Ford F-150 Investigations

59 ODI actions on file.

• PEPE08060CLOSEDOpened 10/14/2008
  TIRE VALVE CRACKING
  TIRES:VALVE

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

• PEPE08001RECALLOpened 1/8/2008
  LOSS OF BRAKE POWER-ASSIST
  SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:POWER ASSIST

  BY LETTER DATED MAY 5, 2008, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WILL CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NUMBER 08V-208) TO ADDRESS A MANUFACTURING DEFECT IN APPROXIMATELY 605,684 MODEL YEAR (MY) 2005 AND 2006 FORD F-150 AND LINCOLN MARK LT VEHICLES ORIGINALLY EQUIPPED WITH THE 5.4L DISPLACEMENT, 3-VALVE PER CYLINDER, V-8 ENGINE.THE RECALLED VEHICLES WERE BUILT FROM JULY 18, 2004 THROUGH MAY 31, 2006 AT THE DEARBORN TRUCK PLANT; FROM MAY 4, 2004 THROUGH MAY 31, 2006 AT THE KANSAS CITY ASSEMBLY PLANT; AND FROM APRIL 19, 2004 THROUGH MAY 31, 2006 AT THE NORFOLK TRUCK PLANT.THE VEHICLES WERE MANUFACTURED WITH THE SAME DEFECTIVE BRAKE BOOSTER VACUUM SUPPLY HOSE ASSEMBLY UNIQUE TO THE 5.4L V-8 ENGINE.FORD F-150 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH OPTIONALLY AVAILABLE 4.2L V6 AND 4.6L V-8 ENGINES ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS RECALL ACTION BECAUSE THEY UTILIZE A DIFFERENT, ONE-PIECE BRAKE BOOSTER VACUUM SUPPLY HOSE ASSEMBLY THAT DOES NOT EXHIBIT AN APPARENT DEFECT TREND. THE RECALLED VEHICLES UTILIZE A TWO-PIECE BRAKE BOOSTER VACUUM SUPPLY HOSE ASSEMBLY COMPRISED OF A STANDPIPE ASSEMBLY AND VACUUM HOSE.THE STANDPIPE ASSEMBLY ATTACHES TO A FITTING ON THE ENGINE AIR INTAKE MANIFOLD UTILIZING A FLEXIBLE RUBBER HOSE AND PLASTIC ELBOW.THE VACUUM HOSE ATTACHES TO THE OPPOSITE END OF THE STANDPIPE ASSEMBLY AND CONNECTS TO A CHECK VALVE FITTING AT THE BRAKE BOOSTER ASSEMBLY.ACCORDING TO FORD, THE PORTION OF THE BRAKE BOOSTER VACUUM SUPPLY HOSE ASSEMBLY ATTACHED TO THE INTAKE MANIFOLD MAY SWELL OVER TIME AND LOSE RETENTION FORCE, WHICH MAY ALLOW THE HOSE TO BECOME DETACHED FROM THE INTAKE MANIFOLD.SHOULD THE BRAKE BOOSTER VACUUM SUPPLY HOSE ASSEMBLY BE DISRUPTED, APPLICATION OF THE BRAKE PEDAL MAY DEPLETE THE VACUUM RESERVE AND CONSEQUENTLY RESULT IN LOSS OF BRAKE POWER-ASSIST. TO CORRECT THE SAFETY DEFECT, FORD WILL INSTALL AN IMPROVED DESIGN BRAKE BOOSTER VACUUM SUPPLY HOSE ASSEMBLY THAT UTILIZES A HOSE CLAMP AT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD ATTACHMENT. THIS REMEDY WILL BE PROVIDED FREE OF CHARGE FOR ALL RECALLED VEHICLES.LATER PRODUCTION FORD F-150 AND LINCOLN MARK LT VEHICLES BUILT AFTER MAY 2006 WERE MANUFACTURED WITH A HOSE CLAMP AT THE BRAKE BOOSTER VACUUM SUPPLY HOSE/INTAKE MANIFOLD ATTACHMENT AND ARE NOT AFFECTED. TO DATE, THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) IS AWARE OF 324 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS AND 14 NON-INJURY CRASHES RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF 4,465 SUBJECT VEHICLES THAT EXPERIENCED ONE OR MORE WARRANTY CLAIMS TO REPAIR OR REPLACE THE SUBJECT BRAKE BOOSTER VACUUM SUPPLY HOSE ASSEMBLY. THE ACTION TAKEN BY FORD IS SUFFICIENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THIS INVESTIGATION.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.

