NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
59 reports60,000 miles · Oct 23, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
A LOUD FOG HORN SOUND COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD. RAISED RPM HELPED TO REDUCE OR STOP NOISE. THE ABS LIGHT (AMBER) COMES ON AND DISENGAGES THE TRACTION LOC FOR THE REAR END (DRIVE WHEELS). OVER A PERIOD OF APPROX. 1 MONTH THE ABS LIGHT STAYS ON WITH TRACLOC DISENGAGED. I GOT THE SYSTEM CHECKED AND THEY STATED NO ELECTRIC SIGNAL…
Read full complaint
A LOUD FOG HORN SOUND COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD. RAISED RPM HELPED TO REDUCE OR STOP NOISE. THE ABS LIGHT (AMBER) COMES ON AND DISENGAGES THE TRACTION LOC FOR THE REAR END (DRIVE WHEELS). OVER A PERIOD OF APPROX. 1 MONTH THE ABS LIGHT STAYS ON WITH TRACLOC DISENGAGED. I GOT THE SYSTEM CHECKED AND THEY STATED NO ELECTRIC SIGNAL IS COMING OUT OF THE CONTROL MODULE BUT POWER IS GOING IN. I WAS TOLD FOR A MORE DETAILED ANALYSIS I SHOULD TAKE IT TO FORD BECAUSE THERE ARE 2 ITEMS THAT COULD BE REPLACED AND IT COULD BE $2600.00 OR MORE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10361861
1,000 miles · Jul 13, 2010
Fuel System, Gasoline
FUEL PUMP BREAKS FREE FROM IN-TANK ATTACHMENT POINT RESULTING IN FUEL LEVEL INDICATOR MALFUNCTION AND FUEL STARVATION WHEN CORNING, ACCELERATION OR ABRUPT DECELERATION. CAUSES UNEXPECTED LAG IN ACCELERATION OR VEHICLE MAY STALL AT INOPPORTUNE TIMES. SINCE ORIGINAL REPLACEMENT OF ENTIRE FUEL TANK ASSEMBLY BY FORD THE FUEL SENDER…
Read full complaint
FUEL PUMP BREAKS FREE FROM IN-TANK ATTACHMENT POINT RESULTING IN FUEL LEVEL INDICATOR MALFUNCTION AND FUEL STARVATION WHEN CORNING, ACCELERATION OR ABRUPT DECELERATION. CAUSES UNEXPECTED LAG IN ACCELERATION OR VEHICLE MAY STALL AT INOPPORTUNE TIMES. SINCE ORIGINAL REPLACEMENT OF ENTIRE FUEL TANK ASSEMBLY BY FORD THE FUEL SENDER IN THIS VEHICLE HAS BEEN REPAIRED/REPLACED 2 ADDITIONAL TIMES. DEALERSHIP NOTED THAT THE PLASTIC RING SENDER ATTACHES TO CRACKS AND ONLY WAY TO REPAIR IS TO REPLACE ENTIRE FUEL TANK AT COST OF APPROX $900. MOST RECENT 2 REPLACEMENTS OCCURRED OUTSIDE OF EXTENDED WARRANTY BY A FEW DAYS AND FORD REFUSED TO REPLACE UNDER WARRANTY EVEN THOUGH THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN PARKED OVER THE WINTER AND ISSUE WAS NOT DISCOVERED UNTIL VEHICLE CAME OUT OF STORAGE AFTER THE EXTENDED WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED. REPAIR HAD OCCURRED IN FALL BEFORE VEHICLE WENT INTO STORAGE. EACH TIME FUEL TANK IS REPLACE RING CRACKS AGAIN, USUALLY WITHIN 30-90DAYS. THIS IS A HAZARD AS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE WHEN THE VEHICLE WILL EXPERIENCE FUEL STARVATION OR STALLING, POSSIBLY RESULTING IN ACCIDENT OR INJURY OUTSIDE DRIVERS ABILITY TO AVOID. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10342866
85,000 miles · Mar 17, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
SPARK PLUG BLOW OUT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10320463
57,000 miles · Mar 16, 2010
Seat Belts
TL*-THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT. THE VEHICLE WAS STATIONARY, WHEN THE CONTACT OBSERVED THE FRONT PASSENGER SEAT BELT RETRACTOR SYSTEM FAILED TO EXTRACT THE WEBBING PROPERLY. THE WEBBING DOES NOT SECURE THE OCCUPANT TIGHTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE FAILURE WAS RELATED TO BROKEN PLASTIC PA…
Read full complaint
TL*-THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT. THE VEHICLE WAS STATIONARY, WHEN THE CONTACT OBSERVED THE FRONT PASSENGER SEAT BELT RETRACTOR SYSTEM FAILED TO EXTRACT THE WEBBING PROPERLY. THE WEBBING DOES NOT SECURE THE OCCUPANT TIGHTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE FAILURE WAS RELATED TO BROKEN PLASTIC PARTS WITHIN THE RETRACTOR SYSTEM. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 57,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 75,000.
