IllustrationTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-150. WHILE DRIVING 30 MPH, THE SUN ROOF EXPLODED INTO PIECES. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. A DEALER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 247,000.
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
Visibility complaints
841 reportsTHE MIRROR(S) ARE FULL OF CORROSION AND THE DRIVERS SIDE MIRROR FELL RIGHT OFF THE CAR WHILE DRIVING. *TR
I HAVE HAD SUNROOF FIXED TWICE. KEEPS JUMPING OFF TRACK & NOW NEED TO GET IT FIXED FOR THIRD TIME. ALSO, ALL 4 POWER WINDOWS HAVE FAILED AND HAD TO BE FIXED A FEW TIMES. *TR
DRIVING DOWN MY STREET THE WINDOW JUST CRASHED DOWN! IT FELL SO FAST AND HARD THAT I HAD TO LOOK TO MY RIGHT SIDE TO SEE WHAT HIT ME! AT THAT POINT I REAR ENDED A CAR THAT SLOWED DOWN! ALL THIS IS DO TO A CHEAP PLASTIC CLIP THAT FAILED AND RELEASED THE WINDOW. *TR
ON MY 2004 FORD F150 XLT LARIAT SUPERCAB, THE PASSENGER REAR WINDOW REGULATOR HAS NOW FAILED. THE DRIVER'S ONE WENT FIRST (WITHIN THREE YEARS OF OWNERSHIP), THEN THE FRONT PASSENGER ONE (A FEW MONTHS LATER) THEN THE REAR PASSENGER ONE ( ABOUT A YEAR AFTER THE FIRST) AND NOW THIS. ALL FOUR REGULATORS HAVE HAD TO BE REPLACED FRO…
Read full complaint
ON MY 2004 FORD F150 XLT LARIAT SUPERCAB, THE PASSENGER REAR WINDOW REGULATOR HAS NOW FAILED. THE DRIVER'S ONE WENT FIRST (WITHIN THREE YEARS OF OWNERSHIP), THEN THE FRONT PASSENGER ONE (A FEW MONTHS LATER) THEN THE REAR PASSENGER ONE ( ABOUT A YEAR AFTER THE FIRST) AND NOW THIS. ALL FOUR REGULATORS HAVE HAD TO BE REPLACED FROM THE ORIGINAL FACTORY INSTALLED ONES. THIS LATEST ONE OCCURRED WHILE THE TRUCK SAT PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY UNOCCUPIED; ALL THE OTHERS HAPPENED ON THE ROADWAY WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION. *TR
THIS IS MY SECOND WINDOW REGULATOR TO BREAK. THE FIRST WAS THE REAR PASSENGER WINDOW SEVERAL MONTHS AGO. WHILE DRIVING ON EXPRESSWAY AT 60 MPH I HEARD A POP AND THEN AIR NOISE. (I SELDOM USE THE REAR WINDOWS.) THE MECHANIC HAD TO REPLACE REGULATOR AND MOTOR BECAUSE THAT WAS ALL THE DEALER HAD IN STOCK. TODAY I HAD WINDOW DOWN …
Read full complaint
THIS IS MY SECOND WINDOW REGULATOR TO BREAK. THE FIRST WAS THE REAR PASSENGER WINDOW SEVERAL MONTHS AGO. WHILE DRIVING ON EXPRESSWAY AT 60 MPH I HEARD A POP AND THEN AIR NOISE. (I SELDOM USE THE REAR WINDOWS.) THE MECHANIC HAD TO REPLACE REGULATOR AND MOTOR BECAUSE THAT WAS ALL THE DEALER HAD IN STOCK. TODAY I HAD WINDOW DOWN ABOUT AN INCH WHILE PARKED. GOT IN TRUCK AND RAISED FRONT PASSENGER WINDOW AND HEARD POP. I KNEW WHAT THE PROBLEM FROM LAST TIME AND WITH TALKING TO OTHER FORD TRUCK OWNERS. A FRIEND HAS THE SAME MODEL TRUCK AND HAS REPLACE THREE OF THE FOUR REGULATORS IN HIS FORD TRUCK. WHEN I BEGAN DRIVING THE WINDOW DROPPED. THIS TRUCK HAS NEVER BEEN DRIVEN HARD OR OFF ROAD. THERE HAS TO BE SOME FLAW IN THESE REGULATORS. I AM 66 YEARS OLD AND HAVE OWNED MANY DIFFERENT MAKES AND MODEL OF VEHICLES AND THIS SEEMS TO BE A COMMON THREAD FOR THESE FORD TRUCKS. *TR