• DPDP05005CLOSEDOpened 9/22/2005
  SPARK PLUG EJECTION FROM CYLINDER HEAD
  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.

• EAEA05005RECALLOpened 3/22/2005
  ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRES
  ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

  EA05-005 IS CLOSED WITH FORD?S ACTIONS IN RECALLS 05V-017, 05V-388, AND 06V-286, RECALLING APPROXIMATELY 6.7 MILLION VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES (SCDS).THE BRAKE SYSTEMS IN THESE RECALLED VEHICLES GENERATE A VACUUM THAT CAN POTENTIALLY CAUSE THE SCDS TO FAIL AND, IN CERTAIN SWITCH INSTALLATION ORIENTATIONS, CATCH FIRE.FORD IS ALSO INCLUDING THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF 1998 EXPLORERS.FORD HAS INFORMED ODI THAT TESTING TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF FAILURES IN THE 1998 EXPLORERS WILL CONTINUE AFTER THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.ODI BELIEVES THAT THE VEHICLES EXHIBITING THE FACTORS CAUSING SCDS FAILURE DESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT CORRELATE WELL WITH THE OBSERVED FAILURE RATES ON THESE VEHICLES BY MODEL AND MODEL YEAR.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST IN THE NON-RECALLED VEHICLES MANUFACTURED WITH SCDS THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN FORD?S RECALLS.ODI WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE NON-RECALLED POPULATION FOR INCIDENCE OF ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRES.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT FOR DETAILS.

• EAEA05004CLOSEDOpened 2/17/2005
  FRONT SEAT BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY
  SEAT BELTS

  DURING THE INITIAL RECALL CAMPAIGN IN 2001, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE INSPECTED BY FORD DEALERSHIPS USING A TEST TOOL THAT WOULD DETECT A DEFECTIVE FRONT SEAT OUTBOARD SEAT BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY.APPROXIMATELY ONE MILLION VEHICLES PASSED THE INSPECTION TEST FOR ONE OR BOTH FRONT BUCKLES.SUBSEQUENT TO THE RECALL SERVICE ACTION, ODI RECEIVED 15 CONSUMER REPORTS ALLEGING THAT A PASSED INSPECTION BUCKLE SUBSEQUENTLY FAILED TO LATCH OR INADVERTENTLY UNLATCHED DURING USE.IN ADDITION, FORD HAS IDENTIFIED 543 OWNER AND FIELD REPORTS ALLEGING BUCKLE FAILURE SUBSEQUENT TO PASSING THE INSPECTION TEST.FORD TESTED AND EXAMINED OVER 100 WARRANTY-RETURNED BUCKLES AND FOUND THAT 44% OF THE BUCKLES HAD NO PROBLEM OR A CONDITION NOT RELATED TO THE RECALL INSPECTION (NON-LATCH RELATED BUCKLE DAMAGE OR FOREIGN CONTAMINATION).WARRANTY CLAIMS WERE HIGHEST DURING THE 18-MONTH PERIOD AFTER THE START OF THE RECALL (JULY 2001) AND HAVE BEEN DECLINING DURING THE PAST 24 MONTHS.OVER THE PAST 12 MONTHS, FORD HAS RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY 12 WARRANTY CLAIMS PER MONTH OUT OF A VEHICLE POPULATION OF ABOUT ONE MILLION.COMPLAINTS COUNTS ARE ALSO DECREASING.DURING THE PAST SEVEN MONTHS, ODI HAS RECEIVED ONLY TWO COMPLAINTS. 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 RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

• PEPE04078RECALLOpened 11/19/2004
  SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH FIRE
  VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:CRUISE CONTROL

