← New search

2004 Ford F-250 Sd

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most F-250 Sd years

Owner complaints for the 2004 Ford F-250 Sd are substantially higher than the model-year median of 89.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

226 reports with mileage · 28 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 101 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 56 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 21 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

13 crash reports12 fire reports9 injury reports

What owners actually said

254 reports
Mileage unknown · Jun 18, 2013
Tires

YOKOHAMA GEOLANDER A/T-S LT315/75R16 CRACKING AND SEPARATION OF TIRE TREAD AROUND ENTIRE CIRCUMFERENCE OF TIRES. ALL 4 TIRES PURCHASED 6/7/07 HAD 50% TREADWEAR AND 52K MILES. THESE WERE NOT DRY ROT CRACKS. YOKOHAMA CREATED CASE# AND ISSUED A 50% CREDIT TOWARDS 4 NEW TIRES AT DISCOUNT TIRE. I HAVE PICTURES OF THE DAMAGED TIRES. …

Read full complaint

YOKOHAMA GEOLANDER A/T-S LT315/75R16 CRACKING AND SEPARATION OF TIRE TREAD AROUND ENTIRE CIRCUMFERENCE OF TIRES. ALL 4 TIRES PURCHASED 6/7/07 HAD 50% TREADWEAR AND 52K MILES. THESE WERE NOT DRY ROT CRACKS. YOKOHAMA CREATED CASE# AND ISSUED A 50% CREDIT TOWARDS 4 NEW TIRES AT DISCOUNT TIRE. I HAVE PICTURES OF THE DAMAGED TIRES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10520534

175,000 miles · May 5, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion System

DRIVING ON INTERSTATE 65MPH. ENGINE STARTED BINDING DOWN AND SPEED DROPPED TO 25MPH AND FINALLY COMPLETELY DIED. HAD IT TOWED HOME. NOW WON'T START. HAVE REPLACED EGR COOLER AND OIL COOLER PREVIOUSLY . THIS TIME REPLACED FUEL PUMP AND ALL FUEL FILTERS. WILL CRANK AND RUN FOR A VERY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME THEN WILL DIE AGAIN-…

Read full complaint

DRIVING ON INTERSTATE 65MPH. ENGINE STARTED BINDING DOWN AND SPEED DROPPED TO 25MPH AND FINALLY COMPLETELY DIED. HAD IT TOWED HOME. NOW WON'T START. HAVE REPLACED EGR COOLER AND OIL COOLER PREVIOUSLY . THIS TIME REPLACED FUEL PUMP AND ALL FUEL FILTERS. WILL CRANK AND RUN FOR A VERY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME THEN WILL DIE AGAIN- AND NOT CRANK BACK FOR AWHILE. JUST REPEATS THIS PROCESS. NOW TOLD THAT IT NEEDS HEAD GASKETS OR HIGH PRESSURE PUMP. THESE PROBLEMS ARE VERY EXPENSIVE. WHY WILL FORD NOT FIX THESE PROBLEMS THAT SEEM TO BE ON ALL 6.0 DIESEL MODELS? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10510721

40,000 miles · Apr 10, 2013
Suspension

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-250 SD. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE STARTING BOUNCING ABNORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE DUPLICATED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS FOR THE S…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-250 SD. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE STARTING BOUNCING ABNORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE DUPLICATED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS FOR THE SAME FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 180,000. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10505803

114,000 miles · Feb 12, 2013
EngineCrash

CAR DIED WHILE GOING THROUGH A INTERSECTION, LOST POWER STEERING CAUSING ME TO ALMOST HIT A PEDESTRIAN AND WRECK IN TO THE CURB ALMOST HITTING THE STOP LIGHT POLE AS WELL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10497881

103,000 miles · Jan 14, 2013
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine Cooling

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-250 SD. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS, THE ENGINE FAILED TO START. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS FOUND THAT THE FUEL INJECTION CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE AN…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-250 SD. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS, THE ENGINE FAILED TO START. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS FOUND THAT THE FUEL INJECTION CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE AND INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 05V270000 (ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING). THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 103,000..... UPDATED 03/08/13 *BF

