Illustration2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR HAD BRAKE FAILURE. CONSUMER STATES THAT THE BRAKES FAILED CAUSING A REAR-END COLLISION. *NJ THE STATE POLICE TOLD THE CONSUMER THE ABS FAILED. *JB
2004 Lincoln Town Car
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2004 Lincoln Town Car do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 86.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Town Car 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
200–25K
925–50K
850–75K
1375–100K
7100–150K
9150K+
66 reports with mileage · 17 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.
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 19 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 14 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 11 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
18 crash reports3 fire reports2 injury reports
What owners actually said
83 reportsCLAMP FAILURE FOR CONNECTING FUEL HOSES TO INLINE FUEL FILTER. CLAMPS ARE MADE OF PLASTIC AND DETERIORATE WITH TIME AND MILEAGE. RESULT IS PRESSURED FUEL LINE SEPARATING FROM FUEL FILTER AND SPRAYING GASOLINE OVER UNDERSIDE OF CAR, INCLUDING CATALYTIC CONVERTER. VEHICLE WAS 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR FUEL LINES WERE REPLACED, BUT RE…
Read full complaint
CLAMP FAILURE FOR CONNECTING FUEL HOSES TO INLINE FUEL FILTER. CLAMPS ARE MADE OF PLASTIC AND DETERIORATE WITH TIME AND MILEAGE. RESULT IS PRESSURED FUEL LINE SEPARATING FROM FUEL FILTER AND SPRAYING GASOLINE OVER UNDERSIDE OF CAR, INCLUDING CATALYTIC CONVERTER. VEHICLE WAS 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR FUEL LINES WERE REPLACED, BUT REPLACEMENTS ALSO HAVE PLASTIC CLAMPS TO SECURE HOSES TO FILTER. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING OR PARKED, THE VEHICLE WHINES, THE POWER DRAINS, AND THE BATTERY FAILS. THE CONTACT HAS TO CHARGE THE BATTERY EVERY TWO OR THREE DAYS. THE FAILURE OCCURRED ON THREE PREVIOUS OCCASIONS. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO FIND ANY FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 26,749 AND CUR…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING OR PARKED, THE VEHICLE WHINES, THE POWER DRAINS, AND THE BATTERY FAILS. THE CONTACT HAS TO CHARGE THE BATTERY EVERY TWO OR THREE DAYS. THE FAILURE OCCURRED ON THREE PREVIOUS OCCASIONS. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO FIND ANY FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 26,749 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 32,794. UPDATED 4/8/08 *CN UPDATED 04/08/08 *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING 72 MPH, THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO A CONCRETE WALL, AND THEN BOUNCED TO ANOTHER CONCRETE WALL. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. BEFORE THE CRASH, NEW BACKUP SENSORS WERE PLACED IN THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE PURCHASE DATE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CU…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING 72 MPH, THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO A CONCRETE WALL, AND THEN BOUNCED TO ANOTHER CONCRETE WALL. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. BEFORE THE CRASH, NEW BACKUP SENSORS WERE PLACED IN THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE PURCHASE DATE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 26,000.
