1997 Lincoln Town Car
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Lincoln › Town Car › 1997
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 1997 Lincoln Town Car. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
8 recalls name the 1997 Lincoln Town Car. Newest first.
Dorman Products, Inc. (Dorman) is recalling certain model Dorman Steering Shafts, part number 425-359, Solutions Steering Shafts, part number 7-0359, and OE Solutions Steering Shafts, part number 425-359, manufactured April 17, 2014, to September 28, 2015. These aftermarket replacement steering shafts are sold for use in 1995-2002 Ford Crown Victoria…
If the shafts separate during vehicle operation, a loss of steering control would result, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Dorman will notify owners, and dealers will replace the steering shaft, free of charge. The recall began on October 28, 2015. Owners may contact Dorman customer service at 1-800-523-2492, option 5.
On certain pickup trucks, passenger vehicles, sport utility vehicles, and motor homes chassis, the speed control deactivation switch may, under certain conditions, leak internally and then overheat, smoke, or burn.
This could result in an underhood fire.
Dealers will install a fused wiring harness. owners of the passenger cars included in this campaign will be instructed to return their vehicles to their dealers to have the speed control deactivation switch disconnected as an interim repair. as soon as repair parts are available (expected october 2007), owners will be instructed to return to the dealers for installation of a fused wiring harness. the recall began on august 13, 2007, and mailing completed by september 19, 2007. owners may contact ford at 1-888-222-2751.
Equipment description: passenger vehicles that have had the driver's air bag module replaced after april 5, 2000. the replacement driver's air bag module inflator may have insufficient welds that could prevent proper inflation of the air bag.
In the event of a crash, the driver's air bag may not properly deploy which could potentially result in less than the intended level of occupant protection.
Dealers will inspect and, if necessary, replace the driver's air bag module. owner notification began october 5, 2001. owners who take their vehicles to an authorized dealer on an agreed upon service date and do not receive the free remedy within a reasonable time should contact ford at 1-866-436-7332.
Vehicle description: passenger vehicles using aftermarket driver's seat belt assemblies that were sold by ford parts departments from january 1, through june 13, 2000. these seat belt assemblies fail to comply with the requirements of fmvss no. 209, "seat belt assemblies." the equipment involved IS service stock seat belt assemblies, model nos. H 9977…
In the event of a collision, these seat belts may not restrain an occupant increasing the risk of injury.
Dealers will inspect these vehicles and replace the service seat belt assemblies that were installed in these vehicles from january 1 through june 13, 2000.
Vehicle description: passenger vehicles using aftermarket front passenger side seat belt assemblies that were sold by ford parts departments from january 1, through june 13, 2000. these seat belt assemblies fail to comply with the requirements of fmvss no. 209, "seat belt assemblies." the equipment involved IS service stock seat belt assemblies, model…
In the event of a collision, these seat belts may not restrain an occupant increasing the risk of injury.
Dealers will inspect these vehicles and replace the service seat belt assemblies that were installed in these vehicles from january 1 through june 13, 2000.
Vehicle description: certain 1996-1999 ford crown victoria police, fleet, natural gas, and 1996-1999 lincoln town car limousine vehicles that were produced with a lower control arm ball joint containing a one piece bearing; and 1990-1996 ford crown victoria police, fleet, and ngv vehicles and 1990-1996 lincoln town car limousine vehicles that have been…
If this occurs while the vehicle IS moving, reduced steering control could occur, increasing the risk of a crash.
Dealers will replace the lower control arm ball joints (2).
This IS not a safety recall in accordance with federal regulation 573. however, it IS deemed a safety improvement campaign by the agency. ford IS initiating an owner notification program for owners of certain 1995-1997 crown victoria model vehicles with police, taxi, and commercial fleet packages and town car vehicles with the livery package. these…
This could lead to brake fluid loss for the rear brakes and, potentially, increased stopping distances.
Dealers will inspect the brake lines for wear, install two new tube bundle clips, and check the brake lines for proper clearances. if the brake lines are worn, the damaged section of the brake line will be replaced.
Two bolts that attach the driver air bag to the steering wheel were not installed during vehicle assembly.
In the event of a frontal collision, the air bag module would stay in position during deployment. however, the module could leave the steering wheel cavity following air bag deployment.
