NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
440 reports85,000 miles · Nov 24, 2009
Wheels
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. THREE OF THE STEEL WHEELS HAVE DEVELOPED CRACKS. THIS CONDITIONS CAUSES THE TIRES TO LOSE AIR PRESSURE. A TECHNICIAN FROM THE DEALER CONFIRMED THE FAILURE, BUT REFERRED HIM TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED, BUT NO ASSISTANCE WAS PROVIDED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPR…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. THREE OF THE STEEL WHEELS HAVE DEVELOPED CRACKS. THIS CONDITIONS CAUSES THE TIRES TO LOSE AIR PRESSURE. A TECHNICIAN FROM THE DEALER CONFIRMED THE FAILURE, BUT REFERRED HIM TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED, BUT NO ASSISTANCE WAS PROVIDED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 98,000. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 85,000.
NHTSA ODI #10293361
50,000 miles · Nov 2, 2009
Air BagsElectrical SystemFuel System, Gasoline
I PURCHASED A 2002 MERCURY SABLE IN SEPTEMBER, 2006. ON JANUARY 19, 2007 WHILE TURNING INTO MY DRIVEWAY GOING 3-5 MILES AN HOUR BOTH FRONTAL AIRBAGS DEPLOYED CAUSING AN ESTIMATED $3,000.00 TO $4,000.00 IN DAMAGES. THE DEALER HAS REFUSED TO ASSIST ME SAYING I BOUGHT THE CAR "AS IS". THEY TOLD ME TO FILE THE CLAIM WITH MY INSURAN…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A 2002 MERCURY SABLE IN SEPTEMBER, 2006. ON JANUARY 19, 2007 WHILE TURNING INTO MY DRIVEWAY GOING 3-5 MILES AN HOUR BOTH FRONTAL AIRBAGS DEPLOYED CAUSING AN ESTIMATED $3,000.00 TO $4,000.00 IN DAMAGES. THE DEALER HAS REFUSED TO ASSIST ME SAYING I BOUGHT THE CAR "AS IS". THEY TOLD ME TO FILE THE CLAIM WITH MY INSURANCE COMPANY. THE INSURANCE COMPANY SAID THEY COULD DO NOTHING "THERE WAS NO IMPACT". FORD MOTOR COMPANY SAID THERE WAS A 50,000 MILE WARRANTY. YOUR DEPARTMENT SENT ME A SERVICE TECHNICAL BULLETIN STATING THAT FORD KNEW OF THIS PROBLEM IN MAY, 2002. I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO GET ANYONE (IE: DEALER, INSURANCE COMPANY, FINANCE COMPANY, OR MANUFACTURER) TO HELP ME WITH THIS ISSUE. IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR 2009, THE FUEL PUMP, DRIVER, COMPUTER, AND TRANSMISSION WENT OUT IN THIS CAR. I HAVE SPENT OVER $1,600.00 IN REPAIR OF THIS VEHICLE . DUE TO THE DEPRECIATION OF THE CAR, THE MECHANICAL FAILURES, AND THE SAFETY ISSUE OF NO AIRBAGS THE VEHICLE IS WORTH NOTHING. I STILL OWE THE FINANCE COMPANY $6,000.00 AND HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DRIVE THE CAR FOR THE LAST 10 MONTHS. I WAS RECENTLY DIRECTED TO RESEARCH THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT OF 1974, THE MAGNUSON-MOSS WARRANTY ACT, SALE OF GOODS ACT 1979, ALABAMA LEMON LAWS, BUYERS REMORSE LAW, TRADE COMMISSION ACT, UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE, AND CONSUMER RIGHTS WHEN BUYING A USED CAR BY THE BBB. I HAVE BEEN DENIED MY RIGHTS. NO CONSUMER SHOULD HAVE TO EXPERIENCE WHAT I HAVE. EVERY CONSUMER HAS THE RIGHT TO EXPECT A CAR THEY PURCHASE TO MEET REASONABLE STANDARDS. THERE WAS A GRAVE ISSUE OF SAFETY FOR ME AND MY GRANDDAUGHTER WHEN THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. THANK GOD WE WERE NOT INJURED. ALL OF THESE FAILURES HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPAIRED THE USE, VALUE, AND SAFETY OF THIS VEHICLE! THEY AROSE OUT OF THE ORDINARY USE OF THE VEHICLE AND NOT AS A RESULT OF ABUSE. THE MOTOR VEHICLE IS OUT OF SERVICE AND IN THE CUSTODY OF THE DEALER DUE TO REPAIR ATTEMPTS, ONE OF WHICH OCCURRED DURING THE LEMON LAW RIGHTS PERIOD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10290614
