IllustrationWHILE ACCELERATING FROM A STOP OR SLOWING AND TURNING TRANSMISSION SLIPS GEARS. VERY NOTICABLE BETWEEN SECOND TO THIRD SHIFT. GEAR SLIPAGE CAUSING LOSS OF ACCELERATION POWER. TRANSMISSION ALSO SHIFTS HARD AS IT SLIPS.
2004 Ford F-150
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most F-150 years
Owner complaints for the 2004 Ford F-150 are substantially higher than the model-year median of 676.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all F-150 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
3570–25K
31325–50K
45050–75K
31575–100K
239100–150K
75150K+
1,749 reports with mileage · 280 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.
- Visibility. Review the 841 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 232 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 167 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
75 crash reports40 fire reports58 injury reports
Power Train complaints
232 reports1. NO SIGNS OR EVENTS LEAD UP TO THE DRIVE-LINE ON MY FORD F-150 DETACHING FROM MY VEHICLE. 2. NO CONSEQUENCES OR FAILURES OCCURED. 3. MY VEHICLE IS UNDER WARRANTY AND NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE FOR OVER 30 DAYS. DESCRIPTION: ON JUNE 14, 2005 BETWEEN 7:30-8:00 AM, I WAS TRAVELING TO WORK ON FREEWAY 99 IN FRESNO, CALIFORNIA.…
Read full complaint
1. NO SIGNS OR EVENTS LEAD UP TO THE DRIVE-LINE ON MY FORD F-150 DETACHING FROM MY VEHICLE. 2. NO CONSEQUENCES OR FAILURES OCCURED. 3. MY VEHICLE IS UNDER WARRANTY AND NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE FOR OVER 30 DAYS. DESCRIPTION: ON JUNE 14, 2005 BETWEEN 7:30-8:00 AM, I WAS TRAVELING TO WORK ON FREEWAY 99 IN FRESNO, CALIFORNIA. I HEARD A 'BANG' UNDERNEATH MY TRUCK AND MY TWO REAR TIRES LOCKED-UP. I PROCEEDED TO SKID IN THE LEFT HAND LANE, UNTIL I MY TRUCK RESTED ON THE SHOULDER. MY TRUCK DID NOT DISPLAY ANY SIGNS BEFORE THE INCIDENT.
MY 2004 FORD F150 WAS PARKED IN MY DRIVEWAY IN PARK WITH THE ENGINE RUNNING AND AC ON MAX. I LEFT IT RUNNING WHILE I UNLOADED THE BACK SEAT OF SEVERAL ITEMS. I THEN CLOSED THE DOORS AND PROCEEDED TO UNLOAD 4 CASES OF WATER FROM THE BED OF THE TRUCK. I MADE 5 TRIPS FROM THE TRUCK TO THE HOUSE AND WHEN I RETURNED AND PUT THE TA…
Read full complaint
MY 2004 FORD F150 WAS PARKED IN MY DRIVEWAY IN PARK WITH THE ENGINE RUNNING AND AC ON MAX. I LEFT IT RUNNING WHILE I UNLOADED THE BACK SEAT OF SEVERAL ITEMS. I THEN CLOSED THE DOORS AND PROCEEDED TO UNLOAD 4 CASES OF WATER FROM THE BED OF THE TRUCK. I MADE 5 TRIPS FROM THE TRUCK TO THE HOUSE AND WHEN I RETURNED AND PUT THE TAILGATE BACK UP MY TRUCK TOOK OFF TOWARDS MY HOUSE AND IMPACTED THE BRICK WALL OF THE GARARGE (APPROX 20 TO 25 FOOT DISTANCE). I TRIED TO RUN FROM THE BACK AND OPEN THE DOOR AND APPLY THE BRAKE BUT THE TRUCK HIT THE HOUSE AS I GOT THE DOOR OPEN. THE SHIFTER WAS STILL IN PARK. I APPLYED THE BRAKE AND PUT IT IN REVERSE AND MOVED IT BACK TO REVEAL THE DAMAGE. MY WIFE AND I TESTED THIS AFTERWARDS TO ATTEMPT TO DUPLICATE THIS WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO REPRODUCE IT. MY HOUSE AND THE TRUCK ARE DAMAGED AND I FEEL THAT THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO REALLY HURT SOMEONE. AFTER BEING TOLD OF THIS SITE BY MY INSURANCE COMPANY I SEE THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO OTHER PEOPLE AND ONE HAS ALMOST AN IDENTICAL STORY. SEE COMPLAINT 10081205. I HAVE TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP AND HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN ANY INFORMATION YET.
I PURCHASED A NEW 2004 F-150 REGULAR CAB PICKUP IN MAY OF 04. IT HAS HAD A SERIOUS VIBRATION SINCE NEW. AT FIRST I THOUGHT IT WAS "TEETHING" PROBLEMS, GETTING BROKEN IN AS IT WERE. THE DEALER REPLACED TWO DRIVE SHAFTS, A DAMPENER AND A COMPLETE REAR END DOWN TO THE BREAK ROTORS. NONE OF THIS HAS HELPED WITH TH…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A NEW 2004 F-150 REGULAR CAB PICKUP IN MAY OF 04. IT HAS HAD A SERIOUS VIBRATION SINCE NEW. AT FIRST I THOUGHT IT WAS "TEETHING" PROBLEMS, GETTING BROKEN IN AS IT WERE. THE DEALER REPLACED TWO DRIVE SHAFTS, A DAMPENER AND A COMPLETE REAR END DOWN TO THE BREAK ROTORS. NONE OF THIS HAS HELPED WITH THE VIBRATION. I TOOK IT TO A SECOND DEALER AFTER THE ORIGINAL REFUSED TO SWAP THE TRUCK OUT AS A GOOD FAITH GESTURE. INSTEAD THEY WANTED TO "TRADE" THE TRUCK. I WAS OFFERD TEN THOUSAND PLUS LESS THAN I HAD PURCHASED THE TRUCK FOR, LESS THAN FIVE MONTHS EARLIER. THE TRUCK I WANTED TO "SWAP" FOR WENT UP OVER SIX THOUSAND MORE THAN THE STICKER PRICE. THE SECOND DEALER KEPT IT MORE THAN TWO WEEKS AND COULD NOT FIX THE ISSUE. THEIR SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME THAT THEY HAVE HAD SEVERAL TTRUCKS WITH THE SAME ISSUE AND HAD NO LUCK WITH RECTIFYING IT. THE ORIGINAL SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME IT WAS A LEMON, THE SECOND SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME IT WAS A LEMON. NEITHER WOULD PUT IT IN WRITING, FOR FEAR OF JOB LOSS. FORD HAS BEEN NO HELP WITH THE ISSUE, AFTER REPEATED PHONE CALLS AND EMAILS, NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. THIS IS MY ONLY "RELIABLE" VEHICLE. IT NOW HAS @17800.0 MILES ON IT MAINLY HIGHWAY. THE VIBRATION IS GETTING WORSE WITH TIME AND MILAGE. I FEEL THAT ANY THING MECHANICAL THAT VIBRATES WILL EVENTUALY BREAK. IF I WAS LOOKING TO BUY THIS VEHICLE USED AND FELT THE VIBRATION I WOULD WALK AWAY FROM IT! IT IS THAT BAD. INCIDENT DATE APPROXIMATE
CONTINUOUS VIBRATIONS IN 2004 F150 AFTER FIVE TIMES TO DEALER FOR REPAIRS. DRIVE SHAFT HAS BEEN REPLACED BUT STILL HAVE VIBRATIONS. ACCORDING TO RADAR AND GPS THE SPEEDOMETER IS INCORRECT UP TO 3 MILES PER HOUR CLOCKING EXAMPLE. OPERATING AT 55 MPH SPEEDOMETER SHOWING 58 TO 58 1/2 MPH.
