IllustrationHAD ABS REPLACED NUMEROUS TIMES ON MY 2000 F-150 COME TO FIND OUT THE WIRING HARNESS HAS BEEN DEFECTIVE THE WHOLE TIME AND HAS JUST BEEN DISCOVERED TO BE THE CULPRIT. FORD HAS AGREED TO PAY 50% OF COST BUT I CAN'T BE THE ONLY ONE WITH A DEFECTIVE HARNESS, RIGHT?*AK
2000 Ford F Series
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Limited comparison data
There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all F Series 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
20–25K
725–50K
850–75K
775–100K
5100–150K
3150K+
32 reports with mileage · 9 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.
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 10 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 6 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
3 crash reports5 fire reports1 injury reports
What owners actually said
41 reportsI HAVE A CRACK IN THE DOOR SKIN OF MY DRIVERS DOOR I THINK FORD NEEDS TO BE MADE TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND FIX THIS PROBLEM. *AK
FAILURE OF TIE RODS ON FORD F150'S. *AK
FAILED TIE ROD END AT 57,000 MILES CAUSIING COMPLETE LOSS OF STEERING. NO WARNING. LUCKILY I WAS IN A PARKING LOT AND NOT ON THE FREEWAY. *AK
2000 FORD F-150 4.6L V-8. BLOWN SPARK PLUG. FORD DEALER CLAIMS THAT FORD WILL NOT APPROVE A A REPAIR AND EITHER THE HEAD ($3,000) OR THE MOTOR ($5000) NEED TO BE REPLACED. THERE IS NO OFFICIAL TSB (TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN) ON THIS PROBLEM, BUT UNOFFICIALLY, IT SEEMS THAT FORD IS AWARE OF THE PROBLEM SINCE THE DEALER PUT A …
Read full complaint
2000 FORD F-150 4.6L V-8. BLOWN SPARK PLUG. FORD DEALER CLAIMS THAT FORD WILL NOT APPROVE A A REPAIR AND EITHER THE HEAD ($3,000) OR THE MOTOR ($5000) NEED TO BE REPLACED. THERE IS NO OFFICIAL TSB (TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN) ON THIS PROBLEM, BUT UNOFFICIALLY, IT SEEMS THAT FORD IS AWARE OF THE PROBLEM SINCE THE DEALER PUT A "SPECIAL NOTE" ON THE QUOTE FROM FORD REGARDING THE UNAPPROVED REPAIR WORK ABOVE. FROM VARIOUS INTERNET SEARCHES, OTHERS HAVE HAD TROUBLE WITH FORD 4.6, 5.4 OR V-10 MOTORS WITH SPARK PLUGS BLOWING OUT OF ALUMINUM HEADS.
WE HAE A 2000 FORD F350 THAT WAS RECENTLY IN AN ACCIDENT AND THE BODY SHOP FOUND THAT IT HAD PRIOR DAMAGE. WE WERE NEVER NOTIFIED BY THE DEALERSHIP THAT THIS VEHICLE HAD PRIOR DAMAGE. THE PRIOR DAMAGE MAKES THE VEHICLE UNSAFE TO DRIVE AS IT HAS THE WRONG CAB ON IT AND THE WRONG CAB HAS BEEN WELDED ON, AS YOU CAN SEE THE WELDIN…
Read full complaint
WE HAE A 2000 FORD F350 THAT WAS RECENTLY IN AN ACCIDENT AND THE BODY SHOP FOUND THAT IT HAD PRIOR DAMAGE. WE WERE NEVER NOTIFIED BY THE DEALERSHIP THAT THIS VEHICLE HAD PRIOR DAMAGE. THE PRIOR DAMAGE MAKES THE VEHICLE UNSAFE TO DRIVE AS IT HAS THE WRONG CAB ON IT AND THE WRONG CAB HAS BEEN WELDED ON, AS YOU CAN SEE THE WELDING MARKS UNDERNEATH THE TRUCK, AND ALSO THE SEAT BELTS HAVE BEEN BOLTED IN AND NOT DRILLED IN, BUT THEIR ARE MANY DRILLED HOLES IN THE BOTTOM OF THE TRUCK CAB. THE BODY SHOP FEELS THAT THE TRUCK IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AS YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN THE WELDING COULD COLLAPSE. WE HAVE PICTURES OF THE PREVIOUS DAMAGE ALONG WITH TWO WITNESSES. WE HAVE NOTIFIED MID STATES FORD AND ALSO FORD MOTOR COMPANY WITH A LONG LIST OF THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED SINCE JUNE 9TH, 2003. MID STATES FORD HAS NOT CONTACTED US SINCE DENNIS CONTACTED THEM ON JULY 8TH AND THEY SAID THEY WOULD GET RIGHT BACK TO US. FORD MOTOR COMPANY HAS NOT CALLED US BACK SINCE OUR LAST NOTE TO THEM LAST WEEK. WE JUST WANT SOME ANSWERS BEFORE SOMETHING ELSE HAPPENS. WE ALSO WOULD LIKE SOME RESOLUTIONS TO THIS PROBLEM.
