RoadVitals

1999 Ford Mustang GT

Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data

Data refreshed

Owner complaintsComplaints are reports submitted to NHTSA by owners and drivers. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a complaint does not establish that a defect exists. Volume is influenced by how many of a vehicle were sold, how long it has been on the road, and how much attention an issue has received.
36
Latest Jul 17, 2014
Safety recallsA safety recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle has a safety-related defect or does not comply with a federal motor vehicle safety standard. Recall repairs are free. Whether a specific vehicle is covered depends on its VIN — a recall listed for a model year does not necessarily apply to every vehicle of that year.
0
InvestigationsNHTSA opens an investigation to examine whether a safety defect may exist. An open investigation is not a determination that a defect exists, and many investigations close without a recall. Investigations can, however, lead to one.
1
Crash or fire reportedComplaints whose submitter recorded that a crash or a fire occurred. These are the reporter's own answers on the NHTSA form, not verified findings.
3
5 injuries, 0 deaths reported

Overview

Our database contains 36 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 1999 Ford Mustang GT, most frequently naming the engine, driver assistance and seat belts categories. 1 NHTSA investigation names it; and 5 manufacturer communications are on file.

Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.

What owners report

Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded

  • Engine2256.4%
  • Driver assistance410.3%
  • Seat belts25.1%
  • Electrical25.1%
  • Interior & seats25.1%
  • Airbags25.1%
  • Visibility12.6%
  • Powertrain (other)12.6%

Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.

Safety recalls

No recalls in our database for this model year

That does not guarantee a specific vehicle is unaffected — recalls are issued against VINs, and new campaigns are announced regularly. Check a VIN on NHTSA.gov.

Safety investigations

NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.

DP05005ClosedDefect Petition

SPARK PLUG EJECTION FROM CYLINDER HEAD

Opened Sep 22, 2005
Closed Jan 4, 2006

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:ENGINE

Recent owner complaints

Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words

Engine
Filed Jul 17, 2014

THE CAR WAS BUILT WITH A PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD. THE MANIFOLD BEGAN LEAKING AT THE THERMOSTAT HOUSING AND THEN THE HEATER HOSE CONNECTION ON THE INTAKE MANIFOLD SUDDENLY BROKE. I NOW HAVE TO HAVE THE ENTIRE INTAKE MANIFOLD REPLACED BECAUSE OF POOR DESIGN AND MATERIAL SELECTION. FORD KNEW OF THE PROBLEM BUT REFUSES TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE AND HOPES IT WILL JUST GO AWAY. THEY SHOULD REIMBURSE THE OWNERS OF THE VEHICLES FOR REPAIRS THAT WERE DUE TO POOR DESIGN AND MATERIALS USED TO MAKE THIS PART. *TR

NHTSA ID
10611188
Incident
Jul 17, 2014
Mileage
142,000 mi
Engine
Filed Feb 8, 2012

SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT OF AN ALREADY FIXED HEAD!!! *TR

NHTSA ID
10447185
Incident
Feb 4, 2012
Driver assistanceEngine
Filed May 13, 2010

CAR LUNGES IN DRIVE OR REVERSE BEFORE ACCELERATOR IS DEPLOYED. *TR

NHTSA ID
10330287
Incident
May 13, 2010
Mileage
49,675 mi
Engine
Filed Jul 10, 2009

HEARING A EXHAUST LEAK LIKE NOISE AND AROUND THE SPARK PLUG THERE IS AIR COMING OUT OF THE HEADS CAUSING THEM TO EVENTUALLY BLOW OUT AND I WILL BE VERY UPSET IF FORD DON'T REPLACE IT SINCE IT IS HAPPENING TO ALOT OF CARS!!! *TR

NHTSA ID
10276302
Incident
Jul 2, 2009
Mileage
105,200 mi
Engine
Filed Oct 30, 2008

SLOWING DOWN FOR A STOP SIGN WHEN THE 3 RD SPARK PLUG BLEW OUT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF MY 1999 MUSTANG GT WITH A 4.6 V8 . IT ALSO DESTROYED THE COIL ON TOP OF THE PLUG. *TR

NHTSA ID
10247316
Incident
Oct 28, 2008
Mileage
115,000 mi
Engine
Filed Jul 31, 2008