  IN ITS LETTER DATED JANUARY 27, 2005 TO ODI, FORD INDICATED THAT IT WOULD CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL # 05V-017) TO REMEDY AN OVERHEATING SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH IN APPROXIMATELY 738,490 SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE VEHICLES AFFECTED BY THE RECALL ARE CERTAIN 2000 MODEL YEAR (MY) FORD F150, FORD EXPEDITION AND LINCOLN NAVIGATOR EQUIPPED WITH SPEED CONTROL AND CERTAIN 2001 MODEL YEAR F150 SUPERCREW VEHICLES BUILT THROUGH AUGUST 7, 2000.SINCE OPENING PE04-078, ODI HAS IDENTIFIED OTHER REPORTS OF KEY OFF ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRES IN FORD VEHICLES WITH SIMILAR SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCHES THAT WERE NOT THE SUBJECT OF THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OR FORD'S RECALL 05V-017.FORD'S RESPONSE TO THE ODI INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER DATED DECEMBER 3, 2004, PROVIDED AN ADDITIONAL 107 ALLEGATIONS OF KEY OFF ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRES THAT WERE ALSO IN VEHICLES NOT SUBJECT TO THIS INVESTIGATION OR INCLUDED IN THE FORD RECALL 05V-017.AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA) IS WARRANTED TO DETERMINE IF A SAFETY DEFECT TREND EXISTS RELATING TO KEY OFF ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRES IN VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION.ODI WILL EXPAND THE SCOPE OF IT'S INVESTIGATION AT THE EA PHASE TO INCLUDE THE 1995 THROUGH 2002 MODEL YEARS OF THE FORD F150, FORD EXPEDITION AND LINCOLN NAVIGATOR VEHICLES.

• RQRQ04011CLOSEDOpened 10/22/2004
  FRONT SEAT BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY
  SEAT BELTS:FRONT:BUCKLE ASSEMBLY

  UNDER RECALL CAMPAIGN (01V227), FORD RECALLED APPROXIMATELY 1.3 MILLION VEHICLES TO INSPECT AND IF NECESSARY REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVER AND/OR PASSENGER SEAT BELT BUCKLE.APPROXIMATELY 1.1 MILLION OWNERS RESPONDED BY TAKING THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER FOR INSPECTION OF THE BUCKLE USING A SPECIALIZED BUCKLE TEST TOOL.FORD REPORTED THAT 829,927 VEHICLES HAD BOTH BUCKLES PASS THE TOOL TEST AND ANOTHER 167,336 VEHICLES HAD ONE BUCKLE PASS.ODI AND FORD RECEIVED COMPLAINTS ALLEGING SEAT BELT BUCKLE FAILURE SHORTLY AFTER PASSING THE ORIGINAL RECALL INSPECTION SERVICE.COMPLAINANTS ALLEGED THAT THE BUCKLE FAILED BY EITHER NOT LATCHING OR FALSE-LATCHING (PARTIAL ENGAGEMENT OF THE LATCH TO THE LATCH PLATE).A FALSE-LATCHED BUCKLE MAY RELEASE WITH MINOR MOVEMENT OR IMPACT AGAINST THE BUCKLE HOUSING INCLUDING INADVERTENT RELEASE WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION.ODI IS UPGRADING THIS RECALL QUERY TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA05-004) TO FURTHER ANALYZE THE FIELD PERFORMANCE OF THOSE VEHICLES THAT FORD DEALERS PASSED (ONE OR BOTH BUCKLES) USING FORD'S INSPECTION TEST (997,263 VEHICLES).

• EAEA02001RECALLOpened 2/6/2002
  STEERING SHAFT SEPARATION
  STEERING

  SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR TECHNICAL DETAILS

• PEPE01033CLOSEDOpened 9/17/2001
  STEERING COLUMN
  STEERING
• EAEA99032RECALLOpened 11/4/1999
  DUAL FUEL TANK CROSSFLOW/LEAKAGE
  VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:LINKAGES