Dealers will inspect the vehicles and install any bolts that are missing.
This has happened to me 3 times in the past 3 months. While driving interstate highway at night and traveling 65 to 70 miles per hr., without any warning or symptoms, the headlights turn off. They then turn on and off a few times and then seem to correct themselves and stay on. This happens on trips after 1 hour or more. Has never occurred on shorter trips under 1 hour. Very dangerous and scary when it is so dark you can't see to pull over off the highway and also worried about vehicles approaching from behind not being able to see you in time. I replaced the headlight switch last week thinking that was the problem, but it happened again last night on my trip back from N.Y.
The contact owns a 1997 Lincoln Town Car. The contact stated while driving at 40 MPH, another vehicle crashed into the front passenger side of the vehicle. The vehicle that crashed into the contact was driving at approximately 55 MPH. The air bags failed to deploy. There were no injuries reported. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. A dealer was not contacted. The contact had a second accident, and the air bags did not deploy during that incident. The dealer stated that the air bags could not be replaced because the vehicle was an older model, and the VIN was not under a recall. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 154,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. While driving approximately 60 mph, the steering ability became loose and the contact lost control. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic who determined that the steering column failed and needed replacement. The vehicle was not taken to the dealer for diagnostic testing or repairs. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 300,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. The contact stated that while the driver was driving at 30 mph, steam emitted from the front end of the vehicle without warning. The vehicle was towed to the contacts residence. The vehicle was not diagnosed however, the contact stated that an after market intake manifold was replaced by an independent mechanic. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 100,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. The contact stated that while driving at 25 mph, the vehicle stalled as the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was restarted. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where it was diagnosed that the intake manifold needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired by the dealer however, the contact stated that he repaired the vehicle independently with aftermarket parts. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 80,000.
Brake lights would not work. bulbs ok. replacing the turn signal switch fixed problem.
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. The contact stated that when the brake pedal was applied, it traveled to the floorboard. The contact noticed that there was premature rust and corrosion on the brake lines causing them to fracture. The vehicle was not included in nhtsa campaign number: 98i001000 (service brakes, hydraulic). The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 44,000. Updated 12/10/15*lj *cn
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. The contact stated that while traveling an unknown rate of speed, the vehicle stalled without warning. The contact stated that upon further inspection of the vehicle, it was noticed that the plastic piece associated with the intake manifold fractured. Also, the contact mentioned that the temperature reader and additional components may have been damaged due to the failure. The vehicle was towed to the contacts residence and was not diagnosed. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact was not included in nhtsa campaign ID number: 10v638000 (engine and engine cooling). The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 98,000.
My 1997 lincoln town car signature series caught fire while parked in the garage. The car had not been driven for approximately 48 hours prior to the fire. About 02:00 hrs on the morning of the 29TH december 2014 I was wakened by a loud popping sound. When I investigated I found my garage totally engulfed by fire. It took the fire department over two hours to extinguish the fire; for it had spread to the other vehicle parked in the garage - 2013 jeep moab and to all of the tools and materials stored in the garage. the fire marshall and the arson investigator stated that the ignition point for the fire was under the hood in the lincoln, on the drivers side and close to the fire wall. It resulted in the total loss of both cars, the garage structure and all contents of said structure. *tr
Ball joint separated from control arm causing control arm to drop to the ground. The same as your recall98v322000 but calling lincoln they said that my car was not part of the recall. Even though it did exactly what the recall said. *tr
I was traveling at 9:30 pm when the headlights went out for about 45 seconds and then came back on. Traveled about a mile, when they went out again, can on, then started rapidly flashing. I pulled over and it about a minute before they returned to normal. This happened three times that night before I arrived home. These headlight problem has happened five times since the first occurrence. I rarely drive at night. ..Updated 06/26/14 *bf
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. the contact stated that brake fluid was leaking from the vehicle in addition to the brake pedal feeling abnormally loose. The contact later inspected the vehicle and discovered that the brake line was rusted. The vehicle was not repaired. the manufacturer was not notified. The approximate failure mileage was 90,000.