NHTSA ODI #10492933

121,000 miles · Nov 14, 2012
TiresCrash

TIRE FAILURE. B F GOODRICH UUF212210. I HAD 2 OF THE TIRE FAIL IN JUNE 2012. I HAD THE OTHER 2 TIRE EXAMINED AND WERE SAID TO BE GOOD. THE 3RD TIRE FAILED IN SEPTEMBER CAUSING MY TRUCK TO LEAVE THE HI WAY TROTALING OUT THE TRAVEL TRAILRE I WAS TOWING TO ROLL OVER AND TOTALED OUT. B F GOODRICH DENIED MY CLAIM SAYING IT WAS CAUSED…

Read full complaint

TIRE FAILURE. B F GOODRICH UUF212210. I HAD 2 OF THE TIRE FAIL IN JUNE 2012. I HAD THE OTHER 2 TIRE EXAMINED AND WERE SAID TO BE GOOD. THE 3RD TIRE FAILED IN SEPTEMBER CAUSING MY TRUCK TO LEAVE THE HI WAY TROTALING OUT THE TRAVEL TRAILRE I WAS TOWING TO ROLL OVER AND TOTALED OUT. B F GOODRICH DENIED MY CLAIM SAYING IT WAS CAUSED BY A ROAD HAZZARD. I NEVER HIT ANYTHING IN ANY OF THE TIRE FAILURES. I HAVE THE TIRE AND PHOTOS OF THE OTHER 2 TIRES THAT HAD BELT FAILURES. I DO NOT BELIEVE IN COINCIDENCE. I BELIEVE THAT THE ENTIRE SET OF TIRES WERE DEFWECTIVE AND THAT B F GOOD RICH IS TRYING TO COVER IT UP. I BELIEVE THAT AN INVESTIGATION IS IN ORDER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10484669

136,560 miles · Jun 24, 2012
SteeringSuspension

TRAVELING AT REGULAR MOTORWAY SPEEDS (55 - 70) THE TRUCK VIBRATES VIOLENTLY AND CONSTANTLY. IT STOPS ONCE THE VEHICLE SLOWS TO BELOW 30MPH. I HAVE CHECKED OTHER COMPLAINTS AND WILL BE CHECKING TIRE PRESSURE AND SEEING IT A STEERING DAMPENER CAN BE ADDED. THIS VEHICLE WAS UNLOADED AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT AND HAD ABOUT 1/2 A…

Read full complaint

TRAVELING AT REGULAR MOTORWAY SPEEDS (55 - 70) THE TRUCK VIBRATES VIOLENTLY AND CONSTANTLY. IT STOPS ONCE THE VEHICLE SLOWS TO BELOW 30MPH. I HAVE CHECKED OTHER COMPLAINTS AND WILL BE CHECKING TIRE PRESSURE AND SEEING IT A STEERING DAMPENER CAN BE ADDED. THIS VEHICLE WAS UNLOADED AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT AND HAD ABOUT 1/2 A TANK OF FUEL ON BOARD. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10462909

36,548 miles · Jun 21, 2012
Air Bags

THE AIR BAG LIGHT IN MY 2004 FORD 250 SD TRUCK CAME ON AND I CHECKED THE FUSES BUT THEY WERE NOT THE PROBLEM. A FEW WEEKS LATER I WAS TALKING WITH A SALESMAN AT A FORD DEALERSHIP ABOUT THE AIR BAG LIGHT HE SAID THIS COULD COST UP TO $1,000 TO REPAIR. I INQUIRED IF THERE HAD BEEN A RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM AND WAS INFORMED IT HA…

