← New search

2004 Ford Freestar

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,091 reports with mileage · 136 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.

  • Power Train. Review the 851 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 118 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Structure. Review the 94 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

16 crash reports14 fire reports17 injury reports

Power Train complaints

851 reports
Clear category filter
120,000 miles · Aug 26, 2013
Power Train

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD FREESTAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER HAVING THE VEHICLE REPAIRED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V006000 (POWER TRAIN), THE VEHICLE LEAKED TRANSMISSION FLUID. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE THE DEALER REPAIRED THE VEHICLE TRANSMISSION AGAIN. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD FREESTAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER HAVING THE VEHICLE REPAIRED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V006000 (POWER TRAIN), THE VEHICLE LEAKED TRANSMISSION FLUID. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE THE DEALER REPAIRED THE VEHICLE TRANSMISSION AGAIN. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO LEAK TRANSMISSION FLUID AFTER THE SECOND REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000.

NHTSA ODI #10537298

100,000 miles · Aug 26, 2013
Power Train

FORD ISSUED A RECALL FOR LOSS OF FORWARD POWER DUE TO A TORQUE CONVERTER ISSUE. MY VEHICLE DID NOT EXHIBIT THE SYMPTOMS BUT I DECIDED IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE IT DONE, I WAS PLANNING TO KEEP THE VEHICLE FOR A WHILE. THE DEALERSHIP SAID IT WOULD TAKE 2 DAYS. THEY HAD VEHICLE OVER A WEEK. THAT WAS DECEMBER 2012. THEY …

Read full complaint

FORD ISSUED A RECALL FOR LOSS OF FORWARD POWER DUE TO A TORQUE CONVERTER ISSUE. MY VEHICLE DID NOT EXHIBIT THE SYMPTOMS BUT I DECIDED IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE IT DONE, I WAS PLANNING TO KEEP THE VEHICLE FOR A WHILE. THE DEALERSHIP SAID IT WOULD TAKE 2 DAYS. THEY HAD VEHICLE OVER A WEEK. THAT WAS DECEMBER 2012. THEY HAD A PROBLEM; THEY DID NOT TELL ME. NOT LONG AFTER GETTING THE CAR BACK, I KNEW SOMETHING WAS DIFFERENT, I COULD NOT PUT MY FINGER ON IT. SOMETIME IN APRIL/MAY 2013 TIME FRAME, I HAD A COUPLE OF INCIDENTS WHERE THE CAR WOULD NOT GO FORWARD. I STOPPED, PUT THE CAR IN PARK, THEN DRIVE AND I WAS OK. I THOUGHT IT WAS A LINKAGE ADJUSTMENT ISSUE. THEN IN JUNE, IT FAILED WHILE GOING UP A HILL ON A VERY BUSY ROAD. I TURNED INTO A DRIVEWAY, BACK OUT, AND WENT DOWN THE HILL AND LIMPED TO THE DEALERSHIP. MY CAR WAS EXHIBITING THE EXACT SAME SYMPTOMS OF THE RECALL. THE DEALERSHIP SAID IT WAS DUE TO A ROTTED DIPSTICK HOUSING ASSEMBLY AND THAT MY REPAIR BILL WAS OVER $3500. I LET CAR SIT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE MONEY. AFTER STEWING ABOUT THIS FOR MANY WEEKS, I CONTACTED FORD TO COMPLAIN. IN DECEMBER, THE MECHANICS WHO WORKED ON THE TRANSMISSION WOULD HAVE HAD TO DISCONNECT THE DIP STICK HOUSING. THEY HAD TO KNOW IT WAS RUSTY AND MAY HAVE EVEN DAMAGED IT TO THE POINT OF ALLOWING WATER IN. THEY IGNORED THAT DANGER. SINCE THE SYMPTOMS OF THE ISSUE ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AS DESCRIBED IN THE RECALL, THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT FORD IS NOT BEING HONEST ABOUT THE REAL SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM. ADDITIONALLY, HOW MANY OF THEIR MODEL LINES USE THE SAME MATERIAL FOR THEIR DIP STICK HOUSING. IF THIS HAPPENS ON A HEAVY INTERSTATE, THIS COULD RESULT IN A MULTI CAR PILEUP AND DEATH.

NHTSA ODI #10537263

178,000 miles · Aug 21, 2013
Power TrainCrash

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD FREESTAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS UNOCCUPIED AND IN PARK, IT ERRONEOUSLY ROLLED AWAY AND CRASHED INTO A HOUSE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES AND A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE M…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD FREESTAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS UNOCCUPIED AND IN PARK, IT ERRONEOUSLY ROLLED AWAY AND CRASHED INTO A HOUSE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES AND A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 178,000.

NHTSA ODI #10536525

160,000 miles · Aug 19, 2013
Power Train

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD FREESTAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE IT WAS STATED THAT THE TORQUE CONVERTER NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE M…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD FREESTAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE IT WAS STATED THAT THE TORQUE CONVERTER NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 160,000.

NHTSA ODI #10536153

52,490 miles · Aug 18, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

VAN STARTED RUNNING POORLY SUDDENLY, THEN WOULD NOT RUN AT ALL. AFTER SHUTTING DOWN AND ALLOWING COOL DOWN TIME, RESTARTED VAN AND IT WOULD NOT GO INTO GEAR. RAN WELL IN PARK OR NEUTRAL, BUT SHIFTING INTO ANY GEAR WOULD "CLUNK" AND THE ENGINE WOULD IMMEDIATELY QUIT. AFTER 5 DAYS OF TROUBLESHOOTING, TRACED TROUBLE TO ENGINE PCM A…

Read full complaint

VAN STARTED RUNNING POORLY SUDDENLY, THEN WOULD NOT RUN AT ALL. AFTER SHUTTING DOWN AND ALLOWING COOL DOWN TIME, RESTARTED VAN AND IT WOULD NOT GO INTO GEAR. RAN WELL IN PARK OR NEUTRAL, BUT SHIFTING INTO ANY GEAR WOULD "CLUNK" AND THE ENGINE WOULD IMMEDIATELY QUIT. AFTER 5 DAYS OF TROUBLESHOOTING, TRACED TROUBLE TO ENGINE PCM AFTER READING IN ON-LINE FORUMS ABOUT IT. FOUND PCM WET AND PINS ON PCM AND CONTACTS ON WIRE HARNESS CORRODED AND GREEN DUE TO WATER LEAKING PAST COWL-TO-BODY SEAL. THE PCM CONNECTOR IS NOT SEALED, SO IF WATER DOES DRIP ON IT, IT IS DRIPPING DIRECTLY ONTO BACK SIDE OF THE CONTACTS AND FORD DID RELEASE A TSB ABOUT THIS ISSUE BUT NOT A RECALL. TSB SAYS TO REMOVE SOME PLUGS FROM BODY (MY VAN IS SEVERELY RUSTED IN ONE OF THOSE 2 SPOTS), SEAL AROUND CLIPS THAT HOLD PLASTIC COWL TO BODY WITH SILICONE SEALANT AND ADD ADDITIONAL WEATHER STRIPPING ON THE OUTER EDGES OF COWL TO TRY TO PREVENT WATER. I HAD TO REPLACE MY PCM. HAD MY WIFE BEEN ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN THIS HAPPENED, THERE WOULD HAVE MOST CERTAINLY BEEN AN ACCIDENT OR INJURY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10535957

