IllustrationAFTER MAKING A SHARP RIGHT HAND TURN, I HEARD A LOUD CLUNK CLUNK NOISE AND THE CAR MADE A AWKWARD MOVEMENT UNTIL I STRAIGHTEN THE VEHICLE BACK OUT. ABOUT A MONTH LATER AFTER GETTING MY BRAKES SERVICED THE REPAIRMAN TOLD ME THAT THE BALL JOINT SEALS WERE BUSTED PREMATURELY AND I HAD NO PROTECTION. $1000.00 FIX. *TR
1995 Mercury Grand Marquis
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Grand Marquis years
Owner complaints for the 1995 Mercury Grand Marquis are substantially higher than the model-year median of 78.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Grand Marquis 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
Limited mileage data: 38 of 179 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.
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.
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 24 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 23 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
19 crash reports5 fire reports8 injury reports
What owners actually said
179 reportsVEHICLE SHUDDERS WHEN SHIFTING GEARS. THIS IN AN INTERMITTENT PROBLEM AND OCCURS MORE FREQUENTLY WHEN THERE IS LOW LOAD ON ENGINE AND WHEN TRANSMISSION IS TRYING TO SELECT GEARS. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A LOUD BANGING NOISE AND THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE LOWERED TO THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO HER RESIDENCE. AN INVESTIGATOR FROM HER INSURANCE COMPANY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND CONCLUDED THAT THE LOWER BALL JOINTS SEPARAT…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A LOUD BANGING NOISE AND THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE LOWERED TO THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO HER RESIDENCE. AN INVESTIGATOR FROM HER INSURANCE COMPANY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND CONCLUDED THAT THE LOWER BALL JOINTS SEPARATED FROM THE VEHICLE. SHE IS IN THE PROCESS OF HAVING THE VEHICLE REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 76,000.
I RECEIVE A RECALL NOTICE ON MY FORD GRAND MARQUIS -1995 TO DISCONNECT MY CRUISE CONTROL BECAUSE IT MAY CAUSE A FIRE (RECALL NUMBER 05S28). ON SEPTEMBER 14, 2007 WE TOOK OUR VEHICLE TO MATHEWS FORD IN HEATH OHIO TO HAVE THE CRUISE CONTROL DISABLED. WE WERE TOLD THE PART WOULD BE IN SOME TIME IN JANUARY. AFTER CALLING AND CHEC…
Read full complaint
I RECEIVE A RECALL NOTICE ON MY FORD GRAND MARQUIS -1995 TO DISCONNECT MY CRUISE CONTROL BECAUSE IT MAY CAUSE A FIRE (RECALL NUMBER 05S28). ON SEPTEMBER 14, 2007 WE TOOK OUR VEHICLE TO MATHEWS FORD IN HEATH OHIO TO HAVE THE CRUISE CONTROL DISABLED. WE WERE TOLD THE PART WOULD BE IN SOME TIME IN JANUARY. AFTER CALLING AND CHECKING ON THE PART FOR QUIT SOMETIME, THE PART FINALLY ARRIVE AND WAS INSTALL ON APRIL 8, 2008. AFTER THE PART WAS INSTALL, MY CRUISE CONTROL DID NOT WORK. IT HAD BEEN WORKING FINE PRIOR TO THE CRUISE CONTROL BEING DISABLED. I RETURNED TO MATHEWS FORD ON APRIL 25, 2008 TO COMPLAIN THAT MY CRUISE CONTROL DID NOT WORK. I WAS INFORMED THAT THEY WOULD LOOK AT IT, BUT IF IT WAS NOT THE PART THEY REPLACED I WOULD BE CHARGE $70 FOR THEM TO LOOK AT IT AND RECEIVE AN ESTIMATE TO FIX THE PROBLEM. I REFUSED THE SERVICE. I DO NOT FEEL THIS IS PROPER. IT WAS WORKING BEFORE THEY MESSED WITH. IF THEY WOULD OF MADE THE REPAIR IN SEPTEMBER AND IT WORKED AFTERWARDS AND THEN LATER BROKE I WOULD UNDERSTAND. THEY