← New search

2005 Ford Freestar

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Limited comparison data

There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

804 reports with mileage · 82 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 677 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 85 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 53 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

8 crash reports2 fire reports14 injury reports

Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints

20 reports
Clear category filter
39,900 miles · Nov 26, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

I TOOK MY CAR IN FOR A ROUTINE OIL CHANGE AND TIRE ROTATION. (WHICH I DO EVERY 5K, THIS WAS AT ABOUT 40K). REAR DRIVER BRAKE PADS WERE DOWN TO 10%, ALL OTHERS WERE FINE. WHEN REPLACING PADS, THE MECHANIC FOUND BRAKE FLUID HAD LEAKED INTO THE CALIPER, CAUSING IT TO FAIL. THE CALIPER FAILURE CAUSED OVERHEATING AND DRAGGING OF T…

Read full complaint

I TOOK MY CAR IN FOR A ROUTINE OIL CHANGE AND TIRE ROTATION. (WHICH I DO EVERY 5K, THIS WAS AT ABOUT 40K). REAR DRIVER BRAKE PADS WERE DOWN TO 10%, ALL OTHERS WERE FINE. WHEN REPLACING PADS, THE MECHANIC FOUND BRAKE FLUID HAD LEAKED INTO THE CALIPER, CAUSING IT TO FAIL. THE CALIPER FAILURE CAUSED OVERHEATING AND DRAGGING OF THE CERAMIC BRAKE PAD ON THE ROTOR, CUTTING A HUGE GROOVE INTO ROTOR, WHICH NEGATED ANY CHANCE OF MACHINING. THE CALIPERS, ROTORS AND BRAKE PADS ALL REQUIRED REPLACEMENT WITH LESS THAN 40K MILES ON THE CAR... BIG $$$$. THIS FAILURE SEEMED PRE-MATURE, AND WAS UNUSUAL EVEN TO A SERVICE MANAGER WITH MANY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE. (HE SUGGESTED THAT FORD SHOULD BE NOTIFIED, WHICH THEY WERE, TODAY, 11/26/2007). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10209934

42,068 miles · Sep 21, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

2005 FORD FREESTAR GRINDING BEGAN BACK BRAKES HAVE HAD VAN MAINTAIN AT DEALERSHIP SINCE GOT NEVER HAD REPORT BRAKES NEED REPLACED AS NOISE INCREASED AT 42,068 MILES TOOK BACK TO DEALERSHIP FOUND BACK BRAKE AND ROTORS NEED REPLACED BUT NOT FRONT BRAKE THIS GOOD THIS IS A FWD VEHICLE FRONT BRAKES SHOULD GO FIRST FORD REPLACE…

Read full complaint

2005 FORD FREESTAR GRINDING BEGAN BACK BRAKES HAVE HAD VAN MAINTAIN AT DEALERSHIP SINCE GOT NEVER HAD REPORT BRAKES NEED REPLACED AS NOISE INCREASED AT 42,068 MILES TOOK BACK TO DEALERSHIP FOUND BACK BRAKE AND ROTORS NEED REPLACED BUT NOT FRONT BRAKE THIS GOOD THIS IS A FWD VEHICLE FRONT BRAKES SHOULD GO FIRST FORD REPLACED ROTORS AND PADS WANTED 475.00 BUT AFTER POINTING OUT NEVER ADV ANY PROBLEM FINAL PRICE PAID 332.01 AFTER CHECKING MAINTENANCE HISTORY IN COMPUTER CHECKING INTERNET MULTI PROBLEM BACK BRAKES HAVE CONTACT CORP FORD WILL NOT ASSIST OR RECALL ISSUE AT MOMENT THIS IS HUGE SAFETY PROBLEM ORIGINAL BACK BRAKES ARE DEFECTIVE. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10203689

