← New search

2002 Mitsubishi Montero

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Montero years

Owner complaints for the 2002 Mitsubishi Montero are substantially higher than the model-year median of 20.5.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

81 reports with mileage · 30 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.

  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 46 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes. Review the 21 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 8 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 reports1 fire reports5 injury reports

Engine And Engine Cooling complaints

8 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · May 3, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling

2000 MONTERO CHECK ENGINE SOON LIGHT ON CONTINUOUSLY STEPS TAKEN, REPLACED PLUGS,WIRES, COILS, TIMING BELT, IDLER PULLEY, THERMOSTAT, ENGINE HEAT INDICATOR RISES TO HOT THAN BACK TO NORMAL, ENGINE RUN'S SLUGGISH, NO POWER, SHIFTING IS DELAYED WHEN ON AN INCLINE AND HEAR A MUFFLED BACK FIRE ON OCCASION NO POWER. THIS SUV HAS HAD…

Read full complaint

2000 MONTERO CHECK ENGINE SOON LIGHT ON CONTINUOUSLY STEPS TAKEN, REPLACED PLUGS,WIRES, COILS, TIMING BELT, IDLER PULLEY, THERMOSTAT, ENGINE HEAT INDICATOR RISES TO HOT THAN BACK TO NORMAL, ENGINE RUN'S SLUGGISH, NO POWER, SHIFTING IS DELAYED WHEN ON AN INCLINE AND HEAR A MUFFLED BACK FIRE ON OCCASION NO POWER. THIS SUV HAS HAD PROBLEMS SINCE WE BOUGHT IT. NOT A GOOD BUY FOR SURE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10398763

72,100 miles · Mar 12, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling

I WAS DRIVING MY 2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO LIMITED THROUGH TOWN WHEN OUT OF THE BLUE, THE LOUDEST NOISE STARTED COMING FROM THE FRONT OF THE ENGINE. YOU COULD HEAR THE NOISE FROM BLOCKS DOWN THE ROAD. TOOK IT TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO DISCOVERED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN THAT STATES, "SOME VEHICLES MAY EXPERIENCE A DIESELING-TYP…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING MY 2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO LIMITED THROUGH TOWN WHEN OUT OF THE BLUE, THE LOUDEST NOISE STARTED COMING FROM THE FRONT OF THE ENGINE. YOU COULD HEAR THE NOISE FROM BLOCKS DOWN THE ROAD. TOOK IT TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO DISCOVERED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN THAT STATES, "SOME VEHICLES MAY EXPERIENCE A DIESELING-TYPE NOISE WHEN THE ENGINE IS IDLING. THIS MAY BE DUE TO THE PISTON PINS CONTACTING THE CYLINDERS. INSPECT THE CYLINDERS WALLS FOR EVIDENCE OF SCUFFING." IF THIS IS THE CASE, I'M LOOKING AT A NEW ENGINE OF UPWARDS OF $5,000 - PLUS THE COST OF TOWING IT TO THE NEAREST DEALER A FIVE HOUR ONE-WAY DRIVE FROM WHERE I LIVE. I BOUGHT THE CAR AT 59,500. IT ONLY HAS 72,000 MILES NOW. I FEEL LIKE I WAS SOLD A LEMON! THE CAR IS INOPERABLE RIGHT NOW. I STILL OWE $13,000 ON IT. I'M SO SCREWED!!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10220864

Mileage unknown · Jan 10, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling

OUR 2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO ENGINE BLEW UP WHILE MY WIFE WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE ON A LOCAL HIGHWAY (RT. 680(N)). THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE PRIOR TO THAT DAY (THE "CHECK ENGINE" WARNING LIGHT HAD NEVER LIT UP). AT THE TIME THIS INSTANCE OCCURRED, MY WIFE WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE ON TH…

Read full complaint

OUR 2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO ENGINE BLEW UP WHILE MY WIFE WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE ON A LOCAL HIGHWAY (RT. 680(N)). THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE PRIOR TO THAT DAY (THE "CHECK ENGINE" WARNING LIGHT HAD NEVER LIT UP). AT THE TIME THIS INSTANCE OCCURRED, MY WIFE WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE ON THE FREEWAY AS IT WENT UP IN SMOKE, ESSENTIALLY ENDANGERING HER LIFE ALONG WITH THE SURROUNDING MOTORISTS, SHOULD THIS REALLY HAPPEN TO A VEHICLE THAT IS ONLY 5 YEARS OLD. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10214454

Mileage unknown · Jul 11, 2007
Engine And Engine Cooling

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO LOSE POWER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FEELS AS IF IT IS DRIVING 40 MPH. HE HAS TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. THE DEALER IS UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF FAILURE. THE ENGINE SIZE, FAILURE MILEAGE, AN…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO LOSE POWER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FEELS AS IF IT IS DRIVING 40 MPH. HE HAS TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. THE DEALER IS UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF FAILURE. THE ENGINE SIZE, FAILURE MILEAGE, AND A VALID VIN WERE UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 85,000.

