Mercury · Model Report
Showing safety data for the 1991 model year only.
THE IGNITION SWITCH COULD EXPERIENCE AN INTERNAL SHORT CIRCUIT.
THE NUTS WHICH HOLD WINDSHIELD WIPER MOTOR TO THE WIPER MODULE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SUFFICIENTLY TIGHTENED AND MAY LOOSEN OR COME OFF. THIS CAUSES CHANGED WIPER PATTERNS, OR THE WIPERS MAY JAM IF TWO OF THE THREE NUTS COME OFF.
THE PARK ROD ASSEMBLY CONTAINS A PARK CAM WITH INADEQUATE SURFACE HARDNESS, WHICH COULD LEAD TO PARK DISENGAGEMENT OR NO PARK ENGAGEMENT WHEN THE LEVER IS PLACED IN PARK.
HEADLIGHTS GO OUT FOR VARIOUS INTERVALS AND IS PRECEDED BY FLICKERING AND/OR BLINKING WHICH CAUSES LOSS OF VISIBILITY WHICH INCREASES MY RISK OF A CRASH. ALSO NOTE A BURNING SMELL FROM VENTS WHEN THIS HAPPENS. MY VEHICLE IS A 1991 COUGAR AND I WENT ONLINE TO SEE IF THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM. NOTED RECALL FOR SAME PROBLEM ON 1992 AND 1993 MODELS NOT FOR 1991. CALLED FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND ASKED IF THERE WAS A RECALL FOR MY MODEL SINCE IT HAS THE SAME ISSUE AS 1992 AND 1993 COUGARS. WAS TOLD NO RECALL FOR THIS AND TO PAY TO GET IT FIX MYSELF. THEY WOULD REPORT PROBLEM TO PROPER DEPARTMENT. *TR
No injuries · No fire · No crash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1991 MERCURY COUGAR. THE CONTACT SMELLED SOMETHING BURNING WHILE DRIVING 50 MPH. THE HEADLIGHTS AND INSTRUMENT PANEL LIGHTS DIMMED AND THE HEADLIGHTS BEGAN TO FLICKER. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE CIRCUIT BREAKER HAD A SHORT CIRCUIT. RECALL NUMBER 99V275000 (EXTERIOR LIGHTING:HEADLIGHTS:SWITCH) WAS FOUND. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 141,000.
No injuries · No fire · No crash
THIS IS THE SECOND TIME IT HAS HAD A BLOWN HEAD GASKET. IT IS NOT FIXED YET BECAUSE I CAN'T AFFORD IT. *NM
No injuries · No fire · No crash
DT: THE CONTACT STATED CAR WAS REVVING WHEN STARTING IT UP. WHEN PUTTING IT IN DRIVE IN WENT DOWN SOMEWHAT. IT FELT LIKE IT WAS GOING TO TAKE OFF BY ITSELF. THIS HAPPENED ON 8-31-05. BACK IN 1998 THE CONTACT WAS HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM. SHE TOOK IT TO A DEALER, AND THEY REPLACED A CHIP THAT HAD BROKEN UNDER THE HOOD. SHE FELT THIS WAS SAME PROBLEM THAT SHE EXPERIENCED IN 1998. THE CONTACT WAS PLANNING TO TAKE VEHICLE TO A DEALER CLOSE TO HER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. SHE WAS NOT GOING TO DRIVE THE CAR BECAUSE SHE WAS AFRAID. SHE WILL HAVE IT TOWED.*AK UPDATED 11/2/2005 - *NM
No injuries · No fire · No crash
WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE ANTI LOCK BRAKING SYSTEM FAILED. AS A RESULT, WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES THE PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR. *AK THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN MAKING NOISES SINCE IT WAS NEW. THE CONSUMER THOUGHT IT WAS NORMAL. THE CONSUMER WAS UNABLE TO FIND THE PARTS. *SC *JB
No injuries · No fire · No crash