I WAS DOING A DAY TRIP HAULING HORSES BY MYSELF WHEN I WAS GETTING READY TO HEAD HOME WHEN I HEARD THIS TERRIBLE NOISE AND SOON WATCHED THE REAR RIGHT WINDOW DISAPPEAR AND WOULD NOT GO BACK UP. I TOOK IT INTO FORD TODAY AND WAS TOLD IT WOULD COST $300 TO FIX BUT THEY DID NOT HAVE IN STOCK AND THAT IT WAS THE REGULATOR THAT WENT…
Read full complaint
I WAS DOING A DAY TRIP HAULING HORSES BY MYSELF WHEN I WAS GETTING READY TO HEAD HOME WHEN I HEARD THIS TERRIBLE NOISE AND SOON WATCHED THE REAR RIGHT WINDOW DISAPPEAR AND WOULD NOT GO BACK UP. I TOOK IT INTO FORD TODAY AND WAS TOLD IT WOULD COST $300 TO FIX BUT THEY DID NOT HAVE IN STOCK AND THAT IT WAS THE REGULATOR THAT WENT OUT. I HAD THEM CHECK THE RIGHT FRONT WINDOW AS WELL AS IT WOULD GO DOWN BUT WOULD NOT GO UP USING THAT DOOR WINDOW SWITCH AND THAT THE SWITCH NEEDS REPLACED AND THAT WOULD BE $130 DOLLARS AND AGAIN PART WAS NOT IN STOCK SO COULD NOT REPLACE. SO WHEN I WENT IN TO GET MY TRUCK ALL OF A SUDDEN I FIND OUT THAT OTHER THAN THE OIL CHANGE WHICH I EXPECTED MY BILL JUST FOR THEM TO LOOK AT AND OIL CHANGE WAS OVER $190.00 AND MY WINDOWS WERE NOT FIXED YET AND NOT TOLD AHEAD OF TIME WHAT THE CHARGE MIGHT BE SO THE EXTRA $150 WAS TOTALLY NOT BUDGETS. BUT HAD TO PAY AS I NEEDED MY TRUCK TO GET HOME. I ALSO FOUND OUT THAT MY BROTHER IN LAWS TRUCK ALSO A 2004 HAD A VIN NUMBER SET THAT FORD DID REPLACE THE REGULATOR BUT NOT FOR MY VIN NUMBER. NOW THAT REALLY UPSET US A LOT ESPECIALLY FINDING OUT OTHERS HAVE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM AND THAT WE COULD HAVE ISSUES WITH THE OTHER THREE WINDOWS. FORD REALLY NEEDS TO RECALLED ALL 2004 F150 DOOR REGULATORS BEFORE SOMEONE REALLY GETS HURT AS IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE IF GLASS WAS TO BREAK IF IT HAD HAPPENED WHILE IN ROUTE. PLUS WAS NOT COVERED BY MY EXTENDED WARRANTY SO EVIDENTLY THE WARRANTY COMPANIES ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM IF THEY EXCLUDE IT. *TR
I STARTED UP MY TRUCK IN MY DRIVEWAY AND BEGAN TO LOWER THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE WINDOWS WHEN THE DRIVERSIDE WINDOW JUST FELL DOWN. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-150. THE CONTACT STATED THAT ALL FOUR WINDOWS FAILED TO OPERATE AND COULD NOT BE CLOSED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE IT WAS ADVISED TO THE CONTACT THAT THE WINDOW MECHANISM NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILU…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-150. THE CONTACT STATED THAT ALL FOUR WINDOWS FAILED TO OPERATE AND COULD NOT BE CLOSED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE IT WAS ADVISED TO THE CONTACT THAT THE WINDOW MECHANISM NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 47,835. *TR UPDATED 7/15/13 *CN
REPLACED TWO WINDOW REGULATORS IN VEHICLE. DRIVER'S WINDOWN AND PASSENGER WINDOW.
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.