← New search

2008 Mercury Grand Marquis

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2008 Mercury Grand Marquis do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 78.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected 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

66 reports with mileage · 12 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.

  • Steering. Review the 21 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 15 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 9 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

11 crash reports1 fire reports7 injury reports

What owners actually said

78 reports
56,150 miles · Aug 15, 2013
EngineService BrakesVehicle Speed Control

VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED USED IN JUNE, 2011. WHILE BRAKING FOR A STOP LIGHT, VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. HAD TO FORCEFULLY PUMP BRAKES TO STOP VEHICLE FROM HITTING VEHICLE IN FRONT. CAR RETURNED TO NORMAL OPERATION AS SOON AS I GOT IT STOPPED. HAVE HAD SIMILAR INCIDENTS A COUPLE OF TIMES BEFORE, ALTHOUGH NOT AS BAD AS THIS …

Read full complaint

VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED USED IN JUNE, 2011. WHILE BRAKING FOR A STOP LIGHT, VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. HAD TO FORCEFULLY PUMP BRAKES TO STOP VEHICLE FROM HITTING VEHICLE IN FRONT. CAR RETURNED TO NORMAL OPERATION AS SOON AS I GOT IT STOPPED. HAVE HAD SIMILAR INCIDENTS A COUPLE OF TIMES BEFORE, ALTHOUGH NOT AS BAD AS THIS ONE, HOWEVER, AT THAT TIME I THOUGHT MAYBE I HAD ACCIDENTALLY PRESSED THE ACCELERATOR WHILE BRAKING. I KNOW THAT WAS NOT THE CASE THIS TIME. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10535491

17,869 miles · Jun 25, 2013
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL AND DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE RPM READING INCREASED AS THE VEHICLE JERKED FORWARD. THE CONTACT STATED ALL THE WARNING LIGHTS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL ILLUMINATED. THE FAILURE RECURRED VARIOUS TIMES CAUSING A CRASH. T…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL AND DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE RPM READING INCREASED AS THE VEHICLE JERKED FORWARD. THE CONTACT STATED ALL THE WARNING LIGHTS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL ILLUMINATED. THE FAILURE RECURRED VARIOUS TIMES CAUSING A CRASH. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED, CAUSING THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO A GUARD RAIL AND A CONCRETE WALL. THE POLICE REPORTED TO THE SCENE AND A REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE THE TECHNICIAN WAS UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 17,869. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10521721

86,000 miles · May 25, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE GOING ABOUT 65 MPH. I ACCELERATED RAPIDLY TO PASS A SEMI WHEN I WAS GETTING CLOSE TO MY EXIT. AFTER PASSING THE SEMI I LET MY FOOT OFF OF THE ACCELERATOR BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT SLOW DOWN. I APPLIED THE BRAKE PEDAL BUT THE VEHICLE KEPT ACCELERATING FOR ABOUT 5 SECONDS. AFTER THAT I HEARD AN AUDIBL…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE GOING ABOUT 65 MPH. I ACCELERATED RAPIDLY TO PASS A SEMI WHEN I WAS GETTING CLOSE TO MY EXIT. AFTER PASSING THE SEMI I LET MY FOOT OFF OF THE ACCELERATOR BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT SLOW DOWN. I APPLIED THE BRAKE PEDAL BUT THE VEHICLE KEPT ACCELERATING FOR ABOUT 5 SECONDS. AFTER THAT I HEARD AN AUDIBLE "CLUNK" COME FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT AND THE VEHICLE RETURNED TO NORMAL OPERATION. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED THE FIRST WAS A MONTH AGO ACCELERATING RAPIDLY FROM A STAND STILL POSITION. IN NEITHER CASE DID I WRECK OR GET A SPEEDING TICKET. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10513530

