IllustrationCONSUMER STATED WHILE TRAVELING, THE ENGINE STALLED. VEHICLE IS NOW IN ITS FIFTH REPAIR. DEALER HAS BEEN CONTACTED. PLEASE PROVIDED ANY FURTHER INFORMATION. *PH
2000 Ford Mustang
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Mustang years
Owner complaints for the 2000 Ford Mustang are substantially higher than the model-year median of 81.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Mustang 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
160–25K
2125–50K
2250–75K
1675–100K
19100–150K
3150K+
97 reports with mileage · 214 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.
- Air Bags. Review the 42 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 40 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 40 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
56 crash reports9 fire reports30 injury reports
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
34 reportsTHE VEHICLE MUFFLER FAILED AND CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. THE FRONT AND REAR END OF THE VEHICLE WAS DAMAGED AND THE HOOD FLEW OPEN AND SHATTERED THE WINDSHIELD. *TS *NLM
CONSUMER CANNOT FILL UP GAS TANK COMPLETELY. VEHICLE CHECKED BY DEALER 4 TIMES, AND PROBLEM STILL EXISTS. DEALER HAS REPLACED FUEL FILLER PIPE, TUBE ASSEMBLY, FUEL VAPOR CONTROL VALVE SOLENOID AND FUEL VAPOR STORAGE CANISTER ASSEMBLY.*AK
THIS IS THE 2ND AIR PUMP TO BE REPLACED ON VEHICLE. ENGINE CHECK LIGHT ILLUMINATED, INDICATING A LOSS OF PERFORMANCE. ENGINE WAS SLUGGISH AND IDLING HIGH AT STOPS. FORD WAS CONTACTED. PLEASE PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION.*AK
ENGINE CHECK LIGHT CAME ON SO I TOOK THE CAR TO A LOCAL DEALER. HE INFORMED ME THAT THE EEC TEST CODE WAS P0411 WHICH DEALS WITH EMISSIONS. WHEN THE DEALER REMOVED A HOSE TO INSPECT THE COMPONENT, WATER CAME OUT OF THE HOSE. THE DEALER INFORMED ME THAT THE ENTIRE AIR PUMP WAS FULL OF WATER AND HAD "BURNED" OUT AS A RESULT. …
Read full complaint
ENGINE CHECK LIGHT CAME ON SO I TOOK THE CAR TO A LOCAL DEALER. HE INFORMED ME THAT THE EEC TEST CODE WAS P0411 WHICH DEALS WITH EMISSIONS. WHEN THE DEALER REMOVED A HOSE TO INSPECT THE COMPONENT, WATER CAME OUT OF THE HOSE. THE DEALER INFORMED ME THAT THE ENTIRE AIR PUMP WAS FULL OF WATER AND HAD "BURNED" OUT AS A RESULT. I WILL HAVE TO HAVE THE PUMP AND RELAY REPLACED AT A COST OF $275 FOR PARTS AND $120 FOR LABOR. HE FURTHER INFORMED ME THAT THIS WAS EXTREMELY RARE AND HE DID NOT KNOW HOW THE WATER COULD HAVE GOTTEN IN TO THE PUMP. I CALLED FORD CUSTOMER CARE AND INFORMED THEM OF THE PROBLEM AND THEY INFORMED ME THAT THEY HAD NO OTHER COMPLAINTS OF THIS NATURE, BUT WOULD FILE THE INFORMATION AWAY FOR FUTURE REFERENCE. ACCORDING TO THE DEALER, THIS "PROBLEM" DOES NOT AFFECT DRIVEABILITY OF THE CAR, AND SINCE VIRGINIA DOESN'T REQUIRE EMISSIONS CONTROL TESTING, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO HAVE IT REPLACED, HOWEVER, THE "CHECK ENGINE SOON" LIGHT WILL REMAIN ON UNTIL THE AIR PUMP AND RELAY ARE REPLACED.*AK
WHEN CLUTCH DISENGAGES RPMS DROP TOO LOW AND VEHICLE STALLS. LOSES ALL POWER STEERING AND BRAKES. DEALER CAN NOT IDENTIFY CAUSE. *AK CONSUMER ADDS ENGINE STALLS EASIER IF A/C IS ON, AND/OR WHEN BRAKES ARE APPLIED. DEALER REPLACED POWERTRAIN CONTROL MODULE AND MASS AIR FLOW, BUT PROBLEM STILL EXIST. ALSO CONSUMER IS A HEARIN…
