NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
130 reportsMileage unknown · Sep 2, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAVE A 2004 FORD F350 AND A F250 BOTH HAVE THE 6.0L DIESEL ENGINE. THERE IS A REAL PROBLEM WITH THE FUEL INJECTORS AND TURBO AND POSSIBLY THE FUEL PUMP ACCORDING TO THE DEALER. BOTH TRUCKS LOAD UP AND START TO RUN VERY ROUGHT THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THE SITUATION IS TO FLOOR THE THROTTLE INTILL IT CLEARS UP PRODUCING AN EXTREME…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2004 FORD F350 AND A F250 BOTH HAVE THE 6.0L DIESEL ENGINE. THERE IS A REAL PROBLEM WITH THE FUEL INJECTORS AND TURBO AND POSSIBLY THE FUEL PUMP ACCORDING TO THE DEALER. BOTH TRUCKS LOAD UP AND START TO RUN VERY ROUGHT THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THE SITUATION IS TO FLOOR THE THROTTLE INTILL IT CLEARS UP PRODUCING AN EXTREMELY AMOUNT OF BLACK SMOG. SEVERAL TIMES THE TRUCKS HAVE STALLED WHILE DRIVING LEAVING US WITHOUT POWER BRAKES AND STEERING. RET URN TRIPS TO THE NEAREST DEALER HAVE NOT BEEN A GOOD EXPERINCE THEY TELL US THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY 6.0L DIESELS WITH THE SAME PROBLEM FORD IS SLAPPING THEM ON THIER HANDS FOR FIXING THESE PROBLEMS WITH THE DRIVIABILITY WARRENTY. I LEFT THE DEALER NOT SURE WHERE TO TURN THE TRUCKS ARE NOT FIXED AND THIS CONDITIONS DO CREATE A HAZARD. THE DEALER EVEN TOLD ME THEY HAD A WHOLE FLEET OF SCHOOL BUSES WITH THE SAME PROBLEM THEY WERE FIXING SO THE PROBLEM IS NOT JUST MY PROBLEM THEY KNOW OF THE PROBLEM AND EVEN KNOW OF THE SOLUTION WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING BUT IT APPEARS FORD IS HOLDING THE DEALERS HOSTAGE AND LEAVING THE CUSTOMERS WITH A HAZARDOUS VECHICLE. I FEEL THIS IS NOT A DRIVIABLITY WARRENTY BUT A SERIOUS RECALL ISSUE. THANKS FOR ANY HELP YOU CAN DO WITH THIS
NHTSA ODI #10135205
75,955 miles · Sep 2, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
WE PURCHASED 4, 2004 F-350 FORD DIESEL 6.0 LITER AMBULANCE CONVERSIONS. ALL 4 VEHICLES ARE HAVING REOCCURRING ENGINE FAILURES. THE PROBLEMS BEGAN ON SOME OF THE VEHICLES AT LOW MILEAGE. THE DEALER CONTINUES TO "PATCH" THE ENGINE PROBLEM. I HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH SEVERAL OTHER AMBULANCE SERVICES AND HAVE FOUND THAT THEY ARE HAVI…
Read full complaint
WE PURCHASED 4, 2004 F-350 FORD DIESEL 6.0 LITER AMBULANCE CONVERSIONS. ALL 4 VEHICLES ARE HAVING REOCCURRING ENGINE FAILURES. THE PROBLEMS BEGAN ON SOME OF THE VEHICLES AT LOW MILEAGE. THE DEALER CONTINUES TO "PATCH" THE ENGINE PROBLEM. I HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH SEVERAL OTHER AMBULANCE SERVICES AND HAVE FOUND THAT THEY ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEMS. THE FAILURE OF THESE ENGINES WHILE TRANSPORTING CRITICAL PATIENTS CREATS A VERY RISKY AND DANGEROUS SITUATION FOR THE PATIENTS AND A HUGH LIABILITY ISSUE FOR THE PARAMEDICS AND OUR COMPANY.LAST NIGHT ANOTHER ENGINE FAILED WHILE TRANSPORTING AN 18 YEAR OLD WITH A BROKEN NECK TO A HIGHER LEVEL HOSPITAL. THE DELIVERY OF THE PATIENT WAS DELAYED UNNECESSARILY BECAUSE ANOTHER AMBULANCE SERVICE HAD TO BE CALLED AND WAITED ON