NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Suspension complaints
10 reportsClear category filter140,000 miles · Jan 19, 2019
Suspension
TOOK VEHICLE TO MECHANIC FOR ROUTINE ANNUAL STATE INSPECTION. VEHICLE PASSED ALL ITEMS EXCEPT THE K MEMBER FRAME (SUBFRAME) HAD EXCESSIVE RUST AND HAD CORRODED TO THE POINT THAT THE CAR WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE UNTIL THIS DEFECT WAS CORRECTED. ESTIMATED COST FOR REPAIR WAS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF $1000. VEHICLE CURRENTLY HAS 140K MILE…
Read full complaint
TOOK VEHICLE TO MECHANIC FOR ROUTINE ANNUAL STATE INSPECTION. VEHICLE PASSED ALL ITEMS EXCEPT THE K MEMBER FRAME (SUBFRAME) HAD EXCESSIVE RUST AND HAD CORRODED TO THE POINT THAT THE CAR WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE UNTIL THIS DEFECT WAS CORRECTED. ESTIMATED COST FOR REPAIR WAS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF $1000. VEHICLE CURRENTLY HAS 140K MILES AND IS OTHERWISE IN VERY GOOD CONDITIION.
NHTSA ODI #11170897
148,000 miles · Feb 21, 2018
Power TrainService BrakesSuspension
FROM THE 1ST DAY I LEASED THE VEHICLE FROM PROGRESSIVE AUTO, I COULD HEAR IT RAVING HIGH, STEERING WHEEL REALLY HEAVY, BRAKES SEEMED STRANGE AND HEAVY TO MOVE. BUT THE SALES MAN KEPT TELLING AND SHOWING ME A REPORT THAT THE VEHICLE IS FINE, AND KEPT SAYING, ITS THE TYPE OF ENGINE IN THE VEHICLE (CVT) THAT'S WHY IT ALL SEEMS STRA…
Read full complaint
FROM THE 1ST DAY I LEASED THE VEHICLE FROM PROGRESSIVE AUTO, I COULD HEAR IT RAVING HIGH, STEERING WHEEL REALLY HEAVY, BRAKES SEEMED STRANGE AND HEAVY TO MOVE. BUT THE SALES MAN KEPT TELLING AND SHOWING ME A REPORT THAT THE VEHICLE IS FINE, AND KEPT SAYING, ITS THE TYPE OF ENGINE IN THE VEHICLE (CVT) THAT'S WHY IT ALL SEEMS STRANGE. I KEPT GOING BACK TO THEM ADVISING THEM THAT I KNOW SOMETHING IS WRONG, BUT THEY KEPT SAYING THEY CANNOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG. FINALLY I TOOK IT TO A FORD DEALERSHIP, AND THEY ADVISED ME IT WAS A TRANSMISSION, BRAKES AND SUSPENSION PROBLEM. AND THIS WAS NOT EVEN 2 MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD. I WAS VERY UPSET AND WANTED TO RETURN THE VEHICLE. SO THEY DECIDED TO CLAIM TO FIX THE TRANSMISSION BY INSTALLING A USED ONE. I HAD TO GET THE OTHER THINGS FIXED MYSELF. NOT EVEN A YEAR AND SOME LATER, I HAVE TO REPLACE THE TRANSMISSION AGAIN. BEFORE THE TRANSMISSION COMPLETELY DIED, AS I WAS DRIVING IT STARTED TO STALL TO A POINT I ALMOST GOT INTO A CAR ACCIDENT WITH KIDS IN THE BACK, AS THE CAR KEPT JERKING AND I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS HAPPENING.THIS WAS THE WORST VEHICLE I HAVE EVER PURCHASED IN MY LIFE TIME. AND THE BEST PART, IS ONE ONE WANTS TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROBLEM WITH THE VEHICLE THAT SEEMS TO BE VERY VERY COMMON. I WISH THE PROBLEMS WERE EASILY DIAGNOSED WHEN FIRST HAPPENING, AND IT WOULD HAVE SAVED ME ALOT OF HEADACHES. I AM USUALLY A IMPORT VEHICLE INDIVIDUAL, BUT I CHOOSE FORD AS I HEARD GREAT THINGS ABOUT THEM. BUT NOW I WILL NEVER BUY A FORD AGAIN AS IT HAS BEEN THE WORST EXPERIENCE I HAVE HAD. I NEED OVER $3000 TO FIX THE TRANSMISSION AND THE VEHICLE IS NOT EVEN WORTH THAT MUCH!