Read full complaint

THE AIR BAG LIGHT IN MY 2004 FORD 250 SD TRUCK CAME ON AND I CHECKED THE FUSES BUT THEY WERE NOT THE PROBLEM. A FEW WEEKS LATER I WAS TALKING WITH A SALESMAN AT A FORD DEALERSHIP ABOUT THE AIR BAG LIGHT HE SAID THIS COULD COST UP TO $1,000 TO REPAIR. I INQUIRED IF THERE HAD BEEN A RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM AND WAS INFORMED IT HAS NOT BEEN. I THINK THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED BY FORD. THIS ISN'T LIKE AN ENGINE OR TRANSMISSION ISSUE, THIS IS SAFETY! THIS BAG COULD DEPLOY AT ANYTIME AND CAUSE BODILY HARM OR EVEN DEATH! PLEASE HELP WITH THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU. *TT

NHTSA ODI #10462548

24,994 miles · Apr 12, 2012
Electrical System

IN 2004 I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE BRAND NEW. SUBSEQUENT EXPENSES TO MAINTAIN THIS VEHICLE IN WORKING CONDITION HAVE BEEN EXTENSIVE. 11/16/05- FUEL INJECTOR WIRING REPAIR, EXHAUST PRESSURE REPLACEMENT, AIR COOLER DUCT REPLACEMENT (WARRANTY) 11/1/06 - WATER IN FUEL LIGHT, THROTTLE UNEXPLAINED ACCELERATION. 1/8/07- RUNAWAY THROTTLE …

Read full complaint

IN 2004 I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE BRAND NEW. SUBSEQUENT EXPENSES TO MAINTAIN THIS VEHICLE IN WORKING CONDITION HAVE BEEN EXTENSIVE. 11/16/05- FUEL INJECTOR WIRING REPAIR, EXHAUST PRESSURE REPLACEMENT, AIR COOLER DUCT REPLACEMENT (WARRANTY) 11/1/06 - WATER IN FUEL LIGHT, THROTTLE UNEXPLAINED ACCELERATION. 1/8/07- RUNAWAY THROTTLE STALLING, HESITATION. 10/31/07- STALLING, HESITATION REPLACED MAIN WIRE HARNESS. REPLACED ELBOW ON TURBO.12/5/08- EGR COOLER FAILED, TURBO HAD WATER AND RUST, REPLACED SAME. 10/15/09- REPLACED STARTER FICM MODULE. 1/15/10 REPLACED IPR VALVE & VGT SOLENOID, EGR COOLER FAILED AGAIN. 6/8/10- DIESEL HEAD STUD PARTS FOR REPAIR. 6/24/10 - REGULATORY & KIT, GASKET-CYLINDER. 7/7/10- HEAD STUD MODIFY. 7/20/10- REPLACED HIGH PRESSURE OIL PUMP & POWER STEERING PUMP. I HAVE SPENT $15,135.17 MORE FOR REPAIRS THAT SEEM TO BE REPETITIVE AND VERY EXPENSIVE. BASED ON THE REPAIR RECORD I THINK THAT EVEN YOU WOULD SAY THAT THERE IS SOMETHING VERY WRONG WITH THIS VEHICLE'S ENGINE. I HAVE HAD THIS TRUCK FOR EIGHT YEARS AND HAVE FINALLY CONTACTED FORD MOTOR COMPANY ONLY TO LEARN THAT THEY ARE UNABLE TO ASSIST WITH THE COST OF ANY REPAIRS BEYOND THE NORMAL WARRANTY PROVISIONS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10454997

164,000 miles · Feb 4, 2012
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine Cooling

I BOUGHT THIS 2004 FORD F-250,6.0 DIESEL IN MAY 2010 WITH 160K MILES ON IT BECAUSE LOTS OF PEOPLE TOLD ME TO BUY A DIESEL IT WOULD GIVE ME BETTER PERFORMANCE THAN GAS. I HAVE HAD NOTHING BUT TROUBLES EVER SINCE. IT STARTED NOT STARTING ABOUT 2 WEEKS AFTER I BOUGHT IT. THE FORD HOUSE IS NO HELP AT ALL. IVE HAD IT THERE SEVERAL TI…