ARE TELLING ME SOMETHING COULD OF HAPPENED SINCE THEY DISABLED IT. WELL SOMETHING MAY OF HAPPENED WHILE IT WAS DISABLED FOR 8-9 MONTHS IT WAS DISABLED, BUT SINCE I COULD NOT USE IT, IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. I FEEL THEY SHOULD RETURN MY VEHICLE TO THE CONDITION IT WAS IN BEFORE THEY MESSED WITH IT. AT A MINIMUM, I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY MONEY FOR THEM TO DIAGNOSE A PROBLEM THEY CAUSED! IF THEY DIAGNOSED IT AND IT WAS ANOTHER PART--THEN I COULD DECIDE HOW TO PROCEED AND I SHOULD NOT BE LOCKED INTO A SERVICE CENTER THAT I WOULD NOT NORMALLY USE. I FEEL LIKE THE FOX IS WATCHING THE HEN HOUSE. IS THERE ANYWAY I CAN GET THIS ISSUE RESOLVED WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY A DEALERSHIP? I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME IN THIS MATTER. MARK SHELL *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: CRUISE CONTROL. WHILE LEAVING HER HOUSE, THE CONTACT WITNESSED HER VEHICLE ON FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT STATED THAT THE FIRE ORIGINATED IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, WHERE IT…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL: CRUISE CONTROL. WHILE LEAVING HER HOUSE, THE CONTACT WITNESSED HER VEHICLE ON FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT STATED THAT THE FIRE ORIGINATED IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, WHERE IT CURRENTLY REMAINS. THE POWERTRAIN AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 170,000.
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE REGARDING THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. SEVERAL DEALERS HAVE INFORMED HIM THAT THE PARTS FOR THE REPAIR ARE UNAVAILABLE. HE HAS EXPERIENCED THE FOLLOWING FAILURES WITH HIS VEHICLE: THE SERPENTINE BELT, BRAKE ROTORS, FRONT PASSENGER SIDE STRUT…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE REGARDING THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. SEVERAL DEALERS HAVE INFORMED HIM THAT THE PARTS FOR THE REPAIR ARE UNAVAILABLE. HE HAS EXPERIENCED THE FOLLOWING FAILURES WITH HIS VEHICLE: THE SERPENTINE BELT, BRAKE ROTORS, FRONT PASSENGER SIDE STRUT, AND ODOMETER. THE MILEAGE INFORMATION AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN.
STEERING BOX SEALS WENT TWICE IN 2 WEEKS. ANOTHER COMPLAINT ON THIS SITE TELLS THE SAME STORY. THE SEALS WENT ONCE WHEN I WENT TO DRIVE AND THE OTHER TIME, WHEN I WENT TO BACK INTO A PARKING SPACE. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL FAILED. IN AUGUST OF 2007, THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL, BUT IT DID NOT MENTION TO PARK THE VEHICLE INSIDE. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A SECOND NOTICE FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 08V051000 (VEHICLE S…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL FAILED. IN AUGUST OF 2007, THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL, BUT IT DID NOT MENTION TO PARK THE VEHICLE INSIDE. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A SECOND NOTICE FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 08V051000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:CRUISE CONTROL), WHICH ADVISED HIM NOT TO PARK THE VEHICLE INSIDE DUE TO THE POSSIBILITY OF A FIRE. THE CONTACT FELT THAT THE FIRST LETTER SHOULD HAVE STATED THIS INFORMATION. THERE HAD BEEN NO FAILURE TO DATE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 70,000.
