IllustrationHORN & CRUISE CONTROL STOPED WORKING , REPAIR SHOP SAID WIRING HARNESS IS BREAKING DOWN AT THE TIGHT BENDS .ALSO SAID THIS IS A COMMON COMPLAINT WITH THIS MODEL AND ITS SISTER MODEL. I HAVE NOT CORRECTED THIS AS OF YET. *JB
1996 Mercury Grand Marquis
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Grand Marquis years
Owner complaints for the 1996 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
60–25K
625–50K
2050–75K
3375–100K
17100–150K
9150K+
91 reports with mileage · 148 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.
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 85 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 23 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Fuel System, Gasoline. Review the 21 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
9 crash reports19 fire reports9 injury reports
What owners actually said
239 reportsMY CAR WAS NOT RUNNING CORRECTLY ONE DAY, SO I TOOK IT TO MY MECHANIC AND HE FOUND ANTI-FREEZE IN THE CYLINDERS. HE SAID THAT THE ANTI-FREEZE BLEW THROUGH PASSAGE ON INTAKE MANIFOLD INTO THE PISTONS, AND I HAD TO REPLACED THE ENTIRE MOTOR AND THE INTAKE WHICH COST ME $3400.00 ENABLE TO FIX. I CAN NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THEY USED A…
Read full complaint
MY CAR WAS NOT RUNNING CORRECTLY ONE DAY, SO I TOOK IT TO MY MECHANIC AND HE FOUND ANTI-FREEZE IN THE CYLINDERS. HE SAID THAT THE ANTI-FREEZE BLEW THROUGH PASSAGE ON INTAKE MANIFOLD INTO THE PISTONS, AND I HAD TO REPLACED THE ENTIRE MOTOR AND THE INTAKE WHICH COST ME $3400.00 ENABLE TO FIX. I CAN NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THEY USED A PLASTIC PART ON THE MOTOR. *NM
DT: WHILE DRIVING THE BRAKE LINES FAILED AND HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE OWNER CAME OUTSIDE AND SAW THE BRAKE FLUID ON THE GROUND AND REALIZED THAT THE BRAKE LINES FAILED. THE OWNER DROVE THE VEHICLE WITH NO BRAKES TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY REPAIRED IT. THEN THE OWNER REALIZED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE RUSTED.*AK THE LEFT REAR …
Read full complaint
DT: WHILE DRIVING THE BRAKE LINES FAILED AND HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE OWNER CAME OUTSIDE AND SAW THE BRAKE FLUID ON THE GROUND AND REALIZED THAT THE BRAKE LINES FAILED. THE OWNER DROVE THE VEHICLE WITH NO BRAKES TO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY REPAIRED IT. THEN THE OWNER REALIZED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE RUSTED.*AK THE LEFT REAR SEAT BELT WAS REPLACED TWICE. THE WIPER MOTOR, WIPER SWITCH, DRIVERS SIDE MIRROR SWITCH AND ROTORS WERE ALL REPLACED. THE TURN SIGNAL SWITCH, DRIVER WINDOW SWITCH , TAIL LIGHT , CATALYTIC CONVERTER WERE REPLACED. THE CONSUMER WAS TOLD THE BALL JOINTS AND SHOCKS WERE BAD. THE BATTERY WAS REPLACED. *JB
DT: THE VEHICLE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE INTAKE MANIFOLD. THE CAR WAS SMOKING WHILE DRIVING. THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS CRACKED. THE VEHICLE HAD 90,000 MILES ON IT. THE OWNER WAS AWARE THIS WAS NOT A SAFETY PROBLEM. THE OWNER WAS UPSET WITH THE DEALERSHIP.*AK
I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE STEERING GEAR BOX IN THE MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 1996 AND ANY OTHER VEHICLES WHICH USE THIS SAME COMPONENT IN THEIR VEHICLE. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE IS EXCESSIVE PLAY INSIDE THE STEERING GEAR BOX. I AM SURE THAT THIS PROBLEM IS THE GEAR BOX NOT SOME OTHER COMPONENT OF THE SYSTE…
