2003 Ford Crown Victoria
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Ford › Crown Victoria › 2003
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2003 Ford Crown Victoria. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
7 recalls name the 2003 Ford Crown Victoria. Newest first.
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles manufactured October 3, 2001, to August 2, 2005. The affected vehicles have a lighting control module (LCM) that may fail, resulting in a loss of headlights.
A loss of headlights can reduce driver visibility and increase the risk of a crash.
Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the LCM, free of charge. The recall began April 14, 2017. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 15S39.
Certain aftermarket fuel filters sold under the purolator brand name, p/n f65277, shipped from january 16 through june 2, 2006, for use on the above listed passenger vehicles. due to incorrect design, the quick connectors may not fully seat with the tube interface, even though the person making the connection may believe that the quick connector IS fully…
Failure of this connection could lead to fuel spillage and, in the presence of an ignition source, a fire could occur.
Ufi will notify owners and replace the filters free of charge. the recall began on august 4, 2006. owners may contact ufi filters USA at 800-230-5876.
On certain police interceptors (cvpi) and commercial heavy duty (taxi) vehicles, at extremely high operating temperatures, the sound insulating panel, located under the vehicle positioned between the exhaust system and the underbody, could sag and possibly contact the surface of the catalytic converter.
If this occurs, the insulator might experience charring of the outer layer, burning odor, or smoke which may ultimately result in a fire.
Dealers will remove the existing dash insulator and install a revised design insulator pad free of charge. the recall began on june 3, 2005. owners may contact ford at 1-800-392-3673.
Certain police, commercial, and passenger vehicles sold to fleets typically input higher loads into the vehicle chassis overloading the wheel bearings and axles.
This could lead to early bearing failure and ultimately to axle shaft fracture. in the event of axle shaft fracture, the vehicle would lose drive function and would coast to a stop. loss of drive function could lead to a crash.
Dealers will replace the rear wheel bearings, seals,and axle shafts. the recall began on july 15, 2004. owners should contact ford at 1-800-392-3673.
On certain natural gas vehicles, if a flame from a vehicle interior fire becomes locally directed at the natural gas fuel tank located immediately behind the rear seat, the flame could damage the fiberglass wrap on the tank weakening the tank.
If the strength of the tank IS significantly compromised, it could rupture, increasing the risk of a fire.
Dealers will install an insulator behind the current seat back. owner notification began on january 7, 2004. owners should contact ford at 1-800-392-3673.
On certain police and taxi vehicles equipped with steel wheels, some of the wheels may develop cracks in the rim near the weld line that connects the rim to the disk.
The cracks can ultimately result in rapid air loss from the tire and could affect vehicle control, increasing the risk of a crash.
Dealers will inspect and replace the four road wheels and spare wheel with the manufacturing date codes of august 18, 2001 through september 22, 2002. in addition, ford IS providing extended warranty coverage for wheels on 2003 crown victoria police interceptor and taxis built from october 1, 2002 through april 29, 2003. these wheels are exhibiting cracks at a substantially lower rate than those wheels included in the recall. owner notification began on august 8, 2003. owners should contact ford at 1-800-392-3673.
In order to enhance police office safety, model year 1992-2003 crown victoria police interceptor (cvpi) vehicles will be equipped with shields designed to help protect the fuel tank in high-speed rear-impact crashes. ford also will be offering an optional trunk package designed to improve the safe transport of sharp-edged, heavy equipment in these vehicles.
Some high-speed rear-impact crashes have resulted in fuel tank punctures and fires in cvpi vehicles.
Ford has advised us that shield kits have been available since late october and will be installed on police interceptor vehicles at no cost. the optional trank package will be available by the end of 2002. ford has established a new web site at www.cvpi.com to answer additional questions about the safe use of cpvi vehicles.
I'm having problems with the lighting control module my high beam lights stop working. I see this year (2003) Ford crown Victoria has a recall for the lighting control module but mines isn't listed when I put in my VIN number and I wanted to see if mines can be listed. Also I would like to know why wasn't it listed on the recall list because this is a safety issue and very dangerous.
The contact's father owns a 2003 Ford Crown Victoria. The contact stated that the headlamps would flash and failed to turn on or to turn off as intended. The contact stated that the failure initially occurred intermittently, but the headlights had become completely inoperable. The vehicle was not taken to the dealer. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The contact related the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V861000 (Exterior Lighting), which described the failure; however, the VIN was not included. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was unknown.
