NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Suspension complaints
962 reportsClear category filter48,000 miles · Jan 20, 2006
SuspensionVisibility
DT*: THE CONSUMER STATED THE WINDSHIELD MAKES A POPPING NOISE WHEN COLD. THERE IS A NHTSA RECALL, # 03V087000, REGARDING THE WINDSHIELD. THE VEHICLE HAS THE SAME PROBLEMS AS INDICATED IN THE RECALL; HOWEVER, IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL DUE TO THE VIN. ALSO, WHILE PULLING OUT OF A PARKING LOT, A LOUD POP WAS HEARD. UPON…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONSUMER STATED THE WINDSHIELD MAKES A POPPING NOISE WHEN COLD. THERE IS A NHTSA RECALL, # 03V087000, REGARDING THE WINDSHIELD. THE VEHICLE HAS THE SAME PROBLEMS AS INDICATED IN THE RECALL; HOWEVER, IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL DUE TO THE VIN. ALSO, WHILE PULLING OUT OF A PARKING LOT, A LOUD POP WAS HEARD. UPON INSPECTION, THE FRONT PASSENGER TIRE WAS FLAT. THE SPARE TIRE WAS PUT ON AND THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP. THE DEALERSHIP DETERMINED THE PASSENGER SIDE COIL SPRING BROKE CAUSING THE TIRE TO GO FLAT. BOTH FRONT COIL SPRINGS WERE REPLACED. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10148227
82,143 miles · Jan 18, 2006
Suspension
MY SISTER'S 2002 FORD TAURUS BROKE ITS LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING AS SHE LEFT THE DRIVEWAY. THE COIL SPRING SNAPPED, SLICED THE TIRE (ALL THE WAY AROUND), AND BROKE THE SWAY BAR LINK. THE COIL SPRING, STRUTS, AND SWAY BAR LINK WERE REPLACED ON THE LEFT AND THE RIGHT SIDE. A NEW TIRE WAS INSTALLED. THE TOTAL REPAIR BILL CAME TO $722…
Read full complaint
MY SISTER'S 2002 FORD TAURUS BROKE ITS LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING AS SHE LEFT THE DRIVEWAY. THE COIL SPRING SNAPPED, SLICED THE TIRE (ALL THE WAY AROUND), AND BROKE THE SWAY BAR LINK. THE COIL SPRING, STRUTS, AND SWAY BAR LINK WERE REPLACED ON THE LEFT AND THE RIGHT SIDE. A NEW TIRE WAS INSTALLED. THE TOTAL REPAIR BILL CAME TO $722.49. THE SPRINGS COST $85.84, SWAY BAR LINKS COST 76.96, AND THE TIRE COST $106.00. THERE WAS VERY LITTLE RUST ON THE COIL SPRINGS. THE CAR HAD 82K ON THE ODOMETER. FORD SHOULD HAVE RECALLED ALL THE TAURUS'S, NOT JUST THE '99-'01'S. IF SOMEONE WAS ON A HIGHWAY WHEN THIS HAPPENED, THE CONSEQUENCES WOULD BE SEVERE. THE CAR MAY SWERVE, HIT A GUARDRAIL, OR EVEN HIT ANOTHER CAR. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10148052
37,174 miles · Jan 8, 2006
Suspension
UPON ROUTINE OIL CHANGE AND INSPECTION THE PASSENGER SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT WAS STATED TO BE LOOSE AND NEEDED REPLACING. AFTER WORK, I JACKED UP THE CAR AND VERIFIED THE PASSENGER FRONT TIRE COULD BE WOBBLED WHEN PULLING ON THE TOP & BOTTOM OF THE TIRE. THIS CAR HAS 37,174 MILES. A REPAIR HAS BEEN SCHEDULED AT A LOCAL SHOP. *…
Read full complaint
UPON ROUTINE OIL CHANGE AND INSPECTION THE PASSENGER SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT WAS STATED TO BE LOOSE AND NEEDED REPLACING. AFTER WORK, I JACKED UP THE CAR AND VERIFIED THE PASSENGER FRONT TIRE COULD BE WOBBLED WHEN PULLING ON THE TOP & BOTTOM OF THE TIRE. THIS CAR HAS 37,174 MILES. A REPAIR HAS BEEN SCHEDULED AT A LOCAL SHOP. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10147176
28,867 miles · Jan 5, 2006
Suspension