NHTSA ODI #11074067
160,000 miles · Jun 26, 2017
SteeringSuspensionWheels
MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING THE CAR AT THE TIME AND FELT A LARGE BANG THEN SHUDDERING WITH THE VEHICLE BECOMING DIFFICULT TO STEER AND LOSING CONTROL, VEERING OFF THE ROAD EDGE. SHE REGAINED CONTROL AND BROUGHT THE CAR TO A SAFE STOP. SHE CALLED ME FOR ASSISTANCE AND I FOUND THE REAR SUB FRAME IS INFERIOR IN CONSTRUCTION AND HAD EXT…
Read full complaint
MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING THE CAR AT THE TIME AND FELT A LARGE BANG THEN SHUDDERING WITH THE VEHICLE BECOMING DIFFICULT TO STEER AND LOSING CONTROL, VEERING OFF THE ROAD EDGE. SHE REGAINED CONTROL AND BROUGHT THE CAR TO A SAFE STOP. SHE CALLED ME FOR ASSISTANCE AND I FOUND THE REAR SUB FRAME IS INFERIOR IN CONSTRUCTION AND HAD EXTENSIVE PERFORATION INCONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE VEHICLE. THIS CAUSED THE REAR CONTROL ARM TO SEPARATE FROM THE SUB FRAME. THE REAR WHEEL BECAME UNSTABLE CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO LOSE CONTROL. I HAVE CONTACTED FORD ON THE ISSUE, THEY HAVE RECALLS ON THE ESCAPE AND WINDSTAR FOR THE SAME PROBLEM. I HAVE ALSO FOUND THE SAME REPORTS FROM OTHER FREESTYLE OWNERS. FORD REFUSED TO ASSIST ON THE MATTER. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE. THIS OCCURRED AT RELATIVELY LOW SPEED APPROX. 35 MILES PER OUR. HAD THIS OCCURRED AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS MY DAUGHTER MAY HAVE BEEN INJURED OR KILLED.
NHTSA ODI #11001445
89,800 miles · Jan 7, 2015
Suspension
DESCRIPTION OF FAILURE FORD MOTOR CASE NO. [XXX] DECEMBER 2, 2014 2007 FORD FREESTYLE SEL FWD ' 89,800 MILES VERY GOOD CONDITION- ORIGINAL OWNER ON NOVEMBER 26, 2014 OWNER EXPERIENCED PROBLEM WITH PASSENGER REAR WHEEL. WHEEL WAS SWAYING IN AN OUTWARD DIRECTION ON THE BASE OF THE WHEEL AND DRIVER WAS NOT ABLE TO CONTROL T…
Read full complaint
DESCRIPTION OF FAILURE FORD MOTOR CASE NO. [XXX] DECEMBER 2, 2014 2007 FORD FREESTYLE SEL FWD ' 89,800 MILES VERY GOOD CONDITION- ORIGINAL OWNER ON NOVEMBER 26, 2014 OWNER EXPERIENCED PROBLEM WITH PASSENGER REAR WHEEL. WHEEL WAS SWAYING IN AN OUTWARD DIRECTION ON THE BASE OF THE WHEEL AND DRIVER WAS NOT ABLE TO CONTROL THE AUTOMOBILE. UPON INSPECTION AT METRO FORD SALES (WHERE AUTOMOBILE WAS PURCHASED) ON DECEMBER 2, 2014 IT WAS FOUND THAT THE REAR SUSPENSION SUB-FRAME HAD FAILED THROUGH EXTENSIVE RUST. THE LOWER CONTROL ARM BRACKET HAD BROKEN FREE OF THE ACTUAL SUSPENSION SUB-FRAME BODY. THIS ALLOWED THE BASE OF THE WHEEL SYSTEM TO PROJECT IN AN OUTWARD DIRECTION AND CAUSED THE LOSS OF CONTROL AND TRACTION. THE MAINTENANCE PERSONAL DETERMINED THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO REPAIR THE SUB-FRAME ASSEMBLY. THE CORRECTIVE ACTION WOULD BE THE REMOVAL OF THE SUB-FRAME ASSEMBLY AND THE REPLACEMENT WITH A SERVICEABLE ASSEMBLY. THERE IS NO DOUBT IN THE MINDS OF THE SERVICE PERSONAL THAT THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS EXTENSIVE AND UNUSUAL RUST. UPON INSPECTION OF THE REMAINDER OF THE UNDERCARRIAGE FRAMEWORK THERE WAS COMPARATIVELY