NHTSA ODI #10196098

29,500 miles · Oct 2, 2003
Engine And Engine Cooling

I'M EXPERIENCING 'AGAIN' ENGINE VIBRATIONS WHILE AT IDLE. THE SPEEDOMETER NEEDLE STARTS TO GO DOWN TO 0, ENGINE VIBRATES, APPEARS THAT IT WILL STALL, AND JUST IN THE NICK OF TIME BEFORE THE NEEDLE HITS 0, THE NEEDLE RETURNS TO IDLE AND ALL IS OK. OK???? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS VEHICLE AND NEITHER DOES THE DEALER. LAST TI…

Read full complaint

I'M EXPERIENCING 'AGAIN' ENGINE VIBRATIONS WHILE AT IDLE. THE SPEEDOMETER NEEDLE STARTS TO GO DOWN TO 0, ENGINE VIBRATES, APPEARS THAT IT WILL STALL, AND JUST IN THE NICK OF TIME BEFORE THE NEEDLE HITS 0, THE NEEDLE RETURNS TO IDLE AND ALL IS OK. OK???? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS VEHICLE AND NEITHER DOES THE DEALER. LAST TIME I TOOK THE VEHICLE FOR SERVICE (11/3/03) THEY CHANGED SPARK PLUGS, GASKET AND INLET MANIFOLD BOTH SIDES. I'M TAKING IT TO THE DEALER ON TOMORROW (THE DAY AFTER THE INCIDENT) AND IF THEY CAN'T FIT IT I'M GETTING A V8 FORD. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10041117

Mileage unknown · Mar 20, 2003
Engine And Engine Cooling

ENGINE VIBRATES WHEN AT IDLE, AND ACTS AS IF IT MAY STALL, BUT DOES NOT. TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND DEALER SAID IDLE WAS TOO LOW. BUT A WEEK LATER, ENGINE VIBRATED AGAIN AND APPEARED IT WAS GOING TO STALL BUT DID NOT. I CALLED MITSUBISHI REPS IN CALIFORNIA, THEY CAME DOWN TO FLORIDA TO TEST MY CAR. FOR THREE DAYS THEY K…

Read full complaint

ENGINE VIBRATES WHEN AT IDLE, AND ACTS AS IF IT MAY STALL, BUT DOES NOT. TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND DEALER SAID IDLE WAS TOO LOW. BUT A WEEK LATER, ENGINE VIBRATED AGAIN AND APPEARED IT WAS GOING TO STALL BUT DID NOT. I CALLED MITSUBISHI REPS IN CALIFORNIA, THEY CAME DOWN TO FLORIDA TO TEST MY CAR. FOR THREE DAYS THEY KEPT IT AND SAID THEY FIXED THE PROBLEM: THEY CHANGED THE SPARK PLUGS AND CABLES AND TOLD ME TO USE PREMIUM FUEL FROM AMOCO. A WEEK LATER THE CAR VIBRATED AGAIN AND APPEARED IT WOULD STALL BUT IT DID NOT. MITSUBISHI SAID THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS CAUSING VIBRATIONS BUT THEY ARE LOOKING IN TO IT. THEY TOLD ME THEY CAN NOT FIND A SOLUTION IF THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS CAUSING PROBLEM. I AM VERY FRUSTRATED WITH MY MONTERO. WILL PROBABLY TRADE FOR BIG AMERICAN GAS GUZZLER.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10010812

9,142 miles · Jan 25, 2003
Engine And Engine CoolingFuel System, GasolineFuel System, Other

THIS CAR HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEM THAT THE DEALER CANNOT RESOLVED OR FIX, IT FIRST STARTED ON NOV 15,2002 WHEN THE CAR STALLED WHEN ON IDLE. I CALLED THE DEALER THE NEXT DAY NOV 16,2002 AND ADDRESS THE PROBLEM, BUT THEY TOLD ME IF THE SAME PROBLEM HAPPEN, BRING IT TO THE NEAREST DEALER. ON JANUARY 1, 2003 THE CAR STALLS AGAIN AND …