140,000 miles · Oct 2, 2009
StructureVisibility
LEAKING CONNECTION BETWEEN WINDSHIELD WATER AND BLOWING MOTOR OF HEATING/VENTILATION CAUSING WINDOWS TO FOG UP AFTER STARTING AND BEGINNING DRIVING. WHEN OPENING THE BLOWER MOTOR COMPARTMENT YOU CAN ACTUALLY WATER SEE DRIPPING OUT. ALSO A SOAKING WET FLOOR WILL OCCUR RIGHT AFTER A SEVERE RAINSTORM. THIS IS A MAYOR SAFETY ISSUE D…
Read full complaint
LEAKING CONNECTION BETWEEN WINDSHIELD WATER AND BLOWING MOTOR OF HEATING/VENTILATION CAUSING WINDOWS TO FOG UP AFTER STARTING AND BEGINNING DRIVING. WHEN OPENING THE BLOWER MOTOR COMPARTMENT YOU CAN ACTUALLY WATER SEE DRIPPING OUT. ALSO A SOAKING WET FLOOR WILL OCCUR RIGHT AFTER A SEVERE RAINSTORM. THIS IS A MAYOR SAFETY ISSUE DUE TO BAD VISIBILITY! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10286119
95,000 miles · Aug 29, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
THIS IS A RECURRING PROBLEM WITH MY 2002 MERCURY SABLE. WATER LEAKS INTO THE INTERIOR BLOWER MOTOR AND SHORTS IT OUT. I'VE REPLACED THE MOTOR AND SWITCH 3 TIMES EACH OVER THE LAST YEAR AND IT KEEPS HAPPENING. FORD WANTS ABOUT $400 TO REPAIR. I DISCOVERED THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE THIS PROBLEM WITH THIS MAKE AND MODEL AND THE TAU…
Read full complaint
THIS IS A RECURRING PROBLEM WITH MY 2002 MERCURY SABLE. WATER LEAKS INTO THE INTERIOR BLOWER MOTOR AND SHORTS IT OUT. I'VE REPLACED THE MOTOR AND SWITCH 3 TIMES EACH OVER THE LAST YEAR AND IT KEEPS HAPPENING. FORD WANTS ABOUT $400 TO REPAIR. I DISCOVERED THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE THIS PROBLEM WITH THIS MAKE AND MODEL AND THE TAURUS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10282235
77,000 miles · Aug 25, 2009
Suspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE WHICH WAS PURCHASED IN 2006. HE STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE COIL SPRING BROKE ON THE VEHICLE WHILE IN THE REVERSE POSITION AT A SPEED OF LESS THAN 5 MPH. THE SHARP END OF THE COIL SPRING PUNCTURED THE TIRE AND FLATTENED IT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND ALTHOUGH THERE WERE NO …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE WHICH WAS PURCHASED IN 2006. HE STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE COIL SPRING BROKE ON THE VEHICLE WHILE IN THE REVERSE POSITION AT A SPEED OF LESS THAN 5 MPH. THE SHARP END OF THE COIL SPRING PUNCTURED THE TIRE AND FLATTENED IT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND ALTHOUGH THERE WERE NO RECALLS AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (NHTSA ACTION NUMBER : EA08018) WAS OPENED TO ASSESS THE FREQUENCY, SCOPE AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE UNDER 77,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. UPDATED 10/5/09 *CN UPDATED 10/07/09*JB
NHTSA ODI #10281729
55,900 miles · Aug 7, 2009
Suspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. WHILE BACKING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED, THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE TIRE FLATTENED. THE CONTACT EXAMINED THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE COIL SPRING PUNCTURED THE TIRE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 55,900.