LITTLE RUST TO OTHER COMPONENTS. THE EXHAUST SYSTEM, WHICH IS ADJACENT TO THE FAILED SUB-FRAME SYSTEM, HAD VERY LITTLE RUST AND WAS STILL VERY SERVICEABLE THIS IS A VERY TROUBLING SITUATION SINCE THE CAR WAS RARELY DRIVEN IN THE SNOW. FURTHERMORE, THE AUTOMOBILE HAS ALWAYS BEEN HOUSED IN A CLIMATICALLY CONTROLLED GARAGE SYSTEM THROUGHOUT ITS LIFESPAN. AT THIS JUNCTURE, IT IS VERY OBVIOUS TO ALL PARTIES CONCERNED THAT THE SUB-FRAME IN QUESTION WAS MANUFACTURED WITH SUB-STANDARD STEEL AND ALLOYS. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10670679
60,000 miles · May 7, 2013
Suspension
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 FORD FREESTYLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE REAR DRIVER AND PASSENGER TIRES HAD TO BE REPLACED EVERY SIXTY DAYS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTICS BUT THE CAUSE OF THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS UNDETERMINED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE, BUT OFFERED NO FURTHER ASSISTANC…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 FORD FREESTYLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE REAR DRIVER AND PASSENGER TIRES HAD TO BE REPLACED EVERY SIXTY DAYS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTICS BUT THE CAUSE OF THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS UNDETERMINED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE, BUT OFFERED NO FURTHER ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 100,000.
NHTSA ODI #10510947
75,019 miles · Jul 2, 2011
Electronic Stability Control (esc)EquipmentFuel System, Other
97,000 MILES. I HAVE REPLACED THE THROTTLE BODY TWICE, NEW TRANSMISSION- HOLE I N THE DRIVE SHAFT. 3 REAR BRAKE JOBS- THE 1ST ON WAS BY RECALL. CRACKED MOTORHEAD 12,000 MILES AFTER NEW TRANSMISSION. THE WHOLE CAR SHAKES, SQUEAKS, AND POPS SINCE THE TRANSMISSION WAS PUT IN. FROM THE CV JOINTS AND BACK BRAKES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10410292
65,699 miles · Jun 15, 2011
SuspensionVehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS 2007 FORD FREESTYLE. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE SURGED RANDOMLY IN BOTH DRIVE AND REVERSE GEAR. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN INSPECTED. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE MAKING A TURN EITHER TO THE LEFT OR TO THE RIGHT, SHE HEARD A CLICKING SOUND IN THE FRONT WHEELS. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED THAT THE FAILURE COULD BE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS 2007 FORD FREESTYLE. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE SURGED RANDOMLY IN BOTH DRIVE AND REVERSE GEAR. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN INSPECTED. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE MAKING A TURN EITHER TO THE LEFT OR TO THE RIGHT, SHE HEARD A CLICKING SOUND IN THE FRONT WHEELS. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED THAT THE FAILURE COULD BE CAUSED BY THE CV JOINT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN, BUT THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 65,699.