REAR AXLE WHINE AT HIGHWAY SPEED WHEN ACCELERATOR IS APPLIED. UNREPAIRED TWO TIMES BY DEALERSHIP. THIRD REPAIR REFUSED BY ME BECAUSE DEALERSHIP AND FORD REFUSED TO REPLACE THE REAR AXLE AND WANTED TO KEEP MY TRUCK FOR AN INDEFINATE PERIOD OF TIME TO DISCOVER WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS WITHOUT PROVIDING ME A LOANER/RENTAL. A MANDITORY …
Read full complaint
REAR AXLE WHINE AT HIGHWAY SPEED WHEN ACCELERATOR IS APPLIED. UNREPAIRED TWO TIMES BY DEALERSHIP. THIRD REPAIR REFUSED BY ME BECAUSE DEALERSHIP AND FORD REFUSED TO REPLACE THE REAR AXLE AND WANTED TO KEEP MY TRUCK FOR AN INDEFINATE PERIOD OF TIME TO DISCOVER WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS WITHOUT PROVIDING ME A LOANER/RENTAL. A MANDITORY RECALL SHOULD BE REQUIRED FOR ALL VEHICLES WITH THIS PROBLEM WHERE THE REAR AXLE ASSEMBLY IS REPLACED, NOT JUST THE RING AND PINION. UNDER THE CURRENT TSB'S FOR THIS PROBLEM THEIR IS TOO MUCH ROOM FOR ERROR! VEHICLE ONLY HAS 5000 MILES.
VEHICLE HAS DRIVE TRAIN VIBRATION & REAR END HOWL SENSE I TEST DROVE IT AUG 2004. I POINTED OUT THE DRIVE TRAIN VIBRATION TO MY SALESMAN AND HE SAID IT " PROBABLY LOST A WHEEL BALANCE WEIGHT". A FRIEND WENT INTO THE SAME DEALERSHIP ( LINDQUIST FORD) AND WAS TOLD THE SAME THING AFTER THEY HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THERE ARE TSBS ON THIS …
Read full complaint
VEHICLE HAS DRIVE TRAIN VIBRATION & REAR END HOWL SENSE I TEST DROVE IT AUG 2004. I POINTED OUT THE DRIVE TRAIN VIBRATION TO MY SALESMAN AND HE SAID IT " PROBABLY LOST A WHEEL BALANCE WEIGHT". A FRIEND WENT INTO THE SAME DEALERSHIP ( LINDQUIST FORD) AND WAS TOLD THE SAME THING AFTER THEY HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THERE ARE TSBS ON THIS PROBLEM AND AFTER MY TRUCK WAS IN & OUT OF THEIR SHOP NUMEROUS TIMES. SO FAR THE TIRES AND WHEELS HAVE BEEN FORCED BALANCE, DRIVE SHAFT REPLACED, CAB MOUNTS REPLACED, TRANSMISSION TAIL SHAFT END PLAY CHECKED & REAR END REPLACED. NONE HAVE RESOLVED THE ISSUES. THE SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME FORD HAS IDENTIFIED THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AS THE PROBLEM. WE PRECEEDED TO ARRANGE REPLACEMENT AND I INSISTED ON A NEW NOT A REBUILT ONE. HE GOT BACK WITH ME AND SAID THE NEW FORD REP HE WAS DEALING WITH DOESNT REPLACE TRANSMISSIONS ! MINE SUDDENLY.......... YOU GUESSED IT.. ITS WITHIN SPECIFICATIONS !! THE DEALERSHIP MANAGEMENT WONT RETURN MY CALLS. FORD WONT BE SHAMED INTO FIXING THESE PROBLEMS UNLESS/ UNTIL THE MEDIA GETS INVOLVED.
WHEN USING PASSING GEAR AT 45-65 MPH YOU GET A VERY STRONG VIBRATION UNTIL YOU GO INTO OVERDRIVE. WHEN YOU USE THE OD SHUT OFF BUTTON AT 65 - 50 MPH YOU GET THE SAME VIBRATION. (1) FORD SENT LETTER IN JANURARY FROM 1ST COMPLAINT IN OCT 04 SAYING IT WAS THE TIRES AND WOULD ONLY WARRANTY THEM FOR 3 YEAR NOT REPLACE THEM NOW. (…
Read full complaint
WHEN USING PASSING GEAR AT 45-65 MPH YOU GET A VERY STRONG VIBRATION UNTIL YOU GO INTO OVERDRIVE. WHEN YOU USE THE OD SHUT OFF BUTTON AT 65 - 50 MPH YOU GET THE SAME VIBRATION. (1) FORD SENT LETTER IN JANURARY FROM 1ST COMPLAINT IN OCT 04 SAYING IT WAS THE TIRES AND WOULD ONLY WARRANTY THEM FOR 3 YEAR NOT REPLACE THEM NOW. (2) MAY BOTH FRONT STEEL RIMS. NOW AT THIS POINT VIBRATION IS ONLY BETWEEN 50 - 65. (3) TRUCK WAS IN SHOP FROM 31 MAY TO 10 JUN 05. REPLACED (A INSULATOR ASY - ENGINE SUPPORT), (DRIVE SHAT ASSEMBY -REAR) REMOVED AND INSTALLED. (INSULATOR - POWERTRAIN REAR SUPPORT) REPLACED. I DO NOT HAVE OLD PARTS, DEALER KEPT THEM. VIBRATION IS STILL THERE. THE MECHANIC TOLD ME THAT THIS PROBLEM IS ONLY IN 373 REAR ENDS. MY BROTHER IN TX (SAN ANGELO, WAS HELPING ME, HIS BEST FRIEND IS THE SERVICE MGR AT THE FORD DEALER THERE AND THEY HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM). A FRIEND TOLD ME HER FATHER IN AL HAS THE SAME PROBLEM AND FORD CAN NOT FIX IT. MY SERVICE MGR BRYAN AND I DROVE A 2005 IDENTICILE TO MY TRUCK AND THE VIBRATION WAS WORSE THEN MINE. MY CONCERN IS WHAT IN THE LON TERM WILL IT HAVE ON US WHO WILL BE TOWING CAMPERS AND GOING UP AND DOWN MOUNTAING AND USING THE LOWER GEAR FOR POWER AND BRAKING. WHAT WILL THAT VIBRATION DO TO THE DRIVE TRAIN? WHO LIVES WILL BE PUT IN AT RISK BECAUSE OF THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP.