Read full complaint

THIS CAR HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEM THAT THE DEALER CANNOT RESOLVED OR FIX, IT FIRST STARTED ON NOV 15,2002 WHEN THE CAR STALLED WHEN ON IDLE. I CALLED THE DEALER THE NEXT DAY NOV 16,2002 AND ADDRESS THE PROBLEM, BUT THEY TOLD ME IF THE SAME PROBLEM HAPPEN, BRING IT TO THE NEAREST DEALER. ON JANUARY 1, 2003 THE CAR STALLS AGAIN AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON, ON JANUARY 2,2003 I WENT TO THE DEALER AND THEY DIAGNOSED THE CAR AND THEY TOLD ME THE PROBLEM IS MISFIRE AND THEY RESET THE LIGHTS AND ADJUST THE IDLE. ON JANUARY 14,2003 THE CAR STALLS AGAIN, THE NEXT DAY I WENT TO THE DEALER AND THE CAR STALLS AGAIN AND I GOT ALMOST HIT AT THE FREEWAY. AND THEY REPLACED THE IDLE SPEED CONTROL AND TOLD ME THEY FIX THE PROBLEM. BUT AFTER A WEEK ON JANUARY 14, 2003 THE CAR STALLS AGAIN, AND WHEN I GOT HOME A GAS IS LEAKING UNDER THE GAS TANK IT ONLY STOP LEAKING WHEN I OPEN THE THE GAS CAP. THE NEXT DAY ON MY WAY TO THE DEALER THE CAR STALLS AGAIN ON THE FREEWAY AND I GOT ALMOST GOT AN ACCIDENT ON THE FREEWAY BECAUSE THE CAR JUST STOP AND HESITATE TO START AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMP IT STARTS AND I CALLED THE DEALER AND MITSUBISHI CUSTOMER RELATIONS AND DRIVE TO THE DEALER, THEY ADVICE ME TO LEAVE THE CAR FOR THE DAY AND THEY WILL CONTACT THE FACTORY TECHNICIAN REGARDING THE PROBLEM, THE NEXT DAY I WENT BACK TO THE DEALER TO PICK UP THE CAR BUT THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY CANNOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM SO THEY NEED ANOTHER DAY, ON THE THIRD DAY I JUST CALLED THEM AND ASK ANY DEVELOPEMENT BUT THEY TOLD ME THAT THE DISTRICT MANAGER IS GOING TO THE DEALER TO LOOK IN TO THE PROBLEM, AND THEY WILL GIVE ME AN ANSWER. THE NEXT DAY ON THE FOURTH DAY I CALLED THE DEALER AND THEY TOLD ME TO PICK UP THE CAR AND THEY CANNOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM, SO HOW IS MY SAFETY WITH THIS CAR WHILE I AM DRIVING IT AND STALLS ON THE ROAD WITHOUT WARNING AND GOT AN ACCIDENT, AND WHEN WILL THEY FIND A SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM IF THEY CANNOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM

NHTSA ODI #10003369

Mileage unknown · Oct 29, 2002
Engine And Engine CoolingFuel System, OtherUnknown Or Other

THIS VEHICLE HAS HAD MULTIPLE PROBLEMS WHICH THE DEALERSHIP, ON MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO FIX, HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIX FAILURE. INITIALLY, THE VEHICLE WAS LEAKING FUEL AT THE PASSENGER REAR WHEEL WELL. THIS HAS OCCURRED ON 3 SEPARATE OCCASIONS. NO REASON FOR THIS WAS FOUND UPON INSPECTION. THE 3RD TIME THERE WAS FUEL LEAKAGE, T…

Read full complaint

THIS VEHICLE HAS HAD MULTIPLE PROBLEMS WHICH THE DEALERSHIP, ON MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO FIX, HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIX FAILURE. INITIALLY, THE VEHICLE WAS LEAKING FUEL AT THE PASSENGER REAR WHEEL WELL. THIS HAS OCCURRED ON 3 SEPARATE OCCASIONS. NO REASON FOR THIS WAS FOUND UPON INSPECTION. THE 3RD TIME THERE WAS FUEL LEAKAGE, THERE WAS ALSO A FAILURE OF THE ENGINE IN WHICH HESITATING AND STALLING OCCURRED. THE SES LIGHT DID INITIATE. INITIALLY THE SOLENOID WAS REPLACED. 6 DAYS LATER THE SAME THING OCCURRED AND THE SES LIGHT DID AGAIN COME ON. THE VEHICLE WAS AGAIN TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THE REAR CAMSTER AND FILTER WAS REPLACED. WE REQUESTED A MEETING WITH THE DISTRICT MANAGER TO DISCUSS THE PROBLEM. WE WERE TOLD HE WOULD BE BACK FROM VACATION AFTER 10/1 AND WE WOULD BE CONTACTED. AFTER THE LAST REPAIR, THE VEHICLE HAD A PROBLEM WITH LOSS OF POWER AT TIMES. THIS INCLUDED SLOW RESPONSE WHEN STEPPING ON THE FUEL (TO INCLUDE FLOORING IT) WHEN TRYING TO PASS. IT WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER ON 10/4. THE SERVICE MANAGER DROVE IT AND STATED "COULD NOT DUPLICATE COMPLAINT". IT WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER A SECOND TIME APPROX. 1 WK LATER AND EVEN THOUGH FLOORING IT AT 35 MPH INITIATED A SLUGGISH RESPONSE IN WHICH THE RPM NEVER JUMPED UP BUT JUST STEADILY INCLINED AT A SLOW RATE, THE SERVICE MANAGER AGAIN SAID HE FELT THERE WAS NO PROBLEM. THIS LOSS OF POWER HAPPENED ONCE WHEN TRYING TO MERGE ONTO THE FREEWAY AND I ALMOST GOT HIT BEFORE I COULD PULL BACK OVER AND OUT OF THE WAY. ON 10/21 THE VEHICLE AGAIN EXHIBITED PROBLEMS WITH ACCELERATION FROM A STOP THIS TIME STALLING. AFTER 3 ATTEMPTS, I WAS STILL UNABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE. IT SAT FOR 65 MINUTES WAITING FOR MITSUBISHI'S TOWING SERVICE. AT THAT TIME, MY HUSBAND CAME AND STARTED THE VEHICLE. IT STARTED ON THE 2ND ATTEMPT AND BLUE-BLACK SMOKE CAME OUT FROM THE EXHAUST. WE DID DRIVE IT DOWN TO THE DEALERSHIP WITH ONLY TWO INSTANCES OF SOME LOSS OF POWER. PROBLEM STILL NOT CORRECTED. DT

