IllustrationLESS THEN 2WEEKS AFTER PURCHASE A CHUNK OF THE TREAD CAME OFF THE TIRE . THE TIRE DID NOT GO FLAT BUT MAINTAINED 35 PSI. *TR
2002 Ford Mustang
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2002 Ford Mustang do not stand out strongly from 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
150–25K
1425–50K
850–75K
675–100K
9100–150K
2150K+
54 reports with mileage · 64 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.
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 22 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Air Bags. Review the 20 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 15 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
19 crash reports6 fire reports8 injury reports
What owners actually said
118 reportsWE HAVE HAD A 2002 FORD MUSTANG FOR ONE YEAR. THE PASSENGER SEAT BELT WILL NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY. IT WILL NOT COME OUT ALL THE WAY MAKING IT USELESS. I HAD THE DEALERSHIP LOOK AT IT. IT WAS FIXED FOR APPROXIMATELY A WEEK. IT IS NOW UNUSABLE AGAIN. FROM MY SEARCH ON THIS ISSUE THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT IT.…
Read full complaint
WE HAVE HAD A 2002 FORD MUSTANG FOR ONE YEAR. THE PASSENGER SEAT BELT WILL NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY. IT WILL NOT COME OUT ALL THE WAY MAKING IT USELESS. I HAD THE DEALERSHIP LOOK AT IT. IT WAS FIXED FOR APPROXIMATELY A WEEK. IT IS NOW UNUSABLE AGAIN. FROM MY SEARCH ON THIS ISSUE THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT IT. WHY SHOULD I PAY FOR A NEW ASSEMBLY FOR SOMETHING THAT OCCURS FREQUENTLY WITH SIMILAR CARS AND IS NOT BEING TAKEN CARE OF BY FORD. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD MUSTANG. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD LEAKED COOLANT WHILE TRAVELING 30 MPH. THE CONTACT BELIEVED THAT THE LEAK COULD CAUSE AN ENGINE MALFUNCTION AND MAYBE A FIRE. THE CONTACT CALLED THE MANUFACTURER WHO OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. ALSO, THE SPARK PLUGS SEPARATED FROM THE CYLINDER HEAD W…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD MUSTANG. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD LEAKED COOLANT WHILE TRAVELING 30 MPH. THE CONTACT BELIEVED THAT THE LEAK COULD CAUSE AN ENGINE MALFUNCTION AND MAYBE A FIRE. THE CONTACT CALLED THE MANUFACTURER WHO OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. ALSO, THE SPARK PLUGS SEPARATED FROM THE CYLINDER HEAD WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING. THE VEHICLE WAS BEING REPAIRED AT A LOCAL REPAIR SHOP IN REFERENCE TO THE SPARK PLUGS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 108,000.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD MUSTANG WITH FEDERAL SUPER STEELE TIRES, LINE SIZE 245/45 R17. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE AND REAR PASSENGER SIDE TIRES SPLIT ALONG THE SIDEWALL. WITHIN 4,000 MILES THE SAME FAILURE OCCURRED ON THE FRONT PASSENGER AND REAR DRIVER SIDE TIRES. THE MANUFACTURER REPLACED THE TIRES …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD MUSTANG WITH FEDERAL SUPER STEELE TIRES, LINE SIZE 245/45 R17. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE AND REAR PASSENGER SIDE TIRES SPLIT ALONG THE SIDEWALL. WITHIN 4,000 MILES THE SAME FAILURE OCCURRED ON THE FRONT PASSENGER AND REAR DRIVER SIDE TIRES. THE MANUFACTURER REPLACED THE TIRES EVERY TIME THE FAILURE OCCURRED YET THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TIRES WERE REPLACED WITH DEFECTIVE TIRES. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED BECAUSE THE TIRES FAILED AT LESS THEN 20,000 MILES. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 64,000.
