2002 Ford Explorer problems

What is wrong

Ford is recalling model years 1995-2003 windstar, 2000-2003 excursion diesel, 1993-1997 and 1999-2003 f-250 sd through f-550 sd diesel, 1992-2003 e-150 through e-550, 1995-2002 explorer, 1997 and 2002 mercury mountaineer, 1995-1997 and 2001-2003 ranger, and 1994 f53 vehicles equipped with the texas instruments speed control deactivation switch (scds). The scds may leak internally and then overheat, smoke, or burn.

Risk

A vehicle fire could occur with or without the engine running.

Remedy

Ford will notify owners that dealers will install a fused wiring harness in line with the scds. On 1999-2003 windstar vehicles with a leaking scds, dealers will also inspect the ABS control module connector and repair as necessary. Repairs will be completed free of charge. The safety recall began on october 27, 2009. Owners may contact ford at 1‑888‑222‑2751.

Recall number 09V399000 · Recall details

What is wrong

On certain sport utility vehicles, the liftgate glass strut may become disengaged or the hinge may fracture allowing the glass to fall and possibly break.

Risk

If the hinge should fracture, there is a potential for the glass to fall and ultimately break and personal injuries could occur.

Remedy

Dealers will have the liftgate glass strut brackets and glass hinges replaced. For the vehicles built from august 1, 2000 through march 3, 2002, the dealers will replace the hinges and liftgate strut bracket. On vehicles built from march 3, 2002 through june 23, 2003, the dealers will only replace the hinges. The recall began on september 30, 2004. A postcard was sent to owners on december 27, 2004, advising them that parts are now available. Owners should contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673.

Recall number 04V442000 · Recall details

What is wrong

Certain pickup truck, van, and mini van conversions equipped with southern comfort built running boards that contain certain courtesy lights manufactured by american technology components, inc. These units contain a courtesy light or lights that might overheat when the wire harness is exposed to excessive moisture and road salt.

Risk

This overheating condition can cause the running board to melt or cause a fire.

Remedy

Dealers will replace the wiring harness on these running boards. Owner notification began march 7, 2003. 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 southern comfort at 1‑800‑745‑6096.

Recall number 03V094000 · Recall details

What is wrong

Vehicle description: sport utility vehicles. The right side tires may have horizontal cuts on the edge of the tread that could have occurred during vehicle assembly.

Risk

Over time, the tire could fail, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy

Dealers will inspect the tires and, if any slices are found, the cut tires will be replaced. Owner notification began june 7, 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 1‑800‑392‑3673.

Recall number 01V171000 · Recall details

This investigation is being closed based on several considerations.By the most inclusive counting of all alleged rollaway incidents (i.e., counting all alleged rollaway incidents and assuming a singular failure mechanism), the incident rate is low, however during EA09-013, ODI identified a number of different failure mechanisms in 180 incidents related to the alleged defect.The highest rate for any particular failure mechanism, the failure of the Automatic Transmission Parking System, was 4.4/100K.The next-highest failure rate was for the BSI System, at 3.4/100K.For all identified failure mechanisms there has been a drastically declining trend including very few incidents occurring in recent years.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist.For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete closing resume in the document file for EA09-013. The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.the federal safety agency.dot.gov/owners/Searchreference under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10168454, 10279630, 10280078.

EA09013

In response to an information request (ir) letter sent by the office of defects investigation (odi), ford stated consumer reports of higher than expected efforts when shifting into and out of park could be a result of a groove being worn into the swing arm ramp of the steering column. The swing arm is a component bolted to the steering column that assists in shifting through the transmission gears.an engineering evaluation conducted by ford of returned steering columns found the groove could be created over time if consumer shift more quickly from the drive or reverse to park than the brake shift interlock (bsi) solenoid pin retracts after the brake pedal is applied. In november of 2004, ford released a redesigned bsi solenoid with a shorter pin retracting time as a serviceable component. Ford has noted the shorter retraction time significantly lessens the likelihood of bsi solenoid pin to swing arm contact even with rapid consumer shifts.ford also issued a technical service bulletin, tsb 04-22-12, to instruct service technicians on the proper diagnosis and vehicle repair. Reviewing complaints to odi and data submitted by ford, odi has identified 200 alleged incidents of unintended vehicle movement after consumers believe they have shifted the vehicle into park, resulting in 85 alleged crashes and 32 alleged injuries.in addition to the reports of alleged incidents of unintended vehicle movement, odi has also identified 883 reports of consumers alleging difficulty or the inability to shift the vehicle into park.this preliminary evaluation has been upgraded to an engineering analysis (ea09-013) to further assess the scope, frequency and risk to motor vehicle safety of the alleged defect in the subject vehicles.