DT: HAD TO PUT 4 SETS OF BRAKES ON VEHICLE SINCE PURCHASING THE CAR. THE ROTORS WERE GETTING GROOVED SO BADLY THAT VEHICLE PULLS OFF THE ROAD. THE CONSUMER TALKED TO FORD, AND THEY IGNORED HIM. HE TRAVELED AND SAW THIS PROBLEM WITH SEVERAL OTHER FORD CARS. FORD TOLD HIM IT WAS COSMETIC. *AK WHILE ON THE FIRST TRIP WITH …
Read full complaint
DT: HAD TO PUT 4 SETS OF BRAKES ON VEHICLE SINCE PURCHASING THE CAR. THE ROTORS WERE GETTING GROOVED SO BADLY THAT VEHICLE PULLS OFF THE ROAD. THE CONSUMER TALKED TO FORD, AND THEY IGNORED HIM. HE TRAVELED AND SAW THIS PROBLEM WITH SEVERAL OTHER FORD CARS. FORD TOLD HIM IT WAS COSMETIC. *AK WHILE ON THE FIRST TRIP WITH THIS VEHICLE, THE REAR END HAD GONE OUT, THE CLUTCH PACK WAS REMOVED AND REPLACED, THE FOG LAMPS WERE HOLDING MOISTURE AND WERE REPLACED, THE BRAKES WOULD PULSATE AND PULL FROM ONE SIDE, THE SHIFTING WAS HARSH WHEN CHANGING FROM FIRST TO SECOND GEAR, A LOUD CLUNK WOULD BE PRESENT AT TIMES WHEN STARTING FROM STOP THEN DECELERATING AND THE VEHICLE WOULD CRANK BUT WOULD NOT START AT TIMES. SC
BEEN TO DEALER 4 TIMES WITH COMPLAINTS OF VIBRATION. REPLACED TIRES, DRIVE SHAFT, ROTORS & CLUTHES IN REAR END. STILL HAD VIBRATION & RETURNED TO DEALER ONY TO HEAR "WE CAN NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM". THE VIBRATION OCCURS ABOUT EVERY 500-1000 MILES.
Official recalls
511V385000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly:mounting
Jul 29, 2011
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN 1997 THROUGH 2003 MODEL YEAR FORD F-150, 2004 MODEL YEAR FORD F-150 HERITAGE, 1997 THROUGH 1999 MODEL YEAR F-250 LESS THAN 8,500 LBS. GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT RATING (GVWR), AND 2002 AND 2003 LINCOLN BLACKWOOD VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 20, 1995, THROUGH AUGUST 4, 2004, ORIGINALLY SOLD, OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, KENTUCKY, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA, WISCONSIN, AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. PROLONGED EXPOSURE TO ROAD DEICING CHEMICALS MAY CAUSE SEVERE CORROSION OF THE FUEL TANK STRAPS WHICH SECURE THE TANK TO THE VEHICLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AS A RESULT OF THE CORROSION, ONE OR BOTH STRAPS MAY FAIL ALLOWING THE FUEL LINES TO SEPARATE FROM THE TANK, OR IN SOME CASES, CAUSING THE TANK TO CONTACT THE GROUND. EITHER SCENARIO MAY RESULT IN A FUEL LEAK PRESENTING A FIRE HAZARD.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND INSTRUCT THEM TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A FORD OR LINCOLN DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL TANK STRAPS REPLACED WITH STRAPS THAT HAVE INCREASED CORROSION PROTECTION. EARLY IN THIS CAMPAIGN, IF REPLACEMENT STRAPS ARE NOT AVAILABLE, DEALERS MAY INSTALL A CABLE SUPPORT UNDER THE STRAP AS AN INTERIM REPAIR OR A STEEL REINFORCEMENT OVER THE EXISTING STRAP AS A PERMANENT REPAIR. ANY REPAIRS WILL BE PERFORMED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332. FORD'S RECALL CAMPAIGN NUMBER IS 11S21
11V107000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
Feb 23, 2011
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2006 F-150 PICK UP TRUCKS AS WELL AS CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2006 LINCOLN MARK LT VEHICLES. IF THE CLOCKSPRING JUMPER WIRE COMES IN CONTACT WITH THE DRIVER SIDE FRONTAL AIR BAG LOWER HORN PLATE, THE WIRE INSULATION MAY BECOME CHAFED, CREATING A POTENTIAL FOR A SHORT CIRCUIT. IF THIS OCCURS THE AIR BAG WARNING LAMP MAY ILLUMINATE INDICATING THAT SERVICE IS REQUIRED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER SIDE FRONTAL AIR BAG COULD INADVERTENTLY DEPLOY INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY OR LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL IF OCCURRING WHILE IN MOTION.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND INSTRUCT THEM TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A FORD OR LINCOLN/MERCURY DEALER TO HAVE A NEW CLOCKSPRING JUMPER WIRE INSTALLED THAT INCORPORATES A PROTECTIVE MESH COVER. REPAIRS WILL BE PERFORMED FREE OF CHARGE. THIS SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON SOME VEHICLES IN MARCH 2011. THE RECALL CAMPAIGN ON THE EXPANDED POPULATION IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN ON OR ABOUT MAY 9, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.
07V336000 · 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.