FIRE STARTED IN THE FRONT OF THE CAR WITHOUT ANY KNOWN REASONS. VEHICLE WAS SERVICED REGULARLY AND NO PROBLEMS WERE NOTED DURING THE SERVICE TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE FIRE. A THOROUGH FULL SERVICE WAS DONE IN MAY 200Y AS WELL. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO 90 MPH ON ITS OWN. THE CONTACT SLAMMED ON THE BRAKES AND THE CRUISE CONTROL DISENGAGED. THE VEHICLE DECELERATED TO ITS REGULAR SPEED. SHE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THEY COULD…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR. WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO 90 MPH ON ITS OWN. THE CONTACT SLAMMED ON THE BRAKES AND THE CRUISE CONTROL DISENGAGED. THE VEHICLE DECELERATED TO ITS REGULAR SPEED. SHE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THEY COULD NOT REPAIR THE VEHICLE ON THEIR OWN. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT FORD MOTORS WOULD SEND HER A RECALL LETTER, HOWEVER, IT HAS NOT YET BEEN RECEIVED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 32,000. UPDATED 02-04-08. *KB THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED A RECALL HAD BEEN ISSUED, HOWEVER THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. UPDATED
2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR'S BRAKES FAILED. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP WHICH RESULTED IN AN ACCIDENT. *KB NOT ONLY DID THE VEHICLE NOT STOP BUT IT ALSO ACCELERATED WHILE THE CONSUMER'S FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE. THE CONSUMER'S VEHICLE HIT THE VEHICLE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF HERS PUSHING THAT VEHICLE OFF THE ROAD. THE CONSUMER CONTINUED …
Read full complaint
2004 LINCOLN TOWN CAR'S BRAKES FAILED. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP WHICH RESULTED IN AN ACCIDENT. *KB NOT ONLY DID THE VEHICLE NOT STOP BUT IT ALSO ACCELERATED WHILE THE CONSUMER'S FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE. THE CONSUMER'S VEHICLE HIT THE VEHICLE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF HERS PUSHING THAT VEHICLE OFF THE ROAD. THE CONSUMER CONTINUED TRYING TO GET HE VEHICLE TO STOP. SHE PUT THE GEAR SHIFT IN PARK AND TURNED OFF THE IGNITION BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP. THE CONSUMER ATTEMPTED TO MANEUVER THE VEHICLE AWAY FROM OTHER VEHICLES BUT EVENTUALLY HAD NO OTHER CHOICE BUT TO RUN INTO A PARKED VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE ROLLED OVER THREE TIMES BEFORE COMING TO REST UPRIGHT ON ALL FOUR WHEELS. THE VEHICLE WAS STILL ACCELERATING AND HIT THE WALL OF A BUILDING THEN STOPPED. *NM
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE APPLYING BRAKE PRESSURE AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, DUE TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS INTERMITTENTLY PRESSED AS WELL WHICH CAUSES THE VEHICLE TO LURCH FORWARD. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY A DEALER WHO NOTED THIS WAS A MANUFACTURING DESIGN CHANGE OF THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE APPLYING BRAKE PRESSURE AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, DUE TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS INTERMITTENTLY PRESSED AS WELL WHICH CAUSES THE VEHICLE TO LURCH FORWARD. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY A DEALER WHO NOTED THIS WAS A MANUFACTURING DESIGN CHANGE OF THE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS ALERTED. UPDATED 06/27/06. *JB
DEFECTIVE CHROMED WHEELS ON THE TOWN CAR WHICH CAUSES EXCESSIVE PRESSURE LOSS. THE CHROME IS FLAKING AT THE BEAD AREA AND IS EXAGGERATED BY LONG DISTANCE DRIVING. HAD TO HAVE TIRES DISMOUNTED AND RE-SEALED; LEFT FRONT TWICE (ONCE BY DEALER) AND RIGHT FRONT AT SAM'S CLUB. THIS STARTED 2 MONTHS AFTER PURCHASE. NEW MAY 2004 AND I…
Read full complaint
DEFECTIVE CHROMED WHEELS ON THE TOWN CAR WHICH CAUSES EXCESSIVE PRESSURE LOSS. THE CHROME IS FLAKING AT THE BEAD AREA AND IS EXAGGERATED BY LONG DISTANCE DRIVING. HAD TO HAVE TIRES DISMOUNTED AND RE-SEALED; LEFT FRONT TWICE (ONCE BY DEALER) AND RIGHT FRONT AT SAM'S CLUB. THIS STARTED 2 MONTHS AFTER PURCHASE. NEW MAY 2004 AND I HAVE CONTINUED TO ADD AIR DURING TRIPS. *JB
2004 TOWN CAR PARKED IN GARAGE. TURNED KEY AND VEHICLE CAUGHT ON FIRE. ALL I DID WAS TURN THE KEY. EXTENSIVE DAMAGE TO CAR, FIRE AND SMOKE DAMAGE TO HOME.*AK
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
1DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.