I HAVE EXPERIENCED A SPARK PLUG BLOWOUT IN MY 1999 FORD MUSTANG WITH 4.6L V8. I HAVE SINCE READ ABOUT THE VULNERABILITY OF THESE ENGINES TO EXPERIENCE SPARK PLUG BLOWOUT. THE FIRST BLOWOUT WAS EXPERIENCED PRIOR TO CHANGING ANY SPARK PLUGS AND THEREFORE CAN NOT BE DEEMED TO BE A CAUSE OF IMPROPER TORQUING, ETC. A HELI-COIL WAS USED TO REPAIR THE SPARK PLUG BLOWOUT, ONLY TO HAVE THE SPARK PLUG BLOWN OUT AGAIN AT A LATER DATE. THIS TIME THE CYLINDER HEADS WERE DAMAGED AND REQUIRED REPLACEMENT. THE CYLINDER HEAD REPLACEMENT WAS A MAJOR INCONVENIENCE BOTH IN COST OF REPAIR, AND IN THE SEVERITY OF THE MALFUNCTION. I AM VERY DISTURBED TO HEAR THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND NUMBER OF OTHER INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS SAME PROBLEM WITHOUT ANY PROPER RECOGNITION OR ACTION BY FORD. I AM FILING THIS COMPLAINT TO DRAW MORE ATTENTION TO THIS ISSUE AND PERHAPS GET SOME FEDERAL ACTION AGAINST FORD FOR THIS ISSUE. I BELIEVE THAT OWNERS LIKE ME SHOULD BE COMPENSATED FOR THE REPAIRS DONE AND THE STRESS/INCONVENIENCE ENCOUNTERED DUE TO THIS MANUFACTURER DEFECT. *TR

NHTSA ID
10236576
Incident
Oct 11, 2006
Mileage
60,000 mi
Engine
Filed Dec 24, 2007

1999 FORD MUSTANG GT APPEARS TO HAVE CRACK IN PLASTIC INTAKE SYSTEM, AND IS LOSING COOLANT. PREVIOUSLY OWNED A 1997 MUSTANG GT, AND THIS WAS REPLACED UNDER A RECALL. I CAN NOT FIND ANY INFO RELATING TO THE SAME PROBLEM WITH THE 1999. *TR

NHTSA ID
10212665
Incident
Dec 24, 2007
Mileage
91,833 mi
Engine
Filed May 17, 2007

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1999 FORD MUSTANG GT. THE CONTACT DETECTED A FAINT BURNING SMELL WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE. ONCE THE VEHICLE STOPPED, THE SMELL INTENSIFIED. THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE MANIFOLD WAS LEAKING COOLANT. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED AND THE CONTACT IS AWAITING A RESPONSE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE IS 29,500 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 29,000.

NHTSA ID
10191058
Incident
Apr 15, 2007
Mileage
29,000 mi

Manufacturer communications

A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.

CSP-08B01

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:EXHAUST SYSTEM:EMISSION CONTROL:CATALYTIC CONVERTOR

FORD: CERTAIN 1999-2001 MODEL YEAR VEHICLES UP TO 6000 LB GVWR REGISTERED IN NEW YORK AND CERTAIN 2001 VEHICLES UP TO 6000 LB GVWR REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF MAINE, CERTIFIED FOR SALE IN CALIFORNIA-FEDERAL EMISSION WARRANTY REFUND. *PE

13950

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE

SOME VEHICLES WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSION OR WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION MAY EXHIBIT A FRONT END ACCESSORY DRIVE (FEAD) BELT THAT HAS BECOME BROKEN OR FRAYED AND / OR DETACH FROM THE ENGINE. *TT

8278

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:GASOLINE

SOME VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSION AND WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION MAY EXHIBIT A FRONT END ACCESSORY DRIVE (FEAD) BELT THAT HAS BECOME BROKEN OR FRAYED AND / OR DETACH FROM THE ENGINE. *TT

8278

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:GASOLINE:BELTS AND ASSOCIATED PULLEYS

SOME VEHICLES WITH MANUAL AND AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSIONS MAY EXHIBIT A FRONT END ACCESSORY DRIVE (FEAD) BELT THAT HAS BECOME BROKEN OR FRAYED AND / OR DETACHED FROM THE ENGINE. *TT

13950

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:GASOLINE:BELTS AND ASSOCIATED PULLEYS

SOME VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSION AND WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION MAY EXHIBIT A FRONT END ACCESSORY DRIVE (FEAD) BELT THAT HAS BECOME BROKEN OR FRAYED AND / OR DETACH FROM THE ENGINE. *TT

Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.

Compare model years

Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model

Ford Mustang GT by model year
YearComplaintsRecallsInvestigationsIssue Index
20061511040.0
20051631039.6
2004140042.2
2003510244.6
2002480141.9
2001590145.8
2000641146.4
1999Viewing360141.7
1998530144.5
1997230138.8
1996320040.2

Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.