I HAVE GOODYEAR EAGLE LS TIRES ON MY 2002 FORD MUSTANG THAT KEEP BLOWING OUT ON THE INSIDE AND SHREDDING THE TIRE. IN 3 YEARS I HAVE PURCHASED 4 TIRES AND HAD ANOTHER BLOWOUT LAST NIGHT THAT SHREDS THE INSIDE OF THE TIRE. I HAD JUST HAD THIS TIRE CHECKED ON THE 8TH OF APRIL AND THE TIRE WAS FINE. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD MUSTANG. HE STATED THAT SINCE THE DATE OF PURCHASED HE NOTICED THAT THE SEAT BELT RETRACTORS WERE DEFECTIVE. HE HAS NOT TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER. HE WILL NOT HAVE THE FAILURE REPAIRED, HE WILL SELL OR TRADE IN THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 62,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 7400.…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD MUSTANG. HE STATED THAT SINCE THE DATE OF PURCHASED HE NOTICED THAT THE SEAT BELT RETRACTORS WERE DEFECTIVE. HE HAS NOT TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER. HE WILL NOT HAVE THE FAILURE REPAIRED, HE WILL SELL OR TRADE IN THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 62,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 7400. UPDATED 5/17/2010 * CN UPDATED 06/17/10*JB
2002 MUSTANG SEATBELTS DO NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY, WILL NOT RETRACT, AND CAN NOT PULL OUT. THAT MEANS THAT IT CAN NOT BE USED. I HAVE TALKED TO MAY PEOPLE THAT HAVE TOLD ME THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE MUSTANG. ANY INFO WOULD BE HELPFUL. *TR
ON MY 2002 FORD MUSTANG V6 THE AC CONDENSATION DRIPS TO MY MANIFOLD AND KEEPS CRACKING THE WELD. I HAVE TO GET IT REWELDED EVERY SIX MONTHS. THE GUY AT THE SHOP TELLS ME HE GETS AT LEAST 10 A MONTH WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. *TR
THE ABS LIGHT ALWAYS GOES ON AFTER 15-29 MILES OF DRIVING, WHICH WAS VERIFIED BY GOODYEAR DEALER. THEY RECOMMENDED ME TO GO TO THE FORD DEALER BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE NECESSARY EQUIPMENT TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM. SO I CAME TO THE QUICK LANE AT 11200 JAMES SWART CIRCLE, FAIRFAX, VA. THEY CALLED ME BACK IN 2 HOURS AND SAID THAT EVE…
Read full complaint
THE ABS LIGHT ALWAYS GOES ON AFTER 15-29 MILES OF DRIVING, WHICH WAS VERIFIED BY GOODYEAR DEALER. THEY RECOMMENDED ME TO GO TO THE FORD DEALER BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE NECESSARY EQUIPMENT TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM. SO I CAME TO THE QUICK LANE AT 11200 JAMES SWART CIRCLE, FAIRFAX, VA. THEY CALLED ME BACK IN 2 HOURS AND SAID THAT EVERYTHING IS FINE WITH MY CAR AND COMPLETELY IGNORED A WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM GOODYEAR THAT THE ABS LIGHT CAME ON AFTER 12 MILES OF DRIVING. THEN THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY WILL KEEP CHECKING, 2 DAYS PAST, NOBODY BOTHERED TO CALL ME. I THINK IT'S A NICE DENIAL STRATEGY: THEY FAIL TO DETECT WHAT IS WRONG AND THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR A PROBLEM AND DON'T HAVE TO FIX IT. OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT CONCERN OF THEIRS THAT MY MUSTANG OR EVERY MUSTANG I'VE DRIVEN ENGAGES TRACTION CONTROL EVERY TIME I HAVE TO TURN UP TO A LITTLE HILL ON A WET ROAD.... I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO MENTION SLIPPERY CONDITIONS DURING WINTER SEASON. THAT'S WHY I ALWAYS APPRECIATED THIS FEATURE, BUT NOW IT'S TURNING ITSELF OFF AND WON'T COME BACK ON UNTIL THE ENGINE IS OFF FOR A WHILE. I'VE READ MULTIPLE PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS, BUT FORD CONVENIENTLY DOESN'T CARE ABOUT ANY OF THIS... THIS IS YOUR CAR AND YOU ARE STUCK WITH IT... I TAKE IT AS FORD MOTOR COMPANY COMPLETE FAILURE TO PROVIDE DRIVERS' SAFETY. DO I HAVE TO WAIT FOR AN INCIDENT TO HAPPEN OR SOME PREVENTIVE MEASURES CAN BE TAKEN? *TR
WAS PULLED OVER BY POLICE WHEN ACCELERATOR STUCK, HE THOUGHT I WAS LYING SO I CONTACTED D.A. AND TICKET REDUCED TO BAD MUFFLER....RIGHT! TOOK AUTO TO DEALERSHIP AND WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE PROBLEM. CAR ALSO SHAKES BADLY AT SPEEDS ABOVE 45MPH, ALL THE TIME. PRIVATE GARAGE STATED PROBLEM NOT WITH SUSPENSION. *TR
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
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.