Read full complaint
I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE STEERING GEAR BOX IN THE MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 1996 AND ANY OTHER VEHICLES WHICH USE THIS SAME COMPONENT IN THEIR VEHICLE. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE IS EXCESSIVE PLAY INSIDE THE STEERING GEAR BOX. I AM SURE THAT THIS PROBLEM IS THE GEAR BOX NOT SOME OTHER COMPONENT OF THE SYSTEM. THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE PLAY INSIDE WITHIN THE GEAR BOX IS TRANSLATED TO THE ROAD IN THE FORM OF POOR HANDLING,SWAYING ETC. I CHANGED MY UPPER, LOWER BALL JOINTS,TIE RODS, PITMAN ARM ,TIRES,SWAY BARS,IDLE ARM,AND ALIGNED AND ALSO REPLACED THE GEARBOX WITH A REBUILT GEARBOX THIS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GEARBOX REBUILT MIND YOU HAS THE SAME PROBLEM AS THE PREVIOUS GEAR BOX. THIS TYPE OF VEHICLE IS DRIVEN BY A LOT OF SENIORS, CAB COMPANIES ,ETC. THE NEWER MODEL VEHICLES OF THIS TYPE USE A DIFFERENT GEAR BOX WHICH I AM PRETTY SURE IT DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AS THE OLDER MODELS HAVE. AS FAR AS HAVING THE OLD PART I GAVE IT TO THE COMPANY THAT I PURCHASED THE NEWLY REBUILT ONE FROM AS A CORE. *NM
PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD SPLIT DURING TRAVEL THROUGH MOUNTAINS CAUSING ALL OF THE COOLANT TO SPEW OUT. OVERHEATING OCCURRED IMMEDIATELY AND CAUSED SEVERE DAMAGE TO ENGINE. FORD HAD ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN 02-2-2 DATED 1/17/2002 AND SUBSEQUENTLY REDESIGNED PART. THIS WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY CO…
Read full complaint
PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD SPLIT DURING TRAVEL THROUGH MOUNTAINS CAUSING ALL OF THE COOLANT TO SPEW OUT. OVERHEATING OCCURRED IMMEDIATELY AND CAUSED SEVERE DAMAGE TO ENGINE. FORD HAD ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN 02-2-2 DATED 1/17/2002 AND SUBSEQUENTLY REDESIGNED PART. THIS WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY COMMUNICATED TO THE CONSUMER RESULTING IN EXTENSIVE COST TO THE CONSUMER WITH AN ENGINE REPLACEMENT.
1996 MERCURY MARQUIS ,,CRACKED COMPOSITE INTAKE HEAD...$ 1100.00 REPAIRED. I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS A FLEET RECALL FOR THIS, BUT NOT FOR PERSONALLY OWNED VEHICLES.I FEEL CHEATED...THE COMPOSITE HEADS ARE DEFECTIVE. *AK
I WAS DRIVING HOME AND MY CAR BEGAN OVERHEATING. THE NEXT DAY I BROUGHT IT TO A REPAIR SHOP. THEY TOLD ME THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS CRACKED AND THAT THERE HAD BEEN RECALLS ON THE ENGINE IN MY CAR FOR THIS EXACT PROBLEM. THEY TOLD ME THAT THERE HAD BEEN SEVERAL INSTANCES OF THIS REPAIR BEING DONE UNDER RECALL. THEY USED TH…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING HOME AND MY CAR BEGAN OVERHEATING. THE NEXT DAY I BROUGHT IT TO A REPAIR SHOP. THEY TOLD ME THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS CRACKED AND THAT THERE HAD BEEN RECALLS ON THE ENGINE IN MY CAR FOR THIS EXACT PROBLEM. THEY TOLD ME THAT THERE HAD BEEN SEVERAL INSTANCES OF THIS REPAIR BEING DONE UNDER RECALL. THEY USED THEIR RESOURCES TO OBTAIN DOCUMENTATION OF RECALLS BEING ISSUED FOR THIS EXACT PROBLEM. I CONTACTED FORD