Check a VIN

2002 Mercury Mountaineer problems

The most common problem on the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer is transmission and drivetrain, typically around 78,375 miles. It has 3.9 times the complaints of a typical Mountaineer model year.

Year to avoid3.9x the typical complaints
Year score
25/100
Owner complaints
372
Recalls
2
Service bulletins
247
Worst area
Transmission
Fuel economy
14-16mpg
Typical repair
$2,700

The worst 2002 Mercury Mountaineer problems

Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.

Problems by type

Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.

Specific symptoms reported on the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer

Transmission failure 28Won't shift 20Slipping 19Coil spring 13Jerking 13Harsh shifting 11Airbag light 10Check engine light 9Stalling 9ABS 8Grinding brakes 7No deployment 6Ball joint 6Engine failure 6Sudden acceleration 6Fire or smoke 5Whining noise 5

Recalls 2

Vehicle speed controlReported October 13, 2009 · 4,500,000 vehicles affected
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

Tires: sidewallReported May 24, 2001 · 52,000 vehicles affected
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

See all 2 recalls for the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer

Defect investigations

Vehicle Rollaway AllegationsOpened August 18, 2009, closed February 12, 2013

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

Spark plug ejection from cylinder headOpened September 22, 2005, closed January 4, 2006

On september 6, 2005, odi received a petition requesting that the agency investigate allegations of engine spark plug ejection in certain model year 1997 through 2004 ford vehicles with triton v-8 and v-10 engines.odi received a total of 474 non-duplicative complaints on the subject vehicles where the complainant, or the dealer repairing the vehicle, reported that a spark plug detached from the cylinder and/or ejected from the engine.as of december 8, 2005, odi is not aware of any allegations where the alleged defect resulted in a loss of vehicle control, a crash, an injury, or a fatality in any of the 10,319,810 subject vehicles.in addition, odi is aware of only two incidents where the vehicle stalled without restart.information contained in the odi consumer complaints and obtained from 72 telephone interviews with complainants showed the following:(1) 99% of the complaints were on my 1997 to 2002 subject vehicles.(2) most the complainants reported hearing a loud pop while driving or upon starting up the vehicle followed by a loud, repetitive clicking or popping sound.(3) many of the complainants reported that the popping sound was accompanied by some loss of vehicle power; however, in 99% of the incidents reported, the vehicle did not stall.in the very few incidents where the vehicle did stall, most vehicles could be restarted.(4) only a small percentage of the complainants cited that they smelled gas or a slight burning smell when the incident occurred.(5) in all but a very few incidents, vehicle damage was limited to the engine.in one incident, the complaint reported that the fuel rail was damaged and replaced after one of the spark plugs ejected from the engine; however, the complainant reported that the damage did not result in any type of fuel leak or fire.in another incident, the only incident where a fire was alleged, the complainant reported that no fluid leak was observed, but that a fire resulted after the spark plug had ejected from the engine and he had restarted the vehicle and driven to another location.none of the complainants reported any damage to the vehicle hood.(6) only two complainants reported that they observed what appeared to be some drops of fuel coming from the cylinder where the spark plug had failed or on the spark plug itself; however, each of these complainants reported that there was no smoke or flames as a result of his incident.as the petitioner noted, and odi?s analysis showed, it is possible for a spark plug to detach from the engine cylinder threads in the subject vehicles.however, odi?s analysis of 474 complaints describing such incidents found only a very few alleged any safety-related consequences.none of these showed any evidence of a serious safety consequence.given the large population and relatively long exposure time of the subject vehicles, the complaint analysis indicates that the risk to motor vehicle safety from the alleged defect is very low.in view of the foregoing, it is unlikely that 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

Stuck engine throttleOpened July 7, 2005, closed November 2, 2005

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

Rear liftgate glass assemblyOpened June 2, 2004, closed September 28, 2004

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

Mis-assembled airbag clockspringOpened July 2, 2002, closed February 25, 2003

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

Technical service bulletins for the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer 247

Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.

See all 247 bulletins for the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer

2002 Mercury Mountaineer fuel economy

Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.

EngineDriveCityHighwayCombined
4.0L 6‑cylRWD141916
4.6L 8‑cylRWD131815
4.0L 6‑cyl4WD131815
4.6L 8‑cyl4WD121714

What 2002 Mercury Mountaineer owners say

Most recent owner complaints, unedited.

Filed Dec 27, 2023 · Steering · AZ

Aftermarket rack and pinion system re-manufactured by Detroit Axel began leaking fluid and caused a loss of power steering within 3 months of purchase. A second unit was installed and after about a year had the exact same failure as the first unit. Also resulting in the loss of power steering. It is my contention that Detroit Axel is not capable of re-manufacturing to a satisfactory safety standard. I believe they should be investigated and perhaps subject to a product recall. I pray nobody has yet been killed by their ineptitude!

Filed Jun 18, 2022 · Body, Electrical · NY

Body : to much rust, corrosion, on rear of truck other failure or detachment of exterior body like rear gate frame components, and other structural components that may present a safety hazard. Electrical :Â electrical systems and items such asa wiring and cable on or inside the door, ignition switch cover detach ,instrument panel and gauges blinking that causes motors and actuators that power mechanical devices like (windows, sunroofs, seats, etc.) Generate some kind of electrical problem that may present a safety hazard. Power train :transmissions, transfer cases fluid hard to check ,electronic control units and shift lever inacurated, drive axles, hubs, shafts, differentials, CV joints star vibration that may present a safety hazard.

