ENGINE STALL ON DECELERATION. *AK
2001 Ford Mustang
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Mustang years
Owner complaints for the 2001 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
63 reports with mileage · 110 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 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 24 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Seat Belts. Review the 22 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
24 reportsWHILE TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY 45MPH AND DECREASING SPEED, THE ENGINE AND ALL POWER STEERING AND POWER BRAKES CEASED AT ABOUT 40MPH WHILE BRAKING. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWICE. FIRST TIME WAS SOMETIME IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR (2001).*AK
CONSUMER NOTICED BOTH FRONT TIRES WERE SEVERELY WORN AT 6616 MILES. VEHICLE TAKEN TO SERVICE DEPT AND HAD BOTH FRONT TIE ROD ENDS REPLACED BECAUSE THEY WERE LOOSE. *AK DURING A ROUTINE OIL CHANGE, IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE TIE RODS WERE COMPLETELY LOOSE. THERE WERE NEW TIRES INSTALLED ON THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE AS THE OTH…
Read full complaint
CONSUMER NOTICED BOTH FRONT TIRES WERE SEVERELY WORN AT 6616 MILES. VEHICLE TAKEN TO SERVICE DEPT AND HAD BOTH FRONT TIE ROD ENDS REPLACED BECAUSE THEY WERE LOOSE. *AK DURING A ROUTINE OIL CHANGE, IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE TIE RODS WERE COMPLETELY LOOSE. THERE WERE NEW TIRES INSTALLED ON THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE AS THE OTHERS WERE COMPLETELY WORN. ALSO, THE HEADER IN THE MOTOR FAILED. *JG
IN FIRST COMPLAINT REGARDING SUSPENSION ARM BOLTS WAS TOLD THIS STUFF HAPPENS, IN REGARDS TO THE WATER LEAKAGE IN EXHAUST, WAS TOLD THAT IS NORMAL. I FEEL IT ISN'T NORMAL WHEN IT IS POURING DOWN MY DRIVEWAY. THEY DIDN'T FIX THE PROBLEM. HAD TIRES ROTATED THEN GOT A FLAT TIRE AND THEY CROSS THREADED THE LUG NUTS AND THE BOLT HAD…
Read full complaint
IN FIRST COMPLAINT REGARDING SUSPENSION ARM BOLTS WAS TOLD THIS STUFF HAPPENS, IN REGARDS TO THE WATER LEAKAGE IN EXHAUST, WAS TOLD THAT IS NORMAL. I FEEL IT ISN'T NORMAL WHEN IT IS POURING DOWN MY DRIVEWAY. THEY DIDN'T FIX THE PROBLEM. HAD TIRES ROTATED THEN GOT A FLAT TIRE AND THEY CROSS THREADED THE LUG NUTS AND THE BOLT HAD TO BE BROKEN OFF TO REPAIR THE FLAT TIRE.*AK
UNDER LIGHT TO MODERATE ACELERATION A SHUDDER OR BUCKING IS FELT IN 3RD GEAR SPEED IS BETWEEN 30 AND 45 MPH . THE DEALER REPLACED EGR. AND MASS AIRFLOW AND THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION PROBLEM STILL IS PRESENT. *AK
CONSUMER STATES THE VEHICLE ENGINE WOULD STALLS INTERMITTENTLY WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED, VEHICLE HAS BEEN TO THE DEALER ON THREE OCCASIONS AND THEY ARE UNABLE TO LOCATE THE PROBLEM. NLM CONSUMER STATES STEERING WHEEL LOCKS WHEN ENGINE SHUTS DOWN AT HIGH OR LOW SPEED. VEHICLE VIBRATES AT SPEED OVER 65 MPH. WIPER MAKE A LOUD N…
Read full complaint
CONSUMER STATES THE VEHICLE ENGINE WOULD STALLS INTERMITTENTLY WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED, VEHICLE HAS BEEN TO THE DEALER ON THREE OCCASIONS AND THEY ARE UNABLE TO LOCATE THE PROBLEM. NLM CONSUMER STATES STEERING WHEEL LOCKS WHEN ENGINE SHUTS DOWN AT HIGH OR LOW SPEED. VEHICLE VIBRATES AT SPEED OVER 65 MPH. WIPER MAKE A LOUD NOISE AT HIGH SPEEDS. CONVERTIBLE TOP HAD RUST ON PORTION THAT CONNECTS WITH FRONT WINDSHIELD. VEHICLE HAD BRAKE PULSATION. *YH
MY V6 MUSTANG STALLS WHILE IN MOTION CAUSING THE STEERING AND BRAKES TO FREEZE. THIS IS A POTENTIALLY DEADLY PROBLEM. IT HAS HAPPENED FOUR TIMES; ONCE AT 30 MPH, 60 MPH, 45 MPH, AND 40 MPH. THE CAR ONLY HAS 4500 MILES ON IT. I ALSO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A HEATER DISPLAY LIGHT GOING OUT. DEALERSHIP CAN'T IDENTIFY THE CAUSE OF …
