NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
48 reports80,300 miles · Mar 19, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
2002 FORD MUSTANG GT (4.6L V8) BLEW OUT # 2 SPARK PLUG AFTER 80,000 MILES. THE DEALERSHIP PUT IN A HELICOIL TO REPLACE THE STRIPPED THREADS CAUSED FROM THE BLOW OUT AND REPLACED THE OTHER SPARK PLUGS AND BOOTS. I WAS TOLD THAT FORD DOES NOT WARRANT THE HELICOIL REPAIR AND THE ONLY WAY TO GET A REPAIR THAT FORD WOULD BACK WOULD B…
Read full complaint
2002 FORD MUSTANG GT (4.6L V8) BLEW OUT # 2 SPARK PLUG AFTER 80,000 MILES. THE DEALERSHIP PUT IN A HELICOIL TO REPLACE THE STRIPPED THREADS CAUSED FROM THE BLOW OUT AND REPLACED THE OTHER SPARK PLUGS AND BOOTS. I WAS TOLD THAT FORD DOES NOT WARRANT THE HELICOIL REPAIR AND THE ONLY WAY TO GET A REPAIR THAT FORD WOULD BACK WOULD BE TO REPLACE THE HEAD. REPLACING THE HEAD WAS A RIDICULOUSLY EXPENSIVE OPTION. AFTER RESEARCHING THE PROBLEM, I FOUND THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS PROBLEM. THE FACT THAT THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN KNOWN TO CAUSE A FIRE AND BURN A VEHICLE TO THE AXELS IN 12 MIN AND NO ONE HAS DONE ANYTHING ABOUT IT IS ABSURD. FORD NEEDS TO RECALL AND REPLACE THE HEADS WITH NO COST TO THE CONSUMER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10221652
40,000 miles · Jul 25, 2007
Visibility
WIPER BLADE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILS. WIPERS FAIL IN INTERMITTENT MODE, FOLLOWED BY COMPLETE FAILURE OF WIPER BLADE FUNCTION. FAILURE HAS RECURRED 5 TIMES AFTER REPAIR WORK. REPAIR WORK INCLUDED REPLACING WIPER MOTOR, REPLACING RELAYS, AND REPLACING ENTIRE RELAY BOX HOUSING. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10197488
85,138 miles · Apr 16, 2007
Engine And Engine Cooling
I OWN A 2002 FORD MUSTANG GT. I BOUGHT THIS CAR BRAND NEW FROM THE DEALER, I HAVE NEVER HAD ANY MECHANICAL PROBLEMS WITH THE ENGINE EVER. CAR MILEAGE :85,138 WHILE DRIVING MY CAR IN TOWN,A LOUD BANG CAME FROM THE ENGINE, FOLLOWED BY A POPPING NOISE AND SEAMED TO BE A LOUD LEAK. HAD THE CAR TOWED TO A GARAGE AND THE MECHANICS IN…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2002 FORD MUSTANG GT. I BOUGHT THIS CAR BRAND NEW FROM THE DEALER, I HAVE NEVER HAD ANY MECHANICAL PROBLEMS WITH THE ENGINE EVER. CAR MILEAGE :85,138 WHILE DRIVING MY CAR IN TOWN,A LOUD BANG CAME FROM THE ENGINE, FOLLOWED BY A POPPING NOISE AND SEAMED TO BE A LOUD LEAK. HAD THE CAR TOWED TO A GARAGE AND THE MECHANICS INFORMED ME THE #3 SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT. HE INFORMED ME THAT THIS KIND OF THING HAS BEEN HAPPENING TO FORDS.HAD TO GET THE IGNITION COIL REPLACED, NEW SPARK PLUGS, AND HELI COILED THE #3 SPARK PLUG THREAD. FINAL BILL $694.00 NOW I AM WONDERING HOW SOON BEFORE THE OTHER SPARK PLUGS DECIDE TO BLOW OUT.I READ ON THE NET THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO MANY OTHER FORD VEHICLES, NOT JUST MUSTANGS. FORD NEEDS TO FIX THIS PROBLEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10188074
Mileage unknown · Nov 27, 2006
Equipment