Filed May 10, 2022 · PA · fire

Heard a pop noise under hood. Engine shut off battery light came on. Went to open hood and there was a fire.

Filed Feb 5, 2020 · Body, Visibility · PA

Tl* the contact owns a 2002 mercury mountaineer. The contact stated that the rear lift gate failed to latch securely on several occasions. The contact stated that the failure was intermittent. The contact stated on one occasion while driving the vehicle, the lift gate ajar warning light illuminated. The contact's son went to close the lift gate and glass shattered. The contact hired a glass repairmen to fix the window for $250.00. The dealer nor the manufacturer had been notified of the failure. Upon investigation, the contact associated the federal safety agency campaign number: 01i010000 (visibility) with the failure. The failure mileage was unknown.

Filed Mar 6, 2019 · Airbags · 250,000 miles · MO · crash · 1 injury

Tl* the contact owned a 2002 mercury mountaineer. While driving, the vehicle slid on ice. The contact lost control of the vehicle and crashed into a ditch. The air bags failed to deploy. The contact sustained head, chest, lower and upper back, abdominal, and neck injuries that required medical attention. A police report was filed. The vehicle was towed to the contact's residence. The vehicle was not taken to a dealer or an independent mechanic for diagnostic testing. The vehicle was destroyed. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 250,000.

Filed Jul 1, 2017 · Electrical · 25,000 miles · MN

My power will stay on for long periods of time also I'm having an acceleration problem when I drive I have to wait for it to go to about 25 mi till 26 for it to pick up any speed it takes a very long time for it to pick up any speed in the 1st place.

Filed Jun 5, 2017 · Brakes, Driver assistance · IL

I purchased a vehicle on march 11, 2017 from a dealership named redefined auto sales in skokie, il. Since I have purchased this vehicle, I have spent over $1,500 in costs for repairs to this vehicle, beginning with I had to get an oil change on the same day that I purchased the vehicle because the change oil required light came on as soon as I exited the expressway in route from the dealership. Also, as I was en route from the dealership, on the expressway a motorist tried to cut me off and that is when I found out that the horn was not working. Things have just went downhill from there.

Filed May 26, 2017 · Brakes, Suspension · IL

I purchased a used vehicle from redefined auto sales located in skokie, il on 3/11/17. Since then I have spent over $1500.00 in cost for repairs on this vehicle, beginning with I had to get the oil changed the same day that I bought the vehicle because the change oil required light came on as soon as I exited the expressway, I almost got into a serious accident on the expressway in route from the car dealership because a motorist tried to cut me off and that is when I discovered that the horn was not working. The next day the power door locks stopped working and things just has went down hill since then, the vehicle is in the shop right now as I'm typing this, I have not driven the vehicle anywhere other than back and forth to repair shops. I filed a complaint with the bbb but nothing was done about the complaint because the business responded saying the vehicle was used and I rejected the response and then received an email from the bbb saying that the case was closed. This vehicle was a lemon with a lot of issues and none of those issues were disclosed to me when I purchased the vehicle.

Filed Mar 9, 2017 · Airbags · 199,000 miles · VA

While driving on a straight road going 20-25 MPH, my driver and passenger side/curtain airbags deployed for no reason. I pulled over and called my insurance company still confused as to why this happened. They informed me to call ford and report it and cut the airbag enough to see. With no luck on getting help from ford or my insurance company, I'm now dealing with failing inspection due to my airbag light. I feel this is a manufacturer problem as I haven't made any modifications to the vehicle.

Filed Nov 21, 2016 · Acceleration, Electrical · 150,351 miles · WI

When going 25-30 MPH vehicle will not shift.it actually kicked the vehicle back. Od light started to flash then service engine soon light came on.been doing this since. Went to go get mountaineer read and of coarse..the transmission..something needs to be done otherwise this might eventually lead to a lawsuit after reading all of the complaints on the exact same thing.

Used buying checklistWhat to check on a 2002 Mercury Mountaineer before you buy

Compare the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer

Other model years

199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Questions about the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer

Is the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer reliable?

Owners have filed 372 complaints about the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer, 3.9 times a typical Mountaineer model year. It is one of the years we flag to avoid.

What is the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer year score?

The 2002 Mercury Mountaineer scores 25 out of 100 (poor). The score compares it with the other model years of the Mercury Mountaineer: 75 is a typical year, 50 means twice the usual complaints, and serious complaints and recalls lower it.

What is the most common problem with the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer?

Transmission and drivetrain, with 144 complaints, typically around 78,375 miles. Next is body (70).

How many recalls does the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer have?

2 recalls, covering vehicle speed control and tires.

What year does the Mercury Mountaineer have bad transmission?

The Mercury Mountaineer model years with the most transmission complaints are 2002 (144 complaints), 2004 (64 complaints) and 2003 (42 complaints).

What gas mileage does the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer get?

Official estimates for the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer range from 14 to 16 mpg combined. The most efficient version (4.0L 6-cyl, RWD) gets 14 city and 19 highway.

Share your experience with the 2002 Mercury Mountaineer

Tell other buyers what went wrong and what it cost. We review every report before it appears, and we never publish names, emails or VINs.

No names, contact details or links. Reports about a dealer or a person are not published.

VIN decoder

See the problems and recalls for an exact car

Buying a used 2002 Mercury Mountaineer?

Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.

Check its history
Is this car on a recall?Check VIN