IllustrationFORD SPARK PLUG BLOW OUT ON 1999 FORD MUSTANG GT 4.6 L MOTOR. *NM
1999 Ford Mustang Gt
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 1999 Ford Mustang Gt do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 51.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Mustang Gt 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
30–25K
825–50K
850–75K
675–100K
4100–150K
0150K+
29 reports with mileage · 7 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 21 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 4 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Air Bags. Review the 2 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
3 crash reports0 fire reports2 injury reports
What owners actually said
36 reports(7/23/06) 1999 FORD MUSTANG GT, 4.6L BLEW SPARK PLUG FOR THE THIRD TIME NOW. THE FIRST TIME WAS BACK IN 2005 WHILE DRIVING ON THE 15 FREEWAY HEADING SOUTH AT ABOUT 8:00 PM. STOP TO GET GAS AND UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE TO CONTINUE MY WAY HOME IT MADE LOUD POP AND THEN CONTINUED TO POP, POP, POP. AT FIRST I THOUGHT I HAD AN EXHA…
Read full complaint
(7/23/06) 1999 FORD MUSTANG GT, 4.6L BLEW SPARK PLUG FOR THE THIRD TIME NOW. THE FIRST TIME WAS BACK IN 2005 WHILE DRIVING ON THE 15 FREEWAY HEADING SOUTH AT ABOUT 8:00 PM. STOP TO GET GAS AND UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE TO CONTINUE MY WAY HOME IT MADE LOUD POP AND THEN CONTINUED TO POP, POP, POP. AT FIRST I THOUGHT I HAD AN EXHAUST MANIFOLD PROBLEM, BUT UPON THE REPAIR SHOP INSPECTION OF THE VEHICLE THEY NOTED THAT THE NUMBER ONE SPARK PLUG HAD BLEW OUT OF THE PISTON. THEY REPAIRED IT FOR ABOUT $ THE SECOND TIME WAS ABOUT 6 MONTHS AGO WHEN THE NUMBER TWO SPARK PLUG (ALL THIS BEING ON THE DRIVERS SIDE) BLEW OUT. NO DAMAGE TO THE THREADS AND A NEW SET OF SPARK PLUGS WERE PUT INTO THE VEHICLE ALL AROUND. THEN ON SUNDAY EVENING, JULY 23RD 2006, THE SAME NUMBER 2 SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT AGAIN; THIS TIME TAKING ALL THE THREADS WITH IT. I HAD TO HAVE THE CAR TOWED TO MY PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND NOW I AM IN THE PROCESS OF FINDING A REPAIR SHOP TO RE-THREAD THE PISTON. I AM SURE THEY WILL HAVE TO GET A NEW COIL AS WELL; SINCE IT BROKE OFF AT THE PLACE OF WERE IT IS BOLTED TO THE HEAD. I CALLED FORD MOTOR COMPANY ON TUESDAY, JULY 25TH 2006 AND SPOKE TO CUSTOMER SERVICE REP. AND BASICALLY WAS GIVEN A NOT OUR PROBLEM ATTITUDE. THIS IS APPALLING THAT SUCH A LARGE COMPANY AS FORD WILL NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM AND FIX IT! I AM A SINGLE MOTHER AND CAN NOT AFFORD TO HAVE MY CAR FIXED AT OVER $3000.00! I AM NOT HAPPY WITH FORD AND WILL NOT BUY FROM THEM AGAIN. I WAS A HUGE FORD FAN; WHEN ANYONE WOULD TRY TO DISCREDIT THEM I WOULD BACK THEM ALL THE WAY! NOT ANY MORE THEY DON'T BACK THEIR CUSTOMERS. I GUESS FORD MOTOR COMPANY HAS NO LOYALTY TO THEIR CUSTOMERS WHAT SO EVER! SO I SHALL NO LONGER BE LOYAL TO THEM. I WILL BE BUYING A CHEVY OR OTHER VEHICLE THAT HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH THE FORD NAME, AS SOON AS THIS IS FIXED. SHE'S BEING TRADED IN ASAP! *JB
