← New search

2003 Mercury Mountaineer

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2003 Mercury Mountaineer do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 117.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

117 reports with mileage · 35 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.

  • Structure. Review the 59 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 42 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. 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.

6 crash reports5 fire reports9 injury reports

Power Train complaints

42 reports
Clear category filter
78,000 miles · Oct 12, 2009
Power Train

I HAVE A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER WITH 78000 MILES ON IT. THE TRANSMISSION WAS REPLACED THREE MONTHS AGO FOR SLIPPING AND NOT DOWNSHIFTING IT IS NOW GONG BACK IN TOMORROW TO BE REPAIRED FOR NEEDS TO RECALL THIS VEHICLE IT ISN'T VERY GOOD. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10287123

127,000 miles · Jun 29, 2009
Electrical SystemFuel System, GasolinePower Train

2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER 4.6L-V8: WHEN THE VEHICLE IS NOT UNDER ACCELERATION [STOP SIGN/SIGNAL, EXITING AN EXPRESSWAY TO A SURFACE STREET, COASTING] THE ENGINE WILL NOT HOLD IDLE, THEN STALL. THE STEERING & BRAKES ARE COMPROMISED WHEN THE ENGINE STALLS. TO RESTART THE ENGINE, THE HEADLIGHTS GO DARK FOR A MOMENT...THIS IS A VER…

Read full complaint

2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER 4.6L-V8: WHEN THE VEHICLE IS NOT UNDER ACCELERATION [STOP SIGN/SIGNAL, EXITING AN EXPRESSWAY TO A SURFACE STREET, COASTING] THE ENGINE WILL NOT HOLD IDLE, THEN STALL. THE STEERING & BRAKES ARE COMPROMISED WHEN THE ENGINE STALLS. TO RESTART THE ENGINE, THE HEADLIGHTS GO DARK FOR A MOMENT...THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS MATTER. DECELERATING FROM AN EXPRESSWAY TO A SURFACE STREET, ON A CURVED EXIT RAMP , AT NIGHT MAKES FOR AN OUT OF CONTROL SITUATION WHERE THE DRIVER CAN NOT SEE BECAUSE OF ENGINE FAILURE! I'VE REPLACED THE THROTTLE POSITION CENSOR [TPS] WITH NO IMPROVEMENT. THE DEALER OFFERS REPLACEMENT OF PARTS $1500, AND NO GUARANTEE OF SOLVING THE PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE IS USELESS TO ME FORE IT IS A HAZARD TO BE ON THE ROAD...FOR ME AND ANYONE ELSE DRIVING NEAR ME. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10275214

88,000 miles · Jun 3, 2009
Power Train

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED DIFFICULTY SHIFTING OUT OF PARK AND INTO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE ALSO HAS DIFFICULTY CHANGING GEARS. THE CONTACT FEELS THAT THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE WITH THE TRANSMISSION BECAUSE THE INABILITY TO CHANGE GEARS COULD CAUSE A CRASH. THE CUR…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED DIFFICULTY SHIFTING OUT OF PARK AND INTO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE ALSO HAS DIFFICULTY CHANGING GEARS. THE CONTACT FEELS THAT THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE WITH THE TRANSMISSION BECAUSE THE INABILITY TO CHANGE GEARS COULD CAUSE A CRASH. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 88,000.

NHTSA ODI #10272769

69,949 miles · Mar 4, 2009
Power Train

I DRIVE MY HUSBAND'S 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER IT HAS 69000 MILES ON IT NOW AND WE BOUGHT IT USED DEC 2004. WHEN THE SUV SHIFTS INTO 3 OR 4TH GEAR IT CLUNKS OR SHUTTERS. WE HAVE TAKEN IT IN TO THE DEALERS SEVERAL TIMES HAVING IT RETURNED AND TOLD THERE IS NOTHING WRONG. IN DECEMBER 2007 WE TOOK IT IN AGAIN WITH THE SAME COMPLAINT…