105,495 miles · Aug 14, 2013
Power Train

FORD MOTOR COMPANY APPEARS NOT WANTING TO HONOR ITS OWN RECALL LETTER 11S25 TORQUE CONVERTER REPLACEMENT. ON JUNE 2009, I TOOK MY VEHICLE TO A REPAIR SHOP AND THEY REPLACED THE TRANSMISSION, IT WAS UNFORTUNATE AS MY EXTENDED WARRANTY HAS EXPIRED. FORTUNATE FOR ME AT THE END OF LAST YEAR I RECEIVED THAT RECALL LETTER WHICH AT LE…

Read full complaint

FORD MOTOR COMPANY APPEARS NOT WANTING TO HONOR ITS OWN RECALL LETTER 11S25 TORQUE CONVERTER REPLACEMENT. ON JUNE 2009, I TOOK MY VEHICLE TO A REPAIR SHOP AND THEY REPLACED THE TRANSMISSION, IT WAS UNFORTUNATE AS MY EXTENDED WARRANTY HAS EXPIRED. FORTUNATE FOR ME AT THE END OF LAST YEAR I RECEIVED THAT RECALL LETTER WHICH AT LEAST WOULD COVER PART OF MY COST. I TOOK THE LETTER FORD MOTOR COMPANY HAD SENT ME ALONG WITH REPAIR SHOP INVOICE TOTALING $2,228.00, REPLACED TRANSMISSION WARRANTY AND RECEIPT SLIPS TO A LOCAL FORD SERVICE CENTER ON MAY 2013 AND STILL BY AUG 2013; THERE HAD BEEN NO CHECK ISSUED AS THE SERVICE MAN TOLD ME OR CALLS UNTIL I GOT WITH FORD NATIONAL 1-800 NUMBER. ONLY THEN AND MORE THAN 60 DAYS LATER I RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE LOCAL SERVICE CENTER ASKING FOR MORE DOCUMENTATION. NOW FORD LOCAL SERVICE CENTER TOLD ME THAT IT WAS UP TO FORD MOTOR COMPANY TO WORK WITH THE ISSUE AND FORD MOTOR COMPANY TOLD ME IT WAS MY FORD LOCAL SERVICE CENTER. I AM CONFUSE THOUGHT THEY BOTH WORK FOR EACH OTHER I DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. BUT CERTAINLY WANT TO GET THIS RESOLVE. CAN YOU HELP? ///// MY PROBLEM WITH THE POWER TRAIN STARTED ON JUNE 2009 WHILE I WAS DRIVING MY SON, FOR A SCHEDULED OUTPATIENT OPERATION. IT HAPPEN ON A TWO LANE PORTION OF THE STREET AT ABOUT 400 FTS OR SO FROM A TRAFFIC LIGHT, MY MINI-VAN ALL OF THE SUDDEN LOSS POWER TRAIN, THE ENGINE WAS STILL ON AND WITH THE VEHICLE MOMENTUM I DROVE IT TO THE SIDE OFF THE STREET. THE ENGINE WAS ON, ELECTRICAL OK, BUT NO MOVING FORWARD OR REVERSE, IT FELT LIKE IT WAS IN "NEUTRAL". WE HAD IT TOWED TO A REPUTABLE AUTO REPAIR SHOP ON THE SAME STREET WERE THE VEHICLE LEFT US. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10535327

99,400 miles · Aug 13, 2013
Power Train

HAVE CHATTER COMING FROM TRANSMISSION AYEAR AGO THE INPUT SHAFT FAILED AND WE HAD A RECALL REPAIR MADE IT IS DOING THE SAME THING AGAIN THERE NEEDS TOO BE A RECALL ON THE TRANSMISSION S IN THESE VEHICLES IMMEDIATELY . *TR

NHTSA ODI #10535040

Mileage unknown · Aug 7, 2013
Power Train

2004 FORD FREESTAR. ATTORNEY REPRESENTING CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO TORQUE CONVERTER OUTPUT SHAFT FAILURE RECALL NOTICE. *SMD THE CONSUMER RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE IN MARCH 2012. THE NOTICE STATED THE PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE, BUT WOULD BE AVAILABLE IN THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2012. THE CONSUMER RECEIVED ANOTHER LETTER IN O…

Read full complaint

2004 FORD FREESTAR. ATTORNEY REPRESENTING CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO TORQUE CONVERTER OUTPUT SHAFT FAILURE RECALL NOTICE. *SMD THE CONSUMER RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE IN MARCH 2012. THE NOTICE STATED THE PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE, BUT WOULD BE AVAILABLE IN THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2012. THE CONSUMER RECEIVED ANOTHER LETTER IN OCTOBER 2012, STATING THE PARTS WERE AVAILABLE. AN APPOINTMENT WAS MADE FOR DECEMBER 26, 2012, EVEN THOUGH THE CONSUMER DID NOT EXPERIENCE ANY TYPE OF FAILURE, HE STILL COMPLIED WITH THE RECALL. TWO DAYS LATER, THE CONSUMER RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE DEALER, STATING THE RECALL HAD BEEN COMPLETED. HOWEVER, ON JANUARY 4, 2013 WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, THE CONSUMER EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER WITH NO WARNING. HE SOON DISCOVERED THE VEHICLE WOULD ONLY GO FORWARD, AS THERE WAS NO ABILITY TO GO IN REVERSE. HE IMMEDIATELY DROVE TO THE DEALER, WHERE AN INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THE TRANSMISSION WAS BEYOND REPAIR AND WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. FORD STATED THE FAILURE OF THE TRANSMISSION IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE RECALL WAS A COINCIDENCE AND THEY WOULD NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE.