NHTSA ODI #10320256
Mileage unknown · Oct 17, 2009
Fuel System, Gasoline
SINCE IT HAS GOTTEN COLDER, THE CAR START AND YOU HAVE TO SIT WITH YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS PEDAL FOR 5 OR 10 MINS OR THE CAR WILL STALL OUT WHEN YOU TRY TO PUT OUT OF WHERE EVER YOU ARE. DANGEROUS! MECHANIC CAN'T SEEM TO FIND THE PROBLEM, THEY THINK ITS A SENSOR BUT ARE NOT SURE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10288809
51,000 miles · Nov 8, 2008
Seat Belts
DRIVER'S SIDE SEATBELT KEEPS TANGLING WITHIN THE TRIM PANELS PREVENTING PROPER DEPLOYMENT OR RETRACTION OF THE BELT. I HAD TO REMOVE THE TRIM PANELS AND MANUALLY TWIST THE BELT THROUGH THE B POST GUIDE TO STRAIGHTEN, AS WELL UNDOING AND REDOING THE ANCHOR BOLTS ON THE B POST AND DRIVER LOWER DOOR SILL SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE LAS…
Read full complaint
DRIVER'S SIDE SEATBELT KEEPS TANGLING WITHIN THE TRIM PANELS PREVENTING PROPER DEPLOYMENT OR RETRACTION OF THE BELT. I HAD TO REMOVE THE TRIM PANELS AND MANUALLY TWIST THE BELT THROUGH THE B POST GUIDE TO STRAIGHTEN, AS WELL UNDOING AND REDOING THE ANCHOR BOLTS ON THE B POST AND DRIVER LOWER DOOR SILL SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10248007
93,600 miles · Oct 16, 2008
Fuel System, Gasoline
WHEN I FILLED MY CAR WITH GAS IT STARTED TO OVERFLOW OUT OF THE TOP THROUGH THE GAS CAP AREA AND POUR OUT OF THE BOTTOM. I HAD MY FATHER CHECK IT ABOUT AN HOUR LATER WHILE IT WAS PARKED AND HE COULDN'T FIND A LEAK. WE DETERMINED THE AUTOMATIC STOP ON THE PUMP MUST HAVE FAILED. I WENT TO PUT $20 OF GAS IN IT TWO DAYS AGO AND O…
Read full complaint
WHEN I FILLED MY CAR WITH GAS IT STARTED TO OVERFLOW OUT OF THE TOP THROUGH THE GAS CAP AREA AND POUR OUT OF THE BOTTOM. I HAD MY FATHER CHECK IT ABOUT AN HOUR LATER WHILE IT WAS PARKED AND HE COULDN'T FIND A LEAK. WE DETERMINED THE AUTOMATIC STOP ON THE PUMP MUST HAVE FAILED. I WENT TO PUT $20 OF GAS IN IT TWO DAYS AGO AND ONCE AGAIN IT WAS POURING OUT OF THE BOTTOM. SINCE I DIDN'T FILL IT UP THIS TIME, I KNEW IT HAD TO BE MY CAR AND NOT THE PUMP. I HAD MY MECHANIC LOOK AT IT AND HE DETERMINED THE FUEL FILLER HOSE HAS RUSTED THROUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE PLASTIC COVER AROUND IT. HE TOLD ME MY CAR IS SAFE TO BE DRIVEN BUT NOT TO PUT GAS IN. I'VE ORDERED THE $184 PART TO REPAIR IT AND AM CURRENTLY WAITING FOR IT TO COME IN TO THE DEALER. I FOUND MANY COMPLAINTS OF THIS INCIDENT BUT NO OFFICIAL RECALLS BY FORD. DID I MISS SOMETHING SOMEWHERE? IT SEEMS TO ME IF THERE ARE THAT MANY PROBLEMS WITH THIS PARTICULAR PART OF THE CAR, FORD WOULD HAVE DONE A RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10245640