45,659 miles · May 17, 2013
Steering

VEHICLE WAS COMING OFF OF A HIGHWAY EXIT RAMP DOING AROUND 40-45 MPH AND IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS TURN THE DRIVER LOST HIS CONTROL OF HIS STEERING CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO VEER INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC ALMOST CAUSING A HEAD ON COLLISION. UPON INSPECTION OF VEHICLE FOUND THAT A STERRING COLUMN SHAFT WICH IS ONLY HELD IN PLACE BY A PLAST…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE WAS COMING OFF OF A HIGHWAY EXIT RAMP DOING AROUND 40-45 MPH AND IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS TURN THE DRIVER LOST HIS CONTROL OF HIS STEERING CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO VEER INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC ALMOST CAUSING A HEAD ON COLLISION. UPON INSPECTION OF VEHICLE FOUND THAT A STERRING COLUMN SHAFT WICH IS ONLY HELD IN PLACE BY A PLASTIC RETAINER AND CONSIST OF 4 CLIPS, 2 OF THE CLIPS WERE BROKEN CAUSING THE COLUMN SHAFT TO SLIDE APART AND HAVE LOSS OF STEERING. SO FAR THE ONLY FIX FROM FORD IS TO SELL YOU A NEW STERRING COLUMN 7W1Z-3C529-A THIS PART IS DESIGNED THE SAME WAY AS THE OLD PART WAS. THIS ISSUE COULD CAUSE A FATAL ACCIDENT, I AM A MECHANIC WITH A GOVERMENT AGENCY WITH MANY OF THESE VEHICLES IN OUR FLEET. I URGE YOU TO PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS ISSUE AND ASK FOR A RECALL WITH THESE VEHICLES BEFORE A LIFE IS LOST! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10512484

56,122 miles · Apr 27, 2013
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes

HAD A FLAT TIRE AND HAD TO INSTALL THE SPARE TIRE THAT CAME WITH VEHICLE. AS SOON AS I GOT BACK ON THE ROAD , THE STABILITY CONTROL LIGHT, THE ABS LIGHT AND THE I-P BRAKE LIGHT CAME ON. THE CAR WOULD GET ONLY 35 MPH. FOR ABOUT 7 TO 8 MILES, THEN PICKED UP SPEED SO I COULD RUN 50 MPH. UNTIL I HAD THE TIRE REPLACED. AFTER I HAD TH…

Read full complaint

HAD A FLAT TIRE AND HAD TO INSTALL THE SPARE TIRE THAT CAME WITH VEHICLE. AS SOON AS I GOT BACK ON THE ROAD , THE STABILITY CONTROL LIGHT, THE ABS LIGHT AND THE I-P BRAKE LIGHT CAME ON. THE CAR WOULD GET ONLY 35 MPH. FOR ABOUT 7 TO 8 MILES, THEN PICKED UP SPEED SO I COULD RUN 50 MPH. UNTIL I HAD THE TIRE REPLACED. AFTER I HAD THE TIRE REPLACED I TOOK THE CAR TO A MECHANIC TO HAVE THE SYSTEM RESET SO THE LIGHTS WOULD RETURN TO NORMAL. THE UNIT THAT CONTROLS THIS HAD TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE THE DIFFERENCE IN TIRE SIZE HAD DESTROYED THE CONTROL UNIT. IT COST ME $313.50 TO HAVE A USED UNIT INSTALLED, IF IT HAD BEEN A NEW UNIT, IT WOULD HAVE COST OVER $600. FORD MOTOR CO. SHOULD HAVE TO PAY THE COST OF THIS REPLACEMENT BECAUSE THE DAMAGE WAS CAUSED BY EQUIPMENT THAT WAS SUPPLIED WITH THE VEHICLE WHEN NEW. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10509754

55,000 miles · Oct 11, 2012
Structure

THIS IS THE THIRD CONSECUTIVE MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS I'VE OWNED THAT HAS DEVELOPED A PEELING PAINT PROBLEM (ALL PURCHASED NEW). ONE INSTANCE OF THIS I COULD CHALK UP TO LUCK OF THE DRAW, A RANDOM DEFECT. BUT THREE AUTOMOBILES, SAME MAKE, WITH THE SAME PROBLEM? THIS DEFIES THE LAWS OF RANDOM CHANCE AND INDICATES AN ONGOING QUALIT…