HTTP://WWW.CONSUMERAFFAIRS.COM/AUTOMOTIVE/FORD_MANIFOLDS.HTML I FOUND INFO WITH THE ABOVE LINK. WE HAVE A 1999 35TH ANN. EDITION MUSTANG . THE PLASTIC MANIFOLD CRACKED AND SINCE IT IS WITHIN 7 YEARS OF PURCHASE THE DEALER TOWED AND IS FIXING FREE WITH THE INFO FROM THE LINK ABOVE. *JB
PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD CRACKED AT THERMOSTAT HOUSING, THUS ALLOWING ANTI-FREEZE TO LEAK ONTO THE ENGINE. I MUST PAY FOR THE PARTS AND LABOR TO REPLACE THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AT + $350.00 FOR TOTAL REPAIR OF PROBLEM THAT FORD HAS BEEN AWARE OF FOR YEARS !!! *JB
ACCIDENT HEAD ON AND THEN ROLLED ONCE AND AIRBAGS DIDN'T DEPLOY. *JB
99 FORD MUSTANG GT. 4.6L ENGINE. SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT. DEFECTIVE HEAD. COST ME $3000. I UNDERSTAND A CA LAWYER HAS FILED A LAWSUIT OR COMPLAINT AGAINST THIS DEFECT. I WANT IN ON THE ACTION. *JB
MY CAR IS LOSING COOLANT THROUGH A CRACK IN THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD. FORD WILL NOT REPAIR IT UNDER ANY WARRANTY. IT IS A DESIGN FLAW THAT FORD SHOULD TAKE CARE OF! ALSO MY CAR SURGES IN RPMS WHEN FIRST STARTING AND SHIFTING INTO DRIVE,,,VERY DANGEROUS!!!!! *NM
1) A TICKING NOISE BEGAN COMING FROM THE UPPER MIDDLE OF THE ENGINE. AFTER A MONTH, 2) THE TICKING BECAME A 'TAPPING' THAT BECAME INCREASINGLY LOUDER. ENROUTE TO HAVE IT EXAMINED BY A LOCAL PERFORMANCE SHOP, THERE WAS A LOUD SOUND SIMILAR TO A GUN SHOT AND AN INSTANT LOSS IN POWER. THIS OCCURRED AT 2000 RPM. UPON EXAMINATI…
Read full complaint
1) A TICKING NOISE BEGAN COMING FROM THE UPPER MIDDLE OF THE ENGINE. AFTER A MONTH, 2) THE TICKING BECAME A 'TAPPING' THAT BECAME INCREASINGLY LOUDER. ENROUTE TO HAVE IT EXAMINED BY A LOCAL PERFORMANCE SHOP, THERE WAS A LOUD SOUND SIMILAR TO A GUN SHOT AND AN INSTANT LOSS IN POWER. THIS OCCURRED AT 2000 RPM. UPON EXAMINATION, THE SPARK PLUG HAD BEEN EJECTED FROM THE 2ND FROM THE LAST CYLINDER ON THE PASS. SIDE BANK. SUCH FORCE WAS EXHIBITED THAT THE MOUNTING TAB OF THE IGNITION COIL WAS BROKEN AND THE COIL WAS SHATTERED. UPON EXAMINATION OF THE HEAD ITSELF, THE PLUG THREADS WERE COMPLETELY STRIPPED. 3)TRUE BLUE PERFORMANCE, A MUSTANG SPECIALTY SHOP, EXAMINED THE PARTS AND CONCLUDED THAT THE ONLY REMEDY VIABLE WAS TO REPLACE THE HEAD, PLUG, AND COIL. *JB
THIS PAST MAY, AFTER DRIVING A 1999 FORD MUSTANG CONVERTIBLE 50,000 MILES IT WAS INADVERTENTLY DISCOVERED THAT THE FRONT LEFT SUSPENSION SYSTEM HAD ONLY ONE OF TWO BOLT HOLDING THAT ENTIRE SYSTEM TO THE FRAME OF THIS CAR. IT APPEARS THAT THIS 4 INCH BOLT WAS NEVER FASTENED TO THE VEHICLE ALTHOUGH THIS CAR WAS INSPECTED A DOZEN…
