NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
59 reports40,000 miles · Jan 14, 2008
Air BagsCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE CONTACT SWERVED TO AVOID A DOG IN THE ROAD. THE VEHICLE SKIDDED INTO THE GRASS, ROLLED OVER TWICE, AND LANDED UPSIDE DOWN. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED KNEE INJURIES AND AN INJURED BACK. HE HAS NOT YET S…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG GT. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE CONTACT SWERVED TO AVOID A DOG IN THE ROAD. THE VEHICLE SKIDDED INTO THE GRASS, ROLLED OVER TWICE, AND LANDED UPSIDE DOWN. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED KNEE INJURIES AND AN INJURED BACK. HE HAS NOT YET SEEN A DOCTOR. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT HAS PICTURES AND VIDEO FOOTAGE AVAILABLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 40,000.
NHTSA ODI #10214724
68,000 miles · Dec 30, 2007
Fuel System, Gasoline
FUEL NECK BEGAN TO LEAK, WITHIN 2 WEEKS IT WAS LOOSING ALMOST A GALLON OF FUEL ON A $20.00 FILL. I CONTACTED FORD TWICE, I WAS TOLD TO TAKE IT TO A FORD DEALERSHIP, I GOT AN ATTITUDE FROM THE DEALERSHIP SO I SPENT THE $110.00 ON A FORD PART AND $180.00 ON THE LABOR AT ANOTHER SERVICE STATION. ADVISED FORD OF THE SAFETY HAZARD, A…
Read full complaint
FUEL NECK BEGAN TO LEAK, WITHIN 2 WEEKS IT WAS LOOSING ALMOST A GALLON OF FUEL ON A $20.00 FILL. I CONTACTED FORD TWICE, I WAS TOLD TO TAKE IT TO A FORD DEALERSHIP, I GOT AN ATTITUDE FROM THE DEALERSHIP SO I SPENT THE $110.00 ON A FORD PART AND $180.00 ON THE LABOR AT ANOTHER SERVICE STATION. ADVISED FORD OF THE SAFETY HAZARD, APPARENTLY DIDN'T CONCERN THEM ENOUGH TO CONTACT ME AND MAKE GOOD ON THE REPAIRS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10213224
60,000 miles · Oct 15, 2007
Exterior Lighting
HEADLIGHT PLASTIC COVERS HAVE BECOME CLOUDY/HAZED OVER THE PAST YEAR TO THE POINT WHERE THE HEADLIGHTS FAIL TO PROPERLY ILLUMINATE THE ROAD CAUSING HAZARDOUS DRIVING CONDITIONS AT NIGHT. I HAVE CONTACTED BOTH MY LOCAL DEALER AND FORD MOTOR CORP. AND HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED THEY WILL NOT PAY FOR THE REPAIR AS THE VEHICLE IS OUT OF …
Read full complaint
HEADLIGHT PLASTIC COVERS HAVE BECOME CLOUDY/HAZED OVER THE PAST YEAR TO THE POINT WHERE THE HEADLIGHTS FAIL TO PROPERLY ILLUMINATE THE ROAD CAUSING HAZARDOUS DRIVING CONDITIONS AT NIGHT. I HAVE CONTACTED BOTH MY LOCAL DEALER AND FORD MOTOR CORP. AND HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED THEY WILL NOT PAY FOR THE REPAIR AS THE VEHICLE IS OUT OF WARRANTY. I FEEL SINCE THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE NOT A COSMETIC PROBLEM THEY SHOULD PAY FOR NEW HEADLIGHTS. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10205737
Mileage unknown · Sep 8, 2007
Power TrainCrash
ABOUT 6-8 MONTHS AFTER I PURCHASED MY 2001 FORD MUSTANG BULLITT MY TRANSMISSION WENT OUT AND HAD TO HAVE IT REPLACED BECAUSE 3 GEAR WOULD NOT ENGAGE WITH EASE OR IT WOULD SLIP.. EVER SINCE THE SHIFTING OF GEARS HAS DETERIORATED.. ALSO THE REAR LEAKS FOR NO APPARENT REASON THE ACCESS NUT SEEMS TO COME LOOSE AND LEAK WITH O…