125,000 miles · Aug 29, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT. WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE IDLED ROUGHLY, OVERHEATED, AND HESITATED. THE DEALER STATED THAT COOLANT WAS LEAKING FROM THE INTAKE MANIFOLD CROSSOVER CHANNEL. THE TECHNICIAN ALSO STATED THAT THERE WAS A FORD SAFETY CAMPAIGN THAT PERTAINED TO THE FAILURES HE WAS EXPERIENC…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT. WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE IDLED ROUGHLY, OVERHEATED, AND HESITATED. THE DEALER STATED THAT COOLANT WAS LEAKING FROM THE INTAKE MANIFOLD CROSSOVER CHANNEL. THE TECHNICIAN ALSO STATED THAT THERE WAS A FORD SAFETY CAMPAIGN THAT PERTAINED TO THE FAILURES HE WAS EXPERIENCING. HOWEVER, THE STIPULATION OF THE SAFETY CAMPAIGN STATE THAT THE VEHICLE MUST BE WITHIN SEVEN YEARS OF THE ORIGINAL PURCHASE DATE. THE VEHICLE EXCEEDS THIS STIPULATION BY SIX WEEKS. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 125,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 131,000.
NHTSA ODI #10240214
58,000 miles · Aug 11, 2008
Fuel System, Gasoline
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN THE GAS TANK WAS FILLED, FUEL WOULD LEAK BACK OUT OF THE VEHICLE. FUEL WOULD ALSO LEAK ONTO THE TAIL PIPES AND THE SHIELD SURROUNDING THE FUEL TANK. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FUEL TANK SHIELD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED IN ORDER TO KEEP THE GASOLINE FROM LEAK…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN THE GAS TANK WAS FILLED, FUEL WOULD LEAK BACK OUT OF THE VEHICLE. FUEL WOULD ALSO LEAK ONTO THE TAIL PIPES AND THE SHIELD SURROUNDING THE FUEL TANK. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FUEL TANK SHIELD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED IN ORDER TO KEEP THE GASOLINE FROM LEAKING OUT OF THE VEHICLE AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF $200. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 58,000. UPDATED 09/13/08.*LJ UPDATED 09/16/08 *JB
NHTSA ODI #10237759
56,000 miles · Jul 18, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
BLOWN FORD SPARK PLUG! I DRIVE A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT, 4.6L V8, AND ONE NIGHT I WAS SITTING AT A RED LIGHT AND AS SOON AS IT TURNED GREEN I STEPPED ON THE GAS LIKE ANY OTHER LIGHT AND I BLEW A SPARK PLUG. I BOUGHT THE CAR USED WITH 10K ON IT AND IT BLEW AT 56K. I NEVER REPLACED THE PLUGS SO IM GUESSING THEY WERE FACTORY INSTALLE…
Read full complaint
BLOWN FORD SPARK PLUG! I DRIVE A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT, 4.6L V8, AND ONE NIGHT I WAS SITTING AT A RED LIGHT AND AS SOON AS IT TURNED GREEN I STEPPED ON THE GAS LIKE ANY OTHER LIGHT AND I BLEW A SPARK PLUG. I BOUGHT THE CAR USED WITH 10K ON IT AND IT BLEW AT 56K. I NEVER REPLACED THE PLUGS SO IM GUESSING THEY WERE FACTORY INSTALLED. AS OF TODAY I HAVE REPLACED BOTH HEADS BUT THE DAMAGE FROM THE BLOWN SPARK PLUG SEEMS TO HAVE AFFECTED MY ENGINE BLOCK ITSELF. MY GUESS IS FROM DRIVING THE CAR OFF THE ROAD INTO A PARKING LOT. NOT HAVING MONEY TO REBUILD THE ENGINE I HAVE SINCE PARKED THE CAR HOPING FORD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS MISTAKE. I HAVE READ MORE AND MORE HOW MANY FORD V8S TEND TO DO THIS YET FORD ACTS LIKE IT DOESN'T EXIST. I CALLED FORD ABOUT ORDERING NEW HEADS AND THEY INSISTED THERE IS NO PROBLEM. I WAS RAISED ON FORDS BUT DON'T SEE ME BUYING ONE EVER AGAIN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10234794
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.
Illustration