28,000 miles · Sep 8, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

AT APPROXIMATELY 28,000 MILES WE HEARD A TERRIBLE SQUEALING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF OUR 2005 FORD FREESTAR MINIVAN AND AFTER VISUAL INSPECTION THE BRAKE PAD ON THE DRIVER'S REAR WAS WORN TO NOTHING. IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE VAN TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY INFORMED US THAT IT WAS NORMAL WEAR AND WOULD NOT BE COVERED BY OUR WARRANT…

Read full complaint

AT APPROXIMATELY 28,000 MILES WE HEARD A TERRIBLE SQUEALING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF OUR 2005 FORD FREESTAR MINIVAN AND AFTER VISUAL INSPECTION THE BRAKE PAD ON THE DRIVER'S REAR WAS WORN TO NOTHING. IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE VAN TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY INFORMED US THAT IT WAS NORMAL WEAR AND WOULD NOT BE COVERED BY OUR WARRANTY. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION BY OUR PERSONAL MECHANIC WE WERE INFORMED THE CALIPER WAS STICKING AND CUT INTO THE ROTOR. HE PUT A SET OF BRAKE PADS ON SO WE COULD DRIVE IT BACK TO THE DEALER WHERE WE BOUGHT THE VEHICLE, SUNSET FORD, IN GRAVOIS. WE WERE TOLD SINCE WE DID NOT USE MOTOCRAFT THE REPAIRS WOULD NOT BE COVERED. NOW AT 50,000 MILES THE PROBLEM STILL EXISTS AND THE VAN NEEDS ANOTHER SET OF BRAKES AND ROTORS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10202249

34,595 miles · May 25, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

AT APPROX. 33,000 MILES STARTED EXPEIENCING BRAKING PROBLEMS- SOFT PEDAL, REQUIRING EXCESS PRESSSURE TO STOP SAFELY. OCCASIONAL INSTANCES OF ACCELERATION WHILE BRAKING BECAUSE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND BRAKE PEDAL WERE AT SAME HEIGHT. A NARROW ACCELERATION MISS DROVE ME TO MY SERVICE SHOP WHERE I ASKED THEM TO CHECK OUT THE BRAKES. …

Read full complaint

AT APPROX. 33,000 MILES STARTED EXPEIENCING BRAKING PROBLEMS- SOFT PEDAL, REQUIRING EXCESS PRESSSURE TO STOP SAFELY. OCCASIONAL INSTANCES OF ACCELERATION WHILE BRAKING BECAUSE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND BRAKE PEDAL WERE AT SAME HEIGHT. A NARROW ACCELERATION MISS DROVE ME TO MY SERVICE SHOP WHERE I ASKED THEM TO CHECK OUT THE BRAKES. THE PADS & ROTORS WERE IN FINE SHAPE. BUT THE MASTER CYLINDER PROVED TO BE BAD. IT TOOK 4 REPLACEMENT CYLINDERS FROM LOCAL DEALERS TO GET ONE THAT FIT AND FUNCTIONED PROPERLY. NOW AT 54,000 MILES THE PEDAL IS AGAIN SOFT AND BRAKING IS GETTING HARDER EACH DAY. VISUAL INSPECTION OF PADS AND ROTORS SHOW PLENTY OF USEFUL LIFE REMAINING. SINCE WHEN IS 30,000 MILES AN ACCEPTABLE AVERAGE LIFE FOR A MASTER BRAKE CYLINDER?

NHTSA ODI #10191699

27,673 miles · Jan 25, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

I RETURNED FROM A CROSS COUNTRY TRIP AND HEARD A GRINDING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF MY 2005 FORD FREESTAR. TO INVESTIGATE I REMOVED THE WHEELS AND FOUND THE PASSENGER REAR ROTOR AND DISC PAD WERE METAL TO METAL. I CHECKED THE OTHER WHEELS, THEY SHOWED NO SIGNS OF DAMAGE, PADS STILL HAD A LOT OF MATERIAL REMAINING. I TOOK …

