1999 Ford E-250

This investigation was opened based on one complaint and reports from four transportation fleets alleging 182 blower motor control switch failures.ODI was concerned that these melting and burning switches could lead to an open flame that could spread throughout the vehicle.After a comprehensive review of all data related to overheating blower motor control switches in the subject vehicles, ODI did not identify the existence of a safety defect trend.ODI reviewed 1,036 complaints, claims, and field reports of failed blower motor control switches and determined that only two fires were likely to have been caused by a failing subject blower motor control switch.This represents a failure rate of 0.2 R/100K on a population of 1,076,975 vehicles that have been in service for up to 14 years.ODI has found that when the subject switches do fail and begin to melt, they are constructed in a manner that typically prevents the failing switch from igniting and developing into an open flame.Ford Motor Company has agreed to take two actions to further reduce the likelihood an overheated blower motor switch in the subject vehicles.Ford informed ODI that it has implemented a series of design changes to the subject switch that will help prevent it from developing internal high resistance short circuits.Ford has also informed ODI that it would release a Technical Service Bulletin (TSB-11-11-21) instructing subject vehicle owners to replace the electrical connector at the same time a failed switch is replaced.In light of the low rate of failure resulting in open flame and fire spread on the subject vehicles, and Ford's actions to reduce the likelihood of a switch failure through switch design changes and a TSB, further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that no safety-related defect exists.The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.The ODI complaints cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following (ODI) numbers: 10427875, 10114393, 10257890For additional information, see the attached closing report.

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.

SPARK PLUG EJECTION WITH PLUG PARTS GOING INTO MOTOR AND PUTTING HOLE IN PISTON-THIS IS A WORK VAN-NO WAY TO ECONOMICALLY FIX IT. HAPPENED WHEN DRIVING 25MPH ON CITY STREET

NHTSA ID

10969126

Incident

Mar 28, 2017

Mileage

95,551 mi

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 FORD E-250. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE GOING 30 MPH, THE BRAKE LINE FAILED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOORBOARD. THE FRONT BRAKES STILL FUNCTIONED BUT THE REAR BRAKES FAILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INSPECTED. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 130,000. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.

NHTSA ID

10463421

Incident

Jun 25, 2012

Mileage

130,000 mi

SUBJECT: FORD V-8 TRUCK ENGINE SPARK PLUG BLOWOUT COMMENTS: I AM A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY BUSINESS OWNER THAT USES FORD VANS FOR OUR WORK. THIS PAST WEEK WE HAD A SPARK PLUG BLOW OUT OF THE HEAD OF ONE OF OUR VEHICLES THIS IS THE THIRD TIME IT HAS OCCURRED ON THIS PARTICULAR VEHICLE EACH TIME WE HAVE TO PLACE IT IN THE SHOP IT COSTS NEARLY $300.00 TO HAVE IT REPAIRED. NOT TO MENTION THE LOSS OF USE OF THE TRUCK FOR 2 -3 DAYS. WHILE RESEARCHING THE PROBLEM ONLINE I HAVE DISCOVERED THAT THIS HAS BEEN A FAIRLY COMMON OCCURRENCE ON MANY OF THESE ENGINES FOR SEVERAL YEARS. I WONDER IF THEIR IS SOME RECOURSE THRU FORD OTHER THAN A CLASS ACTION LAW SUITE TO RECOVER THE EXPENSE? PLEASE RESPOND YOURS TRULY[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ID

10417014

Incident

Aug 2, 2011

Mileage

110,000 mi

1999 FORD E-250 1999 TRUCK ABS AND BRAKE LIGHT STAYS ON, AND BRAKES ARE ALL GOOD. DON'T LET AUTO OWNERS DISCONNECT DASH LIGHTS. *TR

NHTSA ID

10384327

Incident

Feb 24, 2011

Mileage

105,000 mi

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 FORD E-250 ECONOLINE VAN. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING AT 27 MPH DOWNHILL, THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED BUT DID NOT ENGAGE. THE CONTACT THEN SHIFTED INTO SECOND GEAR AND WAS ABLE TO COME TO A STOP. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION, THE CONTACT FOUND THAT THE REAR BRAKE LINES ON THE VEHICLE WERE CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE FAILURE AND THERE WERE NO SIGNS OF RUST OR CORROSION ON THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 158,563.