Read full complaint
ABOUT 6-8 MONTHS AFTER I PURCHASED MY 2001 FORD MUSTANG BULLITT MY TRANSMISSION WENT OUT AND HAD TO HAVE IT REPLACED BECAUSE 3 GEAR WOULD NOT ENGAGE WITH EASE OR IT WOULD SLIP.. EVER SINCE THE SHIFTING OF GEARS HAS DETERIORATED.. ALSO THE REAR LEAKS FOR NO APPARENT REASON THE ACCESS NUT SEEMS TO COME LOOSE AND LEAK WITH OUT A CAUSE, I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE REAR NUT AND OIL WERE THE DRIVELINE MEETS THE REAR AXLE. IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO PUT THE CAR IN 1ST OR IN REVERSE SOME TIMES AND WHEN SHIFTING BETWEEN 1ST 2ND AND 3RD THE GEARS STICK OR SLIP. I HAD A NUMBER OF ISSUES SINCE DAY ONE WITH THIS CAR AND IT SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THE SHOP THE FIRST TWO YEARS I OWED IT AND SAT FOR A LITTLE OVER A YEAR DUE TO MECHANICAL PROBLEM THERE AFTER. I WAS REAR ENDED ONCE WHILE TRYING TO MAKE A RIGHT HAND TURN BECAUSE THE CAR SLIPPED OUT OF SECOND GEAR LUCKILY THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO SLOW DOWN ENOUGH TO ONLY LEAVE HIS LICENSE PLACE SCREWS IMPRINTED IN MY REAR BUMPER AND NO ONE WAS SERIOUSLY HURT JUST STUNNED AND FRIGHTENED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10202259
48,000 miles · Feb 15, 2007
Engine And Engine CoolingEquipmentFuel System, GasolineInjury
2 WEEKS AFTER I BOUGHT THE CAR, I HAD REPORTED PROBLEMS WITH ENGINE AND TRANS AND REAR-END. THEY KNEW ABOUT IT, BUT SAID THEY DID NOT HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE TO WORK ON A SELEEN, WHICH THAT IS WHAT I WAS TOLD I WAS BUYING AT THE TIME. COME TO FIND OUT IT IS NO. BIG DIFFERENCE IN PRICE. ON OR ABOUT FEB 15TH 2006 THE ENGINE BLEW, I H…
Read full complaint
2 WEEKS AFTER I BOUGHT THE CAR, I HAD REPORTED PROBLEMS WITH ENGINE AND TRANS AND REAR-END. THEY KNEW ABOUT IT, BUT SAID THEY DID NOT HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE TO WORK ON A SELEEN, WHICH THAT IS WHAT I WAS TOLD I WAS BUYING AT THE TIME. COME TO FIND OUT IT IS NO. BIG DIFFERENCE IN PRICE. ON OR ABOUT FEB 15TH 2006 THE ENGINE BLEW, I HAD PARKED IT IN THEIR PARKING LOT. THEY HAD MY CAR FOR A TOTAL OF 45 DAYS. STILL NO TRANS WORK OR REAR-END, THEY SAID TO BRING IT BACK IN 30 DAYS. ADDING ON THE LINKAGE WAS DAMAGED WHEN THEY HAD IT. I HAD TO PAY OTHER SHOP TO FIX. ALONG WITH ENGINE PROBLEMS, ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON. SINCE JUNE OF 2006 MY CAR HAS BEEN IN THE SHOP 10 TIMES , TOTALING 55 MORE DAYS. RENTAL CAR COST OVER 2500.00 AND TIME AND MENTAL ANGUISH . LUZZI REFUSED ME THE 2ND TIME ENGINE BLEW BECAUSE THE FACT I AM MARRIED TO DAVID HARDING. HE IS NOT ON ANY CONTRACT WITH ME. THEY REFUSE TO DO ANY WARRANTY WORK ON THE ENGINE THEY INSTALLED 9 MONTHS AGO. I PAID FOR A WARRANTY WITH THEM FOR 1800.00 AND I WAS CANCELLED BECAUSE OF THE MONEY ALREADY PAID FOR THE CAR. 10 MONTHS , WHERE'S THE OTHER 2 YEAR PRORATED FEES? THE LIST GOES ON AND ON. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10182716
74,000 miles · Dec 14, 2006