NHTSA ODI #10279685
55,623 miles · Jul 5, 2009
Suspension
I HAVE A 2002 MERCURY SABLE THAT HAS ONLY 55,623 MILES ON IT. BOTH OF THE REAR SPRINGS BROKE. THE SPRING ON THE DRIVERS SIDE BROKE IN A WAY THAT IT PUNCTURED THE TIRE. THANKFULLY I HAPPENED TO BE BACKING OUT OF MY DRIVE WAY WHEN I HEARD THE NOISE OF THE SPRING RUBBING AND NOT ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN THE TIRE WAS PUNCTURED. I THIN…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2002 MERCURY SABLE THAT HAS ONLY 55,623 MILES ON IT. BOTH OF THE REAR SPRINGS BROKE. THE SPRING ON THE DRIVERS SIDE BROKE IN A WAY THAT IT PUNCTURED THE TIRE. THANKFULLY I HAPPENED TO BE BACKING OUT OF MY DRIVE WAY WHEN I HEARD THE NOISE OF THE SPRING RUBBING AND NOT ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN THE TIRE WAS PUNCTURED. I THINK THE SPRINGS SHOULD LAST LONGER THAN 55,000 MILES. I CONTACTED MY DEALER WHO SAID THIS WAS NOT COVERED UNDER ANY WARRANTY. I WAS ALSO TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT MANY OTHER PEOPLE HAVE HAD THIS SAME PROBLEM. I CONTACTED FORD AND THEY WILL NOT COVER THIS REPAIR. I THINK THAT THIS COULD BE A VERY DANGEROUS FAILURE WHEN THE SPRING CAN BREAK IN A WAY THAT IT POPS THE TIRE SINCE PEOPLE COULD BE DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. FORD SHOULD BE RECALLING THIS VEHICLE AND REPLACING THESE SPRINGS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10275796
45,000 miles · Jul 2, 2009
Suspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE COIL SPRING FAILED AND PUNCTURED THE FRONT TIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL REPAIR SHOP AND THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE COIL SPRING FAILED. THE VEHICLE IS CURRENTLY BEING REPAIRED. THE ESTIMATED REPAIR COST HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE COIL SPRING FAILED AND PUNCTURED THE FRONT TIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL REPAIR SHOP AND THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE COIL SPRING FAILED. THE VEHICLE IS CURRENTLY BEING REPAIRED. THE ESTIMATED REPAIR COST HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED. THE CONTACT IS IN THE PROCESS OF NOTIFYING THE MANUFACTURER. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 45,000.
NHTSA ODI #10275632
98,000 miles · Jun 10, 2009
Suspension
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. IN NOVEMBER OF 2008, WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE REAR COIL SPRING FAILED AND PUNCTURED ONE OF THE REAR TIRES. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AT A TIRE DEALER. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. IN MARCH OF 2009, THE CONTACT BELIEVED THAT HE HAD A FLAT TIRE WHILE DRIVING. AAA ARRIVED AND INSPECTED THE …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MERCURY SABLE. IN NOVEMBER OF 2008, WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE REAR COIL SPRING FAILED AND PUNCTURED ONE OF THE REAR TIRES. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AT A TIRE DEALER. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. IN MARCH OF 2009, THE CONTACT BELIEVED THAT HE HAD A FLAT TIRE WHILE DRIVING. AAA ARRIVED AND INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRONT COIL SPRINGS FAILED AND CAUSED THE TIRE TO FLATTEN. THE DEALER STATED THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS FOR HIS MODEL VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER HAS NOT BEEN NOTIFIED. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 105,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 98,000.