04V443000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly:mounting
Sep 13, 2004
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH 4.2L, 4.6L AND 5.4L GASOLINE ENGINES, THE FUEL TANK MAY HAVE A DEPRESSION AT THE SEAM BETWEEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM HALVES OF THE TANK. IF A DEPRESSION IS LARGE ENOUGH, FUEL MAY PERMEATE THE FUEL TANK WALL RESULTING IN A FUEL ODOR, ILLUMINATION, OF THE "SERVICE ENGINE SOON" INDICATOR LIGHT, OR A FUEL LEAK.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE, IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FUEL TANK. THE RECALL BEGAN SEPTEMBER 17, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
04V200000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly
Apr 26, 2004
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS MAY HAVE A FUEL TANK WITH LOCALIZED DEPRESSIONS IN THE FUEL TANK WALL AT THE SEAM BETWEEN TOP AND BOTTOM HALVES OF THE TANK. IF A DEPRESSION IS LARGE ENOUGH, FUEL MAY PERMEATE THE FUEL TANK WALL RESULTING IN A FUEL ODOR, OR THE "SERVICE ENGINE SOON" INDICATOR LIGHT IN THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER MAY ILLUMINATE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF LEFT UNCORRECTED, A FUEL LEAK COULD EVENTUALLY DEVELOP.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FUEL TANK ON THESE VEHICLES. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON MAY 6, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-248-0186.
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
4EA11006 · Fuel Tank Strap Failure Due To Corrosion
Opened May 4, 2011 · Closed Aug 19, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly; Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly:mounting; Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly; Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly:mounting
One or both of the steel straps holding up the fuel tank and attaching it to the truck frame can corrode and fail (break or separate).If one strap fails, the tank may tilt and drop and possibly contact the road surface.If both straps break, the entire tank may drop to the road.If either failure occurs while the vehicle is being driven, contact with the road can abrade the tank and create a hole from which gasoline can spill.When the tank drops, it remains attached to the vehicle only by the fuel filler hose and/or supply lines, or in rare instances, by the skid plate, if present.In some cases the weight of the tank sufficiently strained the hoses and fittings and caused separation and subsequent fuel leaks from those connections.The fire hazard created by leaking gasoline is increased by the possible presence of sparks created by the metal tank being dragged along the road.Corrosion of the straps appears to be caused by prolonged exposure to road deicers, frequently road salt, used to treat snow or ice covered roads.States in which large quantities of deicers are applied to roads during the winter season (salt belt states) account for the predominant portion of strap failures.Vehicles in these salt belt states are prone to experience corrosion related failures more frequently and earlier in a vehicle?s life cycle.Ford reports approximately 97 percent of reports it received relating to strap failure involve vehicles that were operated in these high corrosion areas, and 95 percent of the reports to NHTSA involved such vehicles.Approximately one-third of F-150 U.S. production was sold in salt belt states.ODI has included in the above counts reports it has received from consumers and reports it has received from Ford in which either the complaint involved confirmed strap corrosion or ODI's assessment of available information suggests corrosion caused the reported problem.Among the incidents reported to NHTSA, 441 involved one or both straps failing due to corrosion, 353 involved the fuel tank dropping and/or dragging on the ground, and 180 involved fuel leakage.ODI has received four reports of strap failure in which the leaking fuel ignited but self-extinguished, and one incident in which fire destroyed the vehicle and injured its driver.Ford reported the same injury incident and three other unique fire incidents, including two in which the leaking fuel ignited and fire destroyed the vehicle.There were no injuries associated with the three unique Ford incidents.Ford has agreed to conduct a recall to repair the subject vehicles.The recall will cover vehicles that were originally sold or are currently registered in salt belt states (regardless of vehicle age).The vehiclesincluded in the recall are those subject vehicles that are, or have ever been, registered in Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, or the District of Columbia.Ford's recall action appears to adequately address the problem at this time.The above vehicle population (1,340,349) includes subject vehicles originally delivered or sold in salt belt states.ODI does not know the current or historical locations of all subject vehicles.According to Ford approximately 73% of the recall population is currently registered (a 27% attrition rate).Ford is also recalling certain MY 1997-1999 F-250 vehicles (under 8,500 GVWR), and MY2002-2003 Lincoln Blackwood vehicles for the same condition, resulting in an estimated 1.1 million total vehicles
Additional source detail variants (4)
Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly
One or both of the steel straps holding up the fuel tank and attaching it to the truck frame can corrode and fail (break or separate).If one strap fails, the tank may tilt and drop and possibly contact the road surface.If both straps break, the entire tank may drop to the road.If either failure occurs while the vehicle is being driven, contact with the road can abrade the tank and create a hole from which gasoline can spill.When the tank drops, it remains attached to the vehicle only by the fuel filler hose and/or supply lines, or in rare instances, by the skid plate, if present.In some cases the weight of the tank sufficiently strained the hoses and fittings and caused separation and subsequent fuel leaks from those connections.The fire hazard created by leaking gasoline is increased by the possible presence of sparks created by the metal tank being dragged along the road.Corrosion of the straps appears to be caused by prolonged exposure to road deicers, frequently road salt, used to treat snow or ice covered roads.States in which large quantities of deicers are applied to roads during the winter season (salt belt states) account for the predominant portion of strap failures.Vehicles in these salt belt states are prone to experience corrosion related failures more frequently and earlier in a vehicle?s life cycle.Ford reports approximately 97 percent of reports it received relating to strap failure involve vehicles that were operated in these high corrosion areas, and 95 percent of the reports to NHTSA involved such vehicles.Approximately one-third of F-150 U.S. production was sold in salt belt states.ODI has included in the above counts reports it has received from consumers and reports it has received from Ford in which either the complaint involved confirmed strap corrosion or ODI's assessment of available information suggests corrosion caused the reported problem.Among the incidents reported to NHTSA, 441 involved one or both straps failing due to corrosion, 353 involved the fuel tank dropping and/or dragging on the ground, and 180 involved fuel leakage.ODI has received four reports of strap failure in which the leaking fuel ignited but self-extinguished, and one incident in which fire destroyed the vehicle and injured its driver.Ford reported the same injury incident and three other unique fire incidents, including two in which the leaking fuel ignited and fire destroyed the vehicle.There were no injuries associated with the three unique Ford incidents.Ford has agreed to conduct a recall to repair the subject vehicles.The recall will cover vehicles that were originally sold or are currently registered in salt belt states (regardless of vehicle age).The vehiclesincluded in the recall are those subject vehicles that are, or have ever been, registered in Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, or the District of Columbia.Ford's recall action appears to adequately address the problem at this time.The above vehicle population (1,340,349) includes subject vehicles originally delivered or sold in salt belt states.ODI does not know the current or historical locations of all subject vehicles.According to Ford approximately 73% of the recall population is currently registered (a 27% attrition rate).Ford is also recalling certain MY 1997-1999 F-250 vehicles (under 8,500 GVWR), and MY2002-2003 Lincoln Blackwood vehicles for the same condition, resulting in an estimated 1.1 million total vehicles
Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly:mounting
One or both of the steel straps holding up the fuel tank and attaching it to the truck frame can corrode and fail (break or separate).If one strap fails, the tank may tilt and drop and possibly contact the road surface.If both straps break, the entire tank may drop to the road.If either failure occurs while the vehicle is being driven, contact with the road can abrade the tank and create a hole from which gasoline can spill.When the tank drops, it remains attached to the vehicle only by the fuel filler hose and/or supply lines, or in rare instances, by the skid plate, if present.In some cases the weight of the tank sufficiently strained the hoses and fittings and caused separation and subsequent fuel leaks from those connections.The fire hazard created by leaking gasoline is increased by the possible presence of sparks created by the metal tank being dragged along the road.Corrosion of the straps appears to be caused by prolonged exposure to road deicers, frequently road salt, used to treat snow or ice covered roads.States in which large quantities of deicers are applied to roads during the winter season (salt belt states) account for the predominant portion of strap failures.Vehicles in these salt belt states are prone to experience corrosion related failures more frequently and earlier in a vehicle?s life cycle.Ford reports approximately 97 percent of reports it received relating to strap failure involve vehicles that were operated in these high corrosion areas, and 95 percent of the reports to NHTSA involved such vehicles.Approximately one-third of F-150 U.S. production was sold in salt belt states.ODI has included in the above counts reports it has received from consumers and reports it has received from Ford in which either the complaint involved confirmed strap corrosion or ODI's assessment of available information suggests corrosion caused the reported problem.Among the incidents reported to NHTSA, 441 involved one or both straps failing due to corrosion, 353 involved the fuel tank dropping and/or dragging on the ground, and 180 involved fuel leakage.ODI has received four reports of strap failure in which the leaking fuel ignited but self-extinguished, and one incident in which fire destroyed the vehicle and injured its driver.Ford reported the same injury incident and three other unique fire incidents, including two in which the leaking fuel ignited and fire destroyed the vehicle.There were no injuries associated with the three unique Ford incidents.Ford has agreed to conduct a recall to repair the subject vehicles.The recall will cover vehicles that were originally sold or are currently registered in salt belt states (regardless of vehicle age).The vehiclesincluded in the recall are those subject vehicles that are, or have ever been, registered in Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, or the District of Columbia.Ford's recall action appears to adequately address the problem at this time.The above vehicle population (1,340,349) includes subject vehicles originally delivered or sold in salt belt states.ODI does not know the current or historical locations of all subject vehicles.According to Ford approximately 73% of the recall population is currently registered (a 27% attrition rate).Ford is also recalling certain MY 1997-1999 F-250 vehicles (under 8,500 GVWR), and MY2002-2003 Lincoln Blackwood vehicles for the same condition, resulting in an estimated 1.1 million total vehicles
Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly
One or both of the steel straps holding up the fuel tank and attaching it to the truck frame can corrode and fail (break or separate).If one strap fails, the tank may tilt and drop and possibly contact the road surface.If both straps break, the entire tank may drop to the road.If either failure occurs while the vehicle is being driven, contact with the road can abrade the tank and create a hole from which gasoline can spill.When the tank drops, it remains attached to the vehicle only by the fuel filler hose and/or supply lines, or in rare instances, by the skid plate, if present.In some cases the weight of the tank sufficiently strained the hoses and fittings and caused separation and subsequent fuel leaks from those connections.The fire hazard created by leaking gasoline is increased by the possible presence of sparks created by the metal tank being dragged along the road.Corrosion of the straps appears to be caused by prolonged exposure to road deicers, frequently road salt, used to treat snow or ice covered roads.States in which large quantities of deicers are applied to roads during the winter season (salt belt states) account for the predominant portion of strap failures.Vehicles in these salt belt states are prone to experience corrosion related failures more frequently and earlier in a vehicle?s life cycle.Ford reports approximately 97 percent of reports it received relating to strap failure involve vehicles that were operated in these high corrosion areas, and 95 percent of the reports to NHTSA involved such vehicles.Approximately one-third of F-150 U.S. production was sold in salt belt states.ODI has included in the above counts reports it has received from consumers and reports it has received from Ford in which either the complaint involved confirmed strap corrosion or ODI's assessment of available information suggests corrosion caused the reported problem.Among the incidents reported to NHTSA, 441 involved one or both straps failing due to corrosion, 353 involved the fuel tank dropping and/or dragging on the ground, and 180 involved fuel leakage.ODI has received four reports of strap failure in which the leaking fuel ignited but self-extinguished, and one incident in which fire destroyed the vehicle and injured its driver.Ford reported the same injury incident and three other unique fire incidents, including two in which the leaking fuel ignited and fire destroyed the vehicle.There were no injuries associated with the three unique Ford incidents.Ford has agreed to conduct a recall to repair the subject vehicles.The recall will cover vehicles that were originally sold or are currently registered in salt belt states (regardless of vehicle age).The vehiclesincluded in the recall are those subject vehicles that are, or have ever been, registered in Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, or the District of Columbia.Ford's recall action appears to adequately address the problem at this time.The above vehicle population (1,340,349) includes subject vehicles originally delivered or sold in salt belt states.ODI does not know the current or historical locations of all subject vehicles.According to Ford approximately 73% of the recall population is currently registered (a 27% attrition rate).Ford is also recalling certain MY 1997-1999 F-250 vehicles (under 8,500 GVWR), and MY2002-2003 Lincoln Blackwood vehicles for the same condition, resulting in an estimated 1.1 million total vehicles
Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly:mounting