Read full complaint

THIS IS THE THIRD CONSECUTIVE MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS I'VE OWNED THAT HAS DEVELOPED A PEELING PAINT PROBLEM (ALL PURCHASED NEW). ONE INSTANCE OF THIS I COULD CHALK UP TO LUCK OF THE DRAW, A RANDOM DEFECT. BUT THREE AUTOMOBILES, SAME MAKE, WITH THE SAME PROBLEM? THIS DEFIES THE LAWS OF RANDOM CHANCE AND INDICATES AN ONGOING QUALITY CONTROL PROBLEM WITH THESE VEHICLES. THIS 2008 MODEL MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS WAS PURCHASED NEW AND HAD ABOUT 55,000 MILES ON THE ODOMETER WHEN I NOTICED THE PEELING PAINT. THERE IS NO REASON ? BEYOND SHODDY QUALITY CONTROL ? THAT THIS KIND OF PAINT PROBLEM SHOULD BE OCCURRING ON A FIVE-YEAR-OLD CAR. THERE IS EVEN LESS REASON ? BEYOND SHODDY QUALITY CONTROL ? THAT IT SHOULD OCCUR ON THREE CARS OF THE SAME MODEL. INTERNET SEARCHES INDICATE THIS IS A FAIRLY COMMON PROBLEM WITH THESE VEHICLES ? AGAIN REFLECTING SHODDY QUALITY CONTROL BY FORD. ONE WOULD THINK, OVER THE 10 YEARS THAT THIS PROBLEM HAS OCCURRED WITH MY GRAND MARQUIS MODELS, THAT FORD WOULD HAVE TAKEN STEPS TO RESOLVE THE SITUATION. APPARENTLY NOT. THEY HAVEN'T EVEN BOTHERED TO RESPOND TO MY LETTER TO THEIR CUSTOMER CARE (?) DEPARTMENT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10479740

79,000 miles · Oct 1, 2012
Steering

THE LOWER RETAINER SLIPPED OUT (RETAINER TABS ARE CRACKED)OF THE COLUMN DISCONNECTING THE STEERING WHEEL FROM THE LOWER STEERING SHAFT. OBVIOUSLY COULD NOT CONTROL DIRECTION OF AUTOMOBILE - WAS ABLE TO STOP WITHOUT AN EVENT. THE NEW ASSEMBLY 'FORD PART NUMBER 7W1Z-3C529-A' LOOKS TO BE MADE AS THE ONE CURRENTLY IN MY AUTOMOBILE. …

Read full complaint

THE LOWER RETAINER SLIPPED OUT (RETAINER TABS ARE CRACKED)OF THE COLUMN DISCONNECTING THE STEERING WHEEL FROM THE LOWER STEERING SHAFT. OBVIOUSLY COULD NOT CONTROL DIRECTION OF AUTOMOBILE - WAS ABLE TO STOP WITHOUT AN EVENT. THE NEW ASSEMBLY 'FORD PART NUMBER 7W1Z-3C529-A' LOOKS TO BE MADE AS THE ONE CURRENTLY IN MY AUTOMOBILE. THIS WILL ALLOW THE SAME SCENARIO TO HAPPEN AGAIN! I MIGHT NOT BE SO LUCKY THE NEXT TIME! I HOPE THE REPLACEMENT ASSEMBLY ?FORD PART NUMBER 7W1Z-3C529-B? CORRECTS THIS PROBLEM FOR OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT SAFETY. PLEASE CORRECT THIS DEFECT FOR THE STANDARD MODELS. I AM REQUESTING A REVIEW AND RESOLVE BY FORD MOTOR CORPORATION PAYING TO CORRECT THIS SERIOUS DEFECT. THANKS FOR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER. [XXX] P.S. MY AUTOMOBILE IS IN THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT OF TEAM FORD OF NAVASOTA, TEXAS. THERE PHONE NUMBER IS 936-825-2225 INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10478155

42,000 miles · Jul 7, 2012
Structure

I HAVE 5 LOCATIONS WHERE THE PAINT IS PEELING OFF. HOOD, ROOF AND BACK WINDOW AREA. I HAVE SEEN OTHER GMS AND LINCOLNS WITH THE SAME PEELING. THE PEELING AREAS A GROWING IN SIZE. PIECES OF PAINT 1 INCH SQ COMES OFF AT A TIME. I SHOULD NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM ON A 4 YEAR OLD CAR. I THINK FORD SHOULD FIX THE PROBLEM. I HAD A 199…

Read full complaint

I HAVE 5 LOCATIONS WHERE THE PAINT IS PEELING OFF. HOOD, ROOF AND BACK WINDOW AREA. I HAVE SEEN OTHER GMS AND LINCOLNS WITH THE SAME PEELING. THE PEELING AREAS A GROWING IN SIZE. PIECES OF PAINT 1 INCH SQ COMES OFF AT A TIME. I SHOULD NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM ON A 4 YEAR OLD CAR. I THINK FORD SHOULD FIX THE PROBLEM. I HAD A 1993 GM ALSO WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. BUT ON THE 93 CAR IT STARTED WHEN THE CAR WAS OLDER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10464567

40,000 miles · Mar 26, 2012
Structure

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED WHEN HE NOTICED CORROSION ON THE ROOF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST. THE TECHNICIAN TOOK PICTURES OF THE VEHICLE AND SENT THEM TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT ASSIST WITH…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED WHEN HE NOTICED CORROSION ON THE ROOF. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST. THE TECHNICIAN TOOK PICTURES OF THE VEHICLE AND SENT THEM TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT ASSIST WITH THE REPAIRS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000.