NHTSA ID

10345806

Incident

Jul 27, 2010

Mileage

158,563 mi

I RETURNED TO MY TRUCK AFTER WORK TO GO HOME. WHEN I STARTED IT, THERE WAS A LOUD POPPING NOISE FROM UNDER THE HOOD. AFTER INVESTIGATION, I FOUND THE #3 SPARKPLUG ON THE PASSENGER SIDE GONE. IT WAS BLOWN OUT. *TR

NHTSA ID

10320942

Incident

Mar 18, 2010

Mileage

82,000 mi

1999 FORD ECONOLINE WITH MULTIPLE ISSUES. CONSUMER STATES THAT THIS VEHICLE HAS MULTIPLE ISSUES WITH BREAKING DOWN. HE ALSO STATES THAT THIS VEHICLE HAS HAD SEVERAL ENGINE PROBLEMS, TIRE PROBLEMS, WINDSHIELD WIPER MOTOR PROBLEMS. *KB THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED, THE LEFT REAR DOOR HANDLE, BATTERY, ALTERNATOR, RADIO, BALL JOINTS WERE REPLACED. THE BRAKE ROTORS AND PADS WERE REPLACED. THE AXLE SHAFT SEALS, MASS AIR FLOW SENSOR, CATALYTIC CONVERTER WERE REPLACED. THE VALVE SPRING WAS BROKEN, THE FRONT TIE ROD ENDS AND DRAG LINKS WERE REPLACED, THE TIRES, WIPER BLADES AND GASKETS WERE REPLACED. THE VAN WAS SERVICED 9 TIMES FOR THE CHECK ENGINE WARNINGS. *JB

NHTSA ID

10222853

Incident

Jan 1, 1901

MY NAME IS [XXX] . I AM A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER IN BARTLETT ILLINOIS. I OWN A FORD ECONOLINE 250 & A FORD EXPEDITION. BOTH VEHICLES HAVE BEEN "FORD SERVICED" SINCE NEW. I RECENTLY HAD A SPARK PLUG BLOW OUT OF THE ENGINE. I HAVE HAD MANY A CAR IN MY DAYS AND I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS FAILURE. FORD INSISTED THIS WAS NOT AN ENGINE DEFECT, AND ALTHOUGH THEY WERE THE ONLY SERVICE PEOPLE THAT EVER WORKED ON THE VEHICLE, I WAS STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPAIR. THE COST AROUND $750. MONEY IS IMPORTANT, BUT PRINCIPLE IS MORE IMPORTANT. AFTER SEARCHING THE WEB I FOUND THIS: HTTP://WWW.CONSUMERAFFAIRS.COM/AUTOMOTIVE/FORD_SPARK.HTML HUNDREDS OF COMPLAINTS WITH THE SAME FAILURE. IT IS MY HOPE THAT YOU CAN DO SOMETHING TO BRING THIS TO THE PUBLIC'S ATTENTION AND FORCE FORD INTO ADMITTING FAULT. THIS IS WHY PEOPLE DO NOT BUY AMERICAN ANY LONGER; TO BE HONEST I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A FORD PERSON; NOT ANY MORE. I AM SELLING BOTH VEHICLES AND NEVER BUYING ANOTHER FORD AGAIN. THANKS IN ADVANCE FOR ANY HELP YOU CAN GIVE IN THIS MATTER. SINCERELY, [XXX] CES, INC. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ID

10216742

Incident

Jan 5, 2008

Mileage

115,100 mi

This SKU is a front upper ball joint. The Customer communication requested return of unsold inventory to inspect for ball studs with excessive rotational friction in the ball joint assembly. Excessive friction in the ball joint assembly may cause a perceptible increase in steering effort.

VIBRATION/HARSHNESS ABOVE 45 MPH (72 KM/H) AFTER TIRE BALANCE. *TT

CLUNK FROM FRONT SUSPENSION. *TT

A BUMP STEER STEERING FEELING, NOTED WHEN THE VEHICLE'S FRONT WHEELS/TIRES CONTACT ROAD SURFACE IRREGULARITIES. *TT

MALFUNCTION INDICATOR LAMP (MIL) ILLUMINATION WITH NO HARD FAULT. *TT

SUBJECT REGARDING EARLY WEAR OF THE INNER BRAKE PAD ON THE REAR DISC BRAKES. *TT