NHTSA ODI #10273316
36,251 miles · Jun 8, 2009
Service Brakes, Electric
WHEN HAVING TO MAKE AN EMERGENCY STOP YOU BETTER PRAY, THIS IS ONE OF THE WORST CARS I HAVE EVER DRIVEN FOR HAVING TO MAKE A PANIC STOP. I HAVE HAD THIS PROBLEM CHECKED BY THE DEALER ONLY TO SAY THERE IS NO PROBLEM WELL, YES THERE IS IF I AM ONLY ONE OF 50 OTHER PEOPLE WHO SEEMS TO HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. WHAT HAPPENED TO SAFETY …
Read full complaint
WHEN HAVING TO MAKE AN EMERGENCY STOP YOU BETTER PRAY, THIS IS ONE OF THE WORST CARS I HAVE EVER DRIVEN FOR HAVING TO MAKE A PANIC STOP. I HAVE HAD THIS PROBLEM CHECKED BY THE DEALER ONLY TO SAY THERE IS NO PROBLEM WELL, YES THERE IS IF I AM ONLY ONE OF 50 OTHER PEOPLE WHO SEEMS TO HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. WHAT HAPPENED TO SAFETY FOR THE PEOPLE? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10273157
NHTSA investigations
4PE12033 · Speed Control Cable Damage
Opened Oct 24, 2012 · Closed Jun 26, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:cables; Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Vehicle Speed Control:cables
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Vehicle Speed Control:cruise Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
Vehicle Speed Control
On June 21, 2013, Ford initiated Customer Satisfaction Program 13B04 to address a concern with Speed Control Cable damage in certain model year (MY) 2000 through 2003 Taurus and Sable vehicles equipped with 3.0L 4V Duratec engines and built at the Chicago assembly plant.In the dealer letter for the program, Ford indicates that the Speed Control Cables on affected vehicles may be susceptible to damage or becoming partially disconnected during under hood vehicle maintenance (e.g., replacing a battery or changing the air filter) and that a damaged Speed Control Cable could interfere with the throttle's full return to idle when the accelerator pedal is released.Ford's program instructs dealers to inspect the Speed Control Cables and replace any with any portion of either collar retention tab missing.Dealers will install a Collar Reinforcement Clip at the Speed Control Cable collar in all vehicles. Figure 1 shows the location of the Speed Control Cable in the engine compartment and the proximity of the battery and air filter.The failure mode of the cable assembly is associated with the plastic collar used to secure the cable to a bracket near the throttle body (Figure 2).Damage to one or both retention tabs used to secure the cable ferrule within the collar may allow the ferrule to become disconnected from the collar when the throttle is opened during accelerator pedal application.Additional examples of Speed Control Cables with damaged collar retention tabs and partial ferrule displacement are shown in Figures 3 through 5.If the displacement pulls the ferrule completely out of the collar, the ferrule end may contact the face of the collar when the accelerator pedal is released and the throttle is returning to idle (Figure 6).This results in a throttle stuck at approximately 26-29% open.Testing conducted at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center found that brake booster vacuum may become depleted, resulting in reduced brake effectiveness, if the brake is applied repeatedly when the throttle is stuck at this position.Drivers who experienced this condition have reported being surprised that the engine speed did not drop as expected and in some cases misjudged the degree of braking required to slow the vehicle.Some drivers reported difficulty in braking the vehicle and responded by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off.One minor crash occurred when the vehicle contacted a roadside fence post after the driver responded to the stuck throttle by shifting the car to neutral, turning the engine off and coasting to the side of a roadway with no shoulder, resulting in approximately $400 damage to the vehicle.There were four crashes reported which were attributed to increased stopping distance caused by the increased engine power and/or reduced brake effectiveness, including two of the complaints to ODI.In one crash reported to ODI (VOQ 10516101), the subject vehicle allegedly hit the back end of a truck at approximately 40 mph causing about $2000 damage.In the other crash complaint to ODI (VOQ 10501834), the subject vehicle side-swiped a vehicle as the driver was unable to stop in time and attempted to maneuver around a line of vehicles stopped at a traffic light.When the tow truck driver subsequently started the incident vehicle, the engine was still racing and it was verified that the Speed Control Cable ferrule was stuck on the collar.After further investigation, ODI does not consider the crashes reported in VOQs 10456249 and 10159399 to be related to the Speed Control Cable problem.