Air Bags
I WAS DRIVING THROUGH AN ALLEY GOING ABOUT 5-10 MPH WHEN I WENT OVER A SMALL POTHOLE AND MY SUSPENSION BOTTOMED OUT AND MY AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. THE AIRBAGS DID NOT FULLY DEPLOY AND IF THIS WAS AN EVENT OF A REAL ACCIDENT THE AIRBAGS WOULD HAVE NOT DID ANYTHING FOR SAFETY. THERE IS NO DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE AT ALL. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10176117
70,000 miles · Nov 28, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE MECHANICS OF CARS, BUT A SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF MY 2001 MUSTANG GT CAUSING A LOUD REPETITIVE NOISE AND A NOTABLE LOSS OF POWER. IT WAS STILL UNDER THE 30 DAY/3000 MILES USED VEHICLE WARRANTY AND IT WAS FIXED AT NO CHARGE TO MYSELF. THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN A WEEK LATER AND I WAS TOLD (IN THE BE…
Read full complaint
I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE MECHANICS OF CARS, BUT A SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF MY 2001 MUSTANG GT CAUSING A LOUD REPETITIVE NOISE AND A NOTABLE LOSS OF POWER. IT WAS STILL UNDER THE 30 DAY/3000 MILES USED VEHICLE WARRANTY AND IT WAS FIXED AT NO CHARGE TO MYSELF. THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN A WEEK LATER AND I WAS TOLD (IN THE BEST WORDS THAT I CAN DESCRIBE IT) THE THREADING IN THE HOLE OF THE PART OF THE ENGINE THAT THE SPARK PLUG SCREWS INTO, WOULD NO LONGER HOLD THE SPARK PLUG AND THAT THE ENGINE NEEDED TO BE SENT TO A MACHINE SHOP TO BORE THE HOLE IN DEEPER COSTING A AROUND $3000.00. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10174622
48,000 miles · Oct 28, 2006
Structure
REAR SPOILER CRACKING ALONG SEAMS. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10172031
105,000 miles · Sep 27, 2006
Air BagsCrashInjury
AUG 13 I WAS INVOLVED IN A ROLLOVER ACCIDENT DUE TO TIRE TREAD SEPARATION. IT WAS THE 4TH TIRE OF THE SET THAT HAD GONE BAD. AFTER THE 2ND TIRE WENT BAD, I TRIED TO GET THE TIRE DEALER TO SEND IT IN FOR INSPECTION/DEFECT. HE REFUSE AND THE ACCIDENT OCCURRED 3 WEEKS LATER. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10169436
79,090 miles · Aug 24, 2006
Fuel System, Gasoline
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 23 MPH ON A RECENTLY FILLED FUEL TANK, THERE WAS A STRONG SMELL OF GASOLINE IN THE CAB OF THE VEHICLE. A PRIVATE REPAIR SHOP INSPECTED THE VEHICLE, AND DETERMINED THAT THE FILLER NECK GASKET HAD SPLIT, CAUSING GASOLINE TO LEAK FROM THE UNDERSIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THERE WERE NO IMMEDIATE REP…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 23 MPH ON A RECENTLY FILLED FUEL TANK, THERE WAS A STRONG SMELL OF GASOLINE IN THE CAB OF THE VEHICLE. A PRIVATE REPAIR SHOP INSPECTED THE VEHICLE, AND DETERMINED THAT THE FILLER NECK GASKET HAD SPLIT, CAUSING GASOLINE TO LEAK FROM THE UNDERSIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THERE WERE NO IMMEDIATE REPAIRS MADE TO THE VEHICLE.
NHTSA ODI #10166427
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