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED A FLAT TIRE WAS DISCOVERED ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE OF THE VEHICLE AFTER ENTERING THE GARAGE. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION THE CONTACT FOUND THE FRONT COIL SPRING BROKE, CAUSING A PUNCTURE IN THE TIRE. THERE WAS NO WARNING PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL DEALERSHIP, WHERE THE TIRE AND COIL…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED A FLAT TIRE WAS DISCOVERED ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE OF THE VEHICLE AFTER ENTERING THE GARAGE. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION THE CONTACT FOUND THE FRONT COIL SPRING BROKE, CAUSING A PUNCTURE IN THE TIRE. THERE WAS NO WARNING PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL DEALERSHIP, WHERE THE TIRE AND COIL SPRING WERE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE OPERATED NORMALLY AFTER THE REPLACEMENT PARTS WERE INSTALLED. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN 04V332000 CONCERNING THE FRONT COIL SPRING. HOWEVER, THIS VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL DUE TO THE YEAR OF MANUFACTURING. *AK UPDATED 2/7/2006 - *NM
NHTSA ODI #10146963
85,000 miles · Jan 5, 2006
Suspension
TOOK 2002 FORD TAURUS TO KAN ROCK TIRE DEALER TO HAVE DRIVERS' SIDE TIRE REPLACED AFTER HAVING HAD A FLAT WHILE MY SON WAS BACKING OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY. TIRE DEALER STATED THAT THE CAUSE OF THE FLAT TIRE WAS THAT THE DRIVERS SIDE COIL SPRING HAD FRACTURED AND PUNCTURED THE TIRE, THUS RUINING IT. TIRE DEALER WOULD NOT REPLACE TIRE …
Read full complaint
TOOK 2002 FORD TAURUS TO KAN ROCK TIRE DEALER TO HAVE DRIVERS' SIDE TIRE REPLACED AFTER HAVING HAD A FLAT WHILE MY SON WAS BACKING OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY. TIRE DEALER STATED THAT THE CAUSE OF THE FLAT TIRE WAS THAT THE DRIVERS SIDE COIL SPRING HAD FRACTURED AND PUNCTURED THE TIRE, THUS RUINING IT. TIRE DEALER WOULD NOT REPLACE TIRE UNTIL COIL SPRING HAD BEEN REPLACED. TOOK TO LOCAL MECHANIC TO HAVE DAMAGE ASSESSED AND REPAIRED. I CALLED FORD AND THEY TOLD ME THAT THERE WERE NOT ANY OPEN RECALLS ON THIS VEHICLE EVEN THOUGH FORD HAD RECALLED '99-'01 MODEL YEAR VEHICLES ( #04V332000) FOR THE EXACT SAME PROBLEM. I GUESS IT IS GOING TO TAKE A SERIOUS INJURY TO GET FORD TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM FOR THE LATER MODEL YEARS. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10146943
140,120 miles · Jan 4, 2006
Suspension
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION AT LOW SPEED THE LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING BROKE, SHEARING OFF THE SWAY BAR LINK. THE INSIDE OF THE FENDER WAS RUBBING THE TIRE. THEREFORE, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED. THIS OCCURRED ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS AND UNDER NORMAL DRIVING. THE MANUFACTURER AND THE DEALERSHIP WERE CONT…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION AT LOW SPEED THE LEFT FRONT COIL SPRING BROKE, SHEARING OFF THE SWAY BAR LINK. THE INSIDE OF THE FENDER WAS RUBBING THE TIRE. THEREFORE, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED. THIS OCCURRED ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS AND UNDER NORMAL DRIVING. THE MANUFACTURER AND THE DEALERSHIP WERE CONTACTED, AND STATED THERE WERE NO RECALLS ON THE VEHICLE. *AK UPDATED 02/07/06. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10146875
48,000 miles · Jan 3, 2006
Suspension
