKOTA, SOUTH DAKOTA, VERMONT, WISCONSIN, AND WYOMING. THESE VEHICLES, WHEN OPERATED FOR EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS AND TEMPERATURES BELOW -20 DEGREES FARENHEIT, DO NOT RETURN TO IDLE DUE TO ICE IN THE THROTTLE BODY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: ALTHOUGH THE VEHICLE CAN BE CONTROLLED BY EITHER APPLYING THE SERVICE BRAKES OR SHIFTING THE TRANSMISSION TO NEUTRAL, INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORTS OR SOME INCREASE IN STOPPING DISTANCE CAN RESULT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A REVISED PCV SYSTEM WITH WATER HEATED VACUUM SOURCE.
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
6DP05005 · 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.
PE99049 · Windshield Wiper Malfunction
Opened Jul 28, 1999 · Closed Apr 24, 2000
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Visibility
There is no summary currently available
PE99045 · Steering Knuckle Separations
Opened Jul 6, 1999 · Closed Oct 29, 1999
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering
There is no summary currently available
EA99001 · Throttle Sticking
Opened Jan 7, 1999 · Closed Feb 9, 2001
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
ON JANUARY 23, 1997, FORD MOTOR COMPANY ISSUED SPECIAL SERVICE MESSAGE (SSM) 10240, ANNOUNCING THAT A REVISED THROTTLE BODY WOULD BE AVAILABLE DURING THE FIRST QUARTER OF 1997 FOR 1997 MODEL YEAR FORD EXPLORERS EQUIPPED WITH THE 4.0L SINGLE OVERHEAD CAM (SOHC) ENGINE.THE SSM STATED THE REVISED THROTTLE BODY WOULD ADDRESS INCREASED THROTTLE EFFORTS THAT HAD BEEN EXPERIENCED ON THESE VEHICLES.ON JULY 31, 1998, THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED SERVICE QUERY SQ98-014 TO DETERMINE WHETHER A SAFETY RECALL WAS WARRANTED FOR THE PROBLEM ADDRESSED BY SSM 10240.AT THAT TIME ODI HAD 14 REPORTS ALLEGING THROTTLES STICKING OPEN, INCLUDING THREE CRASHES, ON 1997 EXPLORERS WITH THE 4.0L SOHC ENGINE.EA99-001 INVESTIGATED ALLEGED THROTTLE BODY STICKING, AND LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL, IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ON DECEMBER 22, 2000, FORD MOTOR COMPANY FILED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT CONCERNING THROTTLE BODY STICKING IN 1997-1998 MODEL YEAR EXPLORER AND MOUNTAINEER VEHICLES WITH 4.0 SOHC ENGINES THAT STILL RETAIN THE ORIGINAL THROTTLE BODY; SAFETY RECALL 00V-422.THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CLOSING REPORT IS ATTACHED.
RQ98020 · Fuel Line Damage From Jump Starting
Opened Nov 3, 1998 · Closed Nov 15, 2000
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
There is no summary currently available
SQ98014 · Throttle Sticking
Opened Jul 31, 1998 · Closed Jan 7, 1999
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
There is no summary currently available