1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS WITH SPEED CONTROL RECALL. CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE IN TO HAVE THE WIRING HARNESS DISCONNECTED. CONSUMER HAS YET TO BE NOTIFIED OF WHEN THE REPLACEMENT PART WILL BE AVAILABLE. *KB
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A FORD SAFETY RECALL NOTICE IN SEPTEMBER OF 2007 FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. THE SWITCH WAS DISCONNECTED AT THAT TIME. HE HAS BEEN INFORMED BY FORD SINCE THAT TIME AND, EVERY MONTH THEREAFTER, THAT THE SWITCH WOULD BE REPAIRED THE FOLLOWING MONTH. THER…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1995 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A FORD SAFETY RECALL NOTICE IN SEPTEMBER OF 2007 FOR THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL. THE SWITCH WAS DISCONNECTED AT THAT TIME. HE HAS BEEN INFORMED BY FORD SINCE THAT TIME AND, EVERY MONTH THEREAFTER, THAT THE SWITCH WOULD BE REPAIRED THE FOLLOWING MONTH. THERE HAD BEEN NO FAILURE TO DATE. THE PURCHASE DATE AND RECALL NUMBER WERE UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 96,000. UPDATED 3/4/08 *CN THE CONSUMER PROVIDED THE RECALL NUMBER 05S28. UPDATED 03/04/08 *TR
Official recalls
508V051000 · Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
Feb 4, 2008
FORD IS RECALLING 225,000 MY 1992-2003 ECONOLINE, MY 1993-1995 TAURUS SHO, MY 1992-1998 CROWN VICTORIA, MY 1993 BRONCO, F-SERIES, MY 1995-1997 F-SERIES SUPER DUTY STRIPPED CHASSIS, MY 1992-1998 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS, AND MY 1992-1995 LINCOLN TOWN CAR VEHICLES. THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE PREVIOUSLY REPAIRED USING A WIRING HARNESS THAT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE VEHICLE CIRCUIT POLARITY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AS A RESULT, THE FUSE IS LOCATED IN THE OUTPUT CIRCUIT RATHER THAN IN THE INTENDED INPUT POWER FEED CIRCUIT, AND MAY NOT OFFER THE INTENDED PROTECTION IN THE EVENT OF AN ELECTRICAL SHORT TO GROUND.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A NEW WIRING HARNESS, OR REPLACE THE MATING ELECTRICAL COMPONENT. THE RECALL BEGAN ON FEBRUARY 18, 2008. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
07V336000 · Vehicle Speed Control
Aug 3, 2007
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, PASSENGER VEHICLES, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND MOTOR HOMES CHASSIS, THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH MAY, UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN AN UNDERHOOD FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. OWNERS OF THE PASSENGER CARS INCLUDED IN THIS CAMPAIGN WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN THEIR VEHICLES TO THEIR DEALERS TO HAVE THE SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH DISCONNECTED AS AN INTERIM REPAIR. AS SOON AS REPAIR PARTS ARE AVAILABLE (EXPECTED OCTOBER 2007), OWNERS WILL BE INSTRUCTED TO RETURN TO THE DEALERS FOR INSTALLATION OF A FUSED WIRING HARNESS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 13, 2007, AND MAILING COMPLETED BY SEPTEMBER 19, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
96V045000 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
Mar 5, 1996
THE RIVETS HOLDING THE REAR OUTBOARD BELT D-RINGS WERE NOT HEAT TREATED PROPERLY CAUSING THE HEADS OF THE RIVETS TO FRACTURE UNDER LOAD AND FAIL TO HOLD THE D-RINGS TO THE STRAPS. THIS DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 210, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLY ANCHORAGES."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: CONSEQUENCE OF NON-COMPLIANCE: THIS CONDITION CAN REDUCE THE RESTRAINING CAPABILITIES OF THE SAFETY BELT IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A REINFORCEMENT PLATE ON THE REAR OUTBOARD SEAT BELT ASSEMBLY ANCHORAGES INVOLVED IN THIS CAMPAIGN.
95V189000 · Electrical System:wiring:fuses And Circuit Breakers
Oct 2, 1995
THESE VEHICLES WERE BUILT WITH THE NON-CYCLING POWER WINDOW CIRCUIT BREAKER AND THE CYCLING HEADLAMP CIRCUIT BREAKER INTERCHANGED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A SHORT OR OVERLOAD IN THE HEADLAMPCIRCUIT, BOTH HEADLAMPS CAN GO OUT WITHOUT WARNING, RATHER THAN FLASHING AS INTENDED WITH THE CYCLING CIRCUIT BREAKER. THIS COULD LEAD TO REDUCED NIGHT TIME DRIVER VISIBILITY, INCREASING THE POTENTIAL FOR A VEHICLE ACCIDENT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THESE VEHICLES, REMOVE THE CIRCUIT BREAKER AND REINSTALL THE BREAKER IN THE CORRECT LOCATIONS.
95V063000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly:filler Pipe And Cap
Mar 27, 1995
THE SEAL MATERIAL BETWEEN THE FUEL FILLER PIPE AND FUEL TANK MAY NOT HAVE BEEN FULLY CURED DURING THE MOLDING PROCESS WHICH COULD ALLOW FOR FUEL LEAKAGE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE COULD RESULT IN A VEHICLE FIRE IF AN IGNITION SOURCE WERE PRESENT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FUEL FILLER PIPE-TO-FUEL TANK SEAL WITH A NEW SEAL OF DIFFERENT MATERIAL.