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE PULLING INTO THE DRIVEWAY THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE BLEW OUT. THE TIRE WAS REMOVED, AND IT WAS DETERMINED THE COIL SPRING BROKE, WHICH MAY HAVE CAUSED THE FAILURE. *AK UPDATED 02/24/06. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10146749
44,552 miles · Dec 29, 2005
Suspension
I WAS PULLING OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY WHEN I HEARD A LOUD POP. UPON INSPECTION, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE COIL SPRING HAD BROKEN. THE CAR HAD TO BE TOWED TO A SERVICE STATION TO BE REPAIRED. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10146369
Mileage unknown · Dec 27, 2005
Suspension
MY 17 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING HOME AFTER CHRISTMAS SHOPPING ON DECEMBER 23. GOOD ROAD, NO BUMPS, NOTHING IN THE ROAD. SHE WAS STOPPING FOR A RED LIGHT, GOING ABOUT 25 MPH WHEN THERE WAS A LOUD "BOOM". BECAUSE SHE WAS SLOWING FOR THE LIGHT, SHE WAS ABLE TO MAINTAIN CONTROL AND TO PULL INTO A MINI-MART. THE RIGHT FRONT S…
Read full complaint
MY 17 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING HOME AFTER CHRISTMAS SHOPPING ON DECEMBER 23. GOOD ROAD, NO BUMPS, NOTHING IN THE ROAD. SHE WAS STOPPING FOR A RED LIGHT, GOING ABOUT 25 MPH WHEN THERE WAS A LOUD "BOOM". BECAUSE SHE WAS SLOWING FOR THE LIGHT, SHE WAS ABLE TO MAINTAIN CONTROL AND TO PULL INTO A MINI-MART. THE RIGHT FRONT SPRING BROKE AND PUNCTURED A BRAND NEW TIRE (3 WEEKS OLD). I HAD IT TOWED TO OUR MECHANIC. IN THE MEANTIME, I CHECKED ONLINE AND I'M SEEING THAT 1999-2001 TAURUS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AND THEY ARE BEING TAKEN CARE OF WITH A RECALL. I PLACED A CALL TO FORD AND TO 2 LOCAL DEALERS AND WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL ON THE 2002 AND I WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR REPAIRING THIS DEFECTIVE PRODUCT. THIS VEHICLE IS USED BY MY 20 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WHO CAME HOME FROM COLLEGE FOR CHRISTMAS BREAK. IF THIS HAD HAPPENED ON THE THRUWAY AT 65 MPH, I HATE TO THINK WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED. THIS IS BEYOND DANGEROUS - DOES IT TAKE A FATALITY TO GET SOMEONE'S ATTENTION? *NM
NHTSA ODI #10146197
47,000 miles · Dec 22, 2005
SuspensionVisibility
2002 FORD TAURUS FRONT RIGHT SIDE SPRING BROKE. *TS ***NO ANSWER REQUIRED*** THE WINDSHIELD HAD TO BE RE-SEALED DUE TO WATER LEAKING INSIDE THE VEHICLE. THE MOTOR ASSEMBLY HAD TO BE REPLACED FOR THE HEATER. THE CONSUMER DISCOVERED THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THE COIL SPRINGS AS WELL AS THE WINDSHIELD PROBLEM THAT SHE WAS EXPER…
Read full complaint
2002 FORD TAURUS FRONT RIGHT SIDE SPRING BROKE. *TS ***NO ANSWER REQUIRED*** THE WINDSHIELD HAD TO BE RE-SEALED DUE TO WATER LEAKING INSIDE THE VEHICLE. THE MOTOR ASSEMBLY HAD TO BE REPLACED FOR THE HEATER. THE CONSUMER DISCOVERED THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THE COIL SPRINGS AS WELL AS THE WINDSHIELD PROBLEM THAT SHE WAS EXPERIENCING. THE CONSUMER FELT SHE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CHARGED FOR THE PROBLEMS THAT SHE WAS EXPERIENCING BECAUSE OF THE RECALLS. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10147569
NHTSA investigations
4PE12033 · 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).
RQ03008 · Brake Light Switch Failure
Opened Oct 23, 2003 · Closed Mar 5, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights; 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.
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.
Illustration