NHTSA ODI #10532520

Mileage unknown · Aug 5, 2013
Power Train

IN SEPTEMBER 2012 I TOOK MY 2004 FREE STAR INTO FORD DEALERSHIP TO HAVE THE TORQUE CONVERTER REPLACED DUE TO A RECALL. NOW I GET A TRANSMISSION CHATTER. I TOOK IT ONCE AGAIN INTO THE DEALERSHIP FOR A RECALL ON THE 3RD ROW SEAT AND ASKED THEM AFTER COMPLETING THE RECALL IF THEY WOULD CHECK OUT THE CHATTER. THEY AT FIRST TOLD ME …

Read full complaint

IN SEPTEMBER 2012 I TOOK MY 2004 FREE STAR INTO FORD DEALERSHIP TO HAVE THE TORQUE CONVERTER REPLACED DUE TO A RECALL. NOW I GET A TRANSMISSION CHATTER. I TOOK IT ONCE AGAIN INTO THE DEALERSHIP FOR A RECALL ON THE 3RD ROW SEAT AND ASKED THEM AFTER COMPLETING THE RECALL IF THEY WOULD CHECK OUT THE CHATTER. THEY AT FIRST TOLD ME IT WAS A MISFIRE...THAT POSSIBLY THE PLUGS AND/OR WIRES NEEDED REPLACED. I OBTAINED A COST FOR THAT AND THEN ASKED THEM TO COMPLETE THE JOB. THEY CALLED ME BACK IN AN HOUR OR SO AND TOLD ME THAT MY PROBLEM WAS A MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM. THEY SAID MY TRANSMISSION HAD WATER IN IT. MY HUSBAND CHECKED THE FLUID AND YES IT HAS A MILKY APPEARANCE. THE DEALERSHIP IS THE ONLY ONES WHO HAVE REMOVED MY TRANSMISSION WHEN THEY DONE THE TORQUE CONVERTER RECALL THE PREVIOUS FALL. NOW I LEARN THAT THERE IS SOME SORT OF SEAL IN WHICH WATER CAN SEEP INTO THE TRANSMISSION. WHAT'S UP WITH THAT AND WHY HASN'T THERE BEEN A RECALL ON THIS SEAL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533764

58,866 miles · Jul 22, 2013
Power Train

BOUGHT CAR NOV 2012 FROM TRUCK JUNCTION AND FROM THE DAY WE BOUGHT IT THE CAR STALLED RAN RUFF WOULDN'T START. GAVE US THE RUN AROUND WHILE UNDER WARRANTY NOW FORD SAYS PCM WET N RUINED FROM DAY ONE. I'VE HAD A BROKEN VAN IN MY DRIVE FOR 8 MONTHS WHAT THE [XXX]HOW CAN FORD MAKE A PRODUCT THAT IS THIS BAD WITH NO RECALL [XXX] AME…

Read full complaint

BOUGHT CAR NOV 2012 FROM TRUCK JUNCTION AND FROM THE DAY WE BOUGHT IT THE CAR STALLED RAN RUFF WOULDN'T START. GAVE US THE RUN AROUND WHILE UNDER WARRANTY NOW FORD SAYS PCM WET N RUINED FROM DAY ONE. I'VE HAD A BROKEN VAN IN MY DRIVE FOR 8 MONTHS WHAT THE [XXX]HOW CAN FORD MAKE A PRODUCT THAT IS THIS BAD WITH NO RECALL [XXX] AMERICAN PRODUCTS THIS IS [XXX]. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10526267

Official recalls

4

13V081000 · Seats

Mar 7, 2013

Ford is recalling certain model year 2004-2007 Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles manufactured from March 24, 2003, through November 7, 2006, equipped with a third row seat and originally sold in, or currently registered in, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 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. The third row stowable seat can experience corrosion and structural degradation at the seat anchor mechanism mounted to the rear wheel wells. As a result of the corrosion, the third row seat may not fully latch into its seating position.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event that the vehicle is crashed into from the rear, an unlatched seat may increase the risk of personal injury.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will install new third row seat latch striker mounting brackets, free of charge. The recall began on March 28, 2013. Owners may contact Ford Motor Company Customer Relationship Center at 1-866-436-7332.

12V006000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission; Power Train:automatic Transmission:torque Converter

Jan 9, 2012

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AND 2005 FORD FREESTAR AND MERCURY MONTEREY VEHICLES. THE TORQUE CONVERTER OUTPUT SHAFT MAY FAIL.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS CONDITION RESULTS IN A SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITH NO WARNING, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE TORQUE CONVERTER FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 9, 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Power Train:automatic Transmission:torque Converter

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AND 2005 FORD FREESTAR AND MERCURY MONTEREY VEHICLES. THE TORQUE CONVERTER OUTPUT SHAFT MAY FAIL.

Consequence: THIS CONDITION RESULTS IN A SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITH NO WARNING, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE TORQUE CONVERTER FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 9, 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.

Power Train:automatic Transmission

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AND 2005 FORD FREESTAR AND MERCURY MONTEREY VEHICLES. THE TORQUE CONVERTER OUTPUT SHAFT MAY FAIL.

Consequence: THIS CONDITION RESULTS IN A SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITH NO WARNING, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE TORQUE CONVERTER FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 9, 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.

04V446000 · Wheels:hub

Sep 13, 2004

CERTAIN MINIVANS MAY HAVE BEEN PRODUCED WITH FRONT WHEEL HUB ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE NOT HEAT TREATED CORRECTLY. THIS CONDITION MAY LEAD TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF SMALL CRACKS IN THE HUB.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THE CRACKS WERE TO PROGRESS, THIS COULD EVENTUALLY RESULT IN WHEEL SEPARATION. WHEEL SEPARATION MAY LEAD TO LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, AND POTENTIALLY RESULT IN A VEHICLE CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT HUB, ROTORS, AND WHEEL BEARINGS. THE RECALL BEGAN SEPTEMBER 20, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.

03V457000 · Steering:hydraulic Power Assist:hose, Piping, And Connections

Nov 6, 2003

ON CERTAIN MINIVANS, THE POWER STEERING LOW-PRESSURE LINE MAY NOT BE FULLY SEATED AT THE RACK AND PINION STEERING GEAR.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THIS LINE BECOMES DISCONNECTED, IT MAY CREATE THE POTENTIAL FOR FLUID TO COME INTO CONTACT WITH THE EXHAUST SYSTEM, WHICH COULD RESULT IN SMOKE OR FIRE.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE POWER STEERING LOW-PRESSURE LINE TO ENSURE THAT IT IS SEATED PROPERLY AT THE RACK AND PINION STEERING GEAR. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN NOVEMBER 10, 2003. OWNERS SHOULD 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

8

EQ12010 · Stabilus Rear Liftgate Struts Failing

Opened Sep 28, 2012 · Closed Dec 31, 2012

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut

Please see the attached closing resume summary.It has been attached to this document as a PDF.