MY CAR HAS A FACTORY 6 DISC CD CHANGER, AND ONE SLOT, #3, HAS NUMEROUS PROBLEMS LOADING AND UNLOADING CDS, CAUSING THEM TO GET STUCK IN THE HEAD UNIT. ALSO, WHEN LOADED WITH CD'S, THE UNIT WILL RANDOMLY GO INTO SHUFFLE MODE IF PLAYING A CD, OR SCAN AND SAVE MODE IF PLAYING THE RADIO. THIS SEEMS LIKE A VERY POOR PART FOR WHAT I…
Read full complaint
MY CAR HAS A FACTORY 6 DISC CD CHANGER, AND ONE SLOT, #3, HAS NUMEROUS PROBLEMS LOADING AND UNLOADING CDS, CAUSING THEM TO GET STUCK IN THE HEAD UNIT. ALSO, WHEN LOADED WITH CD'S, THE UNIT WILL RANDOMLY GO INTO SHUFFLE MODE IF PLAYING A CD, OR SCAN AND SAVE MODE IF PLAYING THE RADIO. THIS SEEMS LIKE A VERY POOR PART FOR WHAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A PREMIUM AUDIO SYSTEM ON A CAR WITH ONLY 40,000 MILES....*JB
NHTSA ODI #10174441
16,000 miles · Nov 9, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
CAR WILL BOG/ HAVE LITTLE POWER ON ACCELERATION THEN YOU WILL FEEL THE CAR PICK UP AND GO. ALSO, WHEN ACCELERATING FROM INTO A TURN CAR WILL BOG DOWN THEN PICK BACK UP. IF GAS IS PRESSED QUICKLY THE CAR WILL BOG THEN PICK UP. MASS AIR SENSOR REPLACED IN 2003 BUT PROBLEM STILL HAPPENING. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10173017
50,000 miles · Aug 27, 2006
Seat Belts
THE SEAT BELTS ON MY 2002 MUSTANG GT BROKE, THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING PROBLEM AS I'VE ASKED OTHERS ABOUT THEIRS. THE RATCHET MECHANISM STOPS WORKING AND / OR THE SEAT BELTS BECOME ENTANGLED SEVERELY IN THE MECHANISM AND FAIL TO WORK ANYMORE, RESULTING IN REPLACING THE RATCHETING MECHANISM AND SEAT BELT. I BROUGHT MY CAR TO A FORD…
Read full complaint
THE SEAT BELTS ON MY 2002 MUSTANG GT BROKE, THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING PROBLEM AS I'VE ASKED OTHERS ABOUT THEIRS. THE RATCHET MECHANISM STOPS WORKING AND / OR THE SEAT BELTS BECOME ENTANGLED SEVERELY IN THE MECHANISM AND FAIL TO WORK ANYMORE, RESULTING IN REPLACING THE RATCHETING MECHANISM AND SEAT BELT. I BROUGHT MY CAR TO A FORD SERVICE CENTER TO SEE IF THEY OFFERED A FIX AND WAS TOLD THEY DO NOT AND THAT MY WARRANTY WAS EXPIRED. THIS IS A SAFETY CONCERN ESPECIALLY WHEN SO MANY MUSTANG OWNERS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10166650
41,000 miles · Aug 9, 2006
Power Train
WHEN THE CAR IS TURNING AT LOW SPEEDS YOU HEAR A RUBBING NOISE OF SOME SORT, ONLY AT LOW SPEED GOING LEFT OR RIGHT. SOUND IS FROM THE REAR END. 2002 MUSTANG GT 5 SPEED, 42,000 MILES. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10165059
40,000 miles · Jul 21, 2006
Seat Belts
FRONT SEAT BELT RETRACTORS DON'T WORK MOST OF THE TIME RESULTING IN LOOSE FIT. SEATBELT EVENTUALLY RETRACTS AFTER DRIVING FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. DEALER OFFERED TO INSTALL SOME SORT OF KIT FOR A HEFTY PRICE. IT SEEMS THIS MAY BE A COMMON COMPLAINT ON FORD VEHICLES. THIS IMPORTANT SAFETY FEATURE SHOULD NOT FAIL DURING THE LIFE …
Read full complaint
FRONT SEAT BELT RETRACTORS DON'T WORK MOST OF THE TIME RESULTING IN LOOSE FIT. SEATBELT EVENTUALLY RETRACTS AFTER DRIVING FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. DEALER OFFERED TO INSTALL SOME SORT OF KIT FOR A HEFTY PRICE. IT SEEMS THIS MAY BE A COMMON COMPLAINT ON FORD VEHICLES. THIS IMPORTANT SAFETY FEATURE SHOULD NOT FAIL DURING THE LIFE OF THE VEHICLE.