Read full complaint

I RETURNED FROM A CROSS COUNTRY TRIP AND HEARD A GRINDING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF MY 2005 FORD FREESTAR. TO INVESTIGATE I REMOVED THE WHEELS AND FOUND THE PASSENGER REAR ROTOR AND DISC PAD WERE METAL TO METAL. I CHECKED THE OTHER WHEELS, THEY SHOWED NO SIGNS OF DAMAGE, PADS STILL HAD A LOT OF MATERIAL REMAINING. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO CRAIG FORD, IN CRAIG, COLORADO FOR REPAIRS. AT FIRST I WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS A DEFECTIVE BRAKE CALIPER AND THAT WARRANTY WOULD COVER THE CALIPER, ROTOR AND PADS. HOWEVER I WAS TOLD LATER THAT THE CALIPER WAS NOT DEFECTIVE AND THAT I WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TOTAL REPAIR COSTS. NOTE, I HAD LESS THAN 30,000 MILES ON THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME OF THE BRAKE FAILURE. I HAD TO PAY FOR THE NEW ROTOR FOR THE PASSENGER REAR, REAR PADS AND TURNING THE DRIVER REAR ROTOR WHICH I WAS TOLD IS A NORMAL PROCEDURE FOR E REAR BREAK JOB; I WAS NOT CHARGED FOR A CALIPER SO I PRESUME CRAIG FORD REUSED THE CALIPER. SINCE WORK WAS BEING DONE ON THE REAR, AND I WAS HAVING TO PAY FOR THE REPAIRS, I INSTRUCTED CRAIG FORD TO DO A COMPLETE BRAKE JOB REPLACING PADS AND TURNING ROTORS ON THE FRONT AS WELL SO THAT I WOULD BE STARTING AGAIN WITH 100% NEW BRAKES ON ALL 4 WHEELS. WHEN I PICKED THE VEHICLE UP, I WAS ADVISED BY THE SERVICE MANAGER, ROB SOVINE, THAT HE CHECKED AND THERE APPEARED TO BE A NUMBER OF INCIDENTS OF 2005 FORD FREESTAR PASSENGER REAR BRAKES WEARING PREMATURELY, WITH NO KNOW REASON FOR THIS PROBLEM; AND THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL OR SERVICE BULLETIN REGARDING THIS PROBLEM. I HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO PAY FOR THE REPAIRS AS THE VEHICLE WAS INOPERABLE, BUT SINCE I WAS NOT THE ONLY OWNER EXPERIENCING THIS PROBLEM, ACCORDING TO MR. SOVINE, I FELT AND STILL DO FEEL THAT FORD SHOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS PROBLEM. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10180720

9,200 miles · Nov 14, 2006
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

REPEATED SPONGY BRAKE PEDAL..SOMETIMES GOES TO FLOOR ON SUDDEN BRAKING. RANDOM 'SQUEAL AND SQUEAK' FROM FRONT BRAKES. ACCORDING TO SERVICE MGR. AT ORANGE FORD-LINCOLN IN ORANGE, TEXAS, THIS IS COMMON SINCE ASBESTOS WAS REMOVED FROM PADS ABOUT 4 YEARS AGO. VERY IRRITATING AND DANGEROUS. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10173519

5,186 miles · Mar 27, 2006
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

BRAKE PEDAL WHEN PUSHED HARD GOES TO THE FLOOR. BRAKE PEDAL WHEN PRESSED NORMAL HAS A SPONGY FEEL TO IT. ALMOST RAN INTO THE BACK END OF A CAR THAT WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN BECAUSE I WAS EXPECTING THE VEHICLE TO STOP WHEN I APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED UNTIL I PRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL HARD. VEHICLE MAKES HORREN…