EA12003 · Corrosion Of Third-Row Seat Attachment

Opened Apr 23, 2012 · Closed May 2, 2013

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats; Seats:mid/rear Assembly; Structure; Structure:body

Ford is conducting a safety recall to repair the third-row seat's latch mechanisms in approximately 196,667 model year (MY) 2004 through 2007 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles (see NHTSA recall 13V-081 for more details).The recall covers vehicles originally sold, or currently registered, in the salt belt states or high corrosion areas of the United States: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.Approximately 100,000 remaining MY 2004-2007 Freestar and Monterey vehicles--those vehicles that were not originally sold, or are not currently registered, in salt belt states--are not included in the recall action. Although these vehicles are the same as the ones described above, they experience significantly lower failure rates because of reduced road salt exposure.ODI is currently aware of only one complaint on vehicle outside of the recall scope.ODI will monitor complaints and take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For owners of vehicles that are outside of the recall scope but exhibit the defect condition, owners (and affected Ford dealers) can contact Ford to request the recall repair.This Engineering Analysis is closed.See attached report and associated recall file for additional information.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10399896, 10410491, 10420028, 10424850, 10433928, 10436592, 10438529, 10440616, 10441489, 10441641, 10442809, 10446564, 10450295, 10450559, 10450587, 10452933, 10453826, 10454977, 10455545, 10456985, 10457423, 10457910, 10458738, 10459042, 10460511, 10461074, 10462910, 10463126, 10463262, 10463366, 10463600, 10464243, 10467003, 10467680, 10468429, 10469188, 10469200, 10470216, 10470510, 10471280, 10471520, 10471813, 10471978, 10472514, 10473087, 10473159, 10477025, 10477387, 10477954, 10478449, 10479247, 10479758, 10480611, 10480665, 10481054, 10481412, 10482213, 10482236, 10482613, 10482620, 10487872, 10489445, 10490515, 10490641, 10490663, 10490744, 10491495, 10492220, 10493470, 10493572, 10496348, 10497631, 10497976, 10498310, 10498433, 10499681, 10499861, 10500495.

Additional source detail variants (4)

Seats

Ford is conducting a safety recall to repair the third-row seat's latch mechanisms in approximately 196,667 model year (MY) 2004 through 2007 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles (see NHTSA recall 13V-081 for more details).The recall covers vehicles originally sold, or currently registered, in the salt belt states or high corrosion areas of the United States: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.Approximately 100,000 remaining MY 2004-2007 Freestar and Monterey vehicles--those vehicles that were not originally sold, or are not currently registered, in salt belt states--are not included in the recall action. Although these vehicles are the same as the ones described above, they experience significantly lower failure rates because of reduced road salt exposure.ODI is currently aware of only one complaint on vehicle outside of the recall scope.ODI will monitor complaints and take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For owners of vehicles that are outside of the recall scope but exhibit the defect condition, owners (and affected Ford dealers) can contact Ford to request the recall repair.This Engineering Analysis is closed.See attached report and associated recall file for additional information.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10399896, 10410491, 10420028, 10424850, 10433928, 10436592, 10438529, 10440616, 10441489, 10441641, 10442809, 10446564, 10450295, 10450559, 10450587, 10452933, 10453826, 10454977, 10455545, 10456985, 10457423, 10457910, 10458738, 10459042, 10460511, 10461074, 10462910, 10463126, 10463262, 10463366, 10463600, 10464243, 10467003, 10467680, 10468429, 10469188, 10469200, 10470216, 10470510, 10471280, 10471520, 10471813, 10471978, 10472514, 10473087, 10473159, 10477025, 10477387, 10477954, 10478449, 10479247, 10479758, 10480611, 10480665, 10481054, 10481412, 10482213, 10482236, 10482613, 10482620, 10487872, 10489445, 10490515, 10490641, 10490663, 10490744, 10491495, 10492220, 10493470, 10493572, 10496348, 10497631, 10497976, 10498310, 10498433, 10499681, 10499861, 10500495.

Seats:mid/rear Assembly

Ford is conducting a safety recall to repair the third-row seat's latch mechanisms in approximately 196,667 model year (MY) 2004 through 2007 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles (see NHTSA recall 13V-081 for more details).The recall covers vehicles originally sold, or currently registered, in the salt belt states or high corrosion areas of the United States: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.Approximately 100,000 remaining MY 2004-2007 Freestar and Monterey vehicles--those vehicles that were not originally sold, or are not currently registered, in salt belt states--are not included in the recall action. Although these vehicles are the same as the ones described above, they experience significantly lower failure rates because of reduced road salt exposure.ODI is currently aware of only one complaint on vehicle outside of the recall scope.ODI will monitor complaints and take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For owners of vehicles that are outside of the recall scope but exhibit the defect condition, owners (and affected Ford dealers) can contact Ford to request the recall repair.This Engineering Analysis is closed.See attached report and associated recall file for additional information.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10399896, 10410491, 10420028, 10424850, 10433928, 10436592, 10438529, 10440616, 10441489, 10441641, 10442809, 10446564, 10450295, 10450559, 10450587, 10452933, 10453826, 10454977, 10455545, 10456985, 10457423, 10457910, 10458738, 10459042, 10460511, 10461074, 10462910, 10463126, 10463262, 10463366, 10463600, 10464243, 10467003, 10467680, 10468429, 10469188, 10469200, 10470216, 10470510, 10471280, 10471520, 10471813, 10471978, 10472514, 10473087, 10473159, 10477025, 10477387, 10477954, 10478449, 10479247, 10479758, 10480611, 10480665, 10481054, 10481412, 10482213, 10482236, 10482613, 10482620, 10487872, 10489445, 10490515, 10490641, 10490663, 10490744, 10491495, 10492220, 10493470, 10493572, 10496348, 10497631, 10497976, 10498310, 10498433, 10499681, 10499861, 10500495.

Structure:body

Ford is conducting a safety recall to repair the third-row seat's latch mechanisms in approximately 196,667 model year (MY) 2004 through 2007 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles (see NHTSA recall 13V-081 for more details).The recall covers vehicles originally sold, or currently registered, in the salt belt states or high corrosion areas of the United States: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.Approximately 100,000 remaining MY 2004-2007 Freestar and Monterey vehicles--those vehicles that were not originally sold, or are not currently registered, in salt belt states--are not included in the recall action. Although these vehicles are the same as the ones described above, they experience significantly lower failure rates because of reduced road salt exposure.ODI is currently aware of only one complaint on vehicle outside of the recall scope.ODI will monitor complaints and take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For owners of vehicles that are outside of the recall scope but exhibit the defect condition, owners (and affected Ford dealers) can contact Ford to request the recall repair.This Engineering Analysis is closed.See attached report and associated recall file for additional information.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10399896, 10410491, 10420028, 10424850, 10433928, 10436592, 10438529, 10440616, 10441489, 10441641, 10442809, 10446564, 10450295, 10450559, 10450587, 10452933, 10453826, 10454977, 10455545, 10456985, 10457423, 10457910, 10458738, 10459042, 10460511, 10461074, 10462910, 10463126, 10463262, 10463366, 10463600, 10464243, 10467003, 10467680, 10468429, 10469188, 10469200, 10470216, 10470510, 10471280, 10471520, 10471813, 10471978, 10472514, 10473087, 10473159, 10477025, 10477387, 10477954, 10478449, 10479247, 10479758, 10480611, 10480665, 10481054, 10481412, 10482213, 10482236, 10482613, 10482620, 10487872, 10489445, 10490515, 10490641, 10490663, 10490744, 10491495, 10492220, 10493470, 10493572, 10496348, 10497631, 10497976, 10498310, 10498433, 10499681, 10499861, 10500495.