Beginning on a cold morning the steering felt off, like it needed more effort to turn at times. the steering also failed to return to center on its own, indicating a possible seized up universal joint in the steering shaft. I removed the steering shaft and found the universal joint seized and very difficult to move which caused my difficult steering. there IS a recall for this same issue on newer town cars, why does this not cover mine? *tr
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. The contact stated that while at a dealer for routine maintenance, the technician stated that engine coolant was leaking from the intake manifold. The technician stated that the intake manifold would have to be replaced. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 88,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. The contact stated that while at a dealer for routine maintenance, the technician stated that engine coolant was leaking from the intake manifold, which would need to be replaced. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 102,000.
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. The contact stated that the horn and cruise control were inoperative. A local mechanic diagnosed that the horn would need to be replaced. Neither the dealer nor the manufacturer were notified. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was 58,000 and the current mileage was 60,000.
Son was operating the vehicle. as he made a left turn, he heard a loud clunking sound and the right side of the vehicle crashed to the ground. had the car towed home and subsequently towed to the repair shop the next day. was told that the lower right ball joint had failed, subsequently snapping the stabilizer link. This happened in august 2010. november 15, 2011, I was driving home. stopped to air up my right rear tire. Upon re-entering the vehicle and backing out, the right front side fell to the ground. again, the right front lower ball joint failed. this time, I had to also replace the right front lower control arm, right front stabilizer link, right front shock and right front ball joint. there IS a serious problem with the 1997 lincoln towncar's front end. when the mechanic went to install the right lower ball joint (which IS a pressed fit) the ball joint went right in by hand, which indicated that the right front lower control arm was faulty. I now have a rattling sound coming from the left front side. I'm really scared to drive this car. *kb
The oil pan rusted through and caused all the oil to leak out onto the ground. The cruise control computer keeps causing the car to take off or not even work at all when u set it, when the car takes off after setting it the gas peddle goes all the way to the floor and it will not deactivate unless you shut the car off while driving. *Tr
The car was sitting in the driveway unattended with no key in the ignition when the fire started. it had been driven about 3 hours before with no problems. the fire inspector said the fire started under the hood on the left side but he was unable to say exactly what caused the fire. after checking on line it was discovered the car was on a recall list for the speed control switch which IS located on the left side.
TL* the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. While driving approximately 20 mph, the engine began to misfire. The check engine warning indicator illuminated on the instrument panel until the engine was turned off. The failure recurred whenever the vehicle was in operation. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where they informed that the engine manifold would need to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. Also, on a separate occasion the front lower control arm fractured and collapsed onto the front driver side wheel. The vehicle was repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 137,000.
Tl*the contact owns a 1997 lincoln town car. The contact stated that when driving at low speeds, the vehicle suddenly stalled. The contact shifted into neutral and restarted the vehicle. The failure occurred several times. The contact informed the dealer of the failure was told there were no related recalls. The vehicle had not been repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 65,000 and the current mileage was approximately 77,000.
Our 1997 lincoln town car that was part of the deactivation switch recall began honking as the alarm triggered on the evening of august 24, 2010 in our garage. after clearing the alarm several times, I investigated the battery voltage and all was well. the alarm triggered again and I cleared it. as I closed the hood smoke began to escape near the rear drivers side corner of the hood. I opened the hood as the smoke slowed down. the connector to the deactivation switch was very warm and the switch had brake fluid on it. the recall installed 20 amp fuse had not opened. upon investigation I found that the fuse in the recall installed harness was in the circuit between the switch and the cruise control instead of between the battery and the switch. hence the fuse provided no protection against the potential fire. thankfully I was standing there when it happened and could disconnect the cable from the switch. otherwise we were at risk of fire that could have spread to our house. *Tr
1997 lincoln town car. 120,000 miles. seat belt does not stay buckled. And comes undone with slightest of movement. *Tr
I was driving as usual and the intake manifold cracked or had been cracking over time. the engine made a ping noise and the coolant was leaking down into the engine. the engine light came on immediately. the manifold, thermostat, and gaskets had to be repaired. the cost for this repair was over $1,200.00. *Tr
