ON THE MORNING OF MARCH 1ST, 2010 MY WIFE WAS BACKING OUR 2002 FORD TAURUS OUT OF THE GARAGE WHEN THE TIRE BLEW. UPON INSPECTING THE CAR I NOTICED THAT THE COIL SPRING WAS BROKEN AND CONTACTED THE TIRE RESULTING IN TIRE FAILURE. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THAT A COIL SPRING HAS BROKEN AND BLOWN A TIRE. THE FIRST TIME WAS IN 2006…
Read full complaint
ON THE MORNING OF MARCH 1ST, 2010 MY WIFE WAS BACKING OUR 2002 FORD TAURUS OUT OF THE GARAGE WHEN THE TIRE BLEW. UPON INSPECTING THE CAR I NOTICED THAT THE COIL SPRING WAS BROKEN AND CONTACTED THE TIRE RESULTING IN TIRE FAILURE. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THAT A COIL SPRING HAS BROKEN AND BLOWN A TIRE. THE FIRST TIME WAS IN 2006. WE LIVE IN FRANKLIN MASSACHUSETTS. WE BOUGHT THE CAR NEW IN 2002 FROM ACTON FORD. FORD DID NOT OFFER TO COVER THE COST OF THE REPAIRS. FRANKLIN FORD MENTIONED THAT IT WAS A CAMPAIGN AND THE CAR WAS NOT COVERED. MY WIFE AND I RECENTLY SOLD THE CAR FOR PARTS TO A TOYOTA DEALER. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF PEOPLE DRIVING THESE CARS THAT ARE UNAWARE OF THE POTENTIAL DANGERS. I'M THANKFUL THAT MY FAMILY WAS NOT DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN THE TIRE BLEW. I TOOK PICTURES OF THE TIRE AND SPRING. I HAVE THE VIN NUMBER AS WELL. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10317120
70,000 miles · Mar 4, 2010
Suspension
I HAVE BEEN THE OWNER OF TWO 2002 FORD TAURUS AUTOMOBILES. I'VE HAD TO REPLACE ALL 4 COIL SPRINGS ON MY FIRST ONE BECAUSE THEY SIMPLY BROKE IN HALF. ONLY ONE BROKE AT A TIME BUT YOU HAVE TO REPLACE THE COIL SPRINGS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CAR WHEN THAT HAPPENS. SO I HAVE HAD 2 REPAIR JOBS REPLACING 4 COIL SPRINGS. ONE OF THE S…
Read full complaint
I HAVE BEEN THE OWNER OF TWO 2002 FORD TAURUS AUTOMOBILES. I'VE HAD TO REPLACE ALL 4 COIL SPRINGS ON MY FIRST ONE BECAUSE THEY SIMPLY BROKE IN HALF. ONLY ONE BROKE AT A TIME BUT YOU HAVE TO REPLACE THE COIL SPRINGS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CAR WHEN THAT HAPPENS. SO I HAVE HAD 2 REPAIR JOBS REPLACING 4 COIL SPRINGS. ONE OF THE SPRINGS BROKE WHILE TRAVELING AT 40 MPH AND DESTROYED THE TIRE ON THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE. I WAS ABLE TO CONTROL THE CAR, NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED. THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED I JUST TOOK IT TO MY REGULAR TIRE STORE AND HAD IT FIXED AT A COST OF $800.00. A YEAR LATER WHEN ANOTHER ONE BROKE I CALLED FORD AND THEY SAID THAT THERE WAS A RECALL ON THOSE SPRINGS BUT ONLY INCLUDED 2001 AND EARLIER MODELS. I TOLD THEM AT THE TIME THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THESE SPRINGS, IT'S HAPPENED TO ME TWICE AND EVERY TECH WHO KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT THESE CARS AGREES. THE FORD TAURUS'S OF THESE MODEL YEARS HAVE COIL SPRING PROBLEMS. NO LUCK WITH FORD AND ONCE AGAIN I HAD TO SHELL OUT AROUND $800.00 IN OCTOBER 2009 I BOUGHT ANOTHER 2002 FORD TAURUS (DUMB ME) OFF A NEIGHBOR AND SURE ENOUGH, ANOTHER BROKEN COIL SPRING. THIS TIME I WAS PULLING IN MY DRIVEWAY, I COULD FEEL IT BREAK AND AGAIN IT RUINED A 5 MONTH OLD TIRE. BY THE WAY WITH EVERY REPAIR JOB YOU HAVE TO BUY 2 NEW TIRES AS WELL. THE BROKEN SPRING RUINS THE TIRE SO YOU HAVE TO BUY 2. I CALLED FORD AGAIN AND THEY TOLD ME I'M OUT OF LUCK. I EXPLAINED THAT THIS IS THE 3RD TIME, IN 2 DIFFERENT CARS AND THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED. THEY WERE LESS THAT HELPFUL, POLITE BUT OF NO HELP. SO NOW I'M LOOKING AT ANOTHER $800 OR SO. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN DO TO HELP ME? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10316868
90,000 miles · Mar 4, 2010
Suspension