NHTSA ODI #10407021
44,761 miles · Sep 15, 2010
Suspension
THE CAR DEVELOPED A SERIOUS RIGHT-LEFT JERK WHEN EVER THE CAR WAS ACCELERATED OR DECELERATED. THE FORD DEALER TECHNICIAN DETERMINED THAT THE LEFT LOWER BALL JOINT WAS LOOSE. FROM THE OFFICIAL FORD REPAIR MANUAL THE BALL JOINT SHOULD BE AT 85 FT-LBS. IN MY OPINION A NUT SET TO 85 FT-LBS SHOULD NOT HAVE WORKED LOOSE. THE TECH…
Read full complaint
THE CAR DEVELOPED A SERIOUS RIGHT-LEFT JERK WHEN EVER THE CAR WAS ACCELERATED OR DECELERATED. THE FORD DEALER TECHNICIAN DETERMINED THAT THE LEFT LOWER BALL JOINT WAS LOOSE. FROM THE OFFICIAL FORD REPAIR MANUAL THE BALL JOINT SHOULD BE AT 85 FT-LBS. IN MY OPINION A NUT SET TO 85 FT-LBS SHOULD NOT HAVE WORKED LOOSE. THE TECHNICIAN HAD NO IDEA WHY THE BALL JOINT NUT HAD COME LOOSE. SINCE THIS VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED FROM A FORD DEALER AND NO FRONT END MECHANICAL WORK WAS EVER DONE, I BELIEVE THAT THE BALL JOINT NUT WAS NOT SET TO THE PROPER TORQUE WHEN THE CAR WAS INITIALLY ASSEMBLED. ONCE THE FORD DEALER COMPLETED THE REPAIR I ASKED THE TECHNICIAN TO CHECK THE RIGHT SIDE AND IN FACT THE RIGHT SIDE BALL JOINT WAS ALSO A LITTLE LOOSE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10355850
Mileage unknown · Aug 5, 2010
SuspensionTires
2007 FORD FREESTYLE. CONSUMER STATES A VIBRATION/ NOISE COMING FROM THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE *TGW THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THE VIBRATION/NOISE INSPECTED. HOWEVER, THE DEALER STATED THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. THE CONSUMER RETURNED TO THE DEALER BECAUSE THE FRONT END NOISE HAD WORSEN…
Read full complaint
2007 FORD FREESTYLE. CONSUMER STATES A VIBRATION/ NOISE COMING FROM THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE *TGW THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THE VIBRATION/NOISE INSPECTED. HOWEVER, THE DEALER STATED THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. THE CONSUMER RETURNED TO THE DEALER BECAUSE THE FRONT END NOISE HAD WORSENED. THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER THAT ALL FOUR PIRELLI P6 TIRES WERE CUPPED WITH FLAT SPOTS. THE DAMAGE WAS ON THE INSIDE EDGE ONLY OF ALL FOUR TIRES. THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED THE TIRES WERE REGULARLY BALANCED AND ROTATED. UPON RESEARCH, THE CONSUMER LEARNED THE PIRELLI P6 TIRES FORD INSTALLED AT THE FACTORY HAD BEEN PROBLEMATIC WHEN USED ON THE 2005/2007 FORD FREESTYLES. THE REPORT DESCRIBED THE EXACT SAME PROBLEM AND SHOWED A TYPICAL WEAR PATTERN THAT HE EXPERIENCED WITH HIS VEHICLE. AFTER 2 1/2 YEARS, THE DEALER CONFIRMED THE NOISE WAS INDEED COMING FROM THE TIRES. THE CONSUMER STATED THE QUESTION STILL REMAINS AT WHICH CAUSED THE PROBLEM; THE TIRES OR THE SUSPENSION. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10347682
31,000 miles · Nov 7, 2008
Suspension
HAVE A 2007 FORD FREESTYLE AND THE PIRELLI TIRES ON IT SEPARATED AT THE TREAD LINE. THERE WAS APPARENTLY A TSB ISSUED ON THIS CAR REGARDING THE SUSPENSION AND DESPITE FREQUENT MAINTENANCE CHECKS AND SERVICES IN THE PAST TWO YEARS - THIS OCCURRED LESS THAN 3 WEEKS AFTER A ROUTINE OIL CHANGE AND CHECK UP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10247912
NHTSA investigations
2PE11018 · Idle Instability
Opened May 11, 2011 · Closed Feb 7, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