Read full complaint

I DRIVE MY HUSBAND'S 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER IT HAS 69000 MILES ON IT NOW AND WE BOUGHT IT USED DEC 2004. WHEN THE SUV SHIFTS INTO 3 OR 4TH GEAR IT CLUNKS OR SHUTTERS. WE HAVE TAKEN IT IN TO THE DEALERS SEVERAL TIMES HAVING IT RETURNED AND TOLD THERE IS NOTHING WRONG. IN DECEMBER 2007 WE TOOK IT IN AGAIN WITH THE SAME COMPLAINT AND THEY DID A TRANSMISSION FLUSH. NOW WHEN ACCELERATING UP TO 35 THE RPM WOULD RAISE UP TO 4,000, LIKE IT WAS SLIPPING.THEN IT SHIFT INTO WRONG GEAR. THE OVERDRIVE OFF LIGHT ON THE DASH STARTED FLASHING. NEXT DAY SERVICE ENGINE SOON LIGHT IS ON. WE TOOK IT TO DEALERSHIP THEY CLAIM THEY WON'T KNOW WHAT IS WRONG WITH IT UNTIL THEY TAKE IT APART AND IT COULD COST ANY WHERE FROM $3,000 TO $4,000. WE REPEATEDLY TOOK IT TO THE SAME DEALER AND THEY WOULD NEVER FIND ANYTHING WRONG AND NOW THAT THE WARRANTY IS EXPIRED WE HAVE A MAJOR EXPENSE NOT COVERED.WE ENDED UP TAKING IT TO A TRANSMISSION REPAIR SHOP WHERE THEY WERE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROBLEM. THE OVERDRIVE PISTON PUT IN AT THE ASSEMBLY FACTORY WAS MADE OF ALUMINUM AND IS A DEFECTIVE PART. SO AFTER 1 WEEK WITHOUT A CAR, THE NEW OVERHAUL KIT, OVERDRIVE PISTON AND TORQUE CONVERTER WE SPENT A GRANT TOTAL $1,895.83. THIS IS SOMETHING THE DEALER SHOULD HAVE FIXED WHEN WE FIRST COMPLAINED ABOUT IT. I CAN HONESTLY SAY WE WILL NEVER GO BACK THAT DEALER AGAIN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10260754

50,515 miles · Nov 27, 2008
Power Train

PURCHASED THE 2003 MERCURY, MOUNTAINEER, AWD VEHICLE NEW ON 6/17/03. ON 05/10/06 AT 50515, THE LEFT FRONT HUB BEARING HAD TO BE REPLACED. A VISUAL EXAM INDICATED WATER DAMAGE WITH BEARING SEIZURE. ON 11/24/08 AT 88826, THE SAME PROBLEM AS THE EARLIER HUB REPLACEMENT WAS DIAGNOSED. AT THIS TIME BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT FRONT B…

Read full complaint

PURCHASED THE 2003 MERCURY, MOUNTAINEER, AWD VEHICLE NEW ON 6/17/03. ON 05/10/06 AT 50515, THE LEFT FRONT HUB BEARING HAD TO BE REPLACED. A VISUAL EXAM INDICATED WATER DAMAGE WITH BEARING SEIZURE. ON 11/24/08 AT 88826, THE SAME PROBLEM AS THE EARLIER HUB REPLACEMENT WAS DIAGNOSED. AT THIS TIME BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT FRONT BEARING HUBS HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE RIGHT FRONT HUB WAS PRACTICALLY FROZEN AND SHOWED SIGNS OF HEAT FATIGUE TO THE OUTER CASING. BOTH HUBS SHOWED RUST AND PITTING. I MAINTAINED POSSESSION OF BOTH HUBS FOR FUTURE REFERENCE. THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT HAD THE HUB LOCKED UP ON THE HIGHWAY WHILE TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, (70MPH) A POTENTIAL FOR A ROLLOVER ACCIDENT EXISTED. ON 11/21/06, A REAR DIFFERENTIAL NOISE WAS DIAGNOSED. THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL WAS REBUILT. ON 11/24/08 THE NOISE WAS AGAIN HEARD COMING FROM THE REAR. APPARENTLY THE NOISE FROM THE FRONT BEARINGS DAMAGE SHIELDED THE REAR DIFF. NOISE. I NOTICE ONLY ONE OTHER COMPLAINT FOR THE PARTICULAR MODEL YEAR, HOWEVER THE BASIC DRIVE TRAIN DESIGN HAS NOT CHANGED FOR MERCURY OR FORD EXPLORER FOR SOME TIME AND OTHER MODEL YEARS MAY ALSO HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS PROBLEM. THERE IS NO REASON THAT A REAR DIFFERENTIAL SHOULD NOT GO 100000 PLUS MILES WITHOUT A PROBLEM AND LIKEWISE THERE IS NO REASON THAT THE FRONT HUBS SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ROLL UP 100,000 MILES WITHOUT A PROBLEM. THIS IS CLEARLY A DESIGN FLAW. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10250011

61,000 miles · Aug 1, 2008
Power Train

POWERTRAIN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10236601

60,000 miles · Apr 10, 2008
Power Train

TRANSMISSION PROBLEMS STARTED AT 62000 MILES. FORD DONE REPAIRS ON 2 DIFFERENT OCCASIONS TWO DAYS AFTER THE WARRANTY WENT OUT THE TRANSMISSION WENT OUT AND IT STARTED SMOKING OUT FROM UNDER IT. THE VEHICLE IS A LEMON!!!! THEY NEED TO RECALL MERCURY MOUNTAINEERS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10224098

Mileage unknown · Mar 1, 2008
Electrical SystemPower TrainFire

UPON LEAVING WORK IN THE AM I STARTED MY VEHICLE AND NONE OF MY DASH GAUGES WERE WORKING NOR WERE ANY OF THE ELECTRIC WINDOW OR THE RADIO. I THEN CALLED MY MECHANIC WHO ADV ME TO BRING IT TO HIM. WHILE I WAS EN ROUTE TO TAKE MY VEHICLE TO HIM IT STARTED MAKING A WEIRD NOISE LIKE I WAS IN A HELICOPTER AND I STARTED SMELLING THIS…

Read full complaint

UPON LEAVING WORK IN THE AM I STARTED MY VEHICLE AND NONE OF MY DASH GAUGES WERE WORKING NOR WERE ANY OF THE ELECTRIC WINDOW OR THE RADIO. I THEN CALLED MY MECHANIC WHO ADV ME TO BRING IT TO HIM. WHILE I WAS EN ROUTE TO TAKE MY VEHICLE TO HIM IT STARTED MAKING A WEIRD NOISE LIKE I WAS IN A HELICOPTER AND I STARTED SMELLING THIS WEIRD SMELL LIKE OIL BURNING AT FIRST IT THOUGHT THEY MESSED UP MY OIL CHANGE AND I WAS FURIOUS. UPON ARRIVING AT THE SHOP HE IMMEDIATELY SMELLED THE ODOR PUT IT UP ON THE LIFT AND FOUND OUT THAT MY FRONT DIFFERENTIAL HAD GONE BAD. I PURCHASED ANOTHER ONE AND HI INSTALLED IT AND I TOOK IT HOME BECAUSE HE COULD NOT FIND OUT WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE GAUGES ON MY WAY TO TAKE IT TO A DEALER I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AND SMOKE AND WAS COMING FROM THE FRONT AND BACK UNDER MY CAR ANOTHER DRIVING PASSING BY SIGNALED SOMETHING WAS COMING FROM BENEATH MY VEHICLE AND UPON THAT I HEARD A LOUD BANG POPPING NOISE AND MY VEHICLE LOST POWER AND I HAD TO HAVE IT TOWED BACK TO THE MECHANIC ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT AGAIN THE DIFFERENTIAL FAILED. I STILL DO NOT HAVE MY VEHICLE AND THE GAUGES WINDOWS AND RADIO STILL DOES NOT WORK. MY MECHANIC CHECKED ALL THE FUSES AND ADV THAT THERE WAS NO PROBLEM WITH THEM. HE DID HOWEVER CALL A MERCURY DEALER WHO ADV HE HAS HAD TO CHANGE SOME OF THE FRONT DIFFERENTIALS ON OTHER MOUNTAINEERS BUT WAS NOT CERTAIN AS TO HOW MANY WERE DONE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10219772

60,000 miles · Jul 11, 2007
Power TrainFire

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE CONTACT NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM THE FRONT AND REAR OF THE VEHICLE. SHE THEN HEARD A LOUD BANG AND THE STEERING WHEEL BEGAN TO SHAKE. THE VEHICLE LOST POWER, BUT DID NOT SHUT OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED. THE FORD DEALER DIAGNOSED THE VEHICLE AS NEEDIN…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE CONTACT NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM THE FRONT AND REAR OF THE VEHICLE. SHE THEN HEARD A LOUD BANG AND THE STEERING WHEEL BEGAN TO SHAKE. THE VEHICLE LOST POWER, BUT DID NOT SHUT OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED. THE FORD DEALER DIAGNOSED THE VEHICLE AS NEEDING THE FRONT END DIFFERENTIAL REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED WHEN THE CONTACT PICKED UP THE VEHICLE. SINCE THEN, THE FRONT END DIFFERENTIAL HAS BEEN REPLACED FIVE TIMES. THE FORD DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE CAUSE OF THE CONTINUOUS FAILURES OF THE REPLACEMENT PART. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE REAR LIFTGATE IS CRACKED. A VALID VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 64,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,000.

