2002 Ford Crown Victoria NHTSA Defect Investigations

NHTSA Defect Investigation #DP05005 On September 6, 2005, ODI received a petition requesting that the Agency investigate allegations of engine spark plug ejection in certain model year 1997 through 2004 Ford vehicles with Triton V-8 and V-10 engines.ODI received a total of 474 non-duplicative complaints on the subject vehicles where the complainant, or the dealer repairing the vehicle, reported that a spark plug detached from the cylinder and/or ejected from the engine.as of December 8, 2005, ODI is not aware of any allegations where the alleged defect resulted in a loss of vehicle control, a crash, an injury, or a fatality in any of the 10,319,810 subject vehicles.in addition, ODI is aware of only two incidents where the vehicle stalled without restart.information contained in the ODI consumer complaints and obtained from 72 telephone interviews with complainants showed the following:(1) 99% of the complaints were on MY 1997 to 2002 subject vehicles.(2) most the complainants reported hearing a loud pop while driving or upon starting up the vehicle followed by a loud, repetitive clicking or popping sound.(3) many of the complainants reported that the popping sound was accompanied by some loss of vehicle power; however, in 99% of the incidents reported, the vehicle did not stall.in the very few incidents where the vehicle did stall, most vehicles could be restarted.(4) only a small percentage of the complainants cited that they smelled gas or a slight burning smell when the incident occurred.(5) in all but a very few incidents, vehicle damage was limited to the engine.in one incident, the complaint reported that the fuel rail was damaged and replaced after one of the spark plugs ejected from the engine; however, the complainant reported that the damage did not result in any type of fuel leak or fire.in another incident, the only incident where a fire was alleged, the complainant reported that no fluid leak was observed, but that a fire resulted after the spark plug had ejected from the engine and he had restarted the vehicle and driven to another location.none of the complainants reported any damage to the vehicle hood.(6) only two complainants reported that they observed what appeared to be some drops of fuel coming from the cylinder where the spark plug had failed or on the spark plug itself; however, each of these complainants reported that there was no smoke or flames as a result of his incident.as the petitioner noted, and ODI¿S analysis showed, it is possible for a spark plug to detach from the engine cylinder threads in the subject vehicles.however, ODI¿S analysis of 474 complaints describing such incidents found only a very few alleged any safety-related consequences.none of these showed any evidence of a serious safety consequence.given the large population and relatively long exposure time of the subject vehicles, the complaint analysis indicates that the risk to motor vehicle safety from the alleged defect is very low.in view of the foregoing, it is unlikely that NHTSA would issue an order for the notification and remedy of the alleged defect at the conclusion of the investigation requested in the petition.therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA¿S limited resources to best accomplish the Agency¿S safety mission, the petition is denied.

Engine And Engine Cooling**

CLOSED

no recall issued

** This defect investigation is filed under 3 related vehicle components.
2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA -- 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. Investigation was initiated on September 22 2005. Closed on January 04 2006. For detailed information & supporting documents, see the official NHTSA page concerning investigation #DP05005 »

NHTSA Defect Investigation #EA03001 In September 2002, a fuel cylinder in a natural gas powered vehicle (ngv) exploded during a fire.Ford and VRTC test engineers jointly examined the incident vehicle and reviewed testing to determine whether the performance of the pressure relief valve (PRD) was proper.the purpose of a PRD is to protect a compressed natural gas tank from overpressure by allowing the CNG to vent when the temperature reaches a specific point.the PRD was removed from the failed tank and subjected to a yield temperature determination test. It was concluded that a direct flame (from the interior of the vehicle) onto the cylinder (located behind the rear seat in the trunk)compromised the hoop strength of the natural gas cylinder, thus allowing the cylinder to fail prior to the PRD releasing at itsdesigned temperature.as a result of this testing and review of the involved vehicle, Ford has developed an insulator to insulate the natural gas fuel tank from a locally directed flame projecting from the interior of the vehicle.insulators will be installed behind the back seat on subject vehicles to prevent future failures of this type. Ford's action addresses the concerns of ODI.therefore, this investigation is closed.

Fuel System, Gasoline:Storage:Tank Assembly

Recall #03V472000

2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA -- In September 2002, a fuel cylinder in a natural gas powered vehicle (ngv) exploded during a fire. Ford and VRTC test engineers jointly examined the incident vehicle and reviewed testing to determine whether the performance of the pressure relief valve (PRD) was proper. The purpose of a PRD is to protect a compressed natural gas tank from overpressure by allowing the CNG to vent when the temperature reaches a specific point. The PRD was removed from the failed tank and subjected to a yield temperature determination test. It was concluded that a direct flame (from the interior of the vehicle) onto the cylinder (located behind the rear seat in the trunk) compromised the hoop strength of the natural gas cylinder, thus allowing the cylinder to fail prior to the PRD releasing at its designed temperature. As a result of this testing and review of the involved vehicle, Ford has developed an insulator to insulate the natural gas fuel tank from a locally directed flame projecting from the interior of the vehicle. Insulators will be installed behind the back seat on subject vehicles to prevent future failures of this type. Ford's action addresses the concerns of ODI. Therefore, this investigation is closed. Investigation was initiated on January 27 2003. Closed on November 19 2003. For detailed information & supporting documents, see the official NHTSA page concerning investigation #EA03001 »

NHTSA Defect Investigation #PE02071 An explosion of a compressed natural gas (CNG) tank should not be able to occur, as the tank is fitted with a pressure relief device (PRD). This PRD should release the CNG in the tank, prior to the pressure reaching the tank burst pressure.the PRD did not release in the subject Wisconsin police cruiser explosion.NHTSA has recovered the PRD valve from the tank that exploded and testing will be necessary to establish why this tank safety valve did not release in the very high temperature fire that occurred in the police cruiser.there is only the single known event, but due to the catastropic force of such an explosion and the potential for injury and loss of life, this investigation is being upgraded.

Fuel System, Gasoline:Storage:Tank Assembly

CLOSED

no recall issued

2002 FORD CROWN VICTORIA -- An explosion of a compressed natural gas (CNG) tank should not be able to occur, as the tank is fitted with a pressure relief device (PRD). This PRD should release the CNG in the tank, prior to the pressure reaching the tank burst pressure. The PRD did not release in the subject Wisconsin police cruiser explosion. NHTSA has recovered the PRD valve from the tank that exploded and testing will be necessary to establish why this tank safety valve did not release in the very high temperature fire that occurred in the police cruiser. There is only the single known event, but due to the catastropic force of such an explosion and the potential for injury and loss of life, this investigation is being upgraded. Investigation was initiated on October 01 2002. Closed on January 27 2003. For detailed information & supporting documents, see the official NHTSA page concerning investigation #PE02071 »

Defect investigation data is from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.