Read full complaint

I BOUGHT THIS 2004 FORD F-250,6.0 DIESEL IN MAY 2010 WITH 160K MILES ON IT BECAUSE LOTS OF PEOPLE TOLD ME TO BUY A DIESEL IT WOULD GIVE ME BETTER PERFORMANCE THAN GAS. I HAVE HAD NOTHING BUT TROUBLES EVER SINCE. IT STARTED NOT STARTING ABOUT 2 WEEKS AFTER I BOUGHT IT. THE FORD HOUSE IS NO HELP AT ALL. IVE HAD IT THERE SEVERAL TIMES AND ALL IT DONE WAS COST ME MONEY. IT HAS NEVER STOPPED RUNNING DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD LIKE THE OTHER COMPLAINTS IV'E READ. BUT IT HAS LEFT ME STRANDED 50 OR 75 TIMES, SOMETIMES IT WILL RUN PERFECT FOR MONTHS AND ALL AT ONCE IT WONT START. SHOWING NO CODES FORD SAYS THEY CANT DO A THING. IN JULY LAST SUMMER IT DID IT 1500 MILES FROM HOME ON VACATION. I HAD A WRECKER TAKE IT TO A SHOP AND $7500.00 AND 6 WEEKS LATER THEY HAD PUT A NEW ENGINE IN IT (SAID THE CAMSHAFT BROKE AND SCORED THE PISTON WALL) I CAME HOME NOW 6 MONTHS LATER ITS DOING IT AGAIN. I CANT AFFORD TO TAKE IT TO FORD, I CANT TRADE IT. WHAT TO DO?? *KB

NHTSA ODI #10446700

Official recalls

2

11V352000 · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights

Jul 13, 2011

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Exterior Lighting:brake Lights

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.

Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.

Exterior Lighting:tail Lights

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.

Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.

05V270000 · Electrical System:wiring

Jun 10, 2005

CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES AND VANS EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES MAY EXPERIENCE STALLING WITHOUT WARNING WHILE DRIVING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: SHOULD THE ENGINE STALL, A VEHICLE CRASH COULD OCCUR.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL UPGRADE THE FUEL INJECTION CONTROL MODULE (FICM) WIRE HARNESS OR REPLACED, AND/OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE (ICP)) SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 22, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.

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

3

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.

EA05003 · Engine Stalling

Opened Feb 15, 2005 · Closed Nov 2, 2005

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:wiring:front Underhood; Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:diesel

IN A JUNE 7, 2005 LETTER, FORD NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 180,000 FORD F-SUPER DUTY, EXCURSION AND E-SERIES VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES TO CORRECT TWO WIRING RELATED CONDITIONS THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-270, FORD NO. 05S34).THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE BUILT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AND MAY 31, 2004.ACCORDING TO FORD, VEHICLES WITH THE CONDITIONS MAY STALL WITHOUT WARNING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS OF VEHICLES INCLUDED IN THE RECALL TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL INJECTOR CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS UPGRADED OR REPLACED AND OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED.DURING A MAY 2005 PRESENTATION TO ODI, FORD IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL FAILURE MECHANISMS THAT COULD AFFECT ENGINE PERFORMANCE IN VARIOUS SEGMENTS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION, INCLUDING THE WIRING CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY 05V-270.THE WIRING CONDITIONS, WHICH BOTH AFFECT ENGINE FUELING, WERE THE MOST LIKELY CONDITIONS TO RESULT IN ENGINE STALL.THE RECALLED VEHICLES COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 43% OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION AND ACCOUNT FOR 75 OF THE 113 ODI REPORTS THAT HAVE A VALID VIN (66%).THE VOQ COMPLAINT RATE FOR THE RECALL POPULATION IS 45/100K WHILE THE RATE FOR VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION IS 17/100K AND THEIR TREND (BY DATE OF RECEIPT) IS DECLINING.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, ODI BELIEVES FORD?S ACTIONS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT SAFETY RISKS AND THE INVESTIGATION IS THUS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IF WARRANTED BY FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES.