I brought this vehicle into the dealership for safety recall 15s39. There were no problems with the vehicle prior to taking it in. When I received the vehicle back from the dealer they had admitted to not completing all the steps in the safety recall. Now that I have the vehicle the dealer returned it to me with the following issues: all of the interior and exterior lighting including the headlights do not work and the air bag light is illuminated. A supervisor at Ford customer service said they refuse to do anything about the new problems they caused. She stated that "well, it's a pretty old car." I don't think the age of the car should give Ford a pass to not fix a safety recall. The fix for their safety recall only created safety problems with this car - namely the air bags may not work.
The contact owns a 2003 Ford Crown Victoria. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the contact became aware that both headlights were inoperable. The contact stated that the headlights failed to function properly and had become inoperable. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed and determined that the lighting control module had failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was not available.
When driving at night and early mornings my head lights and tail lights will randomly go out when my light switch is set to automatic. I can turn it on manually and then I have head lights and brakes but no running tail lights. Which is a major problem and safety hazard.
The contact owns a 2003 Ford Crown Victoria. The contact stated that after starting the vehicle, the contact smelled an abnormal coolant odor. The contact inspected the vehicle and noticed there was corrosion and a crack near the intake and radiator hose. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed that the intake manifold needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and advised the contact to file a complaint with the NHTSA Hotline. The approximate failure mileage was 70,000.
My 2003 crown vic has a horrible time steering I've watched several videos that depicts exactly the same issue. you however do have a recall out for this make just starting at 2005. I find it hard to believe that I am the only one that's made a complaint. pls get this fixed im 67 and with cancer my only way of getting around. please contact me asap this IS serious. of course it on molly does this when in motion.
These particular wheels on the crown victoria police interceptor were known to crack, and leak air, causing an accident. They were recalled by ford, but the police department that purchased this vehicle, yavapai-apache police in camp verde, az, never had them replaced. I am constantly adding air to my tires. Luckily I haven't had a blowout. I would settle for a used set of stock wheels(12 hole type) to replace the current 8 hole type, since I still have the original hubcaps on the vehicle
A couple of years ago while on vacation 200 miles from home with my family the headlights suddenly went out. after a little inspection I found we still had flash to pass high beams. The next day (july 3RD) I went to the local dealer and the parts houses and no one had a replacement. As a former usaf jet engine mechanic I went back to the camper and found a wiring diagram. I figured out it was a problem with the lighting control module. I took it apart and replaced the defective relay. We finished our vacation and I soon forgot the issue. I received a recall notice for the module and took it to the dealership for replacement. I was informed by the service manager that since I had repaired the part ford would not take it back so they could not help me. I had the sneaking feeling I was being lied to. I went home and researched the recall. I found the repair does not even involve replacing the part but taps into the wiring before the module. I called ford corp and was told they did not understand what I was talking about as they weren't a technician but they stood by their dealers decision. I don't feel that I should be punished for doing what it took to get my family home safely. I hope you can help me with this problem
On april 14TH 2017 a recall was issued (recall ID = 264137) on 2003-2005 ford crown victoria's manufactured october 3RD, 2001 through august 2ND, 2005. Nhtsa campaign # = 15v861000. The recall was on the affected component, exterior lighting, headlights. I have a ford crown victoria that was manufactured in may of 2002 that has the exact same issue. Yet when I contact ford about the issue they said my vehicle was not included in the recall. Working with a major automobile company previously in honda of america, I tried to understand why yet found no reliable answers. I've been having this issue for multiple years where my headlight will come on and just shut off while driving.
I bought the car a few months back. The headlights worked just fine at first, then started either not turning on or would shut off while going down the road. They will not turn back on by flipping the lights on there IS nothing you can do. Only thing you can do it wait a few hours and hope they turn back on.
Dash lights and headlights on when driving down road on dark night, then dash lights went out - couldn't see speedometer or gear indicator. then headlights went out, but dash lights came back on. this happened several times while driving the 25 miles home. Tried looking under the hood and making sure all connections were good, they seemed to be. in case something got wet in the rain I waited several days to try again, then tried it today - the same things happened on the street near my home.