NHTSA ODI #10453107

53,850 miles · Jan 20, 2012
Electrical System

LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS DO NOT WORK. HIGH BEAM WORKS AS WELL AS DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS. THE DEALER SAID THE LCM MODULE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED BUT DID NOT HAVE ONE IN STOCK AND WILL CALL ME WHEN IT COMES IN. MY CONCERN IS THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE AT LEAST THE YEAR 2000. NOW I HAVE A 100 DEDUCTIBLE SERVICE WARRANTY ON T…

Read full complaint

LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS DO NOT WORK. HIGH BEAM WORKS AS WELL AS DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS. THE DEALER SAID THE LCM MODULE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED BUT DID NOT HAVE ONE IN STOCK AND WILL CALL ME WHEN IT COMES IN. MY CONCERN IS THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE AT LEAST THE YEAR 2000. NOW I HAVE A 100 DEDUCTIBLE SERVICE WARRANTY ON THIS 2008 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS SO IT WILL NOT BE A GREAT EXPENSE FOR ME AS IT WOULD BE FOR OTHERS. THIS ISSUE SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED BY NOW. MY GUESS HERE IS FORD IS USING OVERSTOCKED EARLIER YEAR MODEL PARTS IN THE NEW MODELS BEING BUILT. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A DEFECTIVE SOLDERING ISSUE. WHY NO RECALL? *TT

NHTSA ODI #10444628

Official recalls

3

14V704000 · Steering:rack And Pinion:pinion Shaft

Nov 5, 2014

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2005-2011 Ford Crown Victoria, 2005-2011 Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles manufactured March 23, 2004, to August 30, 2011, and 2005-2011 Lincoln Town Car vehicles manufactured March 8, 2004, to August 30, 2011, and on which the upper intermediate shaft was serviced during the course of safety recall 13V-385. The prior repairs may not have been correctly performed.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Improper servicing of the upper intermediate shaft could cause the shaft to separate, which can then result in a loss of steering control, and increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Ford will notify the owners of vehicles whose repair records reflect that the upper intermediate steering shaft was repaired during the course of the prior recall 13V-385. Dealers will inspect and replace the upper immediate shaft if necessary free of charge. The recall began November 17, 2014. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 14S25.

13V385000 · Steering

Aug 29, 2013

Ford is recalling certain model year 2005-2011 Ford Crown Victoria (including Crown Victoria Police Interceptors), Mercury Grand Marquis, and Lincoln Town Car vehicles. The affected vehicles are currently registered or were originally sold in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Severe corrosion can seize the lower intermediate shaft which may cause the upper intermediate shaft to collapse and the steering column lower bearing to separate.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the lower bearing separates, the vehicle may experience a loss of steering, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners and dealers will replace the lower intermediate shaft, free of charge. The upper intermediate shaft and steering column lower bearing will be inspected to identify any damage that may have occurred as a result of lower intermediate shaft corrosion, and repaired or replaced as necessary. If the steering column lower bearing has separated, a retainer clip will be installed. The recall began on October 23, 2013. Owners may contact Ford at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's recall number is 13S08.

07V270000 · Suspension:front:hub

Jun 26, 2007

ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES, A FRONT WHEEL BEARING AND HUB ASSEMBLY MAY FRACTURE DUE TO IMPROPER HEAT TREATMENT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF A HUB FRACTURES, IT MAY POTENTIALLY DETACH FROM THE WHEEL KNUCKLE, RESULTING IN THE WHEEL BEING RETAINED ONLY BY THE BRAKE CALIPER ASSEMBLY. AS A RESULT, THE WHEEL MAY SEPARATE FROM THE VEHICLE POTENTIALLY RESULTING IN A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT BOTH FRONT WHEEL BEARING AND HUB ASSEMBLIES AND REPLACE THEM FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 22, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.

