1995 Mercury Grand Marquis
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Have the VIN?
Vehicles › Mercury › Grand Marquis › 1995
These records cover every 1995 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
Recalls
7 recalls name the 1995 Mercury Grand Marquis. 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…
Risk and remedy
Risk
If the shafts separate during vehicle operation, a loss of steering control would result, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy
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.
Ford IS recalling 225,000 my 1992-2003 econoline, my 1993-1995 taurus sho, my 1992-1998 crown victoria, my 1993 bronco, f-series, my 1995-1997 f-series super duty stripped chassis, my 1992-1998 mercury grand marquis, and my 1992-1995 lincoln town car vehicles. the affected vehicles were previously repaired using a wiring harness that IS not compatible with…
Risk and remedy
Risk
As a result, the fuse IS located in the output circuit rather than in the intended input power feed circuit, and may not offer the intended protection in the event of an electrical short to ground.
Remedy
Dealers will install a new wiring harness, or replace the mating electrical component. the recall began on february 18, 2008. owners may contact ford at 1-800-392-3673.
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.
Risk and remedy
Risk
This could result in an underhood fire.
Remedy
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.
The rivets holding the rear outboard belt d-rings were not heat treated properly causing the heads of the rivets to fracture under load and fail to hold the d-rings to the straps. This does not conform to the requirements of fmvss no. 210, "seat belt assembly anchorages."
Risk and remedy
Risk
Consequence of non-compliance: this condition can reduce the restraining capabilities of the safety belt in the event of an accident.
Remedy
Dealers will install a reinforcement plate on the rear outboard seat belt assembly anchorages involved in this campaign.
These vehicles were built with the non-cycling power window circuit breaker and the cycling headlamp circuit breaker interchanged.
Risk and remedy
Risk
In the event of a short or overload in the headlampcircuit, both headlamps can go out without warning, rather than flashing as intended with the cycling circuit breaker. This could lead to reduced night time driver visibility, increasing the potential for a vehicle accident.
Remedy
Dealers will inspect these vehicles, remove the circuit breaker and reinstall the breaker in the correct locations.
The seal material between the fuel filler pipe and fuel tank may not have been fully cured during the molding process which could allow for fuel leakage.
Risk and remedy
Risk
Fuel leakage could result in a vehicle fire if an ignition source were present.
Remedy
Dealers will replace the fuel filler pipe-to-fuel tank seal with a new seal of different material.
The passenger side air bag has an inflator body that cracked during forming of the curl that retains the igniter plug in the end of the inflator. Also the igniter end cap can separate from the inflator.
Risk and remedy
Risk
The passenger side air bag may not inflate properly resulting in reduced occupant protection in a vehicle accident. If the igniter end cap separates in a frontal collision, hot gases can be released and ignite flammable material or cause burn injuries.
Remedy
Dealers will remove and replace the passenger side air bag module.
Owner complaints
179 complaints19 involved a crash5 involved a fire13 injuries3 deaths
What owners report most
Latest complaints
- Air bags · Steering
Merging onto highway sudden loss of control /steering airbags deployed causing injuries including chemical burns
- Fuel/propulsion system
TL* the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. The contact stated that while decelerating from driving at 70 mph, a fuel odor emitted from the vehicle without warning. The contact mentioned that the failure recurred intermittently. The vehicle was taken to a dealer but was not diagnosed or…
TL* the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. The contact stated that while decelerating from driving at 70 mph, a fuel odor emitted from the vehicle without warning. The contact mentioned that the failure recurred intermittently. The vehicle was taken to a dealer but was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and the vehicle was previously serviced under nhtsa campaign number: 95v063000 (fuel system, gasoline). The failure mileage was 77,000.