NHTSA ODI #769049

Official recalls

3

04V428000 · Equipment:other:labels

Sep 1, 2004

CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES FAIL TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 208, 'OCCUPANT CRASH PROTECTION.' THE BILINGUAL ENGLISH/SPANISH REMOVABLE AIR BAG WARNING LABELS AFFIXED TO THE DASH AND TO THE SUNVISOR DO NOT MEET THE SIZE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STANDARD.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STANDARD.

Remedy: MITSUBISHI CARIBBEAN WILL MAIL A CUSTOMER NOTIFICATION LETTER CONTAINING A WRITTEN DESCRIPTION AND A GRAPHIC OF THE BI-LINGUAL DASHBOARD AIR BAG WARNING LABEL. IN ADDITION, ALL CURRENT 2000-2004 NATIVA OWNERS WILL ALSO RECEIVE REPLACEMENT AIR BAG ALERT LABELS FOR THE SUN VISORS. THIS RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING MARCH OR APRIL 2005. THE NOTIFICATION TO THE NATIVA OWNERS IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING APRIL OR MAY 2005. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT MITSUBISHI CARIBBEAN AT 1-787-251-8715.

04V319000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage

Jul 6, 2004

ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, WHEN THE FUEL TANK IS FULL AND THE VEHICLE IS PARKED FACING FORWARD ON AN UPWARD SLOPE, THE FUEL TANK LEVELING VALVE MAY NOT MAINTAIN PROPER SEALING IN THE EVENT THE FUEL EXPANDS FROM A RISE IN THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THE FUEL LEVELING VALVE DOES NOT SEAL PROPERLY, FUEL MAY LEAK ONTO THE GROUND. FUEL LEAKAGE IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE MAY RESULT IN A FIRE.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE LEVELING VALVE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 30, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT MITSUBISHI AT 1-800-222-0037 OR MITSUBISHI CARIBBEAN AT 1-787-251-8715.

01V254001 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum

Aug 3, 2001

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN IMPROPERLY MANUFACTURED. OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, THIS COULD RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE COULD RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, WHICH COULD RESULT IN A VEHICLE CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL AN IMPROVED ACCUMULATOR. OWNER NOTIFICATION MAILING BEGAN OCTOBER 1, 2001. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT MITSUBISHI AT 1-800-222-0037.

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

RQ06007 · Brake Booster Accumulator Failure

Opened May 24, 2006 · Closed Oct 12, 2006

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:hydraulic:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings

IN OCTOBER 2001, MITSUBISHI NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 01V-254) TO REMEDY A DEFECT CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN A LEAK OF PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR IN APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MODEL YEARS (MY) 2001-2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 12, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 20, 2001. ACCORDING TO MITSUBISHI, THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY, WHICH OVER A PERIOD OF TIME MAY RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR. THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE MAY RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.DURING RQ06-007, MITSUBISHI INDICATED THAT THE DECISION TO CONDUCT RECALL 01V-254 WAS BASED ON PROJECTED FAILURE RATES OF 36.5% WITHIN 2-YEARS OF SERVICE AND 100% IN THE FIRST 4-YEARS OF SERVICE. THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED RQ06-007 BASED ON SIX COMPLAINTS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE APPROXIMATELY 23,335 MY 2002 MONTERO VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT AFTER THE VEHICLES RECALLED IN 01V-254.ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGED THAT THE FAILURE RESULTED IN A CRASH.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, ODI IDENTIFIED 20 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND 58 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 85 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.25%.MITSUBISHI?S PROJECTED ACCUMULATOR FAILURE RATES AT 2- AND 4-YEARS IN SERVICE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE 0.5% AND 1.3% RESPECTIVELY AND ODI?S ANALYSES PRODUCED SIMILAR RESULTS.ODI?S INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE INCIDENTS OF INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TYPICALLY OCCURRED WITHIN THE FIRST FEW SECONDS AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND WERE ACCOMPANIED BY NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCUMULATOR CHARGING.ODI?S INVESTIGATION OF THE CRASH INCIDENT CONCLUDED THAT IT COULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION.ODI ALSO COLLECTED AND ANALYZED DATA FOR POST-REMEDY ACCUMULATOR FAILURES IN VEHICLES THAT HAD THE 01V-254 REPAIRS COMPLETED.MITSUBISHI PROVIDED DATA DURING THE INVESTIGATION THAT INDICATED 95% OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES HAD RECEIVED THE RECALL REMEDY.FOR THESE VEHICLES, THERE WERE 14 COMPLAINTS AND 249 WARRANTY CLAIMS IDENTIFIED, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF 28 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.64%.ANALYSIS OF THESE FAILURES SHOWED A DECLINING TREND WITH INCREASING VEHICLE AGE, WITH ALMOST HALF OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS OCCURRING WITHIN THE FIRST 12-MONTHS AFTER RECEIVING THE RECALL REMEDY. DUE TO THE LOW FAILURE RATES, ABSENCE OF RELATED CRASHES, AND NO INDICATION OF INCREASING FAILURE TRENDS IN EITHER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES OR POST-REPAIR RECALL POPULATION 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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Additional source detail variants (7)