Structure

Ford is conducting a safety recall to repair the third-row seat's latch mechanisms in approximately 196,667 model year (MY) 2004 through 2007 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles (see NHTSA recall 13V-081 for more details).The recall covers vehicles originally sold, or currently registered, in the salt belt states or high corrosion areas of the United States: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.Approximately 100,000 remaining MY 2004-2007 Freestar and Monterey vehicles--those vehicles that were not originally sold, or are not currently registered, in salt belt states--are not included in the recall action. Although these vehicles are the same as the ones described above, they experience significantly lower failure rates because of reduced road salt exposure.ODI is currently aware of only one complaint on vehicle outside of the recall scope.ODI will monitor complaints and take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For owners of vehicles that are outside of the recall scope but exhibit the defect condition, owners (and affected Ford dealers) can contact Ford to request the recall repair.This Engineering Analysis is closed.See attached report and associated recall file for additional information.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10399896, 10410491, 10420028, 10424850, 10433928, 10436592, 10438529, 10440616, 10441489, 10441641, 10442809, 10446564, 10450295, 10450559, 10450587, 10452933, 10453826, 10454977, 10455545, 10456985, 10457423, 10457910, 10458738, 10459042, 10460511, 10461074, 10462910, 10463126, 10463262, 10463366, 10463600, 10464243, 10467003, 10467680, 10468429, 10469188, 10469200, 10470216, 10470510, 10471280, 10471520, 10471813, 10471978, 10472514, 10473087, 10473159, 10477025, 10477387, 10477954, 10478449, 10479247, 10479758, 10480611, 10480665, 10481054, 10481412, 10482213, 10482236, 10482613, 10482620, 10487872, 10489445, 10490515, 10490641, 10490663, 10490744, 10491495, 10492220, 10493470, 10493572, 10496348, 10497631, 10497976, 10498310, 10498433, 10499681, 10499861, 10500495.

PE11039 · Corrosion Of Third-Row Seat Attachment

Opened Dec 21, 2011 · Closed Apr 27, 2012

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Latches/locks/linkages; Seats; Seats:mid/rear Assembly; Structure; Structure:body

ODI has received 18 complaints on the subject vehicles from the salt belt states that allege severe corrosion at the rear wheel wells.Additionally, ODI identified 4 similar reports from Ford's response to the investigation.Ford submitted a total of 10 reports to ODI (6 of 10 Ford reports are duplicates of ODI reports).The complaints indicated difficulty or inability to latch the rear seat as some of the complaints reported the entire anchor plate completely detached from the vehicle (rear wheel well).The first report of this condition was received in March 2011 and subsequent reporting frequency indicates a potentially increasing trend over time.ODI seeks to evaluate the potential occupant safety risks resulting from structurally degraded seat anchorages.In addition to the subject vehicles, ODI also will collect and review information on MY 2005-2007 Freestar/Monterey vehicles that appear to have a seat design identical to the subject vehicles.To date, ODI is not aware of any similar complaints on the MY 2005-2007 vehicles.ODI also will collect and review information on Freestar/Monterey vehicles used outside of the salt belt states.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA12-003) to further assess whether a safety defect exists in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers: 10454977, 10453826, 10452933, 10450587, 10450559, 10450295, 10446564, 10442809, 10441641, 10441489, 10440616, 10438529, 10436592, 10433928, 10424850, 10420028, 10410491 and 10399896.

Additional source detail variants (5)

Latches/locks/linkages

ODI has received 18 complaints on the subject vehicles from the salt belt states that allege severe corrosion at the rear wheel wells.Additionally, ODI identified 4 similar reports from Ford's response to the investigation.Ford submitted a total of 10 reports to ODI (6 of 10 Ford reports are duplicates of ODI reports).The complaints indicated difficulty or inability to latch the rear seat as some of the complaints reported the entire anchor plate completely detached from the vehicle (rear wheel well).The first report of this condition was received in March 2011 and subsequent reporting frequency indicates a potentially increasing trend over time.ODI seeks to evaluate the potential occupant safety risks resulting from structurally degraded seat anchorages.In addition to the subject vehicles, ODI also will collect and review information on MY 2005-2007 Freestar/Monterey vehicles that appear to have a seat design identical to the subject vehicles.To date, ODI is not aware of any similar complaints on the MY 2005-2007 vehicles.ODI also will collect and review information on Freestar/Monterey vehicles used outside of the salt belt states.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA12-003) to further assess whether a safety defect exists in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers: 10454977, 10453826, 10452933, 10450587, 10450559, 10450295, 10446564, 10442809, 10441641, 10441489, 10440616, 10438529, 10436592, 10433928, 10424850, 10420028, 10410491 and 10399896.

Seats

ODI has received 18 complaints on the subject vehicles from the salt belt states that allege severe corrosion at the rear wheel wells.Additionally, ODI identified 4 similar reports from Ford's response to the investigation.Ford submitted a total of 10 reports to ODI (6 of 10 Ford reports are duplicates of ODI reports).The complaints indicated difficulty or inability to latch the rear seat as some of the complaints reported the entire anchor plate completely detached from the vehicle (rear wheel well).The first report of this condition was received in March 2011 and subsequent reporting frequency indicates a potentially increasing trend over time.ODI seeks to evaluate the potential occupant safety risks resulting from structurally degraded seat anchorages.In addition to the subject vehicles, ODI also will collect and review information on MY 2005-2007 Freestar/Monterey vehicles that appear to have a seat design identical to the subject vehicles.To date, ODI is not aware of any similar complaints on the MY 2005-2007 vehicles.ODI also will collect and review information on Freestar/Monterey vehicles used outside of the salt belt states.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA12-003) to further assess whether a safety defect exists in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers: 10454977, 10453826, 10452933, 10450587, 10450559, 10450295, 10446564, 10442809, 10441641, 10441489, 10440616, 10438529, 10436592, 10433928, 10424850, 10420028, 10410491 and 10399896.

Seats:mid/rear Assembly

ODI has received 18 complaints on the subject vehicles from the salt belt states that allege severe corrosion at the rear wheel wells.Additionally, ODI identified 4 similar reports from Ford's response to the investigation.Ford submitted a total of 10 reports to ODI (6 of 10 Ford reports are duplicates of ODI reports).The complaints indicated difficulty or inability to latch the rear seat as some of the complaints reported the entire anchor plate completely detached from the vehicle (rear wheel well).The first report of this condition was received in March 2011 and subsequent reporting frequency indicates a potentially increasing trend over time.ODI seeks to evaluate the potential occupant safety risks resulting from structurally degraded seat anchorages.In addition to the subject vehicles, ODI also will collect and review information on MY 2005-2007 Freestar/Monterey vehicles that appear to have a seat design identical to the subject vehicles.To date, ODI is not aware of any similar complaints on the MY 2005-2007 vehicles.ODI also will collect and review information on Freestar/Monterey vehicles used outside of the salt belt states.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA12-003) to further assess whether a safety defect exists in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers: 10454977, 10453826, 10452933, 10450587, 10450559, 10450295, 10446564, 10442809, 10441641, 10441489, 10440616, 10438529, 10436592, 10433928, 10424850, 10420028, 10410491 and 10399896.