Read full complaint
THIS PAST MAY, AFTER DRIVING A 1999 FORD MUSTANG CONVERTIBLE 50,000 MILES IT WAS INADVERTENTLY DISCOVERED THAT THE FRONT LEFT SUSPENSION SYSTEM HAD ONLY ONE OF TWO BOLT HOLDING THAT ENTIRE SYSTEM TO THE FRAME OF THIS CAR. IT APPEARS THAT THIS 4 INCH BOLT WAS NEVER FASTENED TO THE VEHICLE ALTHOUGH THIS CAR WAS INSPECTED A DOZEN TIMES BY THE DEALER. THIS APPARENTLY DANGEROUS DEFECT WAS DISCOVERED BY AN INDEPENDENT BRAKE SHOP NOT FORD. SINCE MAY OF 2005 THIS VEHICLE HAS BEEN IN STORAGE AWAITING SOME ANSWER BY FORD; NOT UNTIL FOLLOW-UP CALLS WERE RECENTLY PLACED TO FORD DID FORD RESPOND. FORD'S ONLY RESPONSE TO COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS IS TAKE IT TO THE DEALER TO BE INSPECTED, THE SAME DEALER THAT INSPECTED IT A DOZEN TIMES. FORDS APPARENT LACK OF CONCERN IS TROUBLING. ESPECIALLY IF THIS IS A DANGEROUS VEHICLE TO DRIVE. IN MAY OF 2005, FORD WAS IMMEDIATELY CONTACTED AND ASKED ABOUT POSSIBLE STRUCTURAL DAMAGE GIVEN THE STRESS TO THE REMAINING STEEL COMPONENTS THAT WERE ATTACHED TO THE FRAME. TWO FOLLOW UP CALLS WERE IGNORED; A LETTER TO WM. C. FORD WAS IGNORED. AS FORD'S RESPONSE IS AWAITED, THIS VEHICLE HAS BEEN PLACED IN STORAGE IN THAT IT APPEARS TO BE A DANGER TO DRIVE. NOT KNOWING WHETHER THIS IS A FLUKE OR NOT, YOUR OFFICE IS BEING CONTACTED. GIVEN THE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS IF THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED INCIDENT, YOUR OFFICE'S INVESTIGATORS ARE WELCOME TO INSPECT THIS VEHICLE BEFORE IT IS FIXED BY A COMPANY OTHER THAN FORD. YOUR RESPONSE IS WELCOME, THANK YOU. *JB
DT: THE SPARE TIRE IN THE TRUNK OF THE VEHICLE H BLEW UP. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT START BECAUSE THE TIRE CAUSED THE TRIP WIRE TO SHUT OFF THE FUEL. AFTER CONSUMER'S HUSBAND PUSHED A RESET BUTTON THE VEHICLE STARTED. THE VEHICLE WAS A CONVERTIBLE. THE CONVERTIBLE TOP WAS PULLED BACK ON THE LEFT SIDE BY THE EXPLOSION, AND T…
Read full complaint
DT: THE SPARE TIRE IN THE TRUNK OF THE VEHICLE H BLEW UP. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT START BECAUSE THE TIRE CAUSED THE TRIP WIRE TO SHUT OFF THE FUEL. AFTER CONSUMER'S HUSBAND PUSHED A RESET BUTTON THE VEHICLE STARTED. THE VEHICLE WAS A CONVERTIBLE. THE CONVERTIBLE TOP WAS PULLED BACK ON THE LEFT SIDE BY THE EXPLOSION, AND THE TRUNK LID WAS PUSHED. BEFORE THERE WAS A RATTLING NOISE IN THE TRUNK AND THE CONSUMER TOOK THE TIRE OUT. AFTER CLEANING THE TRUNK OUT SHE PUT THE TIRE BACK IN, AND HAD NOT USED IT. A WEEK LATER IT BLEW OUT. THE CONSUMER HAD THE VEHICLE SINCE MAY 2005. SHE WAS UNSURE IF IT WAS USED BY THE PREVIOUS OWNER. THE CONSUMER HAS NOT CHANGED ANYTHING IN THE TRUNK AREA SINCE THIS HAPPENED. *AK
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
1DP05005 · 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.