One or both of the steel straps holding up the fuel tank and attaching it to the truck frame can corrode and fail (break or separate).If one strap fails, the tank may tilt and drop and possibly contact the road surface.If both straps break, the entire tank may drop to the road.If either failure occurs while the vehicle is being driven, contact with the road can abrade the tank and create a hole from which gasoline can spill.When the tank drops, it remains attached to the vehicle only by the fuel filler hose and/or supply lines, or in rare instances, by the skid plate, if present.In some cases the weight of the tank sufficiently strained the hoses and fittings and caused separation and subsequent fuel leaks from those connections.The fire hazard created by leaking gasoline is increased by the possible presence of sparks created by the metal tank being dragged along the road.Corrosion of the straps appears to be caused by prolonged exposure to road deicers, frequently road salt, used to treat snow or ice covered roads.States in which large quantities of deicers are applied to roads during the winter season (salt belt states) account for the predominant portion of strap failures.Vehicles in these salt belt states are prone to experience corrosion related failures more frequently and earlier in a vehicle?s life cycle.Ford reports approximately 97 percent of reports it received relating to strap failure involve vehicles that were operated in these high corrosion areas, and 95 percent of the reports to NHTSA involved such vehicles.Approximately one-third of F-150 U.S. production was sold in salt belt states.ODI has included in the above counts reports it has received from consumers and reports it has received from Ford in which either the complaint involved confirmed strap corrosion or ODI's assessment of available information suggests corrosion caused the reported problem.Among the incidents reported to NHTSA, 441 involved one or both straps failing due to corrosion, 353 involved the fuel tank dropping and/or dragging on the ground, and 180 involved fuel leakage.ODI has received four reports of strap failure in which the leaking fuel ignited but self-extinguished, and one incident in which fire destroyed the vehicle and injured its driver.Ford reported the same injury incident and three other unique fire incidents, including two in which the leaking fuel ignited and fire destroyed the vehicle.There were no injuries associated with the three unique Ford incidents.Ford has agreed to conduct a recall to repair the subject vehicles.The recall will cover vehicles that were originally sold or are currently registered in salt belt states (regardless of vehicle age).The vehiclesincluded in the recall are those subject vehicles that are, or have ever been, registered in Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, or the District of Columbia.Ford's recall action appears to adequately address the problem at this time.The above vehicle population (1,340,349) includes subject vehicles originally delivered or sold in salt belt states.ODI does not know the current or historical locations of all subject vehicles.According to Ford approximately 73% of the recall population is currently registered (a 27% attrition rate).Ford is also recalling certain MY 1997-1999 F-250 vehicles (under 8,500 GVWR), and MY2002-2003 Lincoln Blackwood vehicles for the same condition, resulting in an estimated 1.1 million total vehicles
EA10001 · Inadvertent Airbag Deployment
Opened Jan 13, 2010 · Closed Apr 25, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags; Air Bags:frontal; Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:sensor/control MODULE-INACTIVE
ODI opened this investigation based on reports of inadvertent airbag deployment.Data provided by Ford indicated that the airbag clockspring jumper wire, which is situated inside the steering wheel assembly, was installed in a manner that would allow it to rub (abrade) against a sharp metal edge on the nearby horn plate.Because the horn plate is electrically grounded the abrasion of an airbag wire on the sharp edge could cause a short circuit condition.As a result the airbag light may illuminate and/or the airbag may inadvertently deploy.Inadvertent deployments are most likely to occur during the airbag system's self-diagnostic test that initiates when the ignition switch is turned on.Ford modified the vehicle design in late January 2006 adding a protective tape over the sharp metal edge of the horn plate.Ford made additional design changes on MY 2007 vehicles to the horn plate, the clockspring jumper, and the connector layouts to further address this issue.ODI identified 318 deployment incidents with 121 alleged injury reports from subject vehicles.All but one of the incident and injury reports occurred in vehicles built before the January 2006 modification.In addition, there was one incident and alleged injury reported in the MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles that share the same design. In letters dated February 21 and April 11, 2011, Ford announced a recall of all of the approximately 1.3 million MY 2004-2006 F-150 vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006, the date the initial vehicle modification was made.In addition, approximately 14,000 MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006 will also be recalled.Vehicles built after that date, which contain the modification, are not within the recall scope.Accordingly the investigation is closed.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Air Bags
ODI opened this investigation based on reports of inadvertent airbag deployment.Data provided by Ford indicated that the airbag clockspring jumper wire, which is situated inside the steering wheel assembly, was installed in a manner that would allow it to rub (abrade) against a sharp metal edge on the nearby horn plate.Because the horn plate is electrically grounded the abrasion of an airbag wire on the sharp edge could cause a short circuit condition.As a result the airbag light may illuminate and/or the airbag may inadvertently deploy.Inadvertent deployments are most likely to occur during the airbag system's self-diagnostic test that initiates when the ignition switch is turned on.Ford modified the vehicle design in late January 2006 adding a protective tape over the sharp metal edge of the horn plate.Ford made additional design changes on MY 2007 vehicles to the horn plate, the clockspring jumper, and the connector layouts to further address this issue.ODI identified 318 deployment incidents with 121 alleged injury reports from subject vehicles.All but one of the incident and injury reports occurred in vehicles built before the January 2006 modification.In addition, there was one incident and alleged injury reported in the MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles that share the same design. In letters dated February 21 and April 11, 2011, Ford announced a recall of all of the approximately 1.3 million MY 2004-2006 F-150 vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006, the date the initial vehicle modification was made.In addition, approximately 14,000 MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006 will also be recalled.Vehicles built after that date, which contain the modification, are not within the recall scope.Accordingly the investigation is closed.
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
ODI opened this investigation based on reports of inadvertent airbag deployment.Data provided by Ford indicated that the airbag clockspring jumper wire, which is situated inside the steering wheel assembly, was installed in a manner that would allow it to rub (abrade) against a sharp metal edge on the nearby horn plate.Because the horn plate is electrically grounded the abrasion of an airbag wire on the sharp edge could cause a short circuit condition.As a result the airbag light may illuminate and/or the airbag may inadvertently deploy.Inadvertent deployments are most likely to occur during the airbag system's self-diagnostic test that initiates when the ignition switch is turned on.Ford modified the vehicle design in late January 2006 adding a protective tape over the sharp metal edge of the horn plate.Ford made additional design changes on MY 2007 vehicles to the horn plate, the clockspring jumper, and the connector layouts to further address this issue.ODI identified 318 deployment incidents with 121 alleged injury reports from subject vehicles.All but one of the incident and injury reports occurred in vehicles built before the January 2006 modification.In addition, there was one incident and alleged injury reported in the MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles that share the same design. In letters dated February 21 and April 11, 2011, Ford announced a recall of all of the approximately 1.3 million MY 2004-2006 F-150 vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006, the date the initial vehicle modification was made.In addition, approximately 14,000 MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006 will also be recalled.Vehicles built after that date, which contain the modification, are not within the recall scope.Accordingly the investigation is closed.