NHTSA ODI #10196047

10,000 miles · Feb 1, 2007
Power Train

PLEASE SEE THE ISSUE ABOUT THE TRANSMISSION NOT GOING INTO PARK PROPERLY. VERY DANGEROUS.... MR. MARK FIELDS, PRESIDENT OF FORD MOTOR COMPANY RE: VIN#[XXX] I OWN A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER, WITH 28000 MILES ON IT, WHICH I PURCHASED NEW FROM LAKEWOOD FORD IN NOV. 2003. IN 2005, I BROUGHT MY CAR IN WITH A FEW MINOR…

Read full complaint

PLEASE SEE THE ISSUE ABOUT THE TRANSMISSION NOT GOING INTO PARK PROPERLY. VERY DANGEROUS.... MR. MARK FIELDS, PRESIDENT OF FORD MOTOR COMPANY RE: VIN#[XXX] I OWN A 2003 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER, WITH 28000 MILES ON IT, WHICH I PURCHASED NEW FROM LAKEWOOD FORD IN NOV. 2003. IN 2005, I BROUGHT MY CAR IN WITH A FEW MINOR PROBLEMS, AT WHICH TIME I EXPLAINED TO THE SERVICE TECH THAT THE CAR WAS NOT SHIFTING INTO PARK PROPERLY AND WAS STICKING. AFTER HAVING THE CAR FOR A DAY, THEY RETURNED IT TO ME SAYING THEY COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING WRONG. YESTERDAY, MY WIFE TOOK AN ENTIRE DAY AND RENTED A CAR, SO THAT WE COULD BRING IT INTO FREEWAY FORD TO HAVE THEM CHECK THE TRANSMISSION AGAIN. THE SERVICE MANAGER OLEY SEEMED NICE ENOUGH IN HANDLING THE MATTER BUT THEN AT THE END OF THE DAY REPORTED BACK TO US THE FOLLOWING; 1)THE TRANSMISSION PROBLEM WAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH A SHIFT LOCK OUT AND IT WOULD COST US $265 DOLLARS TO REPLACE AND WAS NOT COVERED UNDER THE WARRANTY. THE WARRANTY ISSUE WITH THE TRANSMISSION IS UNACCEPTABLE AND I WOULD LIKE YOUR TEAM TO RECONSIDER. FIRST, IT IS INDEED PART OF THE POWER TRAIN AND IT IS UNFATHOMABLE TO ME THAT ANY COURT OF LAW WOULD CONSIDER IT OTHERWISE. SECOND, I'D THINK THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AS WELL, AND SHOULD SOMETHING HAPPEN WHERE THE CAR SLIPS OUT OF PARK AND KILLS SOMEONE, I CAN'T IMAGINE THE NHTSA WOULD FIND NO FAULT UPON YOUR COMPANY. I FRANKLY WAS TOTALLY SHOCKED AT THE RESPONSE I GOT FROM THE DEALER. I'VE OWNED MANY BRANDS OF NEW CARS, AND NO ONE HAS EVER CLAIMED SOMETHING AS OBVIOUS AS THIS (WITH DOCUMENTED HISTORY!) AS NOT COVERED IN WARRANTY. I CONSIDER MYSELF A PRETTY FAIR PERSON AND I'M NOT ONE TO MAKE A BIG ISSUE OUT OF SOMETHING BUT THIS IS JUST WRONG! IF THIS IS YOUR POLICY, IT'S NOW VERY CLEAR WHY FORD IS A FAILING COMPANY. THIS IS THE TYPE THING THAT WILL SHOW UP ON U-TUBE AND JUST CONTINUE LOSS OF CUSTOMER LOYALTY. *NM *JS

NHTSA ODI #10181352

Official recalls

0

No 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

2

EA09013 · Vehicle Rollaway Allegations

Opened Aug 18, 2009 · Closed Feb 12, 2013

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission:gear Position Indication (prndl); Power Train:automatic Transmission:lever And Linkage:column Shift; Steering; Steering:column; Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.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.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Additional source detail variants (5)

Power Train:automatic Transmission:gear Position Indication (prndl)

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.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.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Power Train:automatic Transmission:lever And Linkage:column Shift

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.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.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Steering:column

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.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.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Steering:column LOCKING:ANTI-THEFT Device

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.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.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

Steering

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.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.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

DP05005 · 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.