- Exterior lighting
Headlights go out while driving. *tr
- Steering
Took car in for squeaking noise under car; discovered it was u-joint seal going dry. however, upon inspection technician discovered four dangerously worn ball joints, both upper and lower ball joints on both sides, and dangerously worn idler arm. This was confirmed visually by myself. Upper left…
Took car in for squeaking noise under car; discovered it was u-joint seal going dry. however, upon inspection technician discovered four dangerously worn ball joints, both upper and lower ball joints on both sides, and dangerously worn idler arm. This was confirmed visually by myself. Upper left ball joint was in the best condition, all others were missing jackets, had no lubrication, and worn to the level that very little force was needed to remove the ball from the socket after removal, one came out with no force. The idler arm was barely connected, and over 75% of metal at the link worn and rusted. nothing in the car's driving behavior gave any indication that any of these parts were worn. steering had only slight amount of play which was still present after the parts were replaced and the car aligned. Left upper ball joint had been replaced one year and 3 months previous to discovery. no other signs of wear were present at that time. The previous ball joint replaced was least worn, but jacket was torn and no lubrication present. with one exception, the ball joints appeared to have only gravity as the primary force holding the balls in the sockets. my concern for other drivers IS related to the lack of indications that the front end of this car had degraded to this level. The vehicle's steering responses were asymptomatic, period. this had not been my experience in the past. possible causes for asymptomatic behavior IS unknown (weight of vehicle and gravity?) the earlier problem (1YR 3MO. Earlier) with the left top ball joint failure was only discovered after it failed after hitting small pot hole coming from parking lot and the wheel broke and layed in flat on the road. Speed was under 5MPH. *js
- Electrical system · Exterior lighting
TL* the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. The contact stated that while driving approximately 60 mph, the headlights suddenly malfunctioned and became inoperable. The contact switched on the high beams that also malfunctioned within a few minutes and failed to function. The vehicle was…
TL* the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. The contact stated that while driving approximately 60 mph, the headlights suddenly malfunctioned and became inoperable. The contact switched on the high beams that also malfunctioned within a few minutes and failed to function. The vehicle was taken to the dealer who diagnosed that the head lamp circuit was faulty. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the defect but no solution was offered. The failure mileage was 76,000. updated 07/28/14 ma the consumer referenced recall # 95v189000. Updated 07/29/14
- Service brakes, hydraulic
All the brake lines on car from front to rear are rotted. Cause brake failure while driving. *tr
- Electrical system · Vehicle speed control
TL* the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. While driving at speeds of 55 mph, the contact noticed smoke coming from under the hood and drove onto the emergency lane. The contact confirmed that the fire began inside the dashboard area and spread to the components under the hood. The vehicle…
TL* the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. While driving at speeds of 55 mph, the contact noticed smoke coming from under the hood and drove onto the emergency lane. The contact confirmed that the fire began inside the dashboard area and spread to the components under the hood. The vehicle was destroyed. The police were called and a report was filed; however, the failure and current mileages were 90,000. updated 6/1/10 *cn updated 06/18/10.*jb
- Electrical system › Instrument cluster/panel · Exterior lighting › Headlights
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. the contact noticed that the speedometer and headlights failed on his vehicle. the dealer stated that the digital display board failed. the repair cost was estimated at $1,000. the manufacturer stated that they would only repair the vehicle…
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. the contact noticed that the speedometer and headlights failed on his vehicle. the dealer stated that the digital display board failed. the repair cost was estimated at $1,000. the manufacturer stated that they would only repair the vehicle according to nhtsa campaign ID number 07v336000 (vehicle speed control). the vehicle will be repaired. the failure and current mileages were 82,000. updated 06/27/09 *bf updated 06/23/09.*jb
- Suspension › Front · Wheels
I also had the clunk noise after a left turn, about 1 month as well after my left tire fell off as I was backing out of garage. ball joints had given out prematurely. 1300.00 to fix plus tow charge. *tr
- Vehicle speed control
Cruise control was replace with a jumper. it worked for about a month, and now it IS not working. the repair shop refuse to fix it. they say that something else IS wrong, and want to charge me a lot of money to fix it. the car has been working every since I purchased it in 1995. now it IS not. *tr
- Suspension › Front
After making a sharp right hand turn, I heard a loud clunk clunk noise and the car made a awkward movement until I straighten the vehicle back out. About a month later after getting my brakes serviced the repairman told me that the ball joint seals were busted prematurely and I had no protection. $1000.00 fix. *tr
- Power train › Automatic transmission
Vehicle shudders when shifting gears. This in an intermittent problem and occurs more frequently when there IS low load on engine and when transmission IS trying to select gears. *tr
- Suspension › Front › Control arm › Lower ball joint
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. while driving approximately 15 mph, the contact heard a loud banging noise and the front driver side lowered to the ground. the vehicle was towed to her residence. an investigator from her insurance company inspected the vehicle and concluded…
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. while driving approximately 15 mph, the contact heard a loud banging noise and the front driver side lowered to the ground. the vehicle was towed to her residence. an investigator from her insurance company inspected the vehicle and concluded that the lower ball joints separated from the vehicle. she IS in the process of having the vehicle repaired. the failure and current mileages were 76,000.