Read full complaint
WHEN CLUTCH DISENGAGES RPMS DROP TOO LOW AND VEHICLE STALLS. LOSES ALL POWER STEERING AND BRAKES. DEALER CAN NOT IDENTIFY CAUSE. *AK CONSUMER ADDS ENGINE STALLS EASIER IF A/C IS ON, AND/OR WHEN BRAKES ARE APPLIED. DEALER REPLACED POWERTRAIN CONTROL MODULE AND MASS AIR FLOW, BUT PROBLEM STILL EXIST. ALSO CONSUMER IS A HEARING METALLIC TICKING NOISE ON COLD ENGINE. AIR BLADDER DEFLATES AFTER 1/2 HOUR. DEALER REPLACED SEAT AIR BLADDER. DRIVERS SIDE FRONT AND BACK WINDOW WILL NOT SEAL AFTER ROLLING UP AT TIMES. *TT
THE PROBLEM IS THE ENGINE STALLS. THIS HAPPENS WHEN THE ENGINE IS WARM OR COLD. IT ALSO HAPPENS AFTER THE CLUTCH HAS BEEN DISENGAGED AFTER BEING AT SPEED AND THE RPMS ARE DECREASING TO THE PROGRAMMED IDLE RPM. HOWEVER, INSTEAD OF STOPPING AT THE IDLING RPM, THE ENGINE RPM DIPS TO LOW AND THE ENGINE STALLS. I LOSE POWER STEERING …
Read full complaint
THE PROBLEM IS THE ENGINE STALLS. THIS HAPPENS WHEN THE ENGINE IS WARM OR COLD. IT ALSO HAPPENS AFTER THE CLUTCH HAS BEEN DISENGAGED AFTER BEING AT SPEED AND THE RPMS ARE DECREASING TO THE PROGRAMMED IDLE RPM. HOWEVER, INSTEAD OF STOPPING AT THE IDLING RPM, THE ENGINE RPM DIPS TO LOW AND THE ENGINE STALLS. I LOSE POWER STEERING AND BRAKES WHICH CAUSE A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION. I ALSO NOTICED THAT THIS HAPPENS MORE OFTEN IF I AM GOING AROUND A TURN OR TURNING ON THE AC (BOTH ITEMS REQUIRE MORE POWER FROM THE ENGINE)WHILE DISENGAGING THE CLUTCH. IN TOTAL, THIS HAS HAPPENED 5 TIMES DURING THE 30500 MILES. *TS *JB ****DIMSII IVOQ ENTRY POSTED AFTER 12-12-02 CUT OVER TO ARTEMIS****761876
CAR KILLS OUT FREQUENTLY WHEN TURNING; WHEN THE CAR STALLS OUT, THE WHEELS LOCK UP AND NEARLY CAUSE ACCIDENTS. THE STALLING BEGAN IMMEDIATELY AFTER WE PRUCHASED THE VEHICLE. WHEN I TOOK IT INTO THE DEALER, THEY STATED THERE HAD BEEN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS OF THE MUSTANG GT'S KILLING OUT AROUND CORNERS. THEY HAVE NO FIX AT THIS P…
Read full complaint
CAR KILLS OUT FREQUENTLY WHEN TURNING; WHEN THE CAR STALLS OUT, THE WHEELS LOCK UP AND NEARLY CAUSE ACCIDENTS. THE STALLING BEGAN IMMEDIATELY AFTER WE PRUCHASED THE VEHICLE. WHEN I TOOK IT INTO THE DEALER, THEY STATED THERE HAD BEEN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS OF THE MUSTANG GT'S KILLING OUT AROUND CORNERS. THEY HAVE NO FIX AT THIS POINT AND HAVE MADE NO CONCERN FOR MY SAFETY. I'VE NEARLY GOTTEN INTO A HAND FULL OF ACCIDENTS BECAUSE OF THIS "DEFECT". I'M RIDING AROUND IN A BRAND NEW CAR THAT I CONSIDER VERY UNSAFE. YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN IT WILL STALL OUT AND LOCK UP. THE DEALER INITIALLY STATED THEY BELIEVED THE STALLS WERE CAUSED BY THE HOT WEATHER. WELL, IT'S NOW DECEMBER IN DENVER, CO AND IT'S QUITE COLD OUT AND THE CAR IS STILL KILLING OUT AROUND CORNERS. WITHIN THE LAST 3 MONTHS, THE PROBLEM IS OCCURING EVEN MORE FREQUENTLY. THE PROBLEM SEEMS TO BE GETTING WORSE AT TIME PROGRESSES. FORD HAS NOT OFFERED ME A REPLACEMENT VEHICLE UNTIL THEY CAN FIGURE OUT THE PROBLEM. THIS IS MY ONLY VEHICLE TO AND FROM WORK AND I PUT MY LIFE IN JEOPARDY EVERYTIME I DRIVE IT. MY WARRANTY EXPIRES AT 36, 000 MILES AND I WILL BE LEFT TO DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM THAT I'VE HAD SINCE DAY ONE OF MY PURCHASE. *AK
