IllustrationTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE'S WINDSHIELD WAS LOOSENING ON THE UPPER PASSENGER SIDE. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE WINDSHIELD WAS COMING OUT OF THE MOLDING. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT NOTIFIED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 129,000.
2002 Ford Taurus
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Taurus years
Owner complaints for the 2002 Ford Taurus are substantially higher than the model-year median of 318.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Taurus 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
600–25K
16525–50K
29950–75K
31175–100K
321100–150K
73150K+
1,229 reports with mileage · 197 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.
- Suspension. Review the 962 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Visibility. Review the 98 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 76 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
75 crash reports11 fire reports40 injury reports
Visibility complaints
98 reportsFORD IS AWARE THAT THEY HAVE A FIT PROBLEM WITH THE COWL AND AIR CABIN FILTER AREAS OF THESE CARS THAT CAUSE WATER TO LEAK ONTO THE FLOOR OF THE PASSENGER SIDE. THIS CAUSES CARPETS TO GET MOLDY/SMELLY. THE LEAK SOMETIMES ALLOWS WATER TO SHORT/RUIN THE BLOWER MOTOR. I BELIEVE RECALL NUMBER 03V087000 IS RELATED TO THIS ISSUE. I HA…
Read full complaint
FORD IS AWARE THAT THEY HAVE A FIT PROBLEM WITH THE COWL AND AIR CABIN FILTER AREAS OF THESE CARS THAT CAUSE WATER TO LEAK ONTO THE FLOOR OF THE PASSENGER SIDE. THIS CAUSES CARPETS TO GET MOLDY/SMELLY. THE LEAK SOMETIMES ALLOWS WATER TO SHORT/RUIN THE BLOWER MOTOR. I BELIEVE RECALL NUMBER 03V087000 IS RELATED TO THIS ISSUE. I HAVE BROUGHT THIS PROBLEM TO THE ATTENTION OF MY LOCAL FORD DEALER AND THEY WON'T DO ANYTHING TO FIX IT UNLESS I PAY THEM $400 OR SO. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. DURING WET WEATHER CONDITIONS, WATER LEAKED INTO THE VEHICLE THROUGH THE WINDSHIELD. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE WINDSHIELD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. DURING WET WEATHER CONDITIONS, WATER LEAKED INTO THE VEHICLE THROUGH THE WINDSHIELD. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE WINDSHIELD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 171,000.
SINCE I BOUGHT MY FORD IN JULY 2003 I'VE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT MY WINDSHIELD BEING DEFECTIVE, THE WINDSHIELD ITSELF HAS LITTLE CHIPS IN IT (A MANUFACTURER DEFECT IN THE GLASS) AND I'VE ALWAYS COMPLAINED TO MY FORD DEALER ABOUT HIGHWAY NOISE. 9 YEARS LATER THE "NOISE" HAS GOTTEN SO BAD THAT I'M AFRAID THAT IF I HIT A POT HOLE HA…
Read full complaint
SINCE I BOUGHT MY FORD IN JULY 2003 I'VE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT MY WINDSHIELD BEING DEFECTIVE, THE WINDSHIELD ITSELF HAS LITTLE CHIPS IN IT (A MANUFACTURER DEFECT IN THE GLASS) AND I'VE ALWAYS COMPLAINED TO MY FORD DEALER ABOUT HIGHWAY NOISE. 9 YEARS LATER THE "NOISE" HAS GOTTEN SO BAD THAT I'M AFRAID THAT IF I HIT A POT HOLE HARD ENOUGH THAT MY WINDSHIELD WILL FALL OUT! ALSO THE BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER OF MY WINDSHIELD HAS GOTTEN SO BAD THAT I HAD TO STUFF TISSUES TO REDUCE THE RATTLING OF MY WINDSHIELD. AFTER DOING EXTENSIVE RESEARCH ON RECALLS FOR MY CAR I'VE FOUND ONE RECALL FOR THE EXACT PROBLEM I'VE BEEN HAVING ALL THESE YEARS. PLEASE TELL ME THAT I CAN STILL HAVE MY WINDSHIELD REPLACED. IT'S COMING TO THE POINT THAT I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE MY CAR. FORD RECALL NUMBER 03C03, DATED MARCH 03, 2003 FROM NHTSA. THESE RECALL NOTICES WERE SENT OUT IN MARCH ON 2003, I BOUGHT MY CAR FROM FORD IN JULY 2003! . THE WEBSITE THAT I HAD FOUND THIS INFORMATION: HTTP://WWW-ODI.NHTSA.DOT.GOV/ACMS/CS/DOCUMENTLIST.XHTML?DOCID=03V087&DOCTYPE=RCL *JS
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT A CLICKING SOUND WAS HEARD FROM THE AIR CONDITIONER AND THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE FLOOR MAT WAS WET. THE CONTACT WAS DID NOT CONFIRM IF THE TWO FAILURES WERE RELATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC BUT NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT A CLICKING SOUND WAS HEARD FROM THE AIR CONDITIONER AND THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE FLOOR MAT WAS WET. THE CONTACT WAS DID NOT CONFIRM IF THE TWO FAILURES WERE RELATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE MECHANIC BUT NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 111,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 112,000.