On November 29, 2012, Ford Motor Company (Ford) initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 12N03 to extend warranty coverage terms for repair of engine idle RPM surge caused by throttle body deposits in all model year (MY) 2005 through 2007 Ford Freestyle, Five Hundred and Mercury Montego vehicles.The program extends the coverage for up to 10 years of service or 150,000 miles from the warranty start date of the vehicle (all vehicles are eligible for the program through May 31, 2013, regardless of mileage).Dealers will repair vehicles exhibiting the condition by removing and cleaning the throttle body and reprogramming the PCM with software containing an updated idle speed control strategy.According to Ford, some of the affected vehicles may experience momentary, intermittent engine idle RPM surge (idle flare) when stopped or during low speed driving maneuvers such as in a parking lot or driveway.Unstable idle speed control (dips and flares) around the target engine speed (700 rpm) can occur in vehicles with deposit build-up in the throttle body when the system adjusts engine speed in response to changes in engine load, typically from power steering application or air-conditioner compressor cycling.Idle speed control logic is only active at vehicle speeds below 3.5 mph and when the accelerator pedal is not applied.Ford testing of a vehicle with a worst case throttle body measured a maximum idle flare of 1360 RPM lasting approximately 1 second, which Ford indicated was consistent with system design to limit vehicle speed and acceleration in idle control mode.Ford indicated that the test vehicle was held in place with normal brake effort and that vehicle speed remained under 4 mph without the brake pedal applied.In addition to throttle body deposit accumulation, symptoms associated with the condition may include Check Engine lamp illumination and diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) P0505, P0506 or P061B.Ford attributed the surge condition to changes in idle air flow resulting from the progressive buildup of deposits in the throttle body from normal Positive Crankcase Ventilation (PCV) system operation.This condition was not adequately compensated for in the original Powertrain Control Module (PCM) calibration.Ford issued a technical service bulletin on August 15, 2011 (TSB 11-8-5), releasing an updated powertrain control calibration for vehicles with CVT transmissions.On October 19, 2011, Ford issued a second bulletin (TSB 11-10-21) superseding TSB 11-8-5 and including updated powertrain control calibration for vehicles with 6-speed transmissions.Prior to Ford issuing the TSB?s, owner?s experiencing the alleged defect either received no repairs, if dealers could not duplicate the condition, or had the throttle body cleaned or replaced, which only provided temporary correction until the throttle deposit build-up returned.Ford?s revised powertrain calibrations appear to be effective remedies for the idle instability caused by build-up of throttle body deposits.However, even after the TSB?s were released, many owners experiencing the condition continued to have difficulty with proper diagnosis and repair as dealers were often either unable to duplicate the condition or were unfamiliar with the new repair procedures.Ford's new program addresses those concerns.NHTSA's testing and complaint analysis indicate that the idle speed control issue in the subject vehicles can only occur at very low speeds, are very brief events, are easily controlled by moderate brake pedal forces and result in minor increases in vehicle speed even with no braking.This investigation is closed.The closing of this in
PE08060 · Tire Valve Cracking
Opened Oct 14, 2008 · Closed Apr 9, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Tires:valve