FRONT SPRING BROKE AND SLASHED TIRE. NOW, A FEW MONTHS LATER, THE REAR SPRING IS BROKEN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10316735
75,000 miles · Mar 1, 2010
Suspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. WHEN THE CONSUMERS SON WAS ATTEMPTING TO ENTER THE VEHICLE, HE NOTICED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE TIRE WAS PUNCTURED BY THE COIL SPRING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CONTACT HAD THE COIL SPRING REPLACED. THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNINGS. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES W…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. WHEN THE CONSUMERS SON WAS ATTEMPTING TO ENTER THE VEHICLE, HE NOTICED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE TIRE WAS PUNCTURED BY THE COIL SPRING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CONTACT HAD THE COIL SPRING REPLACED. THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNINGS. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 75000. UPDATED 04/01/10. *LJ THE FRONT SPRINGS. LEFT FRONT LINK. LOWER BALL JOINT AND TIRE WERE REPLACED. UPDATED 06/04/10
NHTSA ODI #10315148
Mileage unknown · Feb 28, 2010
EquipmentService Brakes, HydraulicSuspension
PROBLEMS WITH NOISE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE SHUDDERING SOUND WHILE DRIVING COMES AND GOES. PROBLEM WITH CAR RUNNING ROUGH ENGINE POWER DECREASED, SEAM LIKE FUEL IS POOR, SOME MALFUNCTION CAUSING PROBLEMS IN TRAFFIC. THIS MALFUNCTION ALWAYS HAPPENS ON START UP AND DURING REGULAR OPERATING DURING DRIVING. WE HAVE TO KEEP LETTING O…
Read full complaint
PROBLEMS WITH NOISE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE SHUDDERING SOUND WHILE DRIVING COMES AND GOES. PROBLEM WITH CAR RUNNING ROUGH ENGINE POWER DECREASED, SEAM LIKE FUEL IS POOR, SOME MALFUNCTION CAUSING PROBLEMS IN TRAFFIC. THIS MALFUNCTION ALWAYS HAPPENS ON START UP AND DURING REGULAR OPERATING DURING DRIVING. WE HAVE TO KEEP LETTING OFF THE GAS AND GIVING GAS TO TRY MAKE IT RUN RIGHT A HOPE TO HAVE A SMOOTH RIDE. THE POPPING NOISE FROM THE FRONT END ALWAYS HAPPEN DAILY DURING DRIVING WITH NORMAL SPEEDS. THE FRONT ROTORS HAS BEEN CHANGED THREE TIMES SINCE I OWNED THIS VEHICLE, CONTINUING TO HAVE PROBLEM WITH THE FRONT END. BRAKE PADS ALWAYS HAVE BEEN CHANGED DURING THESE PROBLEMS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10315023
105,000 miles · Feb 27, 2010
Suspension
RIGHT FRONT SPRING BROKE AND PUNCTURED THE TIRE - SPRING AND TIRE HAD TO BE REPLACED. THEY PUNCTURED AFTER VEHICLE WAS OUT IN MOTION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10314890
124 miles · Feb 27, 2010
Suspension
THE CAR MADE A LOUD BANG N FRONT END DROPPED TO THE GROUND. DRIVERS SIDE FRONT SUSPENSION BUSTED N BLEW OUT THE TIRE, JUST REACHED HOME DRIVEWAY. IT IS NOT FIXED AS I AM ON LIMITED INCOME. ALSO I DO HAVE THE BROKEN PARTS AND THEY ARE NOT RUSTED AT ALL. ALSO THE TIRE WAS LIKE NEW AND IS TOTALLY SHOT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10314837
Mileage unknown · Feb 26, 2010
SteeringSuspension
THIS HAPPEN TO MY CAR AND NOW I SEE FIVE OTHERS: 2002 FORD TAURUS FRONT SUSPENSION COMPLAINTS 1 COMPLAINT NUMBER: 10311880 INCIDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 4, 2010 DATE ADDED TO FILE: FEBRUARY 18, 2010 DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPLAINT: LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING BROKE AND RUPTURED LEFT FRONT TIRE, ALSO BROKE LEFT SIDE SWAYBAR END LINK DE…
Read full complaint