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER PURCHASING 4 NEW TIRES HE NOTICED THAT WHILE DRIVING THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE BECAME FLAT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A TIRE DEALER WHO ADVISED HIM THAT THE FRONT COIL SPRINGS HAD PUNCTURED THE TIRE CAUSING THE FLAT. THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE COIL SPRING WAS REPAIRED…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER PURCHASING 4 NEW TIRES HE NOTICED THAT WHILE DRIVING THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE BECAME FLAT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A TIRE DEALER WHO ADVISED HIM THAT THE FRONT COIL SPRINGS HAD PUNCTURED THE TIRE CAUSING THE FLAT. THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE COIL SPRING WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND ADVISED HIM THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS ON HIS VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 76,000. UPDATED 06/16/11 *BF THE CONSUMER STATED HE WAS IN THE GARAGE. WHEN HE SHIFTED THE VEHICLE IN REVERSE, THE LEFT FRONT TIRE EXPLODED. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TOOK GOODYEAR WHERE THEY INFROMED HIM THE BOTH COIL SPRINGS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. ALSO, THE DRIVERS SIDE WINDOW WOULD NOT GO UP OR DOWN AND ANTI-LOCK BRAKES WERE NOT WORKING. UPDATED 11/16/11
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT BLOWER MOTOR HAD BECOME INOPERABLE. THE DEALER AS WELL AS AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC MADE TWO ATTEMPTS TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE TO NO AVAIL. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND STATED THAT THERE WERE NO ISSUES WITH THE BLOWER AND DID NOT OFFER ANY ADDITIONAL…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT BLOWER MOTOR HAD BECOME INOPERABLE. THE DEALER AS WELL AS AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC MADE TWO ATTEMPTS TO DUPLICATE THE FAILURE TO NO AVAIL. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND STATED THAT THERE WERE NO ISSUES WITH THE BLOWER AND DID NOT OFFER ANY ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 80,000 AND THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000.
I OWN A 2002 FORD TAURUS SES, IT HAS 69,400 MILES. I HAVE OWNED THE CAR SINCE NEW, IT IS GARAGED 90% OF THE TIME. A COUPLE YEARS AGO I NOTICED THAT THE PASSENGER CARPET WAS SOAK AND WET, AND I NEVER THOUGHT ANYTHING OF IT, I ASSUMED THAT MAYBE WHEN DRIVING IN THE RAIN, I HAD CRACKEDTHE WINDOW OPEN AND RAIN GOT INSIDE ON PASSEN…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2002 FORD TAURUS SES, IT HAS 69,400 MILES. I HAVE OWNED THE CAR SINCE NEW, IT IS GARAGED 90% OF THE TIME. A COUPLE YEARS AGO I NOTICED THAT THE PASSENGER CARPET WAS SOAK AND WET, AND I NEVER THOUGHT ANYTHING OF IT, I ASSUMED THAT MAYBE WHEN DRIVING IN THE RAIN, I HAD CRACKEDTHE WINDOW OPEN AND RAIN GOT INSIDE ON PASSENGER CARPET. IN MARCH OF 2010, I HAD A HOUSE SITTER, WHILE I WENT ON VACATION. I MOVED MY CAR OUTSIDE, SO THAT SHE COULD USE MY GARAGE. THE CAR SAT OUTSIDE FOR 3 WEEKS, THE NORTHEAST HAD TORRENTIAL RAINS EVERYDAY, AND AREA FLOODING ON STREETS. I HAD COME HOME FROM VACATION, DROVE MY CAR AND HEARD A NOISE CLANKING UNDER DASHBOARD. I TOOK CAR TO MECHANIC, HE SAID IT WAS MY HEATER. I HAD MY HUSBAND REMOVE AND REPLACE WITH A NEW ONE. WHEN MY HUSBAND TOOK THE OLD HEATER OUT, IT WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED WITH WATER STILL ON IT. I THOUGHT MAYBE HOUSESITTER HAD TAKEN MY CAR OUT AND SHE LEFT A WINDOW OPEN.NOW IT IS OCTOBER, I AM ATTENDING DRIVING INSTRUCTOR SCHOOL, AND MY TEACHER GAVE ME WEBSITE FOR RECALLS. I DECIDED TO CHECK TO SEE IF ANY RECALLS, AND FIND THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS ON MY YEAR MAKE AND MODEL, FOR HEATERS SHORTENING OUT ,I NOW HAVE NO A/C AND DON'T KNOW WHY ALONG WITH WET CARPETS ON PASSENGER SIDE L. I PRINTED OUT RECALL 03V-087000 AND TOOK TO FORD TODAY, THEY STATE THAT MY VIN HAS NO CAMPAIGN MESSAGE FOR A RECALL. RECALL#03V-087000 IS FOR CERTAIN 2002-2003 TAURUS AND SABLES. WHAT IS BEING DONE WITH THE REST OF VIN # THAT ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM AND ARE NOT INCLUDED. I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE MY CAR IN RAIN AND GET OTHER COMPONENTS SHORT OUT, OR POSSIBLE FIRE, AND KEEP GETTING THE CARPET WET, BECAUSE IT WILL CAUSE MOLD TO GROW UNDERNEATH. ALL CARS IN THIS YEAR MAKE MODEL SHOULD BE RECALLED IF ALL ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEMS. I DID NOT SAVE THE OLD HEATER, BECAUSE AT THE TIME I THOUGHT MAYBE RAIN HAD GOT IN THRU THE WINDOW. PLEASE HELP, I LOVE MY CAR AND IT IS OTHERWISE A GOOD RUNNING CAR. *TR
2002 FORD TAURUS COWL LEAK WATER INTO PASS/SIDE FLOOR & RUG BURNING (SHORTING)OUT AC MOTOR FORD ISSUED TSB-03-15-6 RECALL EXISTED 03V087000 BOUGHT 2ND HAND FROM FORD DEALERI HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF PROBLEM UNTIL THE RAINS CAME IN WINTER OF 2008- 2009 WHEN BLOWER BURNED OUT.I WENT TO FORD DEALER & HE NEVER TOLD ME FORD KNEW …
Read full complaint
2002 FORD TAURUS COWL LEAK WATER INTO PASS/SIDE FLOOR & RUG BURNING (SHORTING)OUT AC MOTOR FORD ISSUED TSB-03-15-6 RECALL EXISTED 03V087000 BOUGHT 2ND HAND FROM FORD DEALERI HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF PROBLEM UNTIL THE RAINS CAME IN WINTER OF 2008- 2009 WHEN BLOWER BURNED OUT.I WENT TO FORD DEALER & HE NEVER TOLD ME FORD KNEW THEY HAD A PROBLEM SO I HAD TO PAY FOR AC BLOWER MOTOR. I WOULD LIKE TO REF.COMPLAINT # 10184014 (YOUR NUMBER) IF FORD KNOWS THIS IS CAUSING CUST/$ WHY SHOULD THEY NOT FIX THE PRODUCT? *TR
OCCASIONALLY, AFTER HEAVY RAIN, THE PASSENGER SIDE FLOOR OF MY TAURUS WOULD BE SOAKED. THIS WENT ON FOR A FEW YEARS. DURING THE WINTER OF 2007, THE BLOWER MOTOR STOPPED FUNCTIONING DUE TO THE LEAK. WHEN THE BLOWER MOTOR STOPPED WORKING I WAS ON THE HIGHWAY AND COULD NOT DEFROST MY WINDOWS. THIS WAS ESPECIALLY DANGEROUS BECAUSE O…
Read full complaint
OCCASIONALLY, AFTER HEAVY RAIN, THE PASSENGER SIDE FLOOR OF MY TAURUS WOULD BE SOAKED. THIS WENT ON FOR A FEW YEARS. DURING THE WINTER OF 2007, THE BLOWER MOTOR STOPPED FUNCTIONING DUE TO THE LEAK. WHEN THE BLOWER MOTOR STOPPED WORKING I WAS ON THE HIGHWAY AND COULD NOT DEFROST MY WINDOWS. THIS WAS ESPECIALLY DANGEROUS BECAUSE OF THE SNOWY AND ICY CONDITIONS. NOT ONLY WAS I UNABLE TO DEFROST THE INSIDE OF MY WINDSHIELD, BUT I ALSO COULD NOT PREVENT ICE FROM FORMING ON THE OUTSIDE OF MY WINDSHIELD. IT WAS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS SITUATION AND I HAD TO EXIT THE HIGHWAY. THE WINDOW COWL UNDER THE WINDSHIELD AND VARIOUS PARTS OF THE BLOWER MOTOR WERE REPLACED. THIS DID STOP THE LEAK. MY TAURUS IS A 2002, BUT I HAVE SEEN THIS PROBLEM IN THE 2000 TO 2005 MODELS. IT IS UNACCEPTABLE THAT NHTSA HAS NOT INVESTIGATED THIS AND ISSUED A RECALL. IT IS A SERIOUS SAFETY CONCERN, AND THE ISSUE HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR ALMOST A DECADE. PLEASE INVESTIGATE. *TR
Official recalls
304V106000 · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
Mar 2, 2004
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.
03V087000 · Visibility:windshield
Mar 10, 2003
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.
02V266000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages
Oct 2, 2002
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
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.