Structure:body

ODI has received 18 complaints on the subject vehicles from the salt belt states that allege severe corrosion at the rear wheel wells.Additionally, ODI identified 4 similar reports from Ford's response to the investigation.Ford submitted a total of 10 reports to ODI (6 of 10 Ford reports are duplicates of ODI reports).The complaints indicated difficulty or inability to latch the rear seat as some of the complaints reported the entire anchor plate completely detached from the vehicle (rear wheel well).The first report of this condition was received in March 2011 and subsequent reporting frequency indicates a potentially increasing trend over time.ODI seeks to evaluate the potential occupant safety risks resulting from structurally degraded seat anchorages.In addition to the subject vehicles, ODI also will collect and review information on MY 2005-2007 Freestar/Monterey vehicles that appear to have a seat design identical to the subject vehicles.To date, ODI is not aware of any similar complaints on the MY 2005-2007 vehicles.ODI also will collect and review information on Freestar/Monterey vehicles used outside of the salt belt states.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA12-003) to further assess whether a safety defect exists in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers: 10454977, 10453826, 10452933, 10450587, 10450559, 10450295, 10446564, 10442809, 10441641, 10441489, 10440616, 10438529, 10436592, 10433928, 10424850, 10420028, 10410491 and 10399896.

Structure

ODI has received 18 complaints on the subject vehicles from the salt belt states that allege severe corrosion at the rear wheel wells.Additionally, ODI identified 4 similar reports from Ford's response to the investigation.Ford submitted a total of 10 reports to ODI (6 of 10 Ford reports are duplicates of ODI reports).The complaints indicated difficulty or inability to latch the rear seat as some of the complaints reported the entire anchor plate completely detached from the vehicle (rear wheel well).The first report of this condition was received in March 2011 and subsequent reporting frequency indicates a potentially increasing trend over time.ODI seeks to evaluate the potential occupant safety risks resulting from structurally degraded seat anchorages.In addition to the subject vehicles, ODI also will collect and review information on MY 2005-2007 Freestar/Monterey vehicles that appear to have a seat design identical to the subject vehicles.To date, ODI is not aware of any similar complaints on the MY 2005-2007 vehicles.ODI also will collect and review information on Freestar/Monterey vehicles used outside of the salt belt states.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA12-003) to further assess whether a safety defect exists in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers: 10454977, 10453826, 10452933, 10450587, 10450559, 10450295, 10446564, 10442809, 10441641, 10441489, 10440616, 10438529, 10436592, 10433928, 10424850, 10420028, 10410491 and 10399896.

PE11033 · Service Jack Failure

Opened Sep 13, 2011 · Closed Dec 7, 2012

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Equipment:mechanical:accessory Scissor/screw/bottle Jack/lift

The subject vehicles (SV) are all automatic transmission, front wheel drive vehicles with hand actuated mechanical park brakes. The investigation focused on allegations that the service jack failed and caused the vehicles to fall. The subject scissors-type jack appears to fail at the slotted hinge joints where the jack screw is located (bends at mid-point). The failures occur while the jack is in use, and vehicle movement (forward or backward) is typically reported coincident with the failure. Ford reported that most MY 2003 Windstar and all MY 2006-2007 Freestar/Monterey also use the subject jack, an additional 223,246 vehicles.NHTSA has received six consumer complaints (VOQs) involving three injury incidents and a fatality.Ford reported 26 complaints for the SVs involving an additional 4 injuries. In the fatal incident, the van fell on a person working on the engine under the otherwise unsupported vehicle; ODI was unable to determine whether the vehicle was adequately chocked or the park brake was properly set. Reported injuries include a broken arm, head and hand injuries, arm and rib bruises, and muscle strains. NHTSA has received just one new report since opening this investigation. The complaint trend in ODI and Ford data is flat if not declining.Ford provides instructions and warnings in the owner's manual, on a placard placed with the jack, and on the jack itself. These instruct consumers to put the vehicle gear selector in Park, properly set the parking brake, chock the opposite wheel, use the jack only for changing a tire, loosen the lug nuts prior to jacking, and to not get under a vehicle supported by the jack only (NHTSA also recommends that jacks only be used for tire changing).In the VOQs, roughly half the consumers were using the jack for something other than tire changing, half had not chocked a wheel, and half had not properly set the parking brake. ODI notes that since the front wheels are drive wheels (with an open center differential) the Park gear cannot provide vehicle stability (longitudinally) when a front wheel is raised. All NHTSA complaints and most of the complaints to Ford involved failures while a front wheel was raised.In response to ODI's inquiry, Ford conducted testing on a 2004 Freestar. Ford's tests showed that when a front tire was raised the service jack held without failing under various scenarios except when a rocking force was applied and the parking brake was not properly set. Based on its testing and its analysis of field data, Ford concluded that the type of jack failure evidenced in this investigation (bending at mid-point) was likely caused by vehicle movement due to an improperly secured vehicle, or other misuse of the jack. Ford notes that rates in this investigation were similar to those in another investigation (EA91-049) which ODI closed. ODI also analyzed jack data for MY 2003 and newer vehicles to compare to the SV population. To assist with this analysis, ODI requested data from the jack manufacturer (actually its successor company) who provided limited data but did identify other models using the same design jack. ODI was unable to identify a significant difference in the incidence of jack failures (including those involving bending failures) between the SVs, other vehicles which used the same jack, or other vehicles where the jack type was unknown or different.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, investigation PE11-033 is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist and ODI reserves

PE10033 · Engine Stalling

Opened Aug 23, 2010 · Closed Jul 15, 2011

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission:control Module (tcm/pcm/tecm); Vehicle Speed Control

The subject vehicles suffered from a design issue whereby water could run down onto the cowling under the hood and located in the area of the windshield wipers and then drip onto a computer module, the Powertrain Control Module (PCM), which could be manifested in a variety of symptoms depending on which part of the circuit board became wet or which of the connector pins shorted out.In addition to causing an engine to stall, which may or may not then restart, the water intrusion could also cause the transmission to shift poorly, the vehicle to have erratic power, a malfunction indicator light to come on, or result in an inability to start the vehicle, an inability to shift the vehicle into either forward or reverse. Also the problem could cause a higher than normal idle RPM in Park, or for the radio to malfunction, or the interior lights to stay on.During this investigation ODI was concerned with the effect of the engine stalling or a drastic and sudden loss of power either of which may create a safety risk.In reviewing the actual number of these types of incidents, collectively referred to here as engine stalls, the number was found to be below what would be considered a defect trend.For example, the number of engine stalls identified in Ford's warranty claims for the model year (MY) 2004 subject vehicles, the MY with the most failures, was 200 out of population of 125,865, for a failure rate of 0.16%.The one crash recorded by a complainant to NHTSA, VOQ 10311522, alleged that the engine stalled, due to water intrusion into the PCM, while the road was turning causing her to go off the road and according to the police report the vehicle then hit an embankment and a tree stump. Ford reported in their response that there were three alleged crashes but none of these were validated as being caused by a problem with water intrusion into the PCM causing a stall.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 continue to monitor complaints and other information relating to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles and take further action in the future if warranted.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Power Train:automatic Transmission:control Module (tcm/pcm/tecm)