TO GET TO MY CREW TO TRANSPORT THE PATIENT. THIS HAPPENS ALMOST EACH TIME I SENT ONE OF THESE AMBULANCES ON A TRIP. NOT ONLY IS THE PATIENT PLACED IN DANGER, BUT MY COMPANY IS QUICKLY GETTING AN UNFAVORABLY REPUTATION BECAUSE OF THESE BREAKDOWNS. THIS IS COSTING US BUSINESS. MY PARAMEDICS ARE REFUSING TO DRIVE THESE VEHICLES BECAUSE OF THE RISK OF LIABILITY THAT THEY MAY HAVE KNOWING THE MECHANICAL HISTORY OF THESE VEHICLES. ALL OF THE TRUCKS ARE STILL UNDER THE 100,000 MILE WARRANTY. FORD HAS SHOWN NO INTEREST IN HELPING US WITH THIS ISSUE. EVEN IF THE ENGINES MAKE IT TO 100,000 MILES , I KNOW THAT THEY WILL NOT LAST MUCH PAST THAT. PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS. WE ARE PAYING GOOD MONEY OUT EACH MONTH FOR VEHICLES THAT WILL NOT DO THE JOB . THE GEORGIA LEMON LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO US . HELP!
NHTSA ODI #10135161
Mileage unknown · Aug 30, 2005
Steering
DT: THE CONSUMER OWNS A 2004 FORD F350 SUPER DUTY. THE STEERING LOCKED AND THE CONSUMER WAS UNABLE TO STEER THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. *JB THIS PROBLEM OCCURRED EVERYDAY. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10129994
10,500 miles · Aug 29, 2005
Engine And Engine CoolingFuel System, Gasoline
DT: THE CONTACT STATES 2004 F-350 6.0 DIESEL TRUCK HAS LOW OIL PRESSURE. A VERY SHORT TIME AFTER BUYING THE CAR IT STARTED HAVING LOW POWER AND SHUT DOWN. ALSO, HEAD GASKET FAILURE. THIS WAS THE FIFTH TIME THAT VEHICLE SHUT DOWN ON THE HIGHWAY OR ON CURVES IN A MOUNTAIN ROAD WITHIN 6 MONTHS. THE DEALER TOLD HIM THE PROBLEM …
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONTACT STATES 2004 F-350 6.0 DIESEL TRUCK HAS LOW OIL PRESSURE. A VERY SHORT TIME AFTER BUYING THE CAR IT STARTED HAVING LOW POWER AND SHUT DOWN. ALSO, HEAD GASKET FAILURE. THIS WAS THE FIFTH TIME THAT VEHICLE SHUT DOWN ON THE HIGHWAY OR ON CURVES IN A MOUNTAIN ROAD WITHIN 6 MONTHS. THE DEALER TOLD HIM THE PROBLEM WAS FIXED, BUT IT KEPT HAPPENING. THE DEALERS REPLACED THE FUEL INJECTORS, BUT MORE OF THEM GO OUT. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10134615
Mileage unknown · Aug 22, 2005
StructureInjury
DT: THE CONSUMER OWNS A 2004 FORD F350 SUPER DUTY. SHE STATED WHILE TRYING TO GET INTO THE TRUCK THE PASSENGER SIDE RUNNING BOARD FELL OFF OF THE VEHICLE CAUSING HER TO FALL AND GET HURT. THE DRIVERS SIDE RUNNING BOARD FELL OFF ABOUT THREE WEEKS AND KNOW ONE WAS HURT AS A RESULT TO THAT ONE. *JB *SC
NHTSA ODI #10129962
4,000 miles · Aug 9, 2005
Fuel System, OtherPower TrainSuspension
DT: THE VEHICLE STALLED UNDER DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES. AND INTERMITTENTLY. HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE FRONT END, 4-WHEEL DRIVE, FUEL INJECTOR, AND DRIVER'S SIDE FRONT SPRING HAS BROKEN,. LATER THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP MANY TIMES. CONSUMER RECEIVED MANUFACTURER'S RECALL CON…
Read full complaint