Driving at night and the lights will cut off I have pull the bright light lever and hold it on so that the lights would stay on other wise I have no lights at all. If I start the car and the light switch IS on auto only the parking lights will come on. Never had this problem before it just started about a month ago and some days the lights will come on and some days they will not
Ford dealership wont fix saftey issues recalls
TL* the contact owns a 2003 ford crown victoria. While driving various speeds, the steering wheel became difficult to steer. The contact decided to place oil on the steering shaft and steering wheel. After a couple of months, the steering seized without warning. The contact was an independent mechanic who diagnosed that the steering shaft bearing failed and there was heavy corrosion on the shaft. The failure recurred. The dealer and manufacturer were not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 123,000.
Driving my vehicle home from work at night got pulled over because I have no tail lights . The lighting control module that was put in from the recall IS bad and now ford says its not under warranty and I have to pay for it myself. Why even have a recall or issue a recall and fix something if you're not going to fix it if it's still messed up leaving consumers screwed
My headlights don't work until ever now & then the only one that work IS the running lights 🤨 I was told that it was a recall on the headlight control module but it wasn't on my vehicle 🤦🏾‍♀️ I just don't understand cause I having problems wit my 3003 like other ppl 🤷🏾‍♀️
TL* the contact owns a 2003 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that the headlights were faulty and the turn signals did not work. As a result, the contact could not drive the vehicle at night. There were no warning indicators illuminated. The vehicle was taken to lb smith ford (1100 market street, lemoyne, pa 17043-1423, 717-761-7600), but was not diagnosed or repaired due to the vehicle's age. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 200,000.
Random loss of park lamps while driving increasing rear-end collision risk. Headlights are operative and working. Headlight recall was performed by ramey ford. 15S39. I paid labor costs and has been diagnosed by ford as the lighting control module being the problem. Ford will replace the module at no cost only if it affects headlight function. After further contacting ford relations help line, fmc does not seem to care about the matter of the solder joints cracking for park lamps. I have had multiple traffic stops over this matter all verble due to me kicking the lighting control module temporarily correcting the issue. Dash lights illuminate, thinking park lights are working when they are not. I have attached a photo of the problem.
TL* the contact owns a 2003 ford crown victoria. The contact took the vehicle to ford of dalton (located at 925 shugart rd, dalton, ga 30720, (706) 278-1151) to be repaired per nhtsa campaign number: 15v861000 (exterior lighting). The contact stated that the lighting control module was inoperable prior to the vehicle being repaired. After the replacement of the lighting control module, the failure remained. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 150,000. The vin was not available.
Driving steadily at around 30 mph on a city street. Suddenly the steering starting binding making it difficult to turn. Upon examination there was a lot of rust on the lower intermediate steering shaft and needed an immediate replacement. The mechanic noted severe corrosion and noted it could have fully broken without a lot of warning. Some research revealed that a recall was done for model years 2005-11 (13v385000). You may want to extend this to 2003-2004 which use the same steering components.
Loss of park lamps while driving/parked not knowing it. When the issue occurs the vehicle looks to have driving running lights type operation when it did not come with that option. My dash stays illuminated. Kicking the lighting control module located under the dash (above right foot) can make the lights come on for a time frame that varies by temp around the unit. Season cold/hot climate does affect how it performs (ac/heat does play a role). I have no tail lights when the problem occurs. I have had the headlight recall performed (similar issue) that states the headlights may go out driving and the lcm would be replaced free of charge. I have paid a diagnostic fee at ramey ford for a verdict of a faulty lcm. I have spoken to ford relations over the phone about the matter and got nowhere and still have to foot the diagnostic fee. To me it sounds like ford knows they fail but will not cover it unless its headlight operation. My vehicle IS a safety concern at night to others. Feel free to contact me if you have any further questions.
My headlights dim in and out while driving and my wheel studs have popped off twice.
TL* the contact owns a 2003 ford crown victoria. While driving unknown speeds, the steering wheel failed to turn right without warning. The vehicle was taken to hall ford elizabeth city (1310 n road st, elizabeth city, nc 27909) where it was diagnosed that the steering shaft needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified and stated that the vehicle was not included in a recall. The vin was unknown. The failure mileage was 100,000.
My vehicle's lower steering shaft became so corroded to the point I was unable to steer the vehicle safely. I did some research online and found that ford actually recalled 2005-2011 crown victoria (nhtsa campaign number: 13v385000) for that same exact problem. I am reside in one the affected states under the recall however ford refuses to honor the recall stating that my vehicle vin IS not affected and my vehicle IS a 2003. I don't think it's a coincidence my vehicle just happens to have the same problem. I would like to include and excerpt from the recall "the recall IS expected to begin october 21, 2013. Ford's recall number IS 13s08. Customers located in non-corrosion states who have concerns regarding their steering will have a one-time option to have their vehicles inspected and, if necessary, repaired." I repaired my vehicle out of pocket at my expense, however ford refuses to reimburse me.