The subject vehicles suffered from a design issue whereby water could run down onto the cowling under the hood and located in the area of the windshield wipers and then drip onto a computer module, the Powertrain Control Module (PCM), which could be manifested in a variety of symptoms depending on which part of the circuit board became wet or which of the connector pins shorted out.In addition to causing an engine to stall, which may or may not then restart, the water intrusion could also cause the transmission to shift poorly, the vehicle to have erratic power, a malfunction indicator light to come on, or result in an inability to start the vehicle, an inability to shift the vehicle into either forward or reverse. Also the problem could cause a higher than normal idle RPM in Park, or for the radio to malfunction, or the interior lights to stay on.During this investigation ODI was concerned with the effect of the engine stalling or a drastic and sudden loss of power either of which may create a safety risk.In reviewing the actual number of these types of incidents, collectively referred to here as engine stalls, the number was found to be below what would be considered a defect trend.For example, the number of engine stalls identified in Ford's warranty claims for the model year (MY) 2004 subject vehicles, the MY with the most failures, was 200 out of population of 125,865, for a failure rate of 0.16%.The one crash recorded by a complainant to NHTSA, VOQ 10311522, alleged that the engine stalled, due to water intrusion into the PCM, while the road was turning causing her to go off the road and according to the police report the vehicle then hit an embankment and a tree stump. Ford reported in their response that there were three alleged crashes but none of these were validated as being caused by a problem with water intrusion into the PCM causing a stall.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 continue to monitor complaints and other information relating to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles and take further action in the future if warranted.

Vehicle Speed Control

The subject vehicles suffered from a design issue whereby water could run down onto the cowling under the hood and located in the area of the windshield wipers and then drip onto a computer module, the Powertrain Control Module (PCM), which could be manifested in a variety of symptoms depending on which part of the circuit board became wet or which of the connector pins shorted out.In addition to causing an engine to stall, which may or may not then restart, the water intrusion could also cause the transmission to shift poorly, the vehicle to have erratic power, a malfunction indicator light to come on, or result in an inability to start the vehicle, an inability to shift the vehicle into either forward or reverse. Also the problem could cause a higher than normal idle RPM in Park, or for the radio to malfunction, or the interior lights to stay on.During this investigation ODI was concerned with the effect of the engine stalling or a drastic and sudden loss of power either of which may create a safety risk.In reviewing the actual number of these types of incidents, collectively referred to here as engine stalls, the number was found to be below what would be considered a defect trend.For example, the number of engine stalls identified in Ford's warranty claims for the model year (MY) 2004 subject vehicles, the MY with the most failures, was 200 out of population of 125,865, for a failure rate of 0.16%.The one crash recorded by a complainant to NHTSA, VOQ 10311522, alleged that the engine stalled, due to water intrusion into the PCM, while the road was turning causing her to go off the road and according to the police report the vehicle then hit an embankment and a tree stump. Ford reported in their response that there were three alleged crashes but none of these were validated as being caused by a problem with water intrusion into the PCM causing a stall.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 continue to monitor complaints and other information relating to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles and take further action in the future if warranted.

EA09016 · Transmission Torque Converter Failure

Opened Nov 10, 2009 · Closed Feb 2, 2012

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission; Power Train:automatic Transmission:torque Converter

On January 4, 2012 Ford Motor Company submitted a Defect Information Report (NHTSA Recall No. 12V-006) to NHTSA regarding a defect in the performance of the transmission torque converter for approximately 205,896 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles.The supplier of the torque converter manufactured converters containing a pump shaft spline that did not consistently meet the specified heat treatment requirements.In normal use, the spline may wear excessively and eventually fails without warning.If a torque converter malfunctions due to a sheared pump drive spline, the vehicle will abruptly lose motive power.This problem affected model year 2004 and 2005 Freestar and Monterey minivans.During the investigation NHTSA identified 532 complaints alleging incidents of vehicle stall while driving due to torque converter failure.These failures were sudden and without any prior warning.Of the 490 complaints that reported the speed at the time of the failure:218 (44%) occurred at or above 55 mph; and 344 (70%) occurred at or above 40 mph.Of the 382 complaints that reported the position of the vehicle relative to traffic after it came to a stop following the loss of motive power: 122 (32%) alleged that the vehicle came to a stop in the flow of traffic and remained in the flow of traffic until pushed or towed out of the way; 225 (59%) reported that the vehicle was maneuvered to the side of the roadway and remained there until towed; and 35 (9%) reported that they were able to maneuver to a location away from the flow of traffic, such as a parking lot.Two crashes were allegedly caused by torque converter failure, including an incident in which a Freestar suddenly lost power in 65 mph traffic in an area where there was no shoulder available.As a result, the Freestar stopped in a travel lane and when trailing traffic maneuvered to avoid the stalled vehicle, a four vehicle collision occurred.In these types of circumstances NHTSA believes the defect presents an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and so advised Ford.In its Defect Information Report, Ford refers to its response to NHTSA's Preliminary Evaluation information request, which stated that a vehicle that loses motive power due to torque converter malfunction remains readily controllable; the vehicle will coast during which it can be safely maneuvered and stopped because the engine continues to run.Because the engine continues to run, steering and braking are unaffected, and the vehicle's electrical system and directional signals remain functional.In view of the foregoing, NHTSA does not agree with this statement.This investigation is closed based on Ford's recall.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Power Train:automatic Transmission

On January 4, 2012 Ford Motor Company submitted a Defect Information Report (NHTSA Recall No. 12V-006) to NHTSA regarding a defect in the performance of the transmission torque converter for approximately 205,896 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles.The supplier of the torque converter manufactured converters containing a pump shaft spline that did not consistently meet the specified heat treatment requirements.In normal use, the spline may wear excessively and eventually fails without warning.If a torque converter malfunctions due to a sheared pump drive spline, the vehicle will abruptly lose motive power.This problem affected model year 2004 and 2005 Freestar and Monterey minivans.During the investigation NHTSA identified 532 complaints alleging incidents of vehicle stall while driving due to torque converter failure.These failures were sudden and without any prior warning.Of the 490 complaints that reported the speed at the time of the failure:218 (44%) occurred at or above 55 mph; and 344 (70%) occurred at or above 40 mph.Of the 382 complaints that reported the position of the vehicle relative to traffic after it came to a stop following the loss of motive power: 122 (32%) alleged that the vehicle came to a stop in the flow of traffic and remained in the flow of traffic until pushed or towed out of the way; 225 (59%) reported that the vehicle was maneuvered to the side of the roadway and remained there until towed; and 35 (9%) reported that they were able to maneuver to a location away from the flow of traffic, such as a parking lot.Two crashes were allegedly caused by torque converter failure, including an incident in which a Freestar suddenly lost power in 65 mph traffic in an area where there was no shoulder available.As a result, the Freestar stopped in a travel lane and when trailing traffic maneuvered to avoid the stalled vehicle, a four vehicle collision occurred.In these types of circumstances NHTSA believes the defect presents an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and so advised Ford.In its Defect Information Report, Ford refers to its response to NHTSA's Preliminary Evaluation information request, which stated that a vehicle that loses motive power due to torque converter malfunction remains readily controllable; the vehicle will coast during which it can be safely maneuvered and stopped because the engine continues to run.Because the engine continues to run, steering and braking are unaffected, and the vehicle's electrical system and directional signals remain functional.In view of the foregoing, NHTSA does not agree with this statement.This investigation is closed based on Ford's recall.