DT: THE VEHICLE STALLED UNDER DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES. AND INTERMITTENTLY. HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE FRONT END, 4-WHEEL DRIVE, FUEL INJECTOR, AND DRIVER'S SIDE FRONT SPRING HAS BROKEN,. LATER THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP MANY TIMES. CONSUMER RECEIVED MANUFACTURER'S RECALL CONCERNING THE STALLING ISSUE. CONSUMER TOOK VEHICLE TO A DEALER TO BE REPAIRED, BUT PROBLEM RECURRED. BEFORE THE RECALL THE CONSUMER WAS UNSURE OF WHAT THE DEALERSHIP DID TO TRY TO FIX THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS COVERED UNDER AN EXTENDED WARRANTY. CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER, THEY TOLD HIM TO CONTACT THE DEALER. VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN TWO NEAR ACCIDENTS. ONE OF THESE ACCIDENTS CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO GO INTO A DITCH. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10132153
Mileage unknown · Aug 3, 2005
Electrical System
DT: 2004 FORD F350. THE VEHICLE TOOK OFF ON IT OWN AND QUIT. THE DEALERSHIP HAD THE VEHICLE FOR THREE WEEKS. THEY CALLED THE CONSUMER, AND TOLD HIM TO COME AND PICK UP VEHICLE BECAUSE THE RECALL HAS BEEN CANCELLED, THE REMEDY WILL NOT RECTIFY THE PROBLEM. CONSUMER CONTACTED FORD, THEY SENT AN ENGINEER TO THE DEALERSHIP,…
Read full complaint
DT: 2004 FORD F350. THE VEHICLE TOOK OFF ON IT OWN AND QUIT. THE DEALERSHIP HAD THE VEHICLE FOR THREE WEEKS. THEY CALLED THE CONSUMER, AND TOLD HIM TO COME AND PICK UP VEHICLE BECAUSE THE RECALL HAS BEEN CANCELLED, THE REMEDY WILL NOT RECTIFY THE PROBLEM. CONSUMER CONTACTED FORD, THEY SENT AN ENGINEER TO THE DEALERSHIP, WHO COULD NOT FIND WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. HE WAS THE SECOND OWNER FOR THIS VEHICLE. FORD GAVE THE FIRST OWNER A NEW VEHICLE AND RESOLD THE DEFECTIVE TRUCK. THE CONSUMER STATED NONE OF THE RECALLS WERE HONORED. THERE WAS NO WARNING WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS NOT GOING TO WORK PROPERLY. THE VEHICLE LOST POWER AND BLACK SMOKE CAME OUT OF THE TAIL PIPE. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT STATED THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE COMPUTER, AND THEY COULD NOT FIX IT. THE DEALERSHIP KNEW THE VEHICLE WAS NOT FIXED, AND THEY CONTINUED TO PUT IT BACK ON THE ROAD.
NHTSA ODI #10131455
6,300 miles · Jul 29, 2005
Electrical System
DT: CONSUMER STATED 2004 FORD F350 SUPER DUTY WAS HAVING ELECTRICAL SURGE PROBLEMS. CONSUMER WAS COMPLAINING TO DEALERSHIP THAT VEHICLE HAD SURGE PROBLEMS FOR THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF. THE DEALER SAID THAT THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. DEALER DID UPDATED THE COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND THE TRUCK RAN SOME WHAT BETTER AFT…
Read full complaint
DT: CONSUMER STATED 2004 FORD F350 SUPER DUTY WAS HAVING ELECTRICAL SURGE PROBLEMS. CONSUMER WAS COMPLAINING TO DEALERSHIP THAT VEHICLE HAD SURGE PROBLEMS FOR THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF. THE DEALER SAID THAT THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. DEALER DID UPDATED THE COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND THE TRUCK RAN SOME WHAT BETTER AFTER THAT. THE PROBLEM CAME BACK AFTER A WEEK, AND WENT BACK TO HAVING COMPUTER SURGES. THE TRUCK WAS IN THE DEALERSHIP FOR REPAIRS ON THIS ISSUE FIVE TIMES. SAME RESULT, THE