THIS HAPPEN TO MY CAR AND NOW I SEE FIVE OTHERS: 2002 FORD TAURUS FRONT SUSPENSION COMPLAINTS 1 COMPLAINT NUMBER: 10311880 INCIDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 4, 2010 DATE ADDED TO FILE: FEBRUARY 18, 2010 DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPLAINT: LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING BROKE AND RUPTURED LEFT FRONT TIRE, ALSO BROKE LEFT SIDE SWAYBAR END LINK DETAILSDISCUSS IT IN FORUM 2 COMPLAINT NUMBER: 10311202 INCIDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 14, 2002 DATE ADDED TO FILE: FEBRUARY 17, 2010 DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPLAINT: LEFT FRONT SPRING BROKEN WITH PUNCTURE OF TIRE DETAILSDISCUSS IT IN FORUM 3 COMPLAINT NUMBER: 10310960 INCIDENT DATE: DECEMBER 9, 2007 DATE ADDED TO FILE: FEBRUARY 16, 2010 DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPLAINT: MY 2002 TAURUS WAS SITTING IN THE DRIVEWAY WHEN MY HUSBAND HEARD A LOUD BANG. THE COIL SPRING ON THE DRIVERS SIDE BROKE AND PUT A HOLE THE TIRE. THE COST TO GET THE SPRINGS REPLACED AND A NEW TIRE WAS OVER $600.00 DETAILSDISCUSS IT IN FORUM 4 COMPLAINT NUMBER: 10308675 INCIDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 10, 2009 DATE ADDED TO FILE: FEBRUARY 11, 2010 DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPLAINT: CAR WAS PARKED AND PUT INTO REVERSE TO BACK UP IN DRIVE WHEN TIRE EXPLODED. UPON EXAMINATION THE DRIVERS SIDE SUSPENSION SPRING HAD EXPLODED INTO 2 PIECES AND RIPPED INTO TIRE. DETAILSDISCUSS IT IN FORUM 5 COMPLAINT NUMBER: 10308774 INCIDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 10, 2010 DATE ADDED TO FILE: FEBRUARY 11, 2010 DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPLAINT: I WAS DRIVING MY FORD TAURUS 2002 AND THE FRONT LEFT COIL SPRING BROKE RESULTING IN THE BROKEN COIL SPRING PUNCTURING MY TIRE CAUSING IT TO GO IMMEDIATELY FLAT. THIS RENDERED MY CAR IMMOBILE, REQUIRED TOWING, AND REPLACEMENT OF BOTH FRONT COIL SPRINGS AND MOUNTS THAT HOLD THE COIL SPRINGS. (COST: $695) SO FAR, THIS HAS ONLY HAPPENED ONCE, AND I REALLY HOPE IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN. I HAVE A PORTION OF THE COIL SPRING THAT BROKE OFF FROM THE REST OF THE COIL SPRING. THE REMAINING SPRING WAS KEPT BY THE AUTO REPAIR SHOP. THE PORTION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10314721
79,437 miles · Feb 26, 2010
Suspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING BROKE AND CUT THE TIRE WHILE HE WAS DRIVING UP A HILL. THE ENTIRE INSIDE OF THE TIRE HAD SHREDDED AND SEPARATED. THE FORD MANUFACTURER WAS CALLED AND STATED THAT THERE WAS NO WARRANTY OR RECALL FOR THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT HAD TO REPAIR …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING BROKE AND CUT THE TIRE WHILE HE WAS DRIVING UP A HILL. THE ENTIRE INSIDE OF THE TIRE HAD SHREDDED AND SEPARATED. THE FORD MANUFACTURER WAS CALLED AND STATED THAT THERE WAS NO WARRANTY OR RECALL FOR THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT HAD TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE HIMSELF. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 79,437. UPDATED 04/13/10. *LJ UPDATED 10/08/10*JB
NHTSA ODI #10314576
139,000 miles · Feb 25, 2010
Suspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH HE SMELLED RUBBER BURNING AND THE TIRE BECAME FLAT. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO CHANGE THE TIRE AND NOTICED THAT THE COIL SPRING WAS BROKEN. THE CONTACT INFORMED THE MANUFACTURER REGARDING THE COIL SPRING FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CO…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH HE SMELLED RUBBER BURNING AND THE TIRE BECAME FLAT. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO CHANGE THE TIRE AND NOTICED THAT THE COIL SPRING WAS BROKEN. THE CONTACT INFORMED THE MANUFACTURER REGARDING THE COIL SPRING FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THERE WERE NO RELATED RECALLS FOR HIS YEAR, MAKE, AND MODEL REGARDING THE COIL SPRING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 139,000.