  ON JULY 14, 1993 FORD FILED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT CONCERNING FUEL TANK CROSS FLOW LEAKAGE ON F-SERIES LIGHT TRUCKS AND CAB CHASSIS BUILT FROM JULY 22, 1989 THROUGH DECEMBER 17, 1992.THE REMEDY WAS TO REPLACE THE FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR AND INSTALL A CHECK VALVE BETWEEN EACH FUEL SUPPLY LINE AND FUEL TANK (2) TO REPAIR THE SUPPLY SIDE FUEL CROSS FLOW PROBLEM (RECALL 93V-125).ODI OPENED RQ98-008 ON MAY 29, 1998 BECAUSE OF THE LARGE NUMBER OF ALLEGED REMEDY FAILURES AND REPORTS OF FUEL CROSS FLOW ON VEHICLES OUTSIDE OF THE RECALL POPULATION.BASED ONTHE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM FORD ON AUGUST 11, SEPTEMBER 30, AND DECEMBER 15, 1998, AND THE INCREASING TREND OF REMEDY FAILURES AND OUT OF SCOPE CROSSFLOW REPORTS, ODI OPENED EA99-032 ON NOVEMBER 4, 1999.THE ATTACHED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CLOSING REPORT FULLY DESCRIBES THE RESULTS OF THIS INVESTIGATION AND REASON FOR CLOSING.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES CAN EXPERIENCE FUEL TRANSFER FROM ONE TANK TO THE OTHER DUE TO MALFUNCTIONS IN THE FUEL SYSTEM.WHEN FUEL IS PUMPED OR RETURNED TO THE NON-OPERATING TANK (CROSS FLOW), THE CAPACITY OF THE NON-OPERATING TANK CAN BE EXCEEDED, CAUSING FUEL TO OVERFLOW PAST THE FILLER CAP, CREATING A FIRE POTENTIAL.

• PEPE99047CLOSEDOpened 7/12/1999
  BLOW BACK DURING REFUELING
  VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:LINKAGES

  There is no summary currently available

• PEPE99019CLOSEDOpened 3/4/1999
  SPARE TIRE WEAR
  STRUCTURE
• DPDP99002CLOSEDOpened 3/2/1999
  SPARE TIRE MOUNTING
  STRUCTURE

  THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION WAS PETITIONED TO COMMENCE A DEFECT INVESTIGATION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES BY A LETTER SIGNED BY WILLIAM F. ALLARD AND DATED 15-FEB-98.THE PETITION ALLEGES THAT THE SPARE TIRE MOUNTING PLACES THE TIRE SIDEWALL DIRECTLY IN CONTACT WITH THE METAL UNDERCARRIAGE CAUSING WEAR AND DAMAGE OF THE SIDEWALL.THE PETITION FURTHER ALLEGES THAT WHEN THE DAMAGED TIRE IS USED, BLOWOUT COULD RESULT ON AN INTERSTATE PLACING VEHICLE OCCUPANTS AND OTHERS AT RISK.

• RQRQ98022RECALLOpened 11/13/1998
  REAR SUSPENSION SPRING BREAKAGE
  SUSPENSION:REAR:SPRINGS:LEAF SPRING ASSEMBLY

  IN JULY 1998, FORD SUBMITTED A PART 573 NOTIFICATION TO NHTSA CONCERNING BROKEN REAR SPRINGS ON CERTAIN 1997-98 FORD F150 TRUCKS, WITH FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE.FORD STATED THAT FATIGUE FRACTURE OF THE REAR SPRINGS MAY OCCUR IF THE SPRING ARE OVER STRESSES(SIC) BY VEHICLE OVERLOADING.THE BROKEN PIECE OF THE SPRING LEAF MAY SPLAY INWARD, DAMAGING THE FUEL TANK AND CAUSING FUEL LEAKAGE.FORD ALSO STATED THAT A BROKEN SPRING WOULD CAUSE VEHICLE SAG AND LOSS IN LOAD CARRING CAPABILITY.FORD HAD 43 REPORTS OF FUEL TANK DAMAGE.FORD WILL INSTALL A CLIP ON THE FORWARD END (ONLY) OF THE REAR SPRINGS TO PREVENT FUEL TANK CONTACT IN THE EVENT OF A LEAF FRACTURE.ONLY BROKEN SPRINGS WILL BE REPLACED.ODI HAS RECEIVED THREE REPORTS OF BROKEN REAR SPRINGS ON 1997-98 F150 TRUCKS;TWO OF THEM HAVE TWO-WHEEL DRIVE.A TIRE PUNCTURE OCCURRED ON A FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE TRUCK IN WHICH THE BROKEN MIDDLE SPRING LEAF SPLAYED OUTWARD AT THE REAR OF THE SPRING ASSEMBLY.EIGHT OTHER REPORTS DESCRIBE REAR SPRINGS THAT HAVE MOVED OUT OF POSITION OR BECAME LOOSE; THREE OF THESE REPORTED SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.CLOSING NOTE: WHILE THERE ISN'T ANY STRONG EVIDENCE THAT THE REAR SPRINGS ARE ONLY BREAKING UNDER CONDITIONS OF OVERLOAD AND SEVERE USE, THE RECALL REMEDY TO PREVENT FUEL TANK DAMAGE MAY BE ADEQUATE AND THERE IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT SPRING FAILURE RATE OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION.THI RQ SHOULD BE CLOSED, SUBJECT TO FUTURE FAILURE OCCURANCES.

• EAEA98018CLOSEDOpened 8/31/1998
  ALLEGED LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL
  VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:LINKAGES

  THE DETAILS OF INFORMATION AND DATA EVALUATED DURING THIS INVESTIGATION ARE STATED IN THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CLOSING REPORT, DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND RESULTING FROM INTERFERENCE BY THE FLOOR MAT WITH PROPER OPERATION OF THE THROTTLE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WAS NOT IDENTIFIED DURING THE COURSE OF THE EA, AND THE INVRESTIGATION HAS BEEN CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR FUTURE COMPLAINTS ON THIS ISSUE TO IDENTIFY ANY INCREASING TREND OF OCCURRENCE, AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

• RQRQ98008RECALLOpened 5/29/1998
  FORD F-SERIES DUAL FUEL TANK LEAKAGE
  FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:STORAGE:TANK ASSEMBLY

  THESE VEHICLES CAN EXPERIENCE FUEL TRANSFER FROM ONE TANK TO THE OTHER DUE TO A MALFUNCTIONING FUEL PUMP.FROM THE INFORMATION GATHERED TO DATE, IT APPEARS THAT THERE CAN BE MULTIPLE CAUSES AND/OR A COMBINATION OF CAUSES FOR FUEL CROSS FLOW AND THAT THE RECALL REMEDY MAY BE INADEQUATE.FURTHER INVESTIGATION IS NEEDED.THIS INVESTIGATION IS UPGRADED TO EA99-032.CLICK ON DOCUMENT SEARCH BUTTON FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

• PEPE98024CLOSEDOpened 4/21/1998
  TIE ROD END FAILURES
  STEERING

  There is no summary currently available

• PEPE98021CLOSEDOpened 4/1/1998
  LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL
  VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:LINKAGES

  There is no summary currently available

• RQRQ98006RECALLOpened 3/18/1998
  INADVERTENT AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT
  AIR BAGS

  There is no summary currently available

• RQRQ98005RECALLOpened 3/13/1998
  AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION CONTROL
  POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION

  ON SEPTEMBER 4, 1997, FORD FILED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT CONCERNING APPROXIMATELY 15,000 1997 MODEL YEAR F-150 TRUCKS, MANUFACTURED FROM FEBRUARY 16 THROUGH MARCH 4, 1996, AND BUILT AT THE NORFOLK OR KANSAS CITY ASSEMBLY PLANTS.THESE VEHICLES COULD HAVE INCORRECTLY MANUFACTURED AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION CONTROL CABLES INSTALLED WHICH CAN RESULT IN A SEPARATION OF THE CABLE END FITTING FROM THE CABLE CONDUIT AT THE TRANSMISSION END OF THE CABLE.IF THE TRANSMISSSION END FITTING WERE TO SEPARATE FROM THE SHIFT CABLE ASSEMBLY, THEOPERATOR WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SHIFT THE TRANSMISSION FROM ONE OF THE DRIVE GEAR POSITIONS INTO THE PARK POSITION EVEN THOUGH THE GEAR SHIFT SELECTOR WOULD INDICATE PARK.ODI HAS RECEIVED 6 REPORTS ALLEGING TRANSMISSION FAULT SHIFTING RESULTING IN 3 CRASHES.THE REPORTED VEHICLES WERE IDENTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:THREE WERE MANUACTURED OUTSIDE OF THE RECALL BUILD DATES; TWO WERE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE RECALL AND THE REMAINING VEHICLE WAS UNKNOWN DUE TO MISSING VIN.THE PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION IS TO EXAMINE THE SCOPE OF RECALL 97V-147, IN PARTICULAR, THE BASIS FOR LIMITING THE RECALL TO THOSE BUILT WITHIN A SPECIFIC TIME PERIOD AND WHETHER THE CABLE IS USED ON OTHER FORD VEHICLES.