Read full complaint
MY V6 MUSTANG STALLS WHILE IN MOTION CAUSING THE STEERING AND BRAKES TO FREEZE. THIS IS A POTENTIALLY DEADLY PROBLEM. IT HAS HAPPENED FOUR TIMES; ONCE AT 30 MPH, 60 MPH, 45 MPH, AND 40 MPH. THE CAR ONLY HAS 4500 MILES ON IT. I ALSO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A HEATER DISPLAY LIGHT GOING OUT. DEALERSHIP CAN'T IDENTIFY THE CAUSE OF EITHER OF THESE PROBLEMS. IT'S BEEN IN THE SHOP FOUR TIMES FOR THE STALLLING AND THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO DETERMINE NOTHING. I HAVE ANXIETY WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE AS IT STALLS OUT AT ANY TIME WITH NO WARNING WHATSOEVER. VERY, VERY SCARY.*AK
ON FEB. 24TH, 2001, I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE WITH ONLY 21 MILES SHOWING ON THE ODOMETER. I TOOK THE VEHICLE HOME AND THE NEXT DAY, I CRANKED THE AUTO AND THE SERVICE ENGINE CHECK LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED. THE DAY WAS SUNDAY AND THE DEALERSHIP, NOR THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT, WERE OPEN. I WAITED UNTIL MONDAY MORNING TO DRIVE THE CAR, AND…
Read full complaint
ON FEB. 24TH, 2001, I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE WITH ONLY 21 MILES SHOWING ON THE ODOMETER. I TOOK THE VEHICLE HOME AND THE NEXT DAY, I CRANKED THE AUTO AND THE SERVICE ENGINE CHECK LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED. THE DAY WAS SUNDAY AND THE DEALERSHIP, NOR THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT, WERE OPEN. I WAITED UNTIL MONDAY MORNING TO DRIVE THE CAR, AND THEN WENT STRAIGHT TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT. THEY DID A DIAGNOSTIC AND SAID THE CATALYTIC SENSOR WAS ACTING UP AND THEY WOULD TURN THE LIGHT OFF AND THAT SHOULD FIX IT. HOWEVER, IF THE LIGHT CAME ON AGAIN, I WAS TO BRING THE CAR BACK. I HAD TO BRING THE VEHICLE BACK A TOTAL OF THREE TIMES, DUE TO THE SERVICE ENGINE SOON LIGHT. I WAS TOLD AFTER THE SECOND REPLACEMENT OF A SENSOR IN THE CATALYTIC CONVERTOR, THAT THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN GIVEN BAD GAS BEFORE I HAD PURCHASED IT, CAUSING THEM, THE SERVICE REPAIRMEN, TO HAVE TO COMPLETELY TAKE APART THE FUEL SYSTEM AND CLEAN IT FROM ENGINE TO EXHAUST. THE PROBLEM WAS NOT FIXED UNTIL AFTER THEY COMPLETELY REPLACED THE CATALYTIC CONVERTOR. INFORMATION WAS WITHHELD CONCERNING REPAIR TO THE VEHICLE BEFORE I PURCHASED IT. THE REPLACEMENT WAS FINALLY COMPLETED BY APRIL 15TH, 2001. MY NEXT PROBLEM OCCURED ON JULY 13TH, 2001. I WAS RETURNING FROM A TRIP TO COLORADO WITH MY FATHER, WHEN AS WE WERE TRAVELING, I HEARD A LOUD POP AND THEN FELT WATER HIT MY FOOT. I HAD BEEN RIDING ON THE PASSENGER'S SIDE AT THE TIME. WHEN I NOTICED THE WATER, I LOOKED TOWARD THE FLOORBOARD AND ALSO FOUND THAT THE DASHBOARD HAD SHIFTED TO THE LEFT AND FALLEN FROM THE WINDOW. WE ARRIVED AT HOME LATER THAT DAY AND I IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP. I WAS TOLD THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT IN AND DO A COMPLETE ONCE OVER TO SEE WHAT HAD CAUSED THE LEAKING. I TOOK IT IN ON JULY 17TH. I WAS TOLD THEY HAD FOUND NOTHING WRONG WITH THE DASH OR COULD NOT FIND A LEAK. I HAVE TAKEN IT BACK A TOTAL OF 6 TIMES THUS FAR FOR THE SAME PROBLEM AND THREE FOR THE FRONT END. *AK
NO SUMMARY LISTED FOR ABOVE VEHICLE. *AK
VEHICLE IN COLD WEATHER WILL SHUT DOWN AT ANY TIME PROBLEM IS WORSE IN COLD WEATHER. CONTACTED DEALER, AND THE DEALER NOTED THAT THEY COULD NOT FIND THE PROBLEM.*AK CONSUMER STATED THAT THE VEHICLE STALLED TWICE AT RED LIGHT, REPLACED BARO, MAF AND RESET KAM BUT THE PROBLEM IS STILL THERE. *YD
Official recalls
100V349000 · 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.
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.
Illustration