Read full complaint

BRAKE PEDAL WHEN PUSHED HARD GOES TO THE FLOOR. BRAKE PEDAL WHEN PRESSED NORMAL HAS A SPONGY FEEL TO IT. ALMOST RAN INTO THE BACK END OF A CAR THAT WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN BECAUSE I WAS EXPECTING THE VEHICLE TO STOP WHEN I APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED UNTIL I PRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL HARD. VEHICLE MAKES HORRENDOUS NOISE "POPPING SOUND" WHEN THE ABS SYSTEM IS ENGAGED. THIS POPPING SOUND HAPPENS EVERY TIME BETWEEN 30 -45 MILES PER HOUR DURING A "HARD' BRAKE SITUATION. THESE INCIDENTS HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO THE DEALER ON 3 OCCASIONS BUT THE DEALER SAID THE ABS SYSTEM AND BRAKES CHECKED OUT OK ACCORDING TO FORD'S SPECIFICATIONS. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10153768

176 miles · Jul 15, 2005
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control

UNDER NORMAL BRAKING BRAKE PEDAL TRAVEL HEIGHT IS EQUAL TO GAS PEDAL HEIGHT. UNDER HEAVY BRAKING BRAKE PEDAL TRAVEL HEIGHT IS BELOW GAS PEDAL HEIGHT. THIS MAY CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO ACCELERATE UNDER BRAKING. UPDATED 11/28/2005 - *NM

NHTSA ODI #10128849

300 miles · Jul 12, 2005
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

DT: ABOUT 2 WEEKS AGO THE BRAKES FAILED. WHEN PRESSURE WAS APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL IT SIMPLY WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR. IT DID SLOW DOWN BUT AS DRIVER PROGRESSED THE BRAKE SHOE HUNG TO THE ROTOR AND MADE A CLICKING SOUND AS THOUGH THEY WERE STILL APPLIED. AFTERWARDS CONSUMER CONTACTED DEALERSHIP AND TOOK VEHICLE IN. …

Read full complaint

DT: ABOUT 2 WEEKS AGO THE BRAKES FAILED. WHEN PRESSURE WAS APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL IT SIMPLY WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR. IT DID SLOW DOWN BUT AS DRIVER PROGRESSED THE BRAKE SHOE HUNG TO THE ROTOR AND MADE A CLICKING SOUND AS THOUGH THEY WERE STILL APPLIED. AFTERWARDS CONSUMER CONTACTED DEALERSHIP AND TOOK VEHICLE IN. THE TECHNICIAN STATED IT WAS A ROTOR PROBLEM. THE DEALER GRINDED RUST OR " LOT ROT" OFF THE ROTORS AND PLACED THEM BACK ON THE VEHICLE. TWO DAYS AGO HOWEVER THE SAME INCIDENT OCCURRED AGAIN WITH THE BRAKE PADS STICKING TO THE ROTOR AND THE CLICKING NOISE. THE VEHICLE IS BACK AT THE DEALER WHO SAYS THEY CAN NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT. THE CONSUMER HAS NOT CONTACTED MANUFACTURER. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10128442

Mileage unknown · Feb 22, 2005
Latches/locks/linkagesService Brakes, Hydraulic

THE ELECTRIC SLIDING DOOR WILL OPEN ABOUT A FOOT, AND IT WILL STICK. THE BRAKES ARE LIKE SPONGES. CONSUMER STATES HE HAS TO COMPLETELY DEPRESS THE BRAKE PEDAL TO THE FLOOR BEFORE THE VEHICLE WILL STOP. CONSUMER CONTACTED FORD THREE TIMES FOR THESE ISSUES. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10112874

Official recalls

3

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.

06V069000 · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate

Mar 9, 2006

ON CERTAIN VANS EQUIPPED WITH THE POWER LIFTGATE OPTION, THE POWER LIFTGATE MOTOR AUTOMATICALLY DISENGAGES AFTER THE LIFTGATE IS POWERED OPEN.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A LIFTGATE STRUT MALFUNCTION, THE LIFTGATE CAN FALL FREELY WITH NO PRIOR WARNING. ANYONE STANDING BENEATH THE LIFTGATE MAY BE INJURED IF THE LIFTGATE FALLS.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPROGRAM THE POWER LIFTGATE MODULE TO REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE LIFTGATE COULD FALL FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON MARCH 15, 2006. 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

6

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.

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.