- Vehicle speed control
I receive a recall notice on my ford grand marquis -1995 to disconnect my cruise control because it may cause a fire (recall number 05s28). on september 14, 2007 we took our vehicle to mathews ford in heath ohio to have the cruise control disabled. we were told the part would be in some time in…
I receive a recall notice on my ford grand marquis -1995 to disconnect my cruise control because it may cause a fire (recall number 05s28). on september 14, 2007 we took our vehicle to mathews ford in heath ohio to have the cruise control disabled. we were told the part would be in some time in january. after calling and checking on the part for quit sometime, the part finally arrive and was install on april 8, 2008. after the part was install, my cruise control did not work. it had been working fine prior to the cruise control being disabled. I returned to mathews ford on april 25, 2008 to complain that my cruise control did not work. I was informed that they would look at it, but if it was not the part they replaced I would be charge $70 for them to look at it and receive an estimate to fix the problem. I refused the service. I do not feel this IS proper. it was working before they messed with. if they would of made the repair in september and it worked afterwards and then later broke I would understand. they are telling me something could of happened since they disabled it. well something may of happened while it was disabled for 8-9 months it was disabled, but since I could not use it, it does not make sense. I feel they should return my vehicle to the condition it was in before they messed with it. at a minimum, I should not have to pay money for them to diagnose a problem they caused! if they diagnosed it and it was another part--then I could decide how to proceed and I should not be locked into a service center that I would not normally use. I feel like the fox IS watching the hen house. IS there anyway I can get this issue resolved without having to pay a dealership? I thank you for your time in this matter. mark shell *tr
- Vehicle speed control › Cruise control
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. the contact received a recall notice for the vehicle speed control: cruise control. while leaving her house, the contact witnessed her vehicle on fire. the fire department stated that the fire originated in the engine compartment. the vehicle…
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. the contact received a recall notice for the vehicle speed control: cruise control. while leaving her house, the contact witnessed her vehicle on fire. the fire department stated that the fire originated in the engine compartment. the vehicle was towed to the dealer, where it currently remains. the powertrain and recall number were unknown. the failure and current mileages were 170,000.
- Electrical system › Instrument cluster/panel · Engine and engine cooling › Engine › Gasoline › Belts and associated pulleys · Service brakes, hydraulic › Foundation components › Disc › Rotor · Suspension · Vehicle speed control
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. the contact received a recall notice regarding the vehicle speed control. several dealers have informed him that the parts for the repair are unavailable. he has experienced the following failures with his vehicle: the serpentine belt, brake rotors, front passenger side strut, and odometer. the mileage information and recall number were unknown.
- Steering › Gear box (other than rack and pinion)
Steering box seals went twice in 2 weeks. Another complaint on this site tells the same story. the seals went once when I went to drive and the other time, when I went to back into a parking space. *tr
- Vehicle speed control › Cruise control
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. several years ago, the vehicle speed control failed. in august of 2007, the contact received a recall notice for the vehicle speed control, but it did not mention to park the vehicle inside. the contact received a second notice for nhtsa campaign…
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. several years ago, the vehicle speed control failed. in august of 2007, the contact received a recall notice for the vehicle speed control, but it did not mention to park the vehicle inside. the contact received a second notice for nhtsa campaign ID number 08v051000 (vehicle speed control:cruise control), which advised him not to park the vehicle inside due to the possibility of a fire. the contact felt that the first letter should have stated this information. there had been no failure to date. the current mileage was 70,000.