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

1

PE08060 · Tire Valve Cracking

Opened Oct 14, 2008 · Closed Apr 9, 2009

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Tires:valve

ON OCTOBER 14, 2008, ODI OPENED PE08-060 TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF CRACKED AND LEAKING SNAP-IN TIRE VALVES IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2007 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY.THE VALVES WERE SUPPLIED TO FORD BY TOPSEAL AUTO-PARTS, A SUBSIDIARY OF THE SHANGHAI BAOLONG AUTOMOTIVE CORPORATION IN CHINA.VALVES MADE BY TOPSEAL FOR AFTERMARKET SALE WERE THE SUBJECT OF TWO RECENT SAFETY RECALLS BY TECH INTERNATIONAL (08T-018) AND DILL AIR CONTROLS (08T-028), THE LATTER OF WHICH WAS INVESTIGATED BY ODI IN PE08-036 AND EA08-022.THE DEFECT CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY THE AFTERMARKET TIRE VALVE RECALLS BOTH INVOLVED INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING DUE TO ISSUES WITH THE SUPPLY OF ANTI-OZONANT CHEMICALS TO TOPSEAL FOR A PERIOD FROM JULY TO MID-NOVEMBER 2006.THE AFTERMARKET VALVES WERE COMPOUNDED WITH A BLEND OF EPDM AND NATURAL RUBBER, USING A RELATIVELY LOW PERCENTAGE OF EPDM (EPDM PROVIDES INHERENT RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING).HENCE, THE NEED FOR ANTI-OZONANT CHEMICALS AND THE PROBLEMS WITH CRACKING WHEN THOSE CHEMICALS WERE MISSING OR OUT OF SPECIFICATION IN SOME LOTS OF VALVES.BOTH RECALL CAMPAIGNS INVOLVED INSPECTION PROGRAMS TO IDENTIFY AND REPLACE VALVES WITH VISIBLE SURFACE CRACKING.ALTHOUGH THE TOPSEAL VALVES SUPPLIED TO FORD ALSO APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE ANTI-OZONANT SUPPLY ISSUES IN MID TO LATE-2006, FORD INDICATED THAT ITS VALVES WERE MADE AT A DIFFERENT TOPSEAL PRODUCTION LINE AND WERE COMPOUNDED WITH A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF EPDM RUBBER TO MEET MORE STRINGENT SPECIFICATIONS FROM FORD.ODI'S ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA PROVIDED BY FORD SHOWED THAT PROBLEMS WITH CRACKED TIRE VALVES WERE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER FOR MY 2007 VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 2006 THROUGH MARCH 2007.FORD RESPONDED BY IMPLEMENTING CHANGES IN ITS MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR SNAP-IN RUBBER TIRE VALVES AND ALSO INCREASING THE QUALITY AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS FOR VALVES IMPORTED FOR USE IN ITS VEHICLES.WHILE THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM RATES ARE ELEVATED FOR SUBJECT VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 2006 THROUGH MARCH 2007, THE RATES OF LEAKING VALVES ARE WELL BELOW ONE PERCENT OF PRODUCTION FOR EACH OF THE PEAK MONTHS FOR ALL OF THE AFFECTED MODELS.A SUBSTANTIAL MAJORITY OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH TIRE PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEMS (TPMS) WHICH WARN THE DRIVER WHEN ANY TIRE PRESSURES DROPS BELOW 25 PERCENT OF RECOMMENDED INFLATION PRESSURE. AS OUTLINED IN A LETTER TO ODI DATED APRIL 6, 2009, FORD HAS AGREED TO SEND LETTERS TO OWNERS OF CERTAIN MY 2007 AND 2008 FORD, LINCOLN AND MERCURY VEHICLES TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CRACKING CONCERN. LETTERS WILL BE SENT TO OWNERS OF VEHICLES BUILT FROM NOVEMBER 2006 THROUGH MAY 2007.OWNERS CAN OPT FOR A FREE DEALER INSPECTION.VALVES EXHIBITING SURFACE CRACKS OR AIR LEAKAGE RELATED TO OZONE ATTACK WILL BE REPLACED BY FORD UNDER ITS NORMAL WARRANTY TERMS.FORD EXPECTS TO SEND THE LETTER BY APPROXIMATELY MID-MAY 2009. BASED ON THE USE OF TPMS IN THE MAJORITY OF SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE RELATIVELY LOW RATES OF REPAIRS ASSOCIATED WITH LEAKING VALVES AND RESULTANT TIRE DAMAGE, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE ACTIONS FORD HAS AGREED TO TAKE WILL PROVIDE EFFECTIVE AND EXPEDITIOUS RESOLUTION FOR VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT DURING THE PERIOD WHEN VALVES WITH INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING WERE MOST LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN USED IN VEHICLE PRODUCTION.FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF THIS MATTER WOULD NOT BE AN EFFICIENT ALLOCATION OF AGENCY RESOURCES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO