IllustrationI AM HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM AS RECORDED IN THE CURRENT NTSA INVESTIGATION NUMBER PE05038 WHERE ACCELLATOR PEDAL STUCK WIDE OPEN DUE TO CARPET INTERFERENCE FOR FORD 2003 MUSTANG CONVERTIBLE GT. THIS HAPPENED ON 7/22/05 AND 7/13/05 AND ONCE IN 2004 ON 8/17/04
2003 Ford Mustang Convertible
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Limited comparison data
There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Mustang Convertible years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
130–25K
325–50K
150–75K
375–100K
2100–150K
0150K+
22 reports with mileage · 13 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Suspension. Review the 5 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
0 crash reports0 fire reports1 injury reports
What owners actually said
35 reportsACCELERATOR PEDAL HANGS UP IN CARPET AND VEHICLE IS AT FULL THROTTLE WITHOUT ABILITY TO SLOW DOWN.
COMPLETE LOSS OF TRACTION - SPIN OUT AT 30MPH WHILE OTHER CARS PASSED ME BY NORMALLY. FELT LIKE THE REAR END JUST COULD NOT STAY ON THE ROAD. CRAWLED 100 MILES TO THE AIRPORT AT 30-35MPH WITH CONSTANT LOSS OF TRACTION MOST OF THE WAY ON A MOIST HIGHWAY. CAR KEPT WANTING TO TURN SIDEWAYS. TIRES LOOKED GOOD AND STILL DO. TRIED SHU…
Read full complaint
COMPLETE LOSS OF TRACTION - SPIN OUT AT 30MPH WHILE OTHER CARS PASSED ME BY NORMALLY. FELT LIKE THE REAR END JUST COULD NOT STAY ON THE ROAD. CRAWLED 100 MILES TO THE AIRPORT AT 30-35MPH WITH CONSTANT LOSS OF TRACTION MOST OF THE WAY ON A MOIST HIGHWAY. CAR KEPT WANTING TO TURN SIDEWAYS. TIRES LOOKED GOOD AND STILL DO. TRIED SHUTTING THE TRAC ON/OFF, NO CHANGE EITHER WAY. COULD NOT KEEP THE CAR STRAIGHT ON THE HIGHWAY AS THE REAR END KEPT SLIDING ALL OVER THE PLACE. I FEEL LIKE THE TRACTION CONTROL WAS LOCKED IN EITHER THE ON OR OFF POSITION OR, THE EMERGENCY BRAKE WAS ON. SCARY. THIS HAPPENED IN SOUTHERN OREGON, CAR WAS PURCHASED IN SOUTHER CALIFORNIA. DEALER IN OR WON'T LOOK AT, SINCE I CAN'T REPRODUCE EFFECT.
I PURCHASED A 2003 COBRA FROM PRESTIGE FORD IN EDMOND, OK. I WENT TO THE DEALERSHIP REGARDING A BRAKE LIGHT THAT CONTINUED TO LIGHT UP ON THE DASH. I ALSO COMPLAINED ABOUT THE CLEAR COAT ON THE FRONT PASSENGER WHEEL. I WAS TOLD TO BRING THE CAR BACK WHEN THERE WAS SOMEBODY WITH AUTHORITY AVAILABLE TO TALK TO. I TOOK THE CAR …
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A 2003 COBRA FROM PRESTIGE FORD IN EDMOND, OK. I WENT TO THE DEALERSHIP REGARDING A BRAKE LIGHT THAT CONTINUED TO LIGHT UP ON THE DASH. I ALSO COMPLAINED ABOUT THE CLEAR COAT ON THE FRONT PASSENGER WHEEL. I WAS TOLD TO BRING THE CAR BACK WHEN THERE WAS SOMEBODY WITH AUTHORITY AVAILABLE TO TALK TO. I TOOK THE CAR HOME AND DISCOVERED A LEAKING BRAKE CALIPER. THE DEALERSHIP KNEW THE CALIPER WAS LEAKING BECAUSE IT WAS SITTING ON THE SHOWROOM FLOOR. THEIR ATTEMPT TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM WAS TO INSTALL ANOTHER WASHER (NOT THE CORRECT ONE) ON THE CALIPER AND OVER-TORQUE THE BOLT TO THE POINT THE THREADS WERE GALLED. I REMOVED THE INCORRECT RETAINING BOLT AND WASHER, PURCHASED THE CORRECT ONES, ALONG WITH A NEW CALIPER. I CHECKED THE TORQUE ON THE OTHER THREE BOLTS AND THEY WERE TO FACTORY SPECS. TO DISCOVER THAT PRESTIGE FORD SOLD ME A $41,000 VEHICLE THAT LEAVES THE FACTORY CAPABLE OF 150+ MPH, WITH A SERIOUS AND DANGEROUS BRAKE PROBLEM INFURIATES ME.*AK