NHTSA ODI #10163039
15,656 miles · Jul 3, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
I WAS TRAVELING HOME FROM WORK ON JUNE 30, 2006, IN MY 2002 FORD MUSTANG GT DURING A HEAVY RAIN STORM. UPON TURNING INTO A SUBDIVISION NEAR MY HOUSE I WENT THROUGH SOME WATER IN THE STREET THAT WAS HIGHER THAN USUAL, BUT NOT HIGH ENOUGH TO STALL MY CAR'S ENGINE OR TO SPRAY UP OVER THE WHEEL WELLS. SHORTLY AFTER THAT, THE STEERIN…
Read full complaint
I WAS TRAVELING HOME FROM WORK ON JUNE 30, 2006, IN MY 2002 FORD MUSTANG GT DURING A HEAVY RAIN STORM. UPON TURNING INTO A SUBDIVISION NEAR MY HOUSE I WENT THROUGH SOME WATER IN THE STREET THAT WAS HIGHER THAN USUAL, BUT NOT HIGH ENOUGH TO STALL MY CAR'S ENGINE OR TO SPRAY UP OVER THE WHEEL WELLS. SHORTLY AFTER THAT, THE STEERING AND BRAKES OF MY CAR QUIT WORKING. I OPENED THE HOOD AND SAW THAT THE DRIVE BELT WAS MISSING. THE NEXT DAY I HAD MY CAR TOWED AND THE PERSON TOWING THE CAR INDICATED THAT THIS TYPE OF FAILURE HAPPENED FREQUENTLY. ACCORDING TO THIS PERSON, THE DRIVE BELT HYDROPLANES WHEN SUBSTANTIALLY WET AND COMES OFF THE PULLEYS. I HAD THE DEALERSHIP FIX THE CAR AND WAS ASTOUNDED TO FIND OUT THAT FORD KNOWS OF THIS PROBLEM AND HAS NOT NOTIFIED THE OWNERS. ON THE INVOICE FOR THE REPAIR IT IS STATED THAT THE TENSIONER ON THE ENGINE NEEDS TO BE UPDATED TO A TENSIONER WITH A RAIL. I WAS ALSO ASTOUNDED TO FIND OUT THAT MY EXTENDED WARRANTY DIDN'T COVER THE WORK ($186.32). IF THIS KIND OF FAILURE CAN OCCUR AT SPEEDS IN EXCESS OF 40 MPH, I BELIEVE THAT AN ACCIDENT COULD HAPPEN. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10161338
47,929 miles · Mar 27, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
WE TOOK THE FORD MUSTANG GT2002 TO METRO FORD IN TUEPLO, MISSISSIPPI DUE TO KNOCKING. ACCORDING TO THE SERVICE MANAGER THE ENTIRE MOTOR WAS OUT NEED TO BE REPLACE. WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY MOTOR PROBLEMS AT ANY TIMES. WE PROVIDED THE SERVICE MANAGER DOCUMENTS WE HAD REGULAR OIL/FILTER TO PREVENT INCIDENTS OF THIS NATURE. WE HAD WO…
Read full complaint
WE TOOK THE FORD MUSTANG GT2002 TO METRO FORD IN TUEPLO, MISSISSIPPI DUE TO KNOCKING. ACCORDING TO THE SERVICE MANAGER THE ENTIRE MOTOR WAS OUT NEED TO BE REPLACE. WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY MOTOR PROBLEMS AT ANY TIMES. WE PROVIDED THE SERVICE MANAGER DOCUMENTS WE HAD REGULAR OIL/FILTER TO PREVENT INCIDENTS OF THIS NATURE. WE HAD WORK COMPLETED OR NOT COMPLETED IN DECEMBER 2005 DUE TO PREVIOUS WORK COMPLETED BY METRO FORD IN TUPELO, MISSISSIPPI THE MOTOR IS OUT. THEY WANT US TO PAY FOR A NEW MOTOR. AFTER FILING A COMPLAINT MARCH 10, 2005 THE SERVICE MANGER WITH METRO FORD HAD A OFFICER GO TO MY SON JOB ON MARCH 17, 2005 TO ESCORT HIM BACK TO METRO IN THE LOANER. THAT WAS HARASSMENT, EMBARRASSMENT AND VIOLATED LAW GOVERNING EMPLOYMENT HARASSMENT. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10153862
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