- Vehicle speed control
1995 mercury grand marquis with speed control recall. Consumer took the vehicle in to have the wiring harness disconnected. Consumer has yet to be notified of when the replacement part will be available. *kb
- Vehicle speed control
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. the contact received a ford safety recall notice in september of 2007 for the vehicle speed control. the switch was disconnected at that time. he has been informed by ford since that time and, every month thereafter, that the switch would be…
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. the contact received a ford safety recall notice in september of 2007 for the vehicle speed control. the switch was disconnected at that time. he has been informed by ford since that time and, every month thereafter, that the switch would be repaired the following month. there had been no failure to date. the purchase date and recall number were unknown. the current mileage was 96,000. updated 3/4/08 *cn the consumer provided the recall number 05s28. Updated 03/04/08 *tr
- Vehicle speed control
1995 mercury marquis recall parts not available. Consumer states that she was told the part wasn't in when talking to the dealer. Consumer had the old part removed but the new part was not installed because it was not in. *kb
- Vehicle speed control
1995 mercury grand marquis recall for speed control. Consumer states that the dealer has informed her that the part IS not available and all they can do for the time being IS disconnect the part. *kb
- Vehicle speed control
1995 mercury grand marquis with speed control recall. Consumer states that she received the recall in august 2007. She states that the dealer stated that the parts would be available in december now they will be available in february to may 2008. *kb
- Vehicle speed control
Tl*the contact owns a 1995 mercury grand marquis. the contact received a safety recall notification for the vehicle speed control in september of 2004. the dealer stated that the part would be available the following month. as of january 16, 2008, the dealer had not repaired the vehicle. the current mileage was 124,000 and there had been no failure to date. updated 02-14-08. *kb updated
- Exterior lighting · Exterior lighting › Headlights › Switch · Vehicle speed control › Cruise control
My 1995 mercury grand marquis odometer IS over 144K. I've experienced intermittent failure of the headlight switch, especially when temperature IS near or below freezing. When it's cold outside, and the vehicle has been sitting for a while and therefore cold when I turn on the headlights, I have to…
My 1995 mercury grand marquis odometer IS over 144K. I've experienced intermittent failure of the headlight switch, especially when temperature IS near or below freezing. When it's cold outside, and the vehicle has been sitting for a while and therefore cold when I turn on the headlights, I have to play with the switch for the headlights to stay on. It's now taking longer and longer for me to get the lights to stay lit. I've only experienced one failure while driving on the highway, after the vehicle had been driven for over 20 minutes. when I first purchased my vehicle, I replaced all 4 headlamp bulbs because they were too dim. the replacements didn't resolve the problem. From what I've read, the root cause of the problem IS the plastic covering on the headlamps. The composition of the plastic breaks down with age and discolors, reducing the brightness of the headlights. This design fault of using plastic over glass IS a dangerous safety hazard. If I change from low to high, my headlights appear to illuminate the road within allowable brightness, increasing visibility. Driving on roads with insufficient street lights IS dangerous with only the low beam headlamps. I've considered driving with the high beams at all times, to ensure my safety, but have questioned the legality of such a choice. The newer vehicles today seem to be sporting those super bright headlights, are extremely blinding to those who have to drive in front of or in the opposite direction as they blind you as they get closer and pass you. this past fall, I received a recall notice for the cruise control in my grand marquis. I took the vehicle into the dealership; they disconnected the cruise control, taped the ends of the wire, and sent me on my way. I was told that the parts would be in during Q4, and that I would receive a follow-up letter to come back and have the replacement part installed. We are into Q1 of the next year, and there hasn't been any follow-up from ford/mercury. *tr
Defect investigations
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
- Rear brake line failure
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…
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.
- Rear brake line failure
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…
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.
- Ball joint separation
See attached report.
- Speed control deactivation switch fires
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…
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.