Air Bags:frontal
ODI opened this investigation based on reports of inadvertent airbag deployment.Data provided by Ford indicated that the airbag clockspring jumper wire, which is situated inside the steering wheel assembly, was installed in a manner that would allow it to rub (abrade) against a sharp metal edge on the nearby horn plate.Because the horn plate is electrically grounded the abrasion of an airbag wire on the sharp edge could cause a short circuit condition.As a result the airbag light may illuminate and/or the airbag may inadvertently deploy.Inadvertent deployments are most likely to occur during the airbag system's self-diagnostic test that initiates when the ignition switch is turned on.Ford modified the vehicle design in late January 2006 adding a protective tape over the sharp metal edge of the horn plate.Ford made additional design changes on MY 2007 vehicles to the horn plate, the clockspring jumper, and the connector layouts to further address this issue.ODI identified 318 deployment incidents with 121 alleged injury reports from subject vehicles.All but one of the incident and injury reports occurred in vehicles built before the January 2006 modification.In addition, there was one incident and alleged injury reported in the MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles that share the same design. In letters dated February 21 and April 11, 2011, Ford announced a recall of all of the approximately 1.3 million MY 2004-2006 F-150 vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006, the date the initial vehicle modification was made.In addition, approximately 14,000 MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006 will also be recalled.Vehicles built after that date, which contain the modification, are not within the recall scope.Accordingly the investigation is closed.
Air Bags:frontal:sensor/control MODULE-INACTIVE
ODI opened this investigation based on reports of inadvertent airbag deployment.Data provided by Ford indicated that the airbag clockspring jumper wire, which is situated inside the steering wheel assembly, was installed in a manner that would allow it to rub (abrade) against a sharp metal edge on the nearby horn plate.Because the horn plate is electrically grounded the abrasion of an airbag wire on the sharp edge could cause a short circuit condition.As a result the airbag light may illuminate and/or the airbag may inadvertently deploy.Inadvertent deployments are most likely to occur during the airbag system's self-diagnostic test that initiates when the ignition switch is turned on.Ford modified the vehicle design in late January 2006 adding a protective tape over the sharp metal edge of the horn plate.Ford made additional design changes on MY 2007 vehicles to the horn plate, the clockspring jumper, and the connector layouts to further address this issue.ODI identified 318 deployment incidents with 121 alleged injury reports from subject vehicles.All but one of the incident and injury reports occurred in vehicles built before the January 2006 modification.In addition, there was one incident and alleged injury reported in the MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles that share the same design. In letters dated February 21 and April 11, 2011, Ford announced a recall of all of the approximately 1.3 million MY 2004-2006 F-150 vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006, the date the initial vehicle modification was made.In addition, approximately 14,000 MY 2006 Mark LT vehicles built prior to January 24, 2006 will also be recalled.Vehicles built after that date, which contain the modification, are not within the recall scope.Accordingly the investigation is closed.
PE08063 · Cng Regulator Leak
Opened Oct 31, 2008 · Closed Feb 27, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Other; Fuel System, Other:delivery; Fuel System, Other:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings; Fuel System, Other:fuel Injection System
THE AGENCY HAS CLOSED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON ITS REVIEW OF COMPLAINT REPORTS, DISCUSSIONS WITH COMPLAINANTS AND FIELD AND TECHNICAL DATA PROVIDED BY FORD.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCKS AND ARE NATURAL GAS VEHICLES (NGV) THAT ARE FUELED BY GASOLINE OR COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS.THE AGENCY HAS RECEIVED REPORTS ALLEGING IMPROPER OPERATION OF THE NATURAL GAS FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR ALLOWING RELEASE OF EXCESS AMOUNTS OF NATURAL GAS INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT.FORD REPORTS THAT THE REGULATOR CONTAINS AN OVER PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE THAT WILL VENT NATURAL GAS SHOULD THE PRESSURE EXCEED A SET THRESHOLD.THE COMPLAINT REPORTS AND DATA REVIEWED BY THE AGENCY INDICATE THAT AN IMPROPERLY OPERATING PRESSURE REGULATOR CAN RESULT IN AN OVERPRESSURE CONDITION AND ACTIVATE THE REGULATOR PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE.THE RELEASED NATURAL GAS IS DIRECTED THROUGH A VENT HOSE THAT DISCHARGES THE NATURAL GAS IN THE VICINITY OF THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL HOUSE AND AWAY FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT'S EXTREMELY HOT AREAS/SURFACES.OWNERS ARE NORMALLY AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM BY THE PRESENCE OF AN ILLUMINATED WARNING LIGHT INSIDE THE VEHICLE, ODOR OF NATURAL GAS OR THE SOUND OF VENTING GAS.WHEN THE OPERATOR TURNS THE ENGINE OFF, THE NATURAL GAS SUPPLY TANK SOLENOID WILL CLOSE AND THE REGULATOR WILL NOT RELEASE NATURAL GAS.AT VEHICLE RESTART, THE SOLENOID VALVE WILL REMAIN CLOSED TO PREVENT LEAKAGE AND THE VEHICLE WILL ONLY OPERATE IN THE GASOLINE MODE.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL MONITOR THIS ISSUE AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Fuel System, Other:delivery