THE TRANS ALWAYS FELT FUNNY BUT THE DEALER SAID IT WAS NORMAL.I HAVE HAD THE DEALER SERVICE THE TRANS EVERY 30,000 MILES AND BETWEEN SERVICES TRANS WAS DRAINED EVERY 15,000 MILES AND HAD NEW TRANS FLUID . I HAVE A ORANGE TAGED TRANSMISSION AND I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER IT HAD TO BE REPLACED.THE 4R100 TRANS AND THE E40D HAVE HAD …
Read full complaint
THE TRANS ALWAYS FELT FUNNY BUT THE DEALER SAID IT WAS NORMAL.I HAVE HAD THE DEALER SERVICE THE TRANS EVERY 30,000 MILES AND BETWEEN SERVICES TRANS WAS DRAINED EVERY 15,000 MILES AND HAD NEW TRANS FLUID . I HAVE A ORANGE TAGED TRANSMISSION AND I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER IT HAD TO BE REPLACED.THE 4R100 TRANS AND THE E40D HAVE HAD A HIGH PREMATURE FAILURE AND FORD IN MY OPINION IS OPERATING UNDER DECEPTIVE PRACTICES BY KEEP SELLING TRUCKS WITH A KNOWN DEFECT. I WAS TOLD BY ONE DEALER THE TRANS HAS A 90% CHANCE OF FAILURE. FORD WANTS BETWEEN $3,200 AND $3,800 TO REPLACE THE TRANS.
I HAVE A 2000 FORD 150 EXT.CAB TRUCK A FREIND OF MINE BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE DOORS ARE CRACKING. HE HAS A 1998 EXT CAB F-150 THAT DID THE SAME THING. HE GOT HIS FIXED UNDER WARRANTY. I CALLED FORD MOTOR CO. THEY TOLD ME THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF A PROBLEM TO TAKE IT TO MY LOCAL DEALER WHO TOLD ME THERE IS NOTHING THEY WI…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2000 FORD 150 EXT.CAB TRUCK A FREIND OF MINE BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE DOORS ARE CRACKING. HE HAS A 1998 EXT CAB F-150 THAT DID THE SAME THING. HE GOT HIS FIXED UNDER WARRANTY. I CALLED FORD MOTOR CO. THEY TOLD ME THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF A PROBLEM TO TAKE IT TO MY LOCAL DEALER WHO TOLD ME THERE IS NOTHING THEY WILL DO TO REPAIR THIS. THEY WOULD NOT EVEN COME OUT AND LOOK AT IT. THEY DID TELL ME THERE IS A FIX FOR THIS PROBLEM BUT THEY DON?T HAVE A RECALL FOR THIS. I WENT TO SEVERAL LOCAL DEALERS AND CHECKED 1997 TO 2000 FORD TRUCKS AND FOUND 8 OUT OF 8 HAD THIS SAME PROBLEM. I CALLED FORD. AGAIN THEY GAVE ME THE SAME STORY. SINCE THEN I HAVE BEEN CHECKING OTHER TRUCKS IN PARKING LOTS AND THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AND MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT I HAVE GOT TO TALK TO WERE NOT AWARE THEIR DOORS WERE CRACKING. I REALLY THINK FORD NEEDS TO RECALL THESE DOORS AFTER PAYING 25,000.00 FOR AN AUTOMOBILE AND HAVING SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN TO IT. THEY KNOW THERE?S A FIX FOR IT BUT WON?T PAY TO FIX THE PROBLEM
MY F150 HAS A DOOR CRACK ON THE DRIVERS DOOR. 80 TO 90% OF 1997 THROUGH 2000 F150/250 PICKUP WILL DEVELOP THIS PROBLEM ON ONE OF BOTH OF THE FRONT DOORS. AS I DIDN'T NOTICE THIS UNTIL TWO WEEKS AFTER MY WARR. RAN OUT, FORD WILL NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS. I HAVE FOUND TWO INTERNET SITES WITH PEOPLE WITH THE SAME PROBLEMS ON T…