Power Train:automatic Transmission:torque Converter

On January 4, 2012 Ford Motor Company submitted a Defect Information Report (NHTSA Recall No. 12V-006) to NHTSA regarding a defect in the performance of the transmission torque converter for approximately 205,896 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey vehicles.The supplier of the torque converter manufactured converters containing a pump shaft spline that did not consistently meet the specified heat treatment requirements.In normal use, the spline may wear excessively and eventually fails without warning.If a torque converter malfunctions due to a sheared pump drive spline, the vehicle will abruptly lose motive power.This problem affected model year 2004 and 2005 Freestar and Monterey minivans.During the investigation NHTSA identified 532 complaints alleging incidents of vehicle stall while driving due to torque converter failure.These failures were sudden and without any prior warning.Of the 490 complaints that reported the speed at the time of the failure:218 (44%) occurred at or above 55 mph; and 344 (70%) occurred at or above 40 mph.Of the 382 complaints that reported the position of the vehicle relative to traffic after it came to a stop following the loss of motive power: 122 (32%) alleged that the vehicle came to a stop in the flow of traffic and remained in the flow of traffic until pushed or towed out of the way; 225 (59%) reported that the vehicle was maneuvered to the side of the roadway and remained there until towed; and 35 (9%) reported that they were able to maneuver to a location away from the flow of traffic, such as a parking lot.Two crashes were allegedly caused by torque converter failure, including an incident in which a Freestar suddenly lost power in 65 mph traffic in an area where there was no shoulder available.As a result, the Freestar stopped in a travel lane and when trailing traffic maneuvered to avoid the stalled vehicle, a four vehicle collision occurred.In these types of circumstances NHTSA believes the defect presents an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and so advised Ford.In its Defect Information Report, Ford refers to its response to NHTSA's Preliminary Evaluation information request, which stated that a vehicle that loses motive power due to torque converter malfunction remains readily controllable; the vehicle will coast during which it can be safely maneuvered and stopped because the engine continues to run.Because the engine continues to run, steering and braking are unaffected, and the vehicle's electrical system and directional signals remain functional.In view of the foregoing, NHTSA does not agree with this statement.This investigation is closed based on Ford's recall.

PE09033 · Torque Converter Output Shaft Failure

Opened Jul 15, 2009 · Closed Nov 17, 2009

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission; Power Train:automatic Transmission:torque Converter

ODI HAS RECEIVED 227 OWNER COMPLAINTS ALLEGING A SUDDEN AND UNEXPECTED LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER DUE TO AN INTERNAL TRANSMISSION FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.OF THOSE COMPLAINTS, 124 CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE TORQUE CONVERTER OUTPUT SHAFT SPLINES STRIPPING CAUSING A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER TO THE DRIVETRAIN.THE REMAINING 103 COMPLAINTS EXPERIENCED A LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER BUT THE SPECIFIC INTERNAL FAILURE CAUSE WITHIN THE TRANSMISSION IS NOT KNOWN.ODI HAS UPGRADED THE INVESTIGATION TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-016) TO CONTINUE ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Power Train:automatic Transmission

ODI HAS RECEIVED 227 OWNER COMPLAINTS ALLEGING A SUDDEN AND UNEXPECTED LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER DUE TO AN INTERNAL TRANSMISSION FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.OF THOSE COMPLAINTS, 124 CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE TORQUE CONVERTER OUTPUT SHAFT SPLINES STRIPPING CAUSING A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER TO THE DRIVETRAIN.THE REMAINING 103 COMPLAINTS EXPERIENCED A LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER BUT THE SPECIFIC INTERNAL FAILURE CAUSE WITHIN THE TRANSMISSION IS NOT KNOWN.ODI HAS UPGRADED THE INVESTIGATION TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-016) TO CONTINUE ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.

Power Train:automatic Transmission:torque Converter

ODI HAS RECEIVED 227 OWNER COMPLAINTS ALLEGING A SUDDEN AND UNEXPECTED LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER DUE TO AN INTERNAL TRANSMISSION FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.OF THOSE COMPLAINTS, 124 CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE TORQUE CONVERTER OUTPUT SHAFT SPLINES STRIPPING CAUSING A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER TO THE DRIVETRAIN.THE REMAINING 103 COMPLAINTS EXPERIENCED A LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER BUT THE SPECIFIC INTERNAL FAILURE CAUSE WITHIN THE TRANSMISSION IS NOT KNOWN.ODI HAS UPGRADED THE INVESTIGATION TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA09-016) TO CONTINUE ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.

DP09004 · Engine Stalling

Opened Jun 4, 2009 · Closed Sep 7, 2010

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission:control Module (tcm/pcm/tecm)

On May 6, 2009, NHTSA received a request for a hearing through Title 49 of the United States Code, Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety, Part 557. the request was in reference to vehicle owner complaint, 10266067, filed with NHTSA on April 20, 2009, which described a problem with engine stall in a model year (MY) 2004 Ford Freestar minivan due to water entering the PCM.Part 557 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations establishes procedures for holding a hearing to determine whether a manufacturer has reasonably met its obligation to notify owners of a safety related defect.Because a safety related defect has not been determined regarding the alleged defect in MY 2004 Ford Freestar vehicles, the Office of Defects Investigation interpreted the request as a defect petition under Part 552 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.In response to the Information Request letter sent by ODI for DP09-004, Ford indicated that a variety of symptoms could result from water intrusion into the PCM, including no start, rough idle, engine misfire, transmission performance degradation, lack of transmission engagement, illumination of the check engine light, and engine stall while driving or parked.Ford stated that it believes that the overall complaint rate for engine stalling is low and comparable to other similar stalling related investigations that the agency has recently closed.Ford stated that the water entry into the PCM is a customer satisfaction issue.ODI has granted DP09-004 and opened a Preliminary Evaluation, PE10-033, to further assess the scope, frequency and potential safety-related consequences of the alleged defect.