2000 Mercury Sable suspension problems

What is wrong

On certain passenger vehicles originally sold in or currently registered in the states of connecticut, delaware, illinois, indiana, iowa, kentucky, maine, maryland, massachusetts, michigan, minnesota, missouri, new hampshire, new jersey, new york, ohio, pennsylvania, rhode island, vermont, west virginia, wisconsin, and the district of columbia, the front coil springs could fracture due to corrosion associated with salt used on the roadways during the winter. A fractured spring could move past the spring seat and contact a front tire.

Risk

If this occurs, the tire may rupture resulting in a rapid air loss, which could result in a crash.

Remedy

Dealers will install protective spring shields. In addition, ford is extending the warranty coverage of the front coil springs in all other states, for fracture only, up to 10 years of service or 150,000 miles, whichever occurs first. If the vehicle has already accumulated more than 150,000 miles, this coverage will last until july 31, 2005. If either front coil spring fractures, dealers will replace both front springs at no charge to the owner. An interim notice was sent to owners on august 2, 2004. Parts are now available for the 2000-2001 my vehicles and owners were sent a letter on january 10, 2005, advising them to bring in their vehicles for repair parts are expected to be available for the 1999 my vehicles by the end of february 2005 and owners of these vehicles will be notified then. Owners should contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673.

Recall number 04V332000 · Recall details

Odi's analysis identified a high complaint rate for the rear coil springs in the salt belt states (approximately 250 per 100,000 vehicles).approximately 59 percent of the complaints alleged that the coil spring failure caused damage to the adjacent rear tire, with about half of these (30 percent of total complaints) alleging that the damage resulted in air loss.because air loss from a rear tire can result in changes in vehicle handling characteristics, odi examined field data, test data and interviewed consumers to assess the safety consequences of such failures in the subject vehicle population.analysis of all available field data did not identify any crashes or injuries resulting from the alleged defect in the subject vehicles.vrtc testing conducted to simulate a coil spring induced rear tire failure did not result in a loss of vehicle control.when interviewed by odi, none of the consumers who experienced incidents of tire air loss due to the alleged defect indicated that the failures caused a loss of vehicle control.tire damage resulting from the alleged defect has involved rubbing/abrasive wear of the inner tire sidewall with the potential for air loss from pin-hole sized leaks in the wear groove.there is no evidence that the alleged defect has caused any sudden, catastrophic tire failures in either straight or turning maneuvers.a safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.accordingly, this investigation is closed.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist.the agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.see document file for additional information regarding this resume.

EA06002

The office of defect investigation (odi) opened preliminary evaluation, pe05-054, based on 131 vehicle owner questionnaires related to alleged rear coil spring fractures.since opening the investigation there have been an additional sixty-three (63) complaints alleging rear coil spring fracture.an analysis of the vehicle owner questionnaires (voqs) submitted to odi reveals that 42% of the complainants allege that the adjacent tire was punctured as result of a rear coil spring fracture. Additionally, an analysis of the complaint data received by odi from ford reveals the following: there were a total of 553 unique vehicle complaints of coil spring fracture. 30% of the complaints allege that the rear coil spring fracture resulted in the adjacent tire being punctured. An engineering analysis (ea06-002) is being opened to further examine the potential safety implications of the rear coil spring fractures as related to tire punctures.

PE05054

Odi possesses 130 vehicle owners questionnaires (voq) alleging front suspension coil spring failure in the subject (model year 1999-2000) vehicles.an additional 11 voqs concerning my 2001 vehicles have been found, bringing the total to 141.more than 75% of these reports allege that the broken spring damaged or punctured the adjacent tire.all of these reports originated in the salt belt states located in the northeast quadrant of the united states and canada.ford will conduct a safety recall (04v‑332) covering vehicles soldor currently registered in connecticut, delaware, illinois, indiana, iowa, kentucky, maine, maryland, massachusetts, michigan, minnesota, missouri, new hampshire, new jersey, new york, ohio, pennsylvania, rhode island, vermont, west virginia, wisconsin, and the district of columbia, to install spring shields in my 1999-2001 taurus/sable vehicles to prevent a fractured spring from damaging the nearby tire.ford will additionally notify owners of all my 1999-2001 taurus/sable vehicles that warranty coverage for spring fractures has been extended to 10 years of age or 150,000 miles.odi analyzed ford?s warranty and complaint data and found that 99% of the spring fractures occurred in the states covered by the recall.the other incidents occurred in the states of florida, north carolina, texas, alabama, and georgia.in view of the coverage of the spring failures by the recall campaign, odi is closing the preliminary evaluation.odi will continue to monitor the performance of the subject vehicles throughout the remainder of the country.

PE04044