Read full complaint
MY F150 HAS A DOOR CRACK ON THE DRIVERS DOOR. 80 TO 90% OF 1997 THROUGH 2000 F150/250 PICKUP WILL DEVELOP THIS PROBLEM ON ONE OF BOTH OF THE FRONT DOORS. AS I DIDN'T NOTICE THIS UNTIL TWO WEEKS AFTER MY WARR. RAN OUT, FORD WILL NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS. I HAVE FOUND TWO INTERNET SITES WITH PEOPLE WITH THE SAME PROBLEMS ON THOUSANDS OF TRUCKS INVOLVED. THERE ARE SEVERAL TSBS FROM FORD ON THIS PROBLEM.
I HAVE NOT GOTTEN THE PROBLEM FIXED. THE PAINT IN THE (RAIN GUTTERS?) IN THE ROOF OF THE TRUCK HAS CRACKS FROM FRONT TO BACK. I BOUGHT THE TRUCK IN MAY AND THE DEALER STATES THEY WERE NOT IN THERE WHEN I BOUGHT IT. THE DEALER ALSO STATES THAT THE FORD COMPANY WILL NOT FIX IT. THEY STATED THAT THE IT IS IN FACT A FACTORY DEFECT B…
Read full complaint
I HAVE NOT GOTTEN THE PROBLEM FIXED. THE PAINT IN THE (RAIN GUTTERS?) IN THE ROOF OF THE TRUCK HAS CRACKS FROM FRONT TO BACK. I BOUGHT THE TRUCK IN MAY AND THE DEALER STATES THEY WERE NOT IN THERE WHEN I BOUGHT IT. THE DEALER ALSO STATES THAT THE FORD COMPANY WILL NOT FIX IT. THEY STATED THAT THE IT IS IN FACT A FACTORY DEFECT BUT SINCE I AM PAST MY 3 YEAR 30,000 MILE WARRANTY IT IS MY PROBLEM NOW..
Official recalls
103V094000 · Structure
Mar 7, 2003
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCK, VAN, AND MINI VAN CONVERSIONS EQUIPPED WITH SOUTHERN COMFORT BUILT RUNNING BOARDS THAT CONTAIN CERTAIN COURTESY LIGHTS MANUFACTURED BY AMERICAN TECHNOLOGY COMPONENTS, INC. THESE UNITS CONTAIN A COURTESY LIGHT OR LIGHTS THAT MIGHT OVERHEAT WHEN THE WIRE HARNESS IS EXPOSED TO EXCESSIVE MOISTURE AND ROAD SALT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS OVERHEATING CONDITION CAN CAUSE THE RUNNING BOARD TO MELT OR CAUSE A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE WIRING HARNESS ON THESE RUNNING BOARDS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN MARCH 7, 2003. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT SOUTHERN COMFORT AT 1-800-745-6096.
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
4DP05005 · 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.
RQ02002 · Tire Valve Stem
Opened Jan 14, 2002 · Closed Aug 19, 2002
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Tires
There is no summary currently available
SQ00002 · Pulls Under Hard Braking
Opened May 4, 2000 · Closed Jan 22, 2001
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic
There is no summary currently available
PE00003 · Front Center Lap Belt Anchorage
Opened Jan 13, 2000 · Closed Apr 20, 2000
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
ALLEGED THAT THE FRONT SAFETY BELT REPORTEDLY WAS NOT MOUNTED TO THE VEHICLE