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
6EA03012 · Rear Brake Line Failure
Opened Jul 25, 2003 · Closed Apr 11, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2005, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM (FORD NO. 04B26) TO CORRECT A REAR BRAKE LINE CHAFING CONCERN IN APPROXIMATELY 44,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 1997 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS NON-FLEET VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONIC TRACTION CONTROL THAT WEREBUILT AFTER MARCH 19, 1997.THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REAR BRAKE LINE AND A MASTIC PATCH CAUSING REDUCED CLEARANCE FROM A STIFFENING RIB IN THE FLOOR PAN.ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THIS POPULATION THAN IN OTHER SUBJECT VEHICLES AND PEER MID-SIZED PASSENGER CARS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THE INVESTIGATION.VEHICLES INVOLVED IN FORD?S PROGRAM WILL HAVE THE REAR BRAKE LINES INSPECTED FOR CONTACT WITH THE FLOOR PAN STIFFING RIB.IF THERE IS CONTACT, BUT NO ABRASION OR LEAKAGE, THE BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPOSITIONED.IF THERE IS ABRASION OR A LEAK IS EVIDENT THE BRAKE LINE WILL BE REPAIRED.IF NECESSARY, BOTH OF THE REAR BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. THOUGH FORD DOES NOT ADMIT TO A SAFETY-DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE FACTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION SHOW OTHERWISE BECAUSE THE INSUFFICIENT CLEARANCE IN THE ROUTING OF THOSE BRAKE LINES MAY RESULT IN LEAKS IN THOSE LINES THAT MAY RESULT IN INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES.ODI IS DESIGNATING THE CAMPAIGN A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-086).BECAUSE OF THE LOW RATES OF BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLES, A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THOSE POPULATIONS AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS IN THOSE VEHICLES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid
IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2005, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM (FORD NO. 04B26) TO CORRECT A REAR BRAKE LINE CHAFING CONCERN IN APPROXIMATELY 44,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 1997 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS NON-FLEET VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONIC TRACTION CONTROL THAT WEREBUILT AFTER MARCH 19, 1997.THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REAR BRAKE LINE AND A MASTIC PATCH CAUSING REDUCED CLEARANCE FROM A STIFFENING RIB IN THE FLOOR PAN.ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THIS POPULATION THAN IN OTHER SUBJECT VEHICLES AND PEER MID-SIZED PASSENGER CARS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THE INVESTIGATION.VEHICLES INVOLVED IN FORD?S PROGRAM WILL HAVE THE REAR BRAKE LINES INSPECTED FOR CONTACT WITH THE FLOOR PAN STIFFING RIB.IF THERE IS CONTACT, BUT NO ABRASION OR LEAKAGE, THE BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPOSITIONED.IF THERE IS ABRASION OR A LEAK IS EVIDENT THE BRAKE LINE WILL BE REPAIRED.IF NECESSARY, BOTH OF THE REAR BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. THOUGH FORD DOES NOT ADMIT TO A SAFETY-DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE FACTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION SHOW OTHERWISE BECAUSE THE INSUFFICIENT CLEARANCE IN THE ROUTING OF THOSE BRAKE LINES MAY RESULT IN LEAKS IN THOSE LINES THAT MAY RESULT IN INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES.ODI IS DESIGNATING THE CAMPAIGN A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-086).BECAUSE OF THE LOW RATES OF BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLES, A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THOSE POPULATIONS AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS IN THOSE VEHICLES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2005, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM (FORD NO. 04B26) TO CORRECT A REAR BRAKE LINE CHAFING CONCERN IN APPROXIMATELY 44,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 1997 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS NON-FLEET VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONIC TRACTION CONTROL THAT WEREBUILT AFTER MARCH 19, 1997.THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REAR BRAKE LINE AND A MASTIC PATCH CAUSING REDUCED CLEARANCE FROM A STIFFENING RIB IN THE FLOOR PAN.ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THIS POPULATION THAN IN OTHER SUBJECT VEHICLES AND PEER MID-SIZED PASSENGER CARS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THE INVESTIGATION.VEHICLES INVOLVED IN FORD?S PROGRAM WILL HAVE THE REAR BRAKE LINES INSPECTED FOR CONTACT WITH THE FLOOR PAN STIFFING RIB.IF THERE IS CONTACT, BUT NO ABRASION OR LEAKAGE, THE BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPOSITIONED.IF THERE IS ABRASION OR A LEAK IS EVIDENT THE BRAKE LINE WILL BE REPAIRED.IF NECESSARY, BOTH OF THE REAR BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. THOUGH FORD DOES NOT ADMIT TO A SAFETY-DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE FACTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION SHOW OTHERWISE BECAUSE THE INSUFFICIENT CLEARANCE IN THE ROUTING OF THOSE BRAKE LINES MAY RESULT IN LEAKS IN THOSE LINES THAT MAY RESULT IN INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES.ODI IS DESIGNATING THE CAMPAIGN A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-086).BECAUSE OF THE LOW RATES OF BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLES, A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THOSE POPULATIONS AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS IN THOSE VEHICLES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
IN A LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2005, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM (FORD NO. 04B26) TO CORRECT A REAR BRAKE LINE CHAFING CONCERN IN APPROXIMATELY 44,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 1997 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AND GRAND MARQUIS NON-FLEET VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONIC TRACTION CONTROL THAT WEREBUILT AFTER MARCH 19, 1997.THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REAR BRAKE LINE AND A MASTIC PATCH CAUSING REDUCED CLEARANCE FROM A STIFFENING RIB IN THE FLOOR PAN.ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED HIGHER COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THIS POPULATION THAN IN OTHER SUBJECT VEHICLES AND PEER MID-SIZED PASSENGER CARS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THE INVESTIGATION.VEHICLES INVOLVED IN FORD?S PROGRAM WILL HAVE THE REAR BRAKE LINES INSPECTED FOR CONTACT WITH THE FLOOR PAN STIFFING RIB.IF THERE IS CONTACT, BUT NO ABRASION OR LEAKAGE, THE BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPOSITIONED.IF THERE IS ABRASION OR A LEAK IS EVIDENT THE BRAKE LINE WILL BE REPAIRED.IF NECESSARY, BOTH OF THE REAR BRAKE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. THOUGH FORD DOES NOT ADMIT TO A SAFETY-DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE FACTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION SHOW OTHERWISE BECAUSE THE INSUFFICIENT CLEARANCE IN THE ROUTING OF THOSE BRAKE LINES MAY RESULT IN LEAKS IN THOSE LINES THAT MAY RESULT IN INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES.ODI IS DESIGNATING THE CAMPAIGN A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-086).BECAUSE OF THE LOW RATES OF BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLES, A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THOSE POPULATIONS AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS IN THOSE VEHICLES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
RQ03004 · Rear Brake Line Failure
Opened Mar 11, 2003 · Closed Jul 25, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
ODI HAS RECEIVED 40 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, INCLUDING 8 THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THIS YEAR.AN ADDITIONAL 192 REPORTS AND 478 WARRANTY CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM FORD.A LEAK IN THE REAR BRAKE LINE CAN CAUSE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE.A SEARCH OF ODI'S COMPLAINT DATABASE FOR PEER VEHICLE COMPLAINTS, USING THE SAME BRAKE LINE FAILURE CRITERIA AS FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE SAME MODEL YEARS (1995-97), IDENTIFIED ONLY 1 COMPLAINT INVOLVING GENERAL MOTORS CAPRICE/IMPLALA/88/98/REGAL VEHICLES AND ONLY 2 COMPLAINTS INVOLVING CHRYSLER LH-CARS.THE INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS RELATED TO REAR BRAKE LINE FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
RQ03002 · Ball Joint Separation
Opened Jan 3, 2003 · Closed Jun 3, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:front:control Arm:lower Ball Joint
SEE ATTACHED REPORT.
EA02025 · Speed Control Deactivation Switch Fires
Opened Sep 6, 2002 · Closed Jun 30, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling
BASED ON THE LOW RATE OF FIRE INCIDENTS (2.5 INCIDENTS PER 100,000 VEHICLES SOLD) WHERE FAILURE OF THE SCDS IS INVOLVED AND THE AGE OF THE VEHICLES ? 7 TO 11 YEARS ? A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.
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