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:fluid

IN OCTOBER 2001, MITSUBISHI NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 01V-254) TO REMEDY A DEFECT CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN A LEAK OF PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR IN APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MODEL YEARS (MY) 2001-2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 12, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 20, 2001. ACCORDING TO MITSUBISHI, THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY, WHICH OVER A PERIOD OF TIME MAY RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR. THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE MAY RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.DURING RQ06-007, MITSUBISHI INDICATED THAT THE DECISION TO CONDUCT RECALL 01V-254 WAS BASED ON PROJECTED FAILURE RATES OF 36.5% WITHIN 2-YEARS OF SERVICE AND 100% IN THE FIRST 4-YEARS OF SERVICE. THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED RQ06-007 BASED ON SIX COMPLAINTS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE APPROXIMATELY 23,335 MY 2002 MONTERO VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT AFTER THE VEHICLES RECALLED IN 01V-254.ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGED THAT THE FAILURE RESULTED IN A CRASH.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, ODI IDENTIFIED 20 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND 58 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 85 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.25%.MITSUBISHI?S PROJECTED ACCUMULATOR FAILURE RATES AT 2- AND 4-YEARS IN SERVICE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE 0.5% AND 1.3% RESPECTIVELY AND ODI?S ANALYSES PRODUCED SIMILAR RESULTS.ODI?S INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE INCIDENTS OF INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TYPICALLY OCCURRED WITHIN THE FIRST FEW SECONDS AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND WERE ACCOMPANIED BY NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCUMULATOR CHARGING.ODI?S INVESTIGATION OF THE CRASH INCIDENT CONCLUDED THAT IT COULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION.ODI ALSO COLLECTED AND ANALYZED DATA FOR POST-REMEDY ACCUMULATOR FAILURES IN VEHICLES THAT HAD THE 01V-254 REPAIRS COMPLETED.MITSUBISHI PROVIDED DATA DURING THE INVESTIGATION THAT INDICATED 95% OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES HAD RECEIVED THE RECALL REMEDY.FOR THESE VEHICLES, THERE WERE 14 COMPLAINTS AND 249 WARRANTY CLAIMS IDENTIFIED, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF 28 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.64%.ANALYSIS OF THESE FAILURES SHOWED A DECLINING TREND WITH INCREASING VEHICLE AGE, WITH ALMOST HALF OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS OCCURRING WITHIN THE FIRST 12-MONTHS AFTER RECEIVING THE RECALL REMEDY. DUE TO THE LOW FAILURE RATES, ABSENCE OF RELATED CRASHES, AND NO INDICATION OF INCREASING FAILURE TRENDS IN EITHER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES OR POST-REPAIR RECALL POPULATION 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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic

IN OCTOBER 2001, MITSUBISHI NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 01V-254) TO REMEDY A DEFECT CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN A LEAK OF PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR IN APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MODEL YEARS (MY) 2001-2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 12, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 20, 2001. ACCORDING TO MITSUBISHI, THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY, WHICH OVER A PERIOD OF TIME MAY RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR. THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE MAY RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.DURING RQ06-007, MITSUBISHI INDICATED THAT THE DECISION TO CONDUCT RECALL 01V-254 WAS BASED ON PROJECTED FAILURE RATES OF 36.5% WITHIN 2-YEARS OF SERVICE AND 100% IN THE FIRST 4-YEARS OF SERVICE. THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED RQ06-007 BASED ON SIX COMPLAINTS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE APPROXIMATELY 23,335 MY 2002 MONTERO VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT AFTER THE VEHICLES RECALLED IN 01V-254.ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGED THAT THE FAILURE RESULTED IN A CRASH.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, ODI IDENTIFIED 20 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND 58 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 85 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.25%.MITSUBISHI?S PROJECTED ACCUMULATOR FAILURE RATES AT 2- AND 4-YEARS IN SERVICE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE 0.5% AND 1.3% RESPECTIVELY AND ODI?S ANALYSES PRODUCED SIMILAR RESULTS.ODI?S INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE INCIDENTS OF INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TYPICALLY OCCURRED WITHIN THE FIRST FEW SECONDS AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND WERE ACCOMPANIED BY NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCUMULATOR CHARGING.ODI?S INVESTIGATION OF THE CRASH INCIDENT CONCLUDED THAT IT COULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION.ODI ALSO COLLECTED AND ANALYZED DATA FOR POST-REMEDY ACCUMULATOR FAILURES IN VEHICLES THAT HAD THE 01V-254 REPAIRS COMPLETED.MITSUBISHI PROVIDED DATA DURING THE INVESTIGATION THAT INDICATED 95% OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES HAD RECEIVED THE RECALL REMEDY.FOR THESE VEHICLES, THERE WERE 14 COMPLAINTS AND 249 WARRANTY CLAIMS IDENTIFIED, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF 28 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.64%.ANALYSIS OF THESE FAILURES SHOWED A DECLINING TREND WITH INCREASING VEHICLE AGE, WITH ALMOST HALF OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS OCCURRING WITHIN THE FIRST 12-MONTHS AFTER RECEIVING THE RECALL REMEDY. DUE TO THE LOW FAILURE RATES, ABSENCE OF RELATED CRASHES, AND NO INDICATION OF INCREASING FAILURE TRENDS IN EITHER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES OR POST-REPAIR RECALL POPULATION 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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:hydraulic:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings

IN OCTOBER 2001, MITSUBISHI NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 01V-254) TO REMEDY A DEFECT CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN A LEAK OF PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR IN APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MODEL YEARS (MY) 2001-2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 12, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 20, 2001. ACCORDING TO MITSUBISHI, THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY, WHICH OVER A PERIOD OF TIME MAY RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR. THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE MAY RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.DURING RQ06-007, MITSUBISHI INDICATED THAT THE DECISION TO CONDUCT RECALL 01V-254 WAS BASED ON PROJECTED FAILURE RATES OF 36.5% WITHIN 2-YEARS OF SERVICE AND 100% IN THE FIRST 4-YEARS OF SERVICE. THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED RQ06-007 BASED ON SIX COMPLAINTS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE APPROXIMATELY 23,335 MY 2002 MONTERO VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT AFTER THE VEHICLES RECALLED IN 01V-254.ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGED THAT THE FAILURE RESULTED IN A CRASH.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, ODI IDENTIFIED 20 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND 58 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 85 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.25%.MITSUBISHI?S PROJECTED ACCUMULATOR FAILURE RATES AT 2- AND 4-YEARS IN SERVICE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE 0.5% AND 1.3% RESPECTIVELY AND ODI?S ANALYSES PRODUCED SIMILAR RESULTS.ODI?S INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE INCIDENTS OF INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TYPICALLY OCCURRED WITHIN THE FIRST FEW SECONDS AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND WERE ACCOMPANIED BY NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCUMULATOR CHARGING.ODI?S INVESTIGATION OF THE CRASH INCIDENT CONCLUDED THAT IT COULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION.ODI ALSO COLLECTED AND ANALYZED DATA FOR POST-REMEDY ACCUMULATOR FAILURES IN VEHICLES THAT HAD THE 01V-254 REPAIRS COMPLETED.MITSUBISHI PROVIDED DATA DURING THE INVESTIGATION THAT INDICATED 95% OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES HAD RECEIVED THE RECALL REMEDY.FOR THESE VEHICLES, THERE WERE 14 COMPLAINTS AND 249 WARRANTY CLAIMS IDENTIFIED, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF 28 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.64%.ANALYSIS OF THESE FAILURES SHOWED A DECLINING TREND WITH INCREASING VEHICLE AGE, WITH ALMOST HALF OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS OCCURRING WITHIN THE FIRST 12-MONTHS AFTER RECEIVING THE RECALL REMEDY. DUE TO THE LOW FAILURE RATES, ABSENCE OF RELATED CRASHES, AND NO INDICATION OF INCREASING FAILURE TRENDS IN EITHER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES OR POST-REPAIR RECALL POPULATION 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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:hydraulic

IN OCTOBER 2001, MITSUBISHI NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 01V-254) TO REMEDY A DEFECT CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN A LEAK OF PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR IN APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MODEL YEARS (MY) 2001-2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 12, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 20, 2001. ACCORDING TO MITSUBISHI, THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY, WHICH OVER A PERIOD OF TIME MAY RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR. THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE MAY RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.DURING RQ06-007, MITSUBISHI INDICATED THAT THE DECISION TO CONDUCT RECALL 01V-254 WAS BASED ON PROJECTED FAILURE RATES OF 36.5% WITHIN 2-YEARS OF SERVICE AND 100% IN THE FIRST 4-YEARS OF SERVICE. THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED RQ06-007 BASED ON SIX COMPLAINTS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE APPROXIMATELY 23,335 MY 2002 MONTERO VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT AFTER THE VEHICLES RECALLED IN 01V-254.ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGED THAT THE FAILURE RESULTED IN A CRASH.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, ODI IDENTIFIED 20 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND 58 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 85 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.25%.MITSUBISHI?S PROJECTED ACCUMULATOR FAILURE RATES AT 2- AND 4-YEARS IN SERVICE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE 0.5% AND 1.3% RESPECTIVELY AND ODI?S ANALYSES PRODUCED SIMILAR RESULTS.ODI?S INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE INCIDENTS OF INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TYPICALLY OCCURRED WITHIN THE FIRST FEW SECONDS AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND WERE ACCOMPANIED BY NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCUMULATOR CHARGING.ODI?S INVESTIGATION OF THE CRASH INCIDENT CONCLUDED THAT IT COULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION.ODI ALSO COLLECTED AND ANALYZED DATA FOR POST-REMEDY ACCUMULATOR FAILURES IN VEHICLES THAT HAD THE 01V-254 REPAIRS COMPLETED.MITSUBISHI PROVIDED DATA DURING THE INVESTIGATION THAT INDICATED 95% OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES HAD RECEIVED THE RECALL REMEDY.FOR THESE VEHICLES, THERE WERE 14 COMPLAINTS AND 249 WARRANTY CLAIMS IDENTIFIED, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF 28 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.64%.ANALYSIS OF THESE FAILURES SHOWED A DECLINING TREND WITH INCREASING VEHICLE AGE, WITH ALMOST HALF OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS OCCURRING WITHIN THE FIRST 12-MONTHS AFTER RECEIVING THE RECALL REMEDY. DUE TO THE LOW FAILURE RATES, ABSENCE OF RELATED CRASHES, AND NO INDICATION OF INCREASING FAILURE TRENDS IN EITHER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES OR POST-REPAIR RECALL POPULATION 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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist

IN OCTOBER 2001, MITSUBISHI NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 01V-254) TO REMEDY A DEFECT CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN A LEAK OF PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR IN APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MODEL YEARS (MY) 2001-2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 12, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 20, 2001. ACCORDING TO MITSUBISHI, THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY, WHICH OVER A PERIOD OF TIME MAY RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR. THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE MAY RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.DURING RQ06-007, MITSUBISHI INDICATED THAT THE DECISION TO CONDUCT RECALL 01V-254 WAS BASED ON PROJECTED FAILURE RATES OF 36.5% WITHIN 2-YEARS OF SERVICE AND 100% IN THE FIRST 4-YEARS OF SERVICE. THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED RQ06-007 BASED ON SIX COMPLAINTS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE APPROXIMATELY 23,335 MY 2002 MONTERO VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT AFTER THE VEHICLES RECALLED IN 01V-254.ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGED THAT THE FAILURE RESULTED IN A CRASH.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, ODI IDENTIFIED 20 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND 58 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 85 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.25%.MITSUBISHI?S PROJECTED ACCUMULATOR FAILURE RATES AT 2- AND 4-YEARS IN SERVICE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE 0.5% AND 1.3% RESPECTIVELY AND ODI?S ANALYSES PRODUCED SIMILAR RESULTS.ODI?S INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE INCIDENTS OF INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TYPICALLY OCCURRED WITHIN THE FIRST FEW SECONDS AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND WERE ACCOMPANIED BY NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCUMULATOR CHARGING.ODI?S INVESTIGATION OF THE CRASH INCIDENT CONCLUDED THAT IT COULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION.ODI ALSO COLLECTED AND ANALYZED DATA FOR POST-REMEDY ACCUMULATOR FAILURES IN VEHICLES THAT HAD THE 01V-254 REPAIRS COMPLETED.MITSUBISHI PROVIDED DATA DURING THE INVESTIGATION THAT INDICATED 95% OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES HAD RECEIVED THE RECALL REMEDY.FOR THESE VEHICLES, THERE WERE 14 COMPLAINTS AND 249 WARRANTY CLAIMS IDENTIFIED, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF 28 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.64%.ANALYSIS OF THESE FAILURES SHOWED A DECLINING TREND WITH INCREASING VEHICLE AGE, WITH ALMOST HALF OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS OCCURRING WITHIN THE FIRST 12-MONTHS AFTER RECEIVING THE RECALL REMEDY. DUE TO THE LOW FAILURE RATES, ABSENCE OF RELATED CRASHES, AND NO INDICATION OF INCREASING FAILURE TRENDS IN EITHER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES OR POST-REPAIR RECALL POPULATION 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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings

IN OCTOBER 2001, MITSUBISHI NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 01V-254) TO REMEDY A DEFECT CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN A LEAK OF PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR IN APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MODEL YEARS (MY) 2001-2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 12, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 20, 2001. ACCORDING TO MITSUBISHI, THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY, WHICH OVER A PERIOD OF TIME MAY RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR. THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE MAY RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.DURING RQ06-007, MITSUBISHI INDICATED THAT THE DECISION TO CONDUCT RECALL 01V-254 WAS BASED ON PROJECTED FAILURE RATES OF 36.5% WITHIN 2-YEARS OF SERVICE AND 100% IN THE FIRST 4-YEARS OF SERVICE. THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED RQ06-007 BASED ON SIX COMPLAINTS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE APPROXIMATELY 23,335 MY 2002 MONTERO VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT AFTER THE VEHICLES RECALLED IN 01V-254.ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGED THAT THE FAILURE RESULTED IN A CRASH.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, ODI IDENTIFIED 20 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND 58 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 85 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.25%.MITSUBISHI?S PROJECTED ACCUMULATOR FAILURE RATES AT 2- AND 4-YEARS IN SERVICE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE 0.5% AND 1.3% RESPECTIVELY AND ODI?S ANALYSES PRODUCED SIMILAR RESULTS.ODI?S INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE INCIDENTS OF INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TYPICALLY OCCURRED WITHIN THE FIRST FEW SECONDS AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND WERE ACCOMPANIED BY NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCUMULATOR CHARGING.ODI?S INVESTIGATION OF THE CRASH INCIDENT CONCLUDED THAT IT COULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION.ODI ALSO COLLECTED AND ANALYZED DATA FOR POST-REMEDY ACCUMULATOR FAILURES IN VEHICLES THAT HAD THE 01V-254 REPAIRS COMPLETED.MITSUBISHI PROVIDED DATA DURING THE INVESTIGATION THAT INDICATED 95% OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES HAD RECEIVED THE RECALL REMEDY.FOR THESE VEHICLES, THERE WERE 14 COMPLAINTS AND 249 WARRANTY CLAIMS IDENTIFIED, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF 28 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.64%.ANALYSIS OF THESE FAILURES SHOWED A DECLINING TREND WITH INCREASING VEHICLE AGE, WITH ALMOST HALF OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS OCCURRING WITHIN THE FIRST 12-MONTHS AFTER RECEIVING THE RECALL REMEDY. DUE TO THE LOW FAILURE RATES, ABSENCE OF RELATED CRASHES, AND NO INDICATION OF INCREASING FAILURE TRENDS IN EITHER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES OR POST-REPAIR RECALL POPULATION 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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum

IN OCTOBER 2001, MITSUBISHI NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 01V-254) TO REMEDY A DEFECT CONDITION THAT COULD RESULT IN A LEAK OF PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR IN APPROXIMATELY 39,000 MODEL YEARS (MY) 2001-2002 MITSUBISHI MONTERO VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 12, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 20, 2001. ACCORDING TO MITSUBISHI, THE ACCUMULATOR THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER MAY HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED IMPROPERLY, WHICH OVER A PERIOD OF TIME MAY RESULT IN LEAKAGE OF THE PRESSURIZED NITROGEN GAS FROM INSIDE THE ACCUMULATOR. THE LOSS OF THIS GAS PRESSURE MAY RESULT IN AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH PANEL WHEN THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED, AND POSSIBLY A DELAYED FIRST TIME BRAKE BOOST ASSIST AFTER THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN PARKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.DURING RQ06-007, MITSUBISHI INDICATED THAT THE DECISION TO CONDUCT RECALL 01V-254 WAS BASED ON PROJECTED FAILURE RATES OF 36.5% WITHIN 2-YEARS OF SERVICE AND 100% IN THE FIRST 4-YEARS OF SERVICE. THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED RQ06-007 BASED ON SIX COMPLAINTS OF HYDRAULIC BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE APPROXIMATELY 23,335 MY 2002 MONTERO VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT AFTER THE VEHICLES RECALLED IN 01V-254.ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ALLEGED THAT THE FAILURE RESULTED IN A CRASH.DURING THE INVESTIGATION, ODI IDENTIFIED 20 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND 58 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO BRAKE BOOSTER ACCUMULATOR FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 85 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.25%.MITSUBISHI?S PROJECTED ACCUMULATOR FAILURE RATES AT 2- AND 4-YEARS IN SERVICE FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE 0.5% AND 1.3% RESPECTIVELY AND ODI?S ANALYSES PRODUCED SIMILAR RESULTS.ODI?S INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE INCIDENTS OF INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TYPICALLY OCCURRED WITHIN THE FIRST FEW SECONDS AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND WERE ACCOMPANIED BY NOISE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCUMULATOR CHARGING.ODI?S INVESTIGATION OF THE CRASH INCIDENT CONCLUDED THAT IT COULD NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT CONDITION.ODI ALSO COLLECTED AND ANALYZED DATA FOR POST-REMEDY ACCUMULATOR FAILURES IN VEHICLES THAT HAD THE 01V-254 REPAIRS COMPLETED.MITSUBISHI PROVIDED DATA DURING THE INVESTIGATION THAT INDICATED 95% OF THE RECALLED VEHICLES HAD RECEIVED THE RECALL REMEDY.FOR THESE VEHICLES, THERE WERE 14 COMPLAINTS AND 249 WARRANTY CLAIMS IDENTIFIED, RESULTING IN A COMPLAINT RATE OF 28 PER 100,000 VEHICLES AND A WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF 0.64%.ANALYSIS OF THESE FAILURES SHOWED A DECLINING TREND WITH INCREASING VEHICLE AGE, WITH ALMOST HALF OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS OCCURRING WITHIN THE FIRST 12-MONTHS AFTER RECEIVING THE RECALL REMEDY. DUE TO THE LOW FAILURE RATES, ABSENCE OF RELATED CRASHES, AND NO INDICATION OF INCREASING FAILURE TRENDS IN EITHER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES OR POST-REPAIR RECALL POPULATION 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 COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.