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES ARE BEING RECALLED TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH A MALFUNCTIONING STOP LAMP SWITCH AND/OR ASSOCIATED WIRING. THIS MALFUNCTIONING COULD RENDER THE STOP LAMPS INOPERABLE OR CAUSE THEM TO STAY ON ALL THE TIME. THIS COULD CAUSE CONFUSION TO A FOLLOWING DRIVER, WHICH COULD LEAD TO A CRASH.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN ADDITION, IF THE SWITCH AND/OR ASSOCIATED WIRING FAIL IN THE OPEN POSITION, THE BRAKE LIGHTS WILL NOT ACTUATE AND THE DRIVER WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SHIFT THE VEHICLE OUT OF "PARK" IF THEY FAIL IN THE CLOSED POSITION, THE BRAKE LIGHTS WILL REMAIN ON, WHICH WILL NOT ALLOW THE SPEED CONTROL TO BE ACTIVATED. THIS COULD ALSO CAUSE THE BATTERY TO DISCHARGE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REMOVE THE STOP LAMP SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING ASSEMBLY AND INSTALL A NEWLY DESIGNED STOP LAMP SWITCH AND WIRE ASSEMBLY. OWNER NOTIFICATION IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN ON APRIL 5, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 212, "WINDSHIELD MOUNTING." THE WINDSHIELDS MAY POTENTIALLY EXHIBIT INCREASED WIND NOISE, WATER LEAKAGE, AND SQUEAKS AND RATTLES.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: POTENTIAL LOSS OF WINDSHIELD RETENTION MAY ALSO REDUCE OCCUPANT PROTECTION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THESE WINDSHIELDS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON MARCH 31, 2003. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT FORD/MERCURY AT 1-800-392-3673.
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PADELS ARE BEING RECALLED IN ORDER TO ADJUST THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS TO A MINIMUM OF 50 MM OF LATERAL SEPARATION. SIMULTANEOUS APPLICATION OF BOTH THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS COULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN ENGINE RPM.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A CUSTOMER EXPERIENCING AN "UNINTENDED VEHICLE SPEED INCREASE" OR A PERCEIVED "UNABLE TO STOP" CONDITION.
Remedy: OWNERS WILL BE INSTRUCTED AS TO THE PROPER WAY TO SET THE POSITION OF THE PEDALS AND TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE SPACING BETWEEN THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS MEASURED. IF THE SPACING IS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN 50 MM, THE DEALER WILL ADJUST THE PEDALS TO INCREASE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THEM TO GREATER THAN 50 MM. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN OCTOBER 28, 2002. OWNERS WHO DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-866-436-7332.
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
4
PE12033 · Speed Control Cable Damage
Opened Oct 24, 2012 · Closed Jun 26, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:cables; Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Vehicle Speed Control:cables
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Vehicle Speed Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
EA08018 · Front Suspension Coil Spring Fracture
Opened Aug 28, 2008 · Closed Jun 30, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:front:springs:coil Springs
To date, ODI is aware of 2,401 non-duplicative complaints related to the alleged defect. In addition, ODI is aware of 1,411 subject vehicles with one or more warranty claims related to the alleged defect. In total, ODI is aware of 3,645 unique subject vehicles that have experienced one or more front suspension coil spring fractures. ODI is also aware of four minor crashes related to the alleged defect resulting in one minor injury.With greater than eight years of exposure, a large subject vehicle population and approximately 2,052 reported front tire punctures caused by fractured coil springs (at all speeds), there have been no reported severe crashes, deaths or injuries related to the alleged defect. The real world consequences of these defective coil springs have been a small number of minor control problems that resulted in minor damage; suggesting that the effect of the defect on vehicle control is minor.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted. Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency will continue to monitor this issue and will take further action if warranted by the circumstances. See the EA08-018 Engineering Analysis Closing Report for more details.
RP03001 · Brake/accelerator Pedal Application
Opened Oct 31, 2003 · Closed Mar 23, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages
MS. RODMAN REPORTED THAT AFTER HER VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED FOR THE RECALL, HER MOTHER EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN ACCELERATION AND CRASHED THE SABLE INTO A LIGHT POLE.PREVIOUSLY NHTSA HAD CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION FOR THIS ISSUE (PE02-035) THAT RESULTED IN THE RECALL (02V-266) OF 369,000 MY 2000-2002 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS TO INSURE THAT THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE PEDALS WAS AT LEAST 50MM..A REVIEW OF ODI'S DATABASE FOR COMPLAINTS REGARDING RECALL 02V-266 DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY RECALL REMEDY COMPLAINTS OTHER THAN THE PETITIONER'S.MS. RODMAN?S VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY ODI USING FORD?S SPECIAL TOOL AND HER VEHICLE WAS FOUND TO EXCEED 50MM.ALSO, THE LATERAL MOVEMENT OF THE PEDALS WAS FOUND NOT TO BE EXCESSIVE RELATIVE TO OTHER COMPARABLE TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES.THEREFORE, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER REQUIRING FORD TO PROVIDE A DIFFERENT REMEDY FOR THIS DEFECT.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.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS ANALYSIS, PLEASE REFER TO THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE DATED MARCH 23, 2004 (VOL 69, NO 56, PAGES 13619-13620).
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Additional source detail variants (5)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
2002 Ford Taurus Problems, Complaints & Recalls | Skip That Year
Illustration