Ford lincoln -- town car, year model 1997. brake line (tubing) between point of distribution from master cylinder/booster to rear axle. also brake line between rear wheels (fastened to outside of rear axle housing). this brake line tubing IS of inferior metal composition prone to rusting in northern climates where winter salt IS spread on road surfaces. case in point: when the car was parked on the parking lot, everything was fine. when car was restarted after a short duration of being parked, upon pressing the brake pedal, all brake fluid squirted onto pavement. root cause: the corroded brake line burst somewhere, approximately, under the driver's seat on the roadside (bottom side) of the floor board. this necessitates the replacement of the entire brake line tubing stretch (as per design) in excess of $1,200, parts and labor included. this burst of fluid could have occurred anywhere. since the incident occurred at a time and a place from where it was possible to drive the car a short distance to its home parking position using only the emergency brake, where needed, at a speed of no higher than 10 -15 mph. a private research indicated that this problem IS somewhat 'common.' subsequent inquiries at dealerships verified the fact that there IS a goodly number of brake line replacements. labor time expended IS about a full day (a full shift). to the writer of this note it IS not known how many serious accidents might have been already caused by this inferior quality brake line. a short length of the subject brake line covered with a plastic coating -- when uncovered to expose the metal tubing -- showed that tubing as if brand new, unaffected by the road salt. this IS a very serious problem, and it merits a thorough investigation including a recall. the writer of this note IS not aware of any later models having the same type of problem. that IS up to the investigators to find out. *Tr
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
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.
In a letter dated february 25, 2005, ford motor company (ford) notified odi that it would be conducting a customer satisfaction program (ford no. 04B26) to correct a rear brake line chafing concern in approximately 44,000 model year (my) 1997 ford crown victoria and grand marquis non-fleet vehicles equipped with electronic traction control that werebuilt after march 19, 1997.these vehicles have an additional rear brake line and a mastic patch causing reduced clearance from a stiffening rib in the floor pan.odi?s analysis showed higher complaint and warranty rates related to rear brake line failures in this population than in other subject vehicles and peer mid-sized passenger cars that were evaluated during the investigation.vehicles involved in ford?s program will have the rear brake lines inspected for contact with the floor pan stiffing rib.if there IS contact, but no abrasion or leakage, the brake lines will be repositioned.if there IS abrasion or a leak IS evident the brake line will be repaired.if necessary, both of the rear brake lines will be replaced. Though ford does not admit to a safety-defect in the subject components, odi believes that the facts in this investigation show otherwise because the insufficient clearance in the routing of those brake lines may result in leaks in those lines that may result in increased stopping distances.odi IS designating the campaign a safety recall (nhtsa recall no. 05V-086).because of the low rates of brake line failures in the remaining subject vehicles, a safety-related defect has not been identified in those populations and 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 in those vehicles.the agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.for additional information, see the attached closing report.
Odi has received 40 complaints alleging rear brake line failure in the subject vehicles, including 8 that have been received this year.an additional 192 reports and 478 warranty claims have been received from ford.a leak in the rear brake line can cause extended stopping distance.a search of odi's complaint database for peer vehicle complaints, using the same brake line failure criteria as for the subject vehicles and the same model years (1995-97), identified only 1 complaint involving general motors caprice/implala/88/98/regal vehicles and only 2 complaints involving chrysler lh-cars.the investigation has been upgraded to an engineering analysis to further evaluate the frequency, scope, and causal factors related to rear brake line failures in the subject vehicle population.
See attached report.
Based on the low rate of fire incidents (2.5 incidents per 100,000 vehicles sold) where failure of the scds IS involved and the age of the vehicles ? 7 to 11 years ? A safety-related defect trend has not been identified and 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.for additional information, see the attached closing report.
The fars data shows that the risk of fire from impact in all directions in the subject vehicles IS the same as all other sedans.the subject vehicles are not over represented with respect to the risk of fire in real-world high-energy crashes.a further discussion of issues related to post crash fires in the subject vehicles IS set out in the closing report for sq 01-014 and that report IS in the docket for this petition.after reviewing the petition and its supporting materials, as well as information furnished by ford and gm, and information within the agency's possession from previous investigations and other related actions,nhtsa has concluded that futher investigation concerning post-crash fires in the subject vehicles IS not likely to lead to a decision that the vehicles contain a safety defect.
There is no summary currently available
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.