NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
173 reportsMileage unknown · Jun 16, 2024
Electrical SystemService BrakesUnknown Or Other
ABS light came on, sometimes when braking/slowing down at freeway speeds, the brakes won't catch and it feels like I'm going to ram into the cars ahead, I've replaced the rotors, the calipers, the brakes, the wheel bearings, ABS light won't go away, I've looked into it on the bullitt community forums, and this is a common probl…
Read full complaint
ABS light came on, sometimes when braking/slowing down at freeway speeds, the brakes won't catch and it feels like I'm going to ram into the cars ahead, I've replaced the rotors, the calipers, the brakes, the wheel bearings, ABS light won't go away, I've looked into it on the bullitt community forums, and this is a common problem that most just decide to live with, cause no solution has been found.
NHTSA ODI #11594615
Mileage unknown · Jul 19, 2023
Service Brakes
Anti lock brake pump leaking brake fluid from what appears to be a vent /weep hole resulting in rapid brake fluid loss and low/ soft pedal and significant loss of braking.
NHTSA ODI #11533150
Mileage unknown · Oct 27, 2020
Wheels
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG EQUIPPED WITH HANKOOK TIRES, TIRE LINE: VENTUS V2 EVO2, TIRE SIZE: 275/35/R18, DOT NUMBER: 5MRKYBH. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TIRES WERE PURCHASED IN MARCH OF 2020 AND INSTALLED IN APRIL OF 2020. AFTER DRIVING THE VEHICLE FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 MILES, THE TIRES SHOWED EXCESSIVE UNEVEN …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG EQUIPPED WITH HANKOOK TIRES, TIRE LINE: VENTUS V2 EVO2, TIRE SIZE: 275/35/R18, DOT NUMBER: 5MRKYBH. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TIRES WERE PURCHASED IN MARCH OF 2020 AND INSTALLED IN APRIL OF 2020. AFTER DRIVING THE VEHICLE FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,000 MILES, THE TIRES SHOWED EXCESSIVE UNEVEN TREAD WEAR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FAILED THE STATE INSPECTION DUE TO THE TREAD WEAR FAILURE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND INFORMED OF THE ISSUE. THE MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDED THAT THE TIRES BE INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED HANKOOK DISTRIBUTOR. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED BY THE MANUFACTURER THAT THE EXCESSIVE TREAD WEAR WAS NOT DUE TO A TIRE MANUFACTURING DEFECT BUT AN ISSUE WITH THE VEHICLE. THE TIRES WERE NOT REPLACED AND REMAINED ON THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN.
NHTSA ODI #11366709
200,000 miles · Oct 25, 2020
Fuel/propulsion SystemSeat BeltsService Brakes
1. THERE IS A DREADFUL GAS FUME ODOR INSIDE THE CAR EVERY TIME I PUT FUEL IN THE CAR ESPECIALLY WHEN I FILL THE TANK. 2.THE EMERGENCY BRAKE DOES NOT WORK PROPERLY. WHEN ENGAGED MY CAR STILL ROLLS A LITTLE. 3. THE SEAT BELTS DO NOT RETRACT PROPERLY AND TEND TO TWIST AND TANGLE WHEN I TRY TO DO IT MANUALLY.
NHTSA ODI #11366261
50,000 miles · Feb 5, 2020
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
WHEN BACKING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, I HAD NO CONTROL OVER THE VEHICLE, EVEN WHILE PRESSING ON THE BRAKES. I LOST CONTROL, WENT INTO A YARD AND HIT A TREE.
NHTSA ODI #11307219
189,000 miles · Sep 5, 2019
Fuel/propulsion System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG. WHILE THE CONTACT'S DAUGHTER WAS PLACING FUEL IN THE VEHICLE, SHE NOTICED FUEL LEAKING FROM THE FUEL TANK WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT MANAGED TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE HOME. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT MADE AWARE OF TH…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG. WHILE THE CONTACT'S DAUGHTER WAS PLACING FUEL IN THE VEHICLE, SHE NOTICED FUEL LEAKING FROM THE FUEL TANK WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT MANAGED TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE HOME. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 189,000.
NHTSA ODI #11253425
64,000 miles · May 3, 2019
Exterior LightingFuel/propulsion SystemParking Brake
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG. AFTER REFUELING THE VEHICLE, A FUEL LEAK WAS DISCOVERED UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS EXAMINED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DISCOVERED THAT A RUBBER WASHER IN THE FUEL SYSTEM WAS FAULTY AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE WASHER WAS REPLACED AND THE FAILURE WAS REMEDIED. WHILE DRI…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG. AFTER REFUELING THE VEHICLE, A FUEL LEAK WAS DISCOVERED UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS EXAMINED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DISCOVERED THAT A RUBBER WASHER IN THE FUEL SYSTEM WAS FAULTY AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE WASHER WAS REPLACED AND THE FAILURE WAS REMEDIED. WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, THE LOW AND HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHTS WERE VERY DIM AND THE DRIVER WAS UNABLE TO SEE THE ROAD. ALSO, WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED ON A INCLINE WITH THE EMERGENCY BRAKE ENGAGED, IT ROLLED DOWN THE DRIVEWAY AND INTO THE STREET. THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURES WAS NOT DETERMINED. ESTABROOK FORD (3689 14TH ST, PASCAGOULA, MS) AND THE MANUFACTURER WERE NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 64,000.
NHTSA ODI #11205578
146,000 miles · Sep 3, 2018
Electrical SystemEnginePower TrainCrash
WHERE IT SHOWS HOW MANY MILES IT'S DIGITAL AND IT CONSTANTLY GOES OFF. SMELLS OF GASOLINE AND LIKE SOMETHING IS BURNING EVERY TIME DRIVE IT. HAS A VERY ROUGH IDLE AND WHEN A /C IS ON THE CAR HAS ABSOLUTELY NO POWER, ALSO BURNS GAS VERY QUICK. EXTERIOR HEAD LIGHTS LIGHTS ARE DIM AND I JUST INSTALLED NEW ONE YET STILL DIM
NHTSA ODI #11124181
64,000 miles · Jun 20, 2016
EngineVehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG. WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO A RESTART A FEW MINUTES LATER. THE FAILURE RECURRED SEVEN TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG. WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO A RESTART A FEW MINUTES LATER. THE FAILURE RECURRED SEVEN TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 64,000.
NHTSA ODI #10875192
155,283 miles · Aug 14, 2015
SeatsCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG. WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS, ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE OF THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE. DURING THE INCIDENT THE BACK OF THE DRIVER SEAT FRACTURED. AS A RESULT, THE DRIVER SUSTAINED A BRUISED HIP THAT DID NOT REQUIRE MEDICAL ATTENTION. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED. THE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 FORD MUSTANG. WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS, ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE OF THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE. DURING THE INCIDENT THE BACK OF THE DRIVER SEAT FRACTURED. AS A RESULT, THE DRIVER SUSTAINED A BRUISED HIP THAT DID NOT REQUIRE MEDICAL ATTENTION. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 155,283.
NHTSA ODI #10748733
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