EA08018 · Front Suspension Coil Spring Fracture
Opened Aug 28, 2008 · Closed Jun 30, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:front:springs:coil Springs
To date, ODI is aware of 2,401 non-duplicative complaints related to the alleged defect. In addition, ODI is aware of 1,411 subject vehicles with one or more warranty claims related to the alleged defect. In total, ODI is aware of 3,645 unique subject vehicles that have experienced one or more front suspension coil spring fractures. ODI is also aware of four minor crashes related to the alleged defect resulting in one minor injury.With greater than eight years of exposure, a large subject vehicle population and approximately 2,052 reported front tire punctures caused by fractured coil springs (at all speeds), there have been no reported severe crashes, deaths or injuries related to the alleged defect. The real world consequences of these defective coil springs have been a small number of minor control problems that resulted in minor damage; suggesting that the effect of the defect on vehicle control is minor.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted. 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 monitor this issue and will take further action if warranted by the circumstances. See the EA08-018 Engineering Analysis Closing Report for more details.
RP03001 · Brake/accelerator Pedal Application
Opened Oct 31, 2003 · Closed Mar 23, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages
MS. RODMAN REPORTED THAT AFTER HER VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED FOR THE RECALL, HER MOTHER EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN ACCELERATION AND CRASHED THE SABLE INTO A LIGHT POLE.PREVIOUSLY NHTSA HAD CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION FOR THIS ISSUE (PE02-035) THAT RESULTED IN THE RECALL (02V-266) OF 369,000 MY 2000-2002 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS TO INSURE THAT THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE PEDALS WAS AT LEAST 50MM..A REVIEW OF ODI'S DATABASE FOR COMPLAINTS REGARDING RECALL 02V-266 DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY RECALL REMEDY COMPLAINTS OTHER THAN THE PETITIONER'S.MS. RODMAN?S VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY ODI USING FORD?S SPECIAL TOOL AND HER VEHICLE WAS FOUND TO EXCEED 50MM.ALSO, THE LATERAL MOVEMENT OF THE PEDALS WAS FOUND NOT TO BE EXCESSIVE RELATIVE TO OTHER COMPARABLE TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES.THEREFORE, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER REQUIRING FORD TO PROVIDE A DIFFERENT REMEDY FOR THIS DEFECT.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.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS ANALYSIS, PLEASE REFER TO THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE DATED MARCH 23, 2004 (VOL 69, NO 56, PAGES 13619-13620).
RQ03008 · Brake Light Switch Failure
Opened Oct 23, 2003 · Closed Mar 5, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Additional source detail variants (5)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights:switch
FORD CONDUCTED A RECALL IN MARCH, 2001 TO CORRECT A DEFECT AFFECTING THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2001 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH POWER ADJUSTABLE PEDALS (RECALL 01V-078).RQ03-008 WAS OPENED TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE REMEDY AND SCOPE OF 01V-078.ODI'S ANALYSIS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS WITH POST-REPAIR FAILURES IN RECALLED VEHICLES,FAILURES IN MY 2001-02 VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL 01V-078, AND FAILURES IN MY 2000 VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.(NOTE: THE MANUFACTURER FAILURE DATA IN THIS RESUME INCLUDES ALL CRASHES AND INJURIES, BUT THE COMPLAINT INFORMATION IS LIMITED TO MY 2001-02 VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF RECALL 01V-078.)ON MARCH 1, 2004, FORD NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MY 2000 THROUGH EARLY-2003 TAURUS AND SABLE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND MY 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH FIXED PEDALS (RECALL 04V-106).THE NOTIFICATION IDENTIFIED THREE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BRAKE LIGHT CIRCUIT FAILURES:(1) CONTINUING GREASE CONTAMINATION ISSUES THAT PROMPTED 01V-078; (2) MISALIGNMENT OF THE BOOSTER ROD PIN AND THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH; AND (3) WIRE ASSEMBLY FATIGUE.THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS WERE LIMITED TO VEHICLES WITH ADJUSTABLE PEDALS AND THE LATTER CONDITION AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH FIXED PEDALS.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND ASSOCIATED WIRING REPLACED WITH A RE-DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH AND WIRING ASSEMBLY.
Illustration