THE AGENCY HAS CLOSED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON ITS REVIEW OF COMPLAINT REPORTS, DISCUSSIONS WITH COMPLAINANTS AND FIELD AND TECHNICAL DATA PROVIDED BY FORD.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCKS AND ARE NATURAL GAS VEHICLES (NGV) THAT ARE FUELED BY GASOLINE OR COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS.THE AGENCY HAS RECEIVED REPORTS ALLEGING IMPROPER OPERATION OF THE NATURAL GAS FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR ALLOWING RELEASE OF EXCESS AMOUNTS OF NATURAL GAS INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT.FORD REPORTS THAT THE REGULATOR CONTAINS AN OVER PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE THAT WILL VENT NATURAL GAS SHOULD THE PRESSURE EXCEED A SET THRESHOLD.THE COMPLAINT REPORTS AND DATA REVIEWED BY THE AGENCY INDICATE THAT AN IMPROPERLY OPERATING PRESSURE REGULATOR CAN RESULT IN AN OVERPRESSURE CONDITION AND ACTIVATE THE REGULATOR PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE.THE RELEASED NATURAL GAS IS DIRECTED THROUGH A VENT HOSE THAT DISCHARGES THE NATURAL GAS IN THE VICINITY OF THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL HOUSE AND AWAY FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT'S EXTREMELY HOT AREAS/SURFACES.OWNERS ARE NORMALLY AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM BY THE PRESENCE OF AN ILLUMINATED WARNING LIGHT INSIDE THE VEHICLE, ODOR OF NATURAL GAS OR THE SOUND OF VENTING GAS.WHEN THE OPERATOR TURNS THE ENGINE OFF, THE NATURAL GAS SUPPLY TANK SOLENOID WILL CLOSE AND THE REGULATOR WILL NOT RELEASE NATURAL GAS.AT VEHICLE RESTART, THE SOLENOID VALVE WILL REMAIN CLOSED TO PREVENT LEAKAGE AND THE VEHICLE WILL ONLY OPERATE IN THE GASOLINE MODE.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL MONITOR THIS ISSUE AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Fuel System, Other:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
THE AGENCY HAS CLOSED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON ITS REVIEW OF COMPLAINT REPORTS, DISCUSSIONS WITH COMPLAINANTS AND FIELD AND TECHNICAL DATA PROVIDED BY FORD.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCKS AND ARE NATURAL GAS VEHICLES (NGV) THAT ARE FUELED BY GASOLINE OR COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS.THE AGENCY HAS RECEIVED REPORTS ALLEGING IMPROPER OPERATION OF THE NATURAL GAS FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR ALLOWING RELEASE OF EXCESS AMOUNTS OF NATURAL GAS INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT.FORD REPORTS THAT THE REGULATOR CONTAINS AN OVER PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE THAT WILL VENT NATURAL GAS SHOULD THE PRESSURE EXCEED A SET THRESHOLD.THE COMPLAINT REPORTS AND DATA REVIEWED BY THE AGENCY INDICATE THAT AN IMPROPERLY OPERATING PRESSURE REGULATOR CAN RESULT IN AN OVERPRESSURE CONDITION AND ACTIVATE THE REGULATOR PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE.THE RELEASED NATURAL GAS IS DIRECTED THROUGH A VENT HOSE THAT DISCHARGES THE NATURAL GAS IN THE VICINITY OF THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL HOUSE AND AWAY FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT'S EXTREMELY HOT AREAS/SURFACES.OWNERS ARE NORMALLY AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM BY THE PRESENCE OF AN ILLUMINATED WARNING LIGHT INSIDE THE VEHICLE, ODOR OF NATURAL GAS OR THE SOUND OF VENTING GAS.WHEN THE OPERATOR TURNS THE ENGINE OFF, THE NATURAL GAS SUPPLY TANK SOLENOID WILL CLOSE AND THE REGULATOR WILL NOT RELEASE NATURAL GAS.AT VEHICLE RESTART, THE SOLENOID VALVE WILL REMAIN CLOSED TO PREVENT LEAKAGE AND THE VEHICLE WILL ONLY OPERATE IN THE GASOLINE MODE.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL MONITOR THIS ISSUE AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Fuel System, Other
THE AGENCY HAS CLOSED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON ITS REVIEW OF COMPLAINT REPORTS, DISCUSSIONS WITH COMPLAINANTS AND FIELD AND TECHNICAL DATA PROVIDED BY FORD.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCKS AND ARE NATURAL GAS VEHICLES (NGV) THAT ARE FUELED BY GASOLINE OR COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS.THE AGENCY HAS RECEIVED REPORTS ALLEGING IMPROPER OPERATION OF THE NATURAL GAS FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR ALLOWING RELEASE OF EXCESS AMOUNTS OF NATURAL GAS INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT.FORD REPORTS THAT THE REGULATOR CONTAINS AN OVER PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE THAT WILL VENT NATURAL GAS SHOULD THE PRESSURE EXCEED A SET THRESHOLD.THE COMPLAINT REPORTS AND DATA REVIEWED BY THE AGENCY INDICATE THAT AN IMPROPERLY OPERATING PRESSURE REGULATOR CAN RESULT IN AN OVERPRESSURE CONDITION AND ACTIVATE THE REGULATOR PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE.THE RELEASED NATURAL GAS IS DIRECTED THROUGH A VENT HOSE THAT DISCHARGES THE NATURAL GAS IN THE VICINITY OF THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL HOUSE AND AWAY FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT'S EXTREMELY HOT AREAS/SURFACES.OWNERS ARE NORMALLY AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM BY THE PRESENCE OF AN ILLUMINATED WARNING LIGHT INSIDE THE VEHICLE, ODOR OF NATURAL GAS OR THE SOUND OF VENTING GAS.WHEN THE OPERATOR TURNS THE ENGINE OFF, THE NATURAL GAS SUPPLY TANK SOLENOID WILL CLOSE AND THE REGULATOR WILL NOT RELEASE NATURAL GAS.AT VEHICLE RESTART, THE SOLENOID VALVE WILL REMAIN CLOSED TO PREVENT LEAKAGE AND THE VEHICLE WILL ONLY OPERATE IN THE GASOLINE MODE.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL MONITOR THIS ISSUE AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Fuel System, Other:fuel Injection System
THE AGENCY HAS CLOSED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON ITS REVIEW OF COMPLAINT REPORTS, DISCUSSIONS WITH COMPLAINANTS AND FIELD AND TECHNICAL DATA PROVIDED BY FORD.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCKS AND ARE NATURAL GAS VEHICLES (NGV) THAT ARE FUELED BY GASOLINE OR COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS.THE AGENCY HAS RECEIVED REPORTS ALLEGING IMPROPER OPERATION OF THE NATURAL GAS FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR ALLOWING RELEASE OF EXCESS AMOUNTS OF NATURAL GAS INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT.FORD REPORTS THAT THE REGULATOR CONTAINS AN OVER PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE THAT WILL VENT NATURAL GAS SHOULD THE PRESSURE EXCEED A SET THRESHOLD.THE COMPLAINT REPORTS AND DATA REVIEWED BY THE AGENCY INDICATE THAT AN IMPROPERLY OPERATING PRESSURE REGULATOR CAN RESULT IN AN OVERPRESSURE CONDITION AND ACTIVATE THE REGULATOR PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE.THE RELEASED NATURAL GAS IS DIRECTED THROUGH A VENT HOSE THAT DISCHARGES THE NATURAL GAS IN THE VICINITY OF THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL HOUSE AND AWAY FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT'S EXTREMELY HOT AREAS/SURFACES.OWNERS ARE NORMALLY AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM BY THE PRESENCE OF AN ILLUMINATED WARNING LIGHT INSIDE THE VEHICLE, ODOR OF NATURAL GAS OR THE SOUND OF VENTING GAS.WHEN THE OPERATOR TURNS THE ENGINE OFF, THE NATURAL GAS SUPPLY TANK SOLENOID WILL CLOSE AND THE REGULATOR WILL NOT RELEASE NATURAL GAS.AT VEHICLE RESTART, THE SOLENOID VALVE WILL REMAIN CLOSED TO PREVENT LEAKAGE AND THE VEHICLE WILL ONLY OPERATE IN THE GASOLINE MODE.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL MONITOR THIS ISSUE AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
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.