Additional source detail variants (3)

Electrical System:wiring:front Underhood

IN A JUNE 7, 2005 LETTER, FORD NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 180,000 FORD F-SUPER DUTY, EXCURSION AND E-SERIES VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES TO CORRECT TWO WIRING RELATED CONDITIONS THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-270, FORD NO. 05S34).THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE BUILT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AND MAY 31, 2004.ACCORDING TO FORD, VEHICLES WITH THE CONDITIONS MAY STALL WITHOUT WARNING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS OF VEHICLES INCLUDED IN THE RECALL TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL INJECTOR CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS UPGRADED OR REPLACED AND OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED.DURING A MAY 2005 PRESENTATION TO ODI, FORD IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL FAILURE MECHANISMS THAT COULD AFFECT ENGINE PERFORMANCE IN VARIOUS SEGMENTS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION, INCLUDING THE WIRING CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY 05V-270.THE WIRING CONDITIONS, WHICH BOTH AFFECT ENGINE FUELING, WERE THE MOST LIKELY CONDITIONS TO RESULT IN ENGINE STALL.THE RECALLED VEHICLES COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 43% OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION AND ACCOUNT FOR 75 OF THE 113 ODI REPORTS THAT HAVE A VALID VIN (66%).THE VOQ COMPLAINT RATE FOR THE RECALL POPULATION IS 45/100K WHILE THE RATE FOR VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION IS 17/100K AND THEIR TREND (BY DATE OF RECEIPT) IS DECLINING.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, ODI BELIEVES FORD?S ACTIONS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT SAFETY RISKS AND THE INVESTIGATION IS THUS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IF WARRANTED BY FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES.

Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:diesel

IN A JUNE 7, 2005 LETTER, FORD NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 180,000 FORD F-SUPER DUTY, EXCURSION AND E-SERIES VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES TO CORRECT TWO WIRING RELATED CONDITIONS THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-270, FORD NO. 05S34).THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE BUILT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AND MAY 31, 2004.ACCORDING TO FORD, VEHICLES WITH THE CONDITIONS MAY STALL WITHOUT WARNING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS OF VEHICLES INCLUDED IN THE RECALL TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL INJECTOR CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS UPGRADED OR REPLACED AND OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED.DURING A MAY 2005 PRESENTATION TO ODI, FORD IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL FAILURE MECHANISMS THAT COULD AFFECT ENGINE PERFORMANCE IN VARIOUS SEGMENTS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION, INCLUDING THE WIRING CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY 05V-270.THE WIRING CONDITIONS, WHICH BOTH AFFECT ENGINE FUELING, WERE THE MOST LIKELY CONDITIONS TO RESULT IN ENGINE STALL.THE RECALLED VEHICLES COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 43% OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION AND ACCOUNT FOR 75 OF THE 113 ODI REPORTS THAT HAVE A VALID VIN (66%).THE VOQ COMPLAINT RATE FOR THE RECALL POPULATION IS 45/100K WHILE THE RATE FOR VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION IS 17/100K AND THEIR TREND (BY DATE OF RECEIPT) IS DECLINING.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, ODI BELIEVES FORD?S ACTIONS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT SAFETY RISKS AND THE INVESTIGATION IS THUS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IF WARRANTED BY FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES.