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened an investigation concerning the loss of headlights in model year (MY) 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles. The subject vehicles share the same architecture and major components.ODI has received 636 unique reports (for all submission dates) related to the alleged defect, with owners describing a loss of both low and/or high beam headlights occurring while driving.ODI identified 4 Vehicle Owner Questionnaire ( VOQ) reports alleging minor crash or loss of control incidents due to headlight failures.Drivers alleged running off of the road due to a lack of headlights and one driver reportedly struck a deer.No injuries were indicated in the VOQ crashes.In response to ODI's Information Request (IR) letter, Ford Motor Company (Ford) responded with 4173 unique reports related to the alleged problem.There were a total of 11 crashes reported within that group as well as one injury that occurred when the vehicle struck an unseen object on the side of the road when the headlights failed. Ford also submitted 49,843 warranty claims related to headlight failures.Most reports indicate that the headlights failed without warning leaving the driver with no forward lighting, however some noted the headlights flickered or dimmed prior to turning off.Consumers also noted they were able to hold the flash to pass lever on the steering column mounted stalk to activate the high beams however this is only effective as long as the lever is physically actuated.On December 21st, 2015 Ford notified ODI that it would conduct a safety recall (15V-861) to remedy headlight failures on (MY) 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles.According to Ford, the headlights of the vehicle are controlled by the Lighting Control Module (LCM) located in the engine compartment of the vehicle.The LCM uses an internal relay, mounted to a circuit board, to control power to the headlights. The headlight relay is soldered to the circuit board at six different terminals. The original equipment LCMs were manufactured in a manner that resulted in the solder joints fatiguing and/or cracking as a result of repeated thermal cycling and/or vibration, a defect condition. The condition could be exacerbated by manufacturing quality issues such as an insufficient amount of solder, effecting the continuity between the circuit board and the relay terminal, and resulting in loss of headlights while driving.Other lighting functions are unaffected by this condition.The LCM manufacturing processes were revised to address the defect condition and Ford has been conducting a warranty extension program to cover defective LCMs since late 2013.Under the recall Ford will replace any remaining defective LCMs in recalled vehicles with remedy LCMs once they become available.See NHTSA recall 15V-861 for further details on the safety recall.The recall action initiated by Ford addresses the safety risks of concern to ODI.Accordingly, the investigation is closed.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at SaferCar.gov under the identification (ODI) numbers found in the attached list.
In a letter dated October 2, 2014 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) was initially petitioned by the North Carolina Consumers Council, Inc. requesting a defect investigation of an alleged defect condition resulting in headlight and/or exterior lighting failure on 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles.ODI analyzed Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) complaints received from consumers and identified a total of 605 reports (for all submission dates) alleging headlight failure.The complaints indicate failures of both low beam headlights typically while driving, a defect condition that was evaluated under a prior ODI investigation (PE08066).Most consumer VOQs indicate that the headlights failed suddenly and without warning leaving the driver with no forward lighting, however some report the headlights flickered or dimmed prior to turning off.In some cases drivers were able to turn the headlights back on after a period of time while others reported the headlights would not come back on at all.Consumers noted they were able to hold the flash to pass lever on the steering column mounted stalk to activate the high beams however this is only effective as long as the lever is actuated.ODI identified 4 VOQ reports alleging minor crash or loss of control incidents due to headlight failures.Drivers indicated running off of the road due to a lack of headlights and one driver reportedly struck a deer.No injuries were indicated in the VOQ crashes.In response to ODI's April 7, 2015 Information Request letter, Ford provided data indicating it has received 3,092 complaints of failed headlights related to the Lighting Control Module (LCM), a device that controls the headlights and other lighting functions.This number includes the complaints Ford reviewed and classified as headlight failure due specifically to the LCM.Within Ford's complaints, there are 11 reports alleging a crash occurred.These drivers reported hitting objects, including other vehicles after the headlights failed causing damage to the affected vehicles.One driver was injured when their car struck an unseen object in the road, jerking the steering wheel from their hands and injuring their shoulder.In total 15 crash allegations were identified, all of which have occurred since ODI's prior evaluation of this issue.This petition has been granted.Preliminary Evaluation PE15-028 has been opened to assess the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequences of the alleged defect.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SarchNHTSAID under the identification (ODI) numbers found in the attached list.
The agency has closed this investigation based on its review of complaint reports, field and technical data provided by ford and complainant interviews. Ford found that some lighting control modules (lcm) in the subject vehicles contained defective solder joints on the printed circuit board.this condition can lead to poor headlight performance ranging from intermittent outage and dimming to eventual headlights failure.the failure does not affect other lighting functions (park, emergency flasher, brake and flash to pass lights).the agency IS aware of a total of 306 consumers complaints and no report of crash, injury or fatality.ford reports 2,074 warranty claims related to headlight failure linked to the lcm during the first three years of operation.about 12% (247) of these claims are specific to headlight failure while driving.the average warranty rate for headlight failing while driving IS low (0.05%).ford reports a slightly higher warranty rate experienced for the crown victoria police interceptor vehicles and this IS attributed to the higher duty cycle of these vehicles (headlights on for longer periods).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 will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
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.
During a september 23, 2004 meeting and in subsequent discussions in november, ford advised the office of defects investigation (odi) of their plans to introduce an improved steel wheel for manufacturing and service component use on the subject vehicles, indicating this would occur in december 2004.the new wheel design incorporates an additional manufacturing process (shot peening) which lowers tensile stress in the surface layer of the rim material adjacent to the circumferential weld. Theoretically this should improve rim durability by reducing fatigue crack initiation sites.indications from ford?s accelerated testing methods show an improvement in the performance of the new wheel.in addition to prior safety recall 03v279 and service action (sa) 03m03, ford will announce a new extended warranty sa for vehicles built prior to december 2004 that suffer rim fractures in service.the new wheel design will be used as a remedy.ford advises that a sa IS sufficient for addressing future wheel failures (including recall 03v279 remedy wheel failures) because: 1) failure rates are low based on ford?s analysis, and 2) driver warnings (repetitive slow air loss, and or steering wheel vibration) allow early and safe detection of cracked wheels.odi has received 25 vehicle owner questionnaire (voq) reports (involving 22 vehicles) which allege a rim fracture of one or more steel wheels.about half the reports involve vehicles built with the remedy wheel used for recall 03v279, and most of the remaining vehicles were subject to the recall.the process of identifying pertinent ford complaints IS made difficult by ford?s prior recall and warranty program activities.the manufacturer complaint and warranty counts, which primarily involve failures of recall 03v279 remedy wheels, are based on analysis conducted to date and are considered to be conservative.further investigation IS required, thus odi IS upgrading this investigation to an engineering analysis (ea).during the ea, pertinent failure reports and consequences will be identified and reviewed.odi and ford will discuss details for conducting an audit analysis of failed wheels replaced under the new sa.additionally, odi IS awaiting ford?s lab analysis of two wheels which were the subject of voq reports, one of which was involved in the noted crash event.a determination will be made as to whether ford?s service action IS sufficient for addressing ongoing rim fractures.
This pe was opened after odi became aware of two allegations concerning rear axle fracture and partial wheel separation involving my 2003 ford crown victoria police interceptors (cvpi).initially, the pe's scope involved all my 2003 grand marquis, crown victoria, and lincoln town cars (i.e., panther platform) produced through january 2003.while gathering information about this issue, it became evident that the failures were confined to long-wheelbase lincoln town cars and the cvpi's due to their unique weight distribution and usage profiles.ford's recall addresses these vehicles.both the company and odi are continuing to monitor the field performance of the axles and will take appropriate action as required.
The subject wheel (new for my 2003) IS used on crown victoria (cv) and grand marquis.complaint data indicates that wheel failure affects primarily the commercial specification cv model (police and taxi) which has unique design characteristics and IS generally subjected to higher usage demands.during ford's analysis, it was determined that cyclic bending moment fatigue could cause rim cracks to occur in the heat affected zone adjacent to the circumferential weld.ford implemented changes in wheel manufacture in september 2002 and introduced a new wheel design with a thicker rim in april 2003.odi found evidence that indicated rapid crack propogation might have occurred in seven wheel failure incidents, two of which lead to tire debeading.ford has announced that 29,946 commercial spec cv vehicles, manufactured prior to the september change, will be recalled to have the april 2003 design wheel installed.odi will continue to monitor for wheel failures in the subject vehicles not covered by the recall.
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.
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.
Technical service bulletins and other communications the manufacturer sent dealers about this vehicle. Ask a dealer for the full document by its number.
Bars are owner complaints, dots mark years with recalls. Select a year to open its report.