MOTOR CORP. CUSTOMER SERVICE AND SPOKE WITH A REPRESENTATIVE WHO TOLD ME THAT MY PARTICULAR CAR HAD NO OUTSTANDING RECALLS ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THE REPEATED OCCURENCE OF THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN NOTED BY ME THROUGH SEVERAL INSTANCES OF CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS POSTED ON THE INTERNET. THE EXACT PROBLEM IS WITH A PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD WHICH DEVELOPS A CRACK NEAR THE THEMOSTAT AND LEAKS COOLANT.*AK
1996 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS SUFFERED INTAKE MANIFOLD FAILURE.*MR *NM
COMPLAINT RECEIVED VIA E-MAIL. WE JUST HAD OUR PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD REPLACED, COSTING $852.28. AFTER SO MANY MILES, THE PRESSURE MAKES THE FRONT END OF THE MANIFOLD CRACK AND LEAK. OUR MECHANIC HAS REPLACED MANY OF THESE FAULTY PLASTIC MANIFOLDS ,AND HE SAID EVENTUALLY ALL EARLY MODELS OF THE MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS WILL HAVE T…
Read full complaint
COMPLAINT RECEIVED VIA E-MAIL. WE JUST HAD OUR PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD REPLACED, COSTING $852.28. AFTER SO MANY MILES, THE PRESSURE MAKES THE FRONT END OF THE MANIFOLD CRACK AND LEAK. OUR MECHANIC HAS REPLACED MANY OF THESE FAULTY PLASTIC MANIFOLDS ,AND HE SAID EVENTUALLY ALL EARLY MODELS OF THE MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS WILL HAVE TO HAVE THIS PART REPLACED. HE SAID THE FORD COMPANY HAS REPLACED THIS MANIFOLD ON LATER MODELS, STARTING WITH 2002 WITH AN ALUMINUM PART WHERE THE PROBLEM WAS. *AK *TC
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.
00V157001 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
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.
00V157002 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
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.
96V070000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Apr 22, 1996
WHEN IN THE SECONDARY LATCHED POSITION, THE DRIVER DOOR LATCHES MAY OPEN WHEN SUBJECTED TO TRANSVERSE LOADS LESS THAN THAT SPECIFIED IN FMVSS NO. 206, "DOOR LOCKS AND DOOR RETENTION COMPONENTS."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER'S DOOR, WHEN CLOSED ONLY TO THE SECONDARY LATCHED POSITION, MAY NOT SUSTAIN A 1,000 POUND TRANSVERSE LOAD.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE DRIVER DOOR LATCH.
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
7EA03012 · 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
DP98007 · Improper Height For Head Restraints
Opened Jul 28, 1998 · Closed Sep 28, 1998
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats:front Assembly:head Restraint
NHTSA WAS PETITIONED TO COMMENCE A DEFECT INVESTIGATION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ON JULY 28, 1998.THE PETITION ALLEGES THAT THE DRIVER'S SEAT HEAD RESTRAINT WAS NOT HIGH ENOUGH AT ITS HIGHEST POSITION TO PROTECT HIM FROM NECK INJURIES SUSTAINED DURING A REAR IMPACT COLLISION.OTHER THAN THE SUBJECT PETITIN, ODI HAS RECEIVED NO OTHER COMPLAINTS OF INADEQUATE HEAD RESTRAINT HEIGHT FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.FORD MOTOR COMPANY'S COMPLIANCE DATA SHOWS THAT THE SUBJECT VEHICLES MET THE HEAD RESTRAINT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OF FMVSS NO. 202, HEAD RESTRAINTS. THEREFORE, THE PETITION IS DENIED.