THE ENGINE STALLS WHILE DRIVING, IN TRAFFIC, ON THE FREEWAY, WHERE/WHENEVER. IT JUST CUTS OUT, WHETHER THE ENGINE IS WARM OR COLD. WE HAVE HAD IT TO 5 DIFFERENT DEALERSHIPS TO FIX THE PROBLEM AND THEY SAY THERE IS NOTHING WRONG OR THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S WRONG.*AK
ENGINE FAILED AFTER OWNING CAR FOR ONLY 2 WEEKS. CAR DIED IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION. TOW TRUCK PICKED IT UP, AND DEALERSHIP SAID THAT THE ENGINE HARNESS WAS NOT PROPERLY WIRED. AIR CONDITIONING MADE LOUD NOISES WHEN RUNNING. DEALERSHIP SAID THAT THE WATER WAS DROPPING DIRECTLY ON TO THE 1500 DEGREE EXHAUST PIPE CAUSING TH…
Read full complaint
ENGINE FAILED AFTER OWNING CAR FOR ONLY 2 WEEKS. CAR DIED IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION. TOW TRUCK PICKED IT UP, AND DEALERSHIP SAID THAT THE ENGINE HARNESS WAS NOT PROPERLY WIRED. AIR CONDITIONING MADE LOUD NOISES WHEN RUNNING. DEALERSHIP SAID THAT THE WATER WAS DROPPING DIRECTLY ON TO THE 1500 DEGREE EXHAUST PIPE CAUSING THE LOUD NOISE. BECAUSE THE HEAT SHIELD WASN'T PROPERLY FUNCTIONING, DEALERSHIP PLACED A PIPE UNDERNEATH TO DIVERT THE WATER.*AK
Official recalls
200V349000 · Parking Brake:conventional
Oct 30, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSIONS. IF A VEHICLE IS PARKED WITH THE PARKING BRAKE NOT FULLY APPLIED AND NOT IN FIRST GEAR, AS DIRECTED IN THE OWNER GUIDE, AND THE SELF ADJUSTMENT PAWL SUBSEQUENTLY SKIPS ONE OR TWO TEETH, THE VEHICLE COULD MOVE ON SOME GRADES.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN UNINTENDED VEHICLE MOVEMENT AND A VEHICLE CRASH WITHOUT PRIOR WARNING.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE PARKING BRAKE CONTROL AND INSTALL A PLATE OR OVER-BRACKET TO THE CONTROL TO LOCK THE SELF ADJUST MECHANISM IN POSITION FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENT.
99V250000 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
Sep 20, 1999
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE SEAT BELT RETRACTOR MAY HAVE A PIN SHAFT IN THE SWITCHABLE ELR/ALR MECHANISM THAT IS INCORRECTLY FORMED. IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES, THE SWITCHING MECHANISM COULD BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL, PREVENTING THE SEAT BELT WEBBING FROM BEING EXTRACTED FROM THE RETRACTOR. IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE THAT MALFUNCTION OF THE MECHANISM COULD PREVENT THE BELT FROM BEING SWITCHED INTO THE ALR MODE. THE ELR MECHANISM IS NOT AFFECTED BY THIS CONDITION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE MECHANISM MALFUNCTIONS AND DOES NOT ALLOW THE WEBBING TO BE EXTRACTED, THE LAP AND SHOULDER BELT COULD NOT BE WORN BY A VEHICLE OCCUPANT. IN THE EVENT THAT THE MECHANISM DOES NOT ALLOW THE ALR MODE TO BE ENGAGED, THE OPERATOR MAY BE UNABLE TO PROPERLY INSTALL A CHILD SEAT IN THAT SEATING POSITION.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE LAP AND SHOULDER BELT ASSEMBLIES. ASSEMBLIES WITH JULIAN DATE CODES OF 200 THROUGH 223 ARE SUSPECT AND WILL BE REPLACED.
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.