WINDOWS LEAK WHEN WASHING OR DRIVING IN THE RAIN.*AK
WHILE DRIVING FLOORBOARDS VIBRATE VIOLENTLY, CAUSING IMPAIRED VISION OF REAR VIEW MIRROR. DEALER STATES, THEY HAVE NO SOLUTION FOR THIS PROBLEM.*AK
RECENTLY PURCHASED A 2003 MUSTANG GT CONVERTIBLE AND THE DEALERSHIP CANNOT SEEM TO GET THE TOP TO STOP LEAKING. I RECENTLY FILED A REPORT WITH THE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT BOARD TO GET FORD TO REPLACE THE CAR. HOWEVER, IT RECENTLY RAINED AND I ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT THE DEALERSHIP TO CONTINUE THE WARRANTY WORK ON THE CONVERTABLE TO IN…
Read full complaint
RECENTLY PURCHASED A 2003 MUSTANG GT CONVERTIBLE AND THE DEALERSHIP CANNOT SEEM TO GET THE TOP TO STOP LEAKING. I RECENTLY FILED A REPORT WITH THE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT BOARD TO GET FORD TO REPLACE THE CAR. HOWEVER, IT RECENTLY RAINED AND I ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT THE DEALERSHIP TO CONTINUE THE WARRANTY WORK ON THE CONVERTABLE TO INCLUDE REPLACING THE FRONT SEATS DUE TO WATER SPOTS. DEALERSHIP TELLS ME THEY CANT SERVICE THE CAR BECAUSE IT IS CURRENTLY WITH THE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT BOARD, FORD TELLS ME IT IS STILL MY CAR TO GET IT SERVICED. I AM AT A TOTAL LOSS, IF FORD WANTS TO DROP NEW SEATS IN THE CAR EVERY TIME IT RAINS THAT IS FINE THEY CAN WASTE THE MONEY. I LOVE THE CAR BUT THE DEALERSHIP HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THEY CANNOT FIX THE PROBLEM. DISPUTE SETTELEMENT BOARD STATES THEY CAN'T HEAR MY CASE UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST. WELL BY THEN THE CAR WILL BE FULL OF MOLD SMELL FROM THE RAIN AND THE SEATS WILL LOOK WORSE THEN THEY DO NOW......*AK
I RECENTLY PURCHASED A 2003 MUSTANG COVERTIBLE (WITHIN THE LAST MONTH). I AM HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE CONVERTIBLE COVER THAT COVERS THE TOP WHEN IT IS IN THE DOWN POSITION. THE COVER DOES NOT FIT PROPERLY. I HAVE CALLED AS WELL AS VISITED MY LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP CONCERNING THIS PROBLEM. I HAVE ALSO CONTACTED FORD IN MICHIGAN(WH…
Read full complaint
I RECENTLY PURCHASED A 2003 MUSTANG COVERTIBLE (WITHIN THE LAST MONTH). I AM HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE CONVERTIBLE COVER THAT COVERS THE TOP WHEN IT IS IN THE DOWN POSITION. THE COVER DOES NOT FIT PROPERLY. I HAVE CALLED AS WELL AS VISITED MY LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP CONCERNING THIS PROBLEM. I HAVE ALSO CONTACTED FORD IN MICHIGAN(WHERE THE CAR WAS BUILT). BOTH ORGANIZATIONS ARE TELLING ME THEY ARE AWARE THERE IS A DESIGN PROBLEM BUT THEY HAVE NOT RECALLED THE ITEM YET AND HAVE NO PLANS TO DO SO AT THIS TIME. ONE OF MY CONCERNS AND THE REASON FOR THIS COMPLAINT IS THAT, IN DRIVING THE CAR WITH THE TOP DOWN AND THE COVER NOT PROPERLY FITTING PLACE, WHAT WOULD THE OUTCOME BE IF IT FLEW OFF THE CAR AND HIT ANOTHER CAR OR A MOTORCYCLIST. I FEAR IT MAY BE DEADLY. I AM ASKING THAT THIS ORGANIZATION LOOK INTO THIS MATTER OF HIGHWAY SAFTEY. AS I AM AWARE AND SURE THERE ARE OTHER CONSUMERS THAT SHARE MY CONCERN. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME WITH ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. KRISTEN . *AK