- Fuel-fed fires
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…
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.
- Post rear end collision fires
There is no summary currently available
Service bulletins
Technical service bulletins and other communications the manufacturer sent dealers about this vehicle. Ask a dealer for the full document by its number.
- 10026401Ford/lincoln mercury: certain 1992-2001 model year crown victoria, grand marquis, and town car vehicles registered in the states of wisconsin and connecticut upgrade modifications for high speed rear impacts.
- 10013060Climate control a/c service tech tips.
- 10008580Lamp-brake-invadvertent disabling of brake shift interlock.
- 10008279New service part - number 5 needle bearing and race kit - 4r70w transmission - service tip.
- 10004027Remote keyless entry (rke) - service tips.
- 10003748New transmission cooler flusher - service tips. 2003 escort and super duty f series included.
- 6090087Information on identifying non-approved / alternate refrigerants which could cause safety, and performance concerns if installed in ford a/c systems.
- 6090085Service information for musty and mildew type odors coming from the air conditioning / heating system.
- 6090082Information for servicing and diagnosing brake vibration, brake inspection, and brake friction material replacement.
- 6089681Subject on a wire harness terminal repair kit available for repairing electrical wiring harnesses.
- 3030413Unknown
- 636080Transfer service tips for the front wiper motor mount bracket and depressed park output arm.
- 630515Engine oil system priming procedures, service tips for reports of premature engine failure.
- 630001Some engine assemblies with aluminum cylinder heads repaired in-vehile have been found to leak coolant and/or oil from the cylinder head gasket area.
- 627791Parts and procedure to reduce the potential of fuel tank punctures during rare and extremely high-speed rear impacts.
- 627747This aritlce IS to provide information on replacement of old style hood lamp switch to the rvised mechanical hood lamp switch.
- 625715Brake shift interlock.*jb
- 623988Information regarding transmission fluid usage charts. *Slc
- 623944Some vehicles may exhibit heater core leaks. *Slc
- 619424Subject regarding engine oil recommendations for use in 2001 vehicles - sae 5W-20 motor oil.
- 619299Information on replacing fuel tank strap bolts.
- 618614Information on programming remotes after driver door module replacement.
- 618546Subject regarding climate control - eatc - blower motor control service tips.
- 616522Subject regarding contamination from prior transmission concerns or excess wear may be trapped in the transmission fluid cooling system.
- 613335Subject regarding a new transmission case and main control released for service on aode / 4r70w transmissions.
- 612867Some vehicles may exhibit yellowing of the headlamps.
- 612689Brief information regarding vehicles that exhibit yellowing of the headlamps.
- 612203Information regarding the new transmission cooler flusher- service tip. *Mjs
- 608431Information on the new flush and fill tool available through rotunda.
- 606508Conditions with the brake lamps inadvertently disabling the brake shift interlock.
- 606460Experiencing a whine / buzz type noise in the speakers of the entertainment radio or two-way radio on vehicles with an in-tank electric fuel pump.
- 606433Information designed to aid in the diagnosis, testing and repair of noise, vibration and harshness (nvh) concerns.
- 606428Experiencing a delayed or no 2-3 upshift, primarily when the transmission IS cold on vehicles with ford qality remanufactured (fqr) 4r70w transmission exchange units with julian build between 062-97 and 040-99.
- 606420Ford motor company now recommends sae 5W-30 viscosity grade for servicing any ford gasoline-powered vehicle regardless of model year.
- 606419Subject regarding door trim panel replacement - service tip.
- 605562Subject regarding the availability of hub-mount brake rotor machining equipment.
- 605557Experiencing squealing and / or moaning noise from the rear brakes during light to medium brake applications.
- 604751Information regarding reprogramming powertrain control modules (pcms).
- 604059Ford motor company has released a new electrical grease ( F8AZ - 19g208-aa ) to reduce the possibility of moisture corrosion at the terminals.
- 604057Concerns regarding the front seat feeling loose on some vehicle.
Every Mercury Grand Marquis model year
Bars are owner complaints, dots mark years with recalls. Select a year to open its report.