Engine And Engine Cooling

IN A JUNE 7, 2005 LETTER, FORD NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 180,000 FORD F-SUPER DUTY, EXCURSION AND E-SERIES VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES TO CORRECT TWO WIRING RELATED CONDITIONS THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-270, FORD NO. 05S34).THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE BUILT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AND MAY 31, 2004.ACCORDING TO FORD, VEHICLES WITH THE CONDITIONS MAY STALL WITHOUT WARNING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS OF VEHICLES INCLUDED IN THE RECALL TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL INJECTOR CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS UPGRADED OR REPLACED AND OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED.DURING A MAY 2005 PRESENTATION TO ODI, FORD IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL FAILURE MECHANISMS THAT COULD AFFECT ENGINE PERFORMANCE IN VARIOUS SEGMENTS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION, INCLUDING THE WIRING CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY 05V-270.THE WIRING CONDITIONS, WHICH BOTH AFFECT ENGINE FUELING, WERE THE MOST LIKELY CONDITIONS TO RESULT IN ENGINE STALL.THE RECALLED VEHICLES COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 43% OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION AND ACCOUNT FOR 75 OF THE 113 ODI REPORTS THAT HAVE A VALID VIN (66%).THE VOQ COMPLAINT RATE FOR THE RECALL POPULATION IS 45/100K WHILE THE RATE FOR VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION IS 17/100K AND THEIR TREND (BY DATE OF RECEIPT) IS DECLINING.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, ODI BELIEVES FORD?S ACTIONS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT SAFETY RISKS AND THE INVESTIGATION IS THUS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IF WARRANTED BY FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES.

PE04070 · Engine Stalling

Opened Oct 7, 2004 · Closed Feb 15, 2005

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:diesel

TWENTY FIVE OF THE ODI FAILURE REPORTS ARE DUPLICATIVE OF FORD COMPLAINTS.TWENTY ODI REPORTS DO NOT CONTAIN A VIN (AND MAY OR MAY NOT BE DUPLICATIVE OF FORD REPORTS).THE 14 ALLEGED CRASHES AND 2 ALLEGED INJURIES WERE ALL MINOR.SUBMITTED DURING PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE) 04-070, FORD'S RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER CONTAINED ABOUT 5,000 CONSUMER REPORTS (MORS) AND 8,700 FIELD REPORTS (CQIS).FORD REVIEWED THE COMPLAINTS AND CATEGORIZED THEM.THE MANUFACTURER REPORTS SHOWN ABOVE REPRESENT A COUNT OF UNIQUE VEHICLES THAT FORD CATEGORIZED AS ALLEGEDLY STALLING DUE TO A SUBJECT ENGINE COMPONENT ('A' CATEGORY, SEE FORD'S IR RESPONSE LETTER FOR FURTHER DETAIL); SOME OF THESE VEHICLES RECEIVED MULTIPLE REPORTS.ODI HAS NOT YET CONFIRMED FORD'S CATEGORIZATION OF THESE REPORTS, NOR HAS ODI CONFIRMED FORD'S CATEGORIZATION OF THE REMAINING REPORTS (WHICH FORD STATES DO NOT PERTAIN TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT).FORD SUBMITTED NEARLY 19,000 WARRANTY CLAIMS, MANY OF WHICH INVOLVED CLAIMS FOR A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB 04-13-08) AND FIELD SERVICE ACTION (FSA 03B05) WHICH FORD IDENTIFIED AS POTENTIAL REMEDIES FOR STALLING COMPLAINTS.ODI HAS NOT CONFIRMED THAT EITHER OF THESE ARE A REMEDY FOR ENGINE STALLING COMPLAINTS.SEVERAL OTHER DEALER COMMUNICATIONS RELATED TO ENGINE STALL WERE ALSO SUBMITTED AS WELL AS OVER 50 PRODUCT MODIFICATIONS, 15 OF WHICH INVOLVE REVISIONS TO THE SOFTWARE FOR THE ELECTRONIC ENGINE CONTROL UNIT.FURTHER INVESTIGATION IS REQUIRED AND ODI IS UPGRADING PE04-070 TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA).DURING THE EA, ODI WILL ESTABLISH AND UPDATE MANUFACTURER FAILURE REPORT COUNTS, FURTHER INVESTIGATE THE FREQUENCY AND TREND OF STALLING COMPLAINTS, AND DETERMINE THE SCOPE AND SAFETY IMPLICATION OF STALLING EVENTS.ODI WILL ALSO INVESTIGATE FORD'S REMEDIES, THEIR EFFECTIVENESS, AND WHETHER FURTHER ACTION IS REQUIRED.