ON OCTOBER 14, 2008, ODI OPENED PE08-060 TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF CRACKED AND LEAKING SNAP-IN TIRE VALVES IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2007 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY.THE VALVES WERE SUPPLIED TO FORD BY TOPSEAL AUTO-PARTS, A SUBSIDIARY OF THE SHANGHAI BAOLONG AUTOMOTIVE CORPORATION IN CHINA.VALVES MADE BY TOPSEAL FOR AFTERMARKET SALE WERE THE SUBJECT OF TWO RECENT SAFETY RECALLS BY TECH INTERNATIONAL (08T-018) AND DILL AIR CONTROLS (08T-028), THE LATTER OF WHICH WAS INVESTIGATED BY ODI IN PE08-036 AND EA08-022.THE DEFECT CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY THE AFTERMARKET TIRE VALVE RECALLS BOTH INVOLVED INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING DUE TO ISSUES WITH THE SUPPLY OF ANTI-OZONANT CHEMICALS TO TOPSEAL FOR A PERIOD FROM JULY TO MID-NOVEMBER 2006.THE AFTERMARKET VALVES WERE COMPOUNDED WITH A BLEND OF EPDM AND NATURAL RUBBER, USING A RELATIVELY LOW PERCENTAGE OF EPDM (EPDM PROVIDES INHERENT RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING).HENCE, THE NEED FOR ANTI-OZONANT CHEMICALS AND THE PROBLEMS WITH CRACKING WHEN THOSE CHEMICALS WERE MISSING OR OUT OF SPECIFICATION IN SOME LOTS OF VALVES.BOTH RECALL CAMPAIGNS INVOLVED INSPECTION PROGRAMS TO IDENTIFY AND REPLACE VALVES WITH VISIBLE SURFACE CRACKING.ALTHOUGH THE TOPSEAL VALVES SUPPLIED TO FORD ALSO APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE ANTI-OZONANT SUPPLY ISSUES IN MID TO LATE-2006, FORD INDICATED THAT ITS VALVES WERE MADE AT A DIFFERENT TOPSEAL PRODUCTION LINE AND WERE COMPOUNDED WITH A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF EPDM RUBBER TO MEET MORE STRINGENT SPECIFICATIONS FROM FORD.ODI'S ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA PROVIDED BY FORD SHOWED THAT PROBLEMS WITH CRACKED TIRE VALVES WERE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER FOR MY 2007 VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 2006 THROUGH MARCH 2007.FORD RESPONDED BY IMPLEMENTING CHANGES IN ITS MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR SNAP-IN RUBBER TIRE VALVES AND ALSO INCREASING THE QUALITY AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS FOR VALVES IMPORTED FOR USE IN ITS VEHICLES.WHILE THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM RATES ARE ELEVATED FOR SUBJECT VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 2006 THROUGH MARCH 2007, THE RATES OF LEAKING VALVES ARE WELL BELOW ONE PERCENT OF PRODUCTION FOR EACH OF THE PEAK MONTHS FOR ALL OF THE AFFECTED MODELS.A SUBSTANTIAL MAJORITY OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH TIRE PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEMS (TPMS) WHICH WARN THE DRIVER WHEN ANY TIRE PRESSURES DROPS BELOW 25 PERCENT OF RECOMMENDED INFLATION PRESSURE. AS OUTLINED IN A LETTER TO ODI DATED APRIL 6, 2009, FORD HAS AGREED TO SEND LETTERS TO OWNERS OF CERTAIN MY 2007 AND 2008 FORD, LINCOLN AND MERCURY VEHICLES TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CRACKING CONCERN. LETTERS WILL BE SENT TO OWNERS OF VEHICLES BUILT FROM NOVEMBER 2006 THROUGH MAY 2007.OWNERS CAN OPT FOR A FREE DEALER INSPECTION.VALVES EXHIBITING SURFACE CRACKS OR AIR LEAKAGE RELATED TO OZONE ATTACK WILL BE REPLACED BY FORD UNDER ITS NORMAL WARRANTY TERMS.FORD EXPECTS TO SEND THE LETTER BY APPROXIMATELY MID-MAY 2009. BASED ON THE USE OF TPMS IN THE MAJORITY OF SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE RELATIVELY LOW RATES OF REPAIRS ASSOCIATED WITH LEAKING VALVES AND RESULTANT TIRE DAMAGE, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE ACTIONS FORD HAS AGREED TO TAKE WILL PROVIDE EFFECTIVE AND EXPEDITIOUS RESOLUTION FOR VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT DURING THE PERIOD WHEN VALVES WITH INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING WERE MOST LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN USED IN VEHICLE PRODUCTION.FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF THIS MATTER WOULD NOT BE AN EFFICIENT ALLOCATION OF AGENCY RESOURCES.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