PE09020

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 the federal safety agency 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 the federal safety agency?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency?s safety mission, the petition is denied.

DP05005

On july 7, 2005, the office of defects investigation (odi) opened a preliminary evaluation to investigate alleged stuck throttle complaints in certain model year (my) 2002 ford explorer and mercury mountaineer vehicles equipped with the standard available 4.0l sohc v6 engine.at that time, odi was aware of 15 complaints that alleged stuck engine throttle causing unwanted vehicle acceleration and 1 alleged crash as a result.six complainants reported that throttle control cable replacement remedied the alleged stuck throttle condition.additionally, odi was aware of a technical service bulletin issued by the manufacturer that referred to an accelerator cable design change.odi sent a letter to the manufacturer on july 18, 2005 requesting certain information about these vehicles. According to ford, approximately 234,092 subject vehicles built from august 14, 2000 (?job 1?) through october 31, 2001 used a particular accelerator cable known as a 16 lay wire design.this design is comprised of the throttle cable surrounded by a conduit made of several concentric layers including a teflon liner, a nylon tube extruded over the teflon liner, 16 lay wires wrapped around the nylon tube, and finally a nylon jacket extruded over and around the lay wires. Ford reports that throttle control concerns related to the accelerator cable are likely caused by a migration of the inner teflon liner out of the conduit at the dash panel fitting.should the teflon liner migrate outward sufficiently to contact the accelerator pedal arm it could interfere with the pedal?s ability to return to idle.in november 2001, ford began using a new 12 lay wire design accelerator cable.this change was implemented to allow for installation of optionally available power-adjustable pedals. Field data suggests that the condition with the subject cable is more prevalent in cold (winter) climates.of the 396 warranty claims related to the alleged defect, nearly 68% occurred in winter months and most warranty claims are associated with vehicles sold in the northeastern, northern interior (midwest), and rocky mountain regions of the united states.this seasonal trend appears to be in decline with fewer warranty claims paid in winter 2005 than in previous winters.there are no known crashes related to the alleged defect on the subject vehicles, the complaint rate is low after approximately four years in service (3.0 incidents per 100,000 vehicles) and the failure trend is declining.there have been no new complaints since january 2005.a safety-related defect trend 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 the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist.odi will continue to monitor its complaint database and will receive updated complaint and warranty data from ford in spring 2006 to verify the trend analysis.the agency will take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

PE05037

Complaints report failure of the rear liftgate glass support while the operator is opening or closing the glass.the falling glass can strike the operator or bystander.the injuries reported are bruises to the head, neck or back, cuts to the face, arm or hand.on september 9, 2004, ford notified the agency that it will recall approximately 955,732 my 2002 and 2003 ford explorer and mercury mountaineer vehicles to replace the liftgate glass strut brackets and/or hinges.see the federal safety agency recall 04v442 for details. This investigation is closed.

PE04045

In july 2001, ford issued a special service message announcing that some air bagclockspring devices may produce noise when the steering wheel is turned full left or right.ford was aware that some clocksprings may have been improperly installed.the improper installation may also cause an open circuit and the air bag warning light to illuminate.starting with vehicles produced in september 2001, ford adding length to the clockspring wire to reduce the likelihood of damage from improper installation.odi's investigation revealed 32 comlaints (vehicle built prior to sept. 2001) of warning light but no crashes, injuries, lawsuits or claims.a safety 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 the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist.the agency will take further action if warranted by the circumstances.see attached summary report.

EA02010

SQ01015