I RECENTLY PURCHASED A 2003 MUSTANG COVERTIBLE (WITHIN THE LAST MONTH). I AM HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE CONVERTIBLE COVER THAT COVERS THE TOP WHEN IT IS IN THE DOWN POSITION. THE COVER DOES NOT FIT PROPERLY. I HAVE CALLED AS WELL AS VISITED MY LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP CONCERNING THIS PROBLEM. I HAVE ALSO CONTACTED FORD IN MICHIGAN(WH…
Read full complaint
I RECENTLY PURCHASED A 2003 MUSTANG COVERTIBLE (WITHIN THE LAST MONTH). I AM HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE CONVERTIBLE COVER THAT COVERS THE TOP WHEN IT IS IN THE DOWN POSITION. THE COVER DOES NOT FIT PROPERLY. I HAVE CALLED AS WELL AS VISITED MY LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP CONCERNING THIS PROBLEM. I HAVE ALSO CONTACTED FORD IN MICHIGAN(WHERE THE CAR WAS BUILT). BOTH ORGANIZATIONS ARE TELLING ME THEY ARE AWARE THERE IS A DESIGN PROBLEM BUT THEY HAVE NOT RECALLED THE ITEM YET AND HAVE NO PLANS TO DO SO AT THIS TIME. ONE OF MY CONCERNS AND THE REASON FOR THIS COMPLAINT IS THAT, IN DRIVING THE CAR WITH THE TOP DOWN AND THE COVER NOT PROPERLY FITTING PLACE, WHAT WOULD THE OUTCOME BE IF IT FLEW OFF THE CAR AND HIT ANOTHER CAR OR A MOTORCYCLIST. I FEAR IT MAY BE DEADLY. I AM ASKING THAT THIS ORGANIZATION LOOK INTO THIS MATTER OF HIGHWAY SAFTEY. AS I AM AWARE AND SURE THERE ARE OTHER CONSUMERS THAT SHARE MY CONCERN. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME WITH ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. KRISTEN . *AK
1998 FORD MUSTANG GT CONVERTIBLE UNDER WARRANTY, THE DRIVER'S SEAT BELT (LAP PORTION) BECAME SEVERELY FRAYED. BELT (AND MAYBE ENTIRE ASSEMBLY) WAS REPLACED BY DEALER. DON'T HAVE AN EXACT DATE - BUT WITHIN THE FIRST YEAR OF OWNERSHIP. *AK NOW, AT 5 YRS 4 MO OF AGE, THIS BELT IS AGAIN FRAYING.
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
2DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
PE05038 · Accelerator Pedal Interference
Opened Jul 7, 2005 · Closed Sep 13, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
PE05-038 WAS OPENED ON JULY 7, 2005, WITH 11 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS TO ODI ALLEGING INCIDENTS OF THROTTLE STICKING DUE TO ACCELERATOR PEDAL INTERFERENCE WITH THE CARPET.ODI HAS RECEIVED AN ADDITIONAL 24 COMPLAINTS SINCE THE PE WAS OPENED.DURING PE05-038, FORD SUPPLIED COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY INFORMATION REGARDING 86 ADDITIONAL INCIDENTS OF ACCELERATOR PEDAL INTERFERENCE IN MODEL YEAR 2003 TO 2004 MUSTANG COBRA VEHICLES.EIGHTY-FIVE OF THESE HAD CONCERNS OF ACCELERATOR PEDAL STICKING, 70 OF WHICH WERE ANALYZED AS BEING RELATED TO CARPET INTERFERENCE.ODI IS CONTINUING ITS ANALYSIS OF THE CAUSAL FACTORS IN THE REMAINING 15 INCIDENTS.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS.