NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
10 reportsClear category filter45,000 miles · Apr 23, 2004
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
WHEN IT RAINS AND I AM STEPPING ON THE BRAKES WHILE DRIVING MY WIFE'S 2000 LINCOLN TOWN CAR, THE CAR VEERS TO THE RIGHT. FORD HAS NOT PUBLISHED ANY TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETINS OR RECALLED THE BRAKES, HOWEVER, THE FORD HOTLINE ADVISES IS MECHANICS TO PUT ON FORD PREMIUM BRAKES. I HAD ON MOTORCRAFT BRAKES WHICH ARE ALSO SOLD BY FO…
Read full complaint
WHEN IT RAINS AND I AM STEPPING ON THE BRAKES WHILE DRIVING MY WIFE'S 2000 LINCOLN TOWN CAR, THE CAR VEERS TO THE RIGHT. FORD HAS NOT PUBLISHED ANY TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETINS OR RECALLED THE BRAKES, HOWEVER, THE FORD HOTLINE ADVISES IS MECHANICS TO PUT ON FORD PREMIUM BRAKES. I HAD ON MOTORCRAFT BRAKES WHICH ARE ALSO SOLD BY FORD. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10067736
30,000 miles · Jun 12, 2003
Air BagsService Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury
WHILE DRIVING AT 45 MPH VEHCILE WAS IN AN HEAD ON COLLISION DUE TO BRAKE FAILURE. UPON IMPACT, NONE OF THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10022956
30,000 miles · Jun 12, 2003
Air BagsService Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury
WHILE DRIVING AT 45 MPH VEHICLE EXPERIENCED BRAKE FAILURE, WHICH RESULTED IN AN ACCIDENT, AND NONE OF THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10022948
Mileage unknown · Mar 20, 2003
Air BagsService Brakes, HydraulicSuspensionCrash
NAR 03-24-2003 MR. WHEN THE CONSUMER HIT THE BRAKES, THE VEHICLE VEERED TO THE LEFT AND THE PEDAL WOULD GO DOWN LOW. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AND BECAUSE THE PROBLEM WAS NEVER FIX, THE CONSUMER WAS INVOLVED IN A COLLISION DUE TO THE BRAKES FAILING WHEN THE CONSUMER NEEDED TO COME…
Read full complaint
NAR 03-24-2003 MR. WHEN THE CONSUMER HIT THE BRAKES, THE VEHICLE VEERED TO THE LEFT AND THE PEDAL WOULD GO DOWN LOW. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AND BECAUSE THE PROBLEM WAS NEVER FIX, THE CONSUMER WAS INVOLVED IN A COLLISION DUE TO THE BRAKES FAILING WHEN THE CONSUMER NEEDED TO COME TO A STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER AFTER THE REPAIR WERE MADE, BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO FIND A PROBLEM, HOWEVER ON 7/10/02 THE CONSUMER WIFE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE AND REAR ENDED A TRUCK AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10012352
Mileage unknown · Aug 30, 2001
Air BagsService Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury
BRAKE FAILURE. FIRST TIME I WAS ABLE TO STOP. MY HUSBAND NEXT DROVE THE CAR AND COULD NOT FIND ANY FAULT WITH BRAKES. THE CAR WAS DRIVEN TO NEW ORLEANS WITH NO OTHER PROBLEMS EXCEPT IT HAD A TENDENCY TO HYDROPLANE DURING A HEAVY RAIN. SEVERAL DAYS LATER HE WAS PREPARING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN AT AN INTERSECTION. THE BRAKES FA…
Read full complaint
BRAKE FAILURE. FIRST TIME I WAS ABLE TO STOP. MY HUSBAND NEXT DROVE THE CAR AND COULD NOT FIND ANY FAULT WITH BRAKES. THE CAR WAS DRIVEN TO NEW ORLEANS WITH NO OTHER PROBLEMS EXCEPT IT HAD A TENDENCY TO HYDROPLANE DURING A HEAVY RAIN. SEVERAL DAYS LATER HE WAS PREPARING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN AT AN INTERSECTION. THE BRAKES FAILED TO HOLD AND HE BUMPED THE CAR AHEAD WHICH HIT ANOTHER WHICH HIT ANOTHER. NO INJURIES BUT DAMAGE TO TWO OF THE VEHICLES. CAR WAS RETURNED TO SUPERIOR LINCOLN TO HAVE THE BRAKES CHECKED AND TO HAVE REAR BUMPER REPAIRED. THEY HAD TO REPLACE THE REAR PLASTIC BUMPER AND STATED THAT THEY COULD NOT FIND ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKES. WE PICKED UP THE CAR ON 8/14/01 AND AFTER TESTING THE BRAKES WHILE DRIVING HOME EVERYTHING SEEMED O.K. THAT NIGHT WHILE DRIVING FROM A 4TH FLOOR PARKING GARAGE THE BRAKES FAILED COMPLETLY AND WE HEADON CRASHED INTO A CONCRETE BLOCK WALL. THERE WERE 4 PEOPLE IN THE CAR (ALL HAD THEIR SEAT BELTS FASTENED) AND ALL SUSTAINED BRUISES AND CONTUSIONS. FORTUNATLY THERE WERE NO BROKEN BONES BUT WE ARE STILL NURSING VARIOUS ACHES AND PAINS. THE 2 PEOPLE IN THE REAR SEAT SUFFERED FROM WIPLASH AND SEAT BELT BRUISES AND SORE CHESTS. ONE THING THAT WORKED WAS THE FRONT AIR BAGS THAT SAVED MY WIFE AND I FROM ANY FURTHER INJURY.*AK
NHTSA ODI #751402
Mileage unknown · Aug 3, 2001
Engine And Engine CoolingService Brakes, HydraulicVisibility
BRAKE PEDAL WILL FADE OUT AND NOT HOLD, CONSUMER HAS TO PUMP BRAKE TO GET VEHICLE TO STOP, TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALER AND THE MASTER CYLINDER WAS REPLACED HOWEVER, THE SAME DAY PROBLEM REOCCURRED, WHILE ON THE HIGHWAY CONSUMER STEPPED ON BRAKES AND PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR, CONSUMER HAD TO PUMP BRAKES AGAIN.*AK CONSUMER STATES BRAKE…
Read full complaint
BRAKE PEDAL WILL FADE OUT AND NOT HOLD, CONSUMER HAS TO PUMP BRAKE TO GET VEHICLE TO STOP, TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALER AND THE MASTER CYLINDER WAS REPLACED HOWEVER, THE SAME DAY PROBLEM REOCCURRED, WHILE ON THE HIGHWAY CONSUMER STEPPED ON BRAKES AND PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR, CONSUMER HAD TO PUMP BRAKES AGAIN.*AK CONSUMER STATES BRAKES NEEDS TO BE PUMPED WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, CONSUMER WAS INFORMED BY A FORD SPECIALIST THAT THE FADE WAS NORMAL FOR THIS VEHICLE,ALSO THE MASS AIRFLOW SENSOR WAS REPLACED, THE WINDSHIELD WIPERS/WASHERS WERE REPLACED,THE WINDSHIELD WAS ALSO REPLACED, AND THE ENGINE HEAD GASKETS WERE REPLACED.*JB
NHTSA ODI #893352
Mileage unknown · May 10, 2001
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control
CONSUMER WAS GOING 75MPH SET ON CRUISE CONTROL, WHEN APPROACHING A CURVE CONUSMER APPLIED BRAKES TO SLOW DOWN,AND AS BRAKE PEDAL WAS PRESSED IT SPEEDED UP VEHICLE. CONSUMER WAS COACHED FROM LIMOUSINE SERVICE ON A 2- WAY RADIO HOW TO CONTROL VEHICLE. CONSUMER TURNED CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH OFF, AND VEHICLE RETURNED TO NORMAL…
Read full complaint
CONSUMER WAS GOING 75MPH SET ON CRUISE CONTROL, WHEN APPROACHING A CURVE CONUSMER APPLIED BRAKES TO SLOW DOWN,AND AS BRAKE PEDAL WAS PRESSED IT SPEEDED UP VEHICLE. CONSUMER WAS COACHED FROM LIMOUSINE SERVICE ON A 2- WAY RADIO HOW TO CONTROL VEHICLE. CONSUMER TURNED CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH OFF, AND VEHICLE RETURNED TO NORMAL DRIVE. PRESSING BRAKES, IT SENT WRONG SIGNAL AND ENGAGED CRUISE CONTROL.*AK
NHTSA ODI #887943
Mileage unknown · Apr 16, 2001
Service Brakes, HydraulicSuspension
INTERMITTENTLY WHILE DRIVING ON SLIGHT INCLINE OR BRAKING ON ANY ROAD CONDITION VEHICLE WILL PULL HARD TO LEFT OR RIGHT. CAUSE IS UNKNOWN. PLEASE PROVIDE FURTHER INFORMATION.*AK
NHTSA ODI #885952
Mileage unknown · Feb 5, 2001
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
AFTER COMING TO A STOP, FOOT ON BRAKE, VEHICLE WILL SURGE FORWARD, BRAKES WILL NOT STOP IT. HAPPENED 4 TIMES SO FAR, LAST TIME CONSUMER HIT ANOTHER VEHICLE. DAMAGE TO VEHICLE NOT KNOWN. *AK
NHTSA ODI #879724
Mileage unknown · Jan 5, 2001
Fuel System, GasolineSeatsService Brakes, Hydraulic
BRAKE PEDAL FEELS SPONGY AND MAKES NOISE WHEN APPLIED, BRAKES GRAB WHEN APPLIED, AND VEHICLE PULLS TO THE RIGHT DUE TO FAULTY BRAKES. LEFT FRONT HEADREST WILL NOT GO UP OR DOWN, RIGHT FROTN HEADREST TILTS WHEN IT'S MOVED UP. LEFT OUTER MIRROR GLASS IS LOOSE, THE MIRROR RETAINING CLIP WAS BROKEN, DEALER REPLACED GLASS. VEHICLE…
Read full complaint
BRAKE PEDAL FEELS SPONGY AND MAKES NOISE WHEN APPLIED, BRAKES GRAB WHEN APPLIED, AND VEHICLE PULLS TO THE RIGHT DUE TO FAULTY BRAKES. LEFT FRONT HEADREST WILL NOT GO UP OR DOWN, RIGHT FROTN HEADREST TILTS WHEN IT'S MOVED UP. LEFT OUTER MIRROR GLASS IS LOOSE, THE MIRROR RETAINING CLIP WAS BROKEN, DEALER REPLACED GLASS. VEHICLE AVERAGES LESS THAN 10 MILES PER GALLON IN THE CITY AND 15 MILES PER GALLON FOR HIGHWAY, CONSUMER STATES THAT THE ENGINE IDLES TOO FAST, DEALER STATED THAT TIMING COULD NOT BE ADJUSTED LOCALLY BECAUSE THE VEHICLE HAD NO DISTRIBUTOR CAP ON THIS MODEL. *SLC
NHTSA ODI #877532
Official recalls
8Aug 8, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER CARS, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND LIGHT AND MEDIUM DUTY PICKUP TRUCKS. A SWITCH LOCATED IN THE PLASTIC COVER OF THE WIPER MOTOR GEAR CASE COULD MALFUNCTION AND OVERHEAT, POTENTIALLY RESULTING IN LOSS OF INTERMITTENT WIPER FUNCTION, LOSS OF WIPER PARK FUNCTION, COMPLETE LOSS OF WIPER FUNCTION, OR IGNITION OF THE PLASTIC COVER MATERIAL. SWITCH MALFUNCTION IS MOST LIKELY TO OCCUR WHEN THE INTERMITTENT SETTING OF THE WIPERS IS BEING USED, OR WHEN SNOW OR ICE OBSTRUCTS THE BLADES FROM RETURNING TO THE "PARKED" POSITION AT THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDSHIELD. THESE VEHICLES WERE BUILT AT THE FOLLOWING ASSEMBLY PLANTS: ATLANTA PLANT FROM 2/11/00 THROUGH 7/31/00; CHICAGO PLANT FROM 2/14/00 THROUGH 8/4/00; KANSAS CITY PLANT FROM 2/26/00 TO 9/4/00; KENTUCKY TRUCK PLANT FROM 2/18/00 TO 8/31/00; MICHIGAN TRUCK PLANT FROM 2/23/00 THROUGH 8/3/00; NORFOLK PLANT FROM 2/21/00 THROUGH 7/27/00; WAYNE STAMPING AND ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM 2/25/00 THROUGH 8/15/00; AND WIXOM PLANT FROM 2/15/00 THROUGH 8/8/00.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: LOSS OF VISIBILITY WHILE DRIVING INCREASES THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE DATE CODE ON THE WIPER MOTOR. MOTORS BUILT WITH THE SUSPECT TIME FRAME WILL HAVE THE WIPER MOTOR GEAR CASE COVER REPLACED. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN AUGUST 20, 2001. 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 AT 1-866-436-7332.
Dec 12, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN LIMOUSINES STRETCHED OVER 60 INCHES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 109, "NEW PNEUMATIC TIRES," AND NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE VEHICLE WEIGHT COULD EXCEED THE MAXIMUM LOAD RATING FOR THE TIRE, INCREASING THE RISK OF PREMATURE TIRE WEAR OR BLOWOUT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE ALL 5 TIRES (INCLUDING THE SPARE TIRE) WITH MICHELIN TIRES (225/70R16 107T REINFORCED WHITE SIDEWALL) WITH A SUFFICIENTLY HIGHER LOAD RATING. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN JANUARY 10, 2001. 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 AT 1-800-248-0186.
Nov 13, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES WITH MEDIUM GRAPHITE SEAT BELTS FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES." AN INCORRECT FRONT CENTER SEAT BELT AND RETRACTOR ASSEMBLY MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A VEHICLE CRASH, THE OCCUPANT MAY NOT BE PROPERLY RESTRAINED.
Remedy: ALL SUSPECT VEHICLES HAVE HAD THE SEAT BELTS INSPECTED OR REPLACED BY FORD.
Nov 9, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES WITH MIDNIGHT BLACK OR MEDIUM PARCHMENT SEAT BELTS MANUFACTURED ON JULY 31, 2000, FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES." AN INCORRECT DRIVER'S SIDE REAR SEAT BELT AND RETRACTOR ASSEMBLY MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A VEHICLE CRASH, THE OCCUPANT MAY NOT BE PROPERLY RESTRAINED.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE SEAT BELTS AND REPLACE THE AFFECTED SEAT BELT AND RETRACTOR ASSEMBLIES.
Aug 18, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES, LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND MINI VANS EQUIPPED WITH TRW SEAT BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLIES. THE BUCKLE BASE OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES WERE NOT PROPERLY HEAT TREATED AND THEREFORE DO NOT PASS THE LOAD BEARING REQUIREMENT OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A VEHICLE CRASH, THE OCCUPANT MAY NOT BE PROPERLY RESTRAINED.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE DATE CODE ON CERTAIN SEAT BELT BUCKLES OF YOUR VEHICLE AND REPLACE ALL SEAT BELT BUCKLES THAT FALL WITHIN THE SUSPECT DATE CODE RANGE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN OCTOBER 26, 2000. 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 AT 1-800-392-3673.
Jul 18, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THESE VEHICLES HAVE JACKING INSTRUCTIONS WHICH, IF FOLLOWED, COULD CAUSE THE VEHICLE OPERATOR TO PLACE THE JACK ON A FRAME WELD WHEN ATTEMPTING TO RAISE A REAR WHEEL. IF THE VEHICLE IS JACKED UP WITH THE JACK PLACED ON THE FRAME WELD AND IF THE VEHICLE IS FREE TO ROLL (WHEELS NOT BLOCKED OR CHOCKED), THE JACK COULD YIELD AND THE VEHICLE MAY DROP SUDDENLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS AND ANY PORTION OF THE OPERATOR'S BODY IS UNDER THE VEHICLE, THE POTENTIAL FOR PERSONAL INJURY EXISTS.
Remedy: OWNERS WILL BE PROVIDED WITH A REVISED JACK INSTRUCTION AND STOWAGE CARD AND JACK WARNING LABEL, AS WELL AS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE OWNER GUIDE.
Jun 12, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES USING AFTERMARKET DRIVER'S SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE SOLD BY FORD PARTS DEPARTMENTS FROM JANUARY 1, THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000. THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES." THE EQUIPMENT INVOLVED IS SERVICE STOCK SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES, MODEL NOS. H 9977, H 9979, T 9063, AND T 9217, BUILT BY TRW VEHICLE SAFETY SYSTEMS, INC. (TRW) MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 1998 THROUGH MAY 21, 2000. SOME OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AS SERVICE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT ON THE VEHICLES INVOLVED IN THE RECALL.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION, THESE SEAT BELTS MAY NOT RESTRAIN AN OCCUPANT INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THESE VEHICLES AND REPLACE THE SERVICE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE INSTALLED IN THESE VEHICLES FROM JANUARY 1 THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000.
Jun 12, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES USING AFTERMARKET FRONT PASSENGER SIDE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE SOLD BY FORD PARTS DEPARTMENTS FROM JANUARY 1, THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000. THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES." THE EQUIPMENT INVOLVED IS SERVICE STOCK SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES, MODEL NOS. H 9977, H 9979, T 9063, AND T 9217, BUILT BY TRW VEHICLE SAFETY SYSTEMS, INC. (TRW) MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 1998 THROUGH MAY 21, 2000. SOME OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AS SERVICE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT ON THE VEHICLES INVOLVED IN THE RECALL.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION, THESE SEAT BELTS MAY NOT RESTRAIN AN OCCUPANT INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THESE VEHICLES AND REPLACE THE SERVICE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES THAT WERE INSTALLED IN THESE VEHICLES FROM JANUARY 1 THROUGH JUNE 13, 2000.
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
4DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
PE03011 · Inadvertent Side Air Bag Deployment
Opened Mar 14, 2003 · Closed Aug 22, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:side/window
ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 173 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING INADVERTENT OR NON-CRASH DEPLOYMENT OF SIDE AIR BAGS ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 1999-2003 LINCOLN TOWN CARS.MOST OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THAT ONE OF THE SIDE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED WHILE DRIVING WITHOUT ANY IMPACT.ANALYSIS SHOWED THAT MY 2001 THROUGH EARLY MY 2003 TOWN CARS HAVE MUCH HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM RATES (138 COMPLAINTS AND 120 WARRANTY CLAIMS) THAN THE REMAINING VEHICLES (35 COMPLAINTS AND 32 WARRANTY CLAIMS).FORD CHANGED ITS SUPPLIER OF THE SIDE CRASH SENSORS FOR THE MY 2001 TOWN CARS.FORD STATES THAT THE ALGORITHM IN THE MY 2001 TOWN CARS IS DIFFERENT FROM THE PREVIOUS MODEL YEAR'S DESIGN, AND THAT IT IS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE IMPROVED OCCUPANT PROTECTION IN MODERATE SPEED SIDE POLE IMPACTS.IN DECEMBER 2002 (I.E., EARLY MY 2003 VEHICLE PRODUCTION), THE CRASH SENSORS WERE MOVED FROM THE FLOOR OF VEHICLE TO NEAR THE BASE OF B-PILLARS IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE INCIDENTS OF INADVERTENT SIDE AIR BAG DEPLOYMENTS.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA03-014) FOR MY 2001-2003 TOWN CARS BUILT BEFORE DECEMBER 2002.
DP02007 · FUEL-FED Fires
Opened Aug 22, 2002 · Closed Dec 4, 2002
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
THE FARS DATA SHOWS THAT THE RISK OF FIRE FROM IMPACT IN ALL DIRECTIONS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS THE SAME AS ALL OTHER SEDANS.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE NOT OVER REPRESENTED WITH RESPECT TO THE RISK OF FIRE IN REAL-WORLD HIGH-ENERGY CRASHES.A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RELATED TO POST CRASH FIRES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS SET OUT IN THE CLOSING REPORT FOR SQ 01-014 AND THAT REPORT IS IN THE DOCKET FOR THIS PETITION.AFTER REVIEWING THE PETITION AND ITS SUPPORTING MATERIALS, AS WELL AS INFORMATION FURNISHED BY FORD AND GM, AND INFORMATION WITHIN THE AGENCY'S POSSESSION FROM PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS AND OTHER RELATED ACTIONS,NHTSA HAS CONCLUDED THAT FUTHER INVESTIGATION CONCERNING POST-CRASH FIRES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS NOT LIKELY TO LEAD TO A DECISION THAT THE VEHICLES CONTAIN A SAFETY DEFECT.
SQ01014 · Post Rear End Collision Fires
Opened Nov 27, 2001 · Closed Oct 3, 2002
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage
There is no summary currently available
Illustration