TRUCK WOULD WORK FOR A LITTLE WHILE, THEN BACK TO THE SAME SURGING PROBLEMS WHICH HAVE BEEN INTERMITTENT. THE MANUFACTURER HAS BEEN CONTACTED 5 TO 6 TIMES. FORD HAS NOT HELPED IN RESOLVING THIS ISSUE. THE LEMON LAW HAS BEEN LOOKED INTO BY THE CONSUMER. THE LEMON LAW WAS DENIED BY THE STATE. CONSUMER HAD ASKED FORD TO INVESTIGATE THIS PROBLEM. FORD SAID THAT THEY HAD NO RECALLS OR ANYTHING ELSE ON THE TRUCK. AS OF JULY 27, THE TRUCK STALLED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. THE TRUCK HAD TO SIT FOR AROUND 15 MINUTES BEFORE IT WOULD START OWNER COULD ACTUALLY DRIVE IT. THE TRUCK RAN YESTERDAY FOR 3 MILES AND STARTED STALLING AGAIN, TWICE YESTERDAY, 7-29-2005. THE OWNER PARKED THE TRUCK AND CALLED A TOW TRUCK TO COME AND GET IT. THE OWNER RECEIVED NHTSA RECALL 05V270000 ON 7-27-2005 AND NHTSA 05V270000 ON THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10130548
250 miles · Jun 17, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAVE A 2004 F350 SUPERDUTY WITH 6800 MILES, IT STALLS AND LOSES POWER EVERY TIME I DRIVE IT. WHILE PULLING INTO TRAFFIC RECENTLY IT STALLED AND ALMOST CAUSED SEVERAL WRECKS. FORD HAS TRIED TO FIX THIS PROBLEM THREE TIMES WITH NO LUCK.I ALSO KNOW SEVREAL OTHER FORD SUPERDUTY'S WITH THE SAME PROBLEM.ONE OF THESE STALLED PULLING …
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2004 F350 SUPERDUTY WITH 6800 MILES, IT STALLS AND LOSES POWER EVERY TIME I DRIVE IT. WHILE PULLING INTO TRAFFIC RECENTLY IT STALLED AND ALMOST CAUSED SEVERAL WRECKS. FORD HAS TRIED TO FIX THIS PROBLEM THREE TIMES WITH NO LUCK.I ALSO KNOW SEVREAL OTHER FORD SUPERDUTY'S WITH THE SAME PROBLEM.ONE OF THESE STALLED PULLING INTO TRAFFIC , BUT NO WRECK.MY FORD SERVICE DEMARTMENT HAS NOT FIXED ANY OF THESE TRUCKS
NHTSA ODI #10125676
7,350 miles · Jun 16, 2005
Engine And Engine Cooling
THERE HAVE BEEN APPROXIMATELY 15 INCIDENTAS WERE THE VEHICLE HAS STALLED, WHILE BEING DRIVEN OR WHEN ATTEMPTING TO STOP AT A STOP SIGN OR TURN. THE VEHICLEHAS TWO METHODS OF STALLING - THE FIRST METHOD IS BE IDLING VERY ROUGH - AS IF MISS FIRING ON A CYLINDER/ TIMING ISSUES WHERE IT BLOWS BLACK SMOKE. THE SECOND METHOD IS IF YOU…
Read full complaint
THERE HAVE BEEN APPROXIMATELY 15 INCIDENTAS WERE THE VEHICLE HAS STALLED, WHILE BEING DRIVEN OR WHEN ATTEMPTING TO STOP AT A STOP SIGN OR TURN. THE VEHICLEHAS TWO METHODS OF STALLING - THE FIRST METHOD IS BE IDLING VERY ROUGH - AS IF MISS FIRING ON A CYLINDER/ TIMING ISSUES WHERE IT BLOWS BLACK SMOKE. THE SECOND METHOD IS IF YOU ARE STOPPED WITH YOUR FOOT HOPEFULLY ON THE BRAKE - THE VEHICLE WILL REV UP AND LURCH FORWARD - IF ON THE BRAKE IT WILL SOMETIMES THEN STALL. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TO THE SHOP AT LEAST 4 TIMES - WITH MULTIPLE INCIDENTS PER VISIT, THE SHOP HAD REPLACED THE EGR VALVE AND HAD REPROGRAMMED THE PCM EVERYTIME IN THE SHOP. WHICH TAKES ME BACK TO LOUSY FUEL ECONOMY AND HAS NOT YET FIXED THE PROBLEM. I AM NOT HAPPY.
NHTSA ODI #10125508
Official recalls
2Jul 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.
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
2DP05005 · 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.
Illustration