Vehicle complaints | FREE VIN Decoder and Lookup tool

We found the following complaints for FORD CROWN VICTORIA (1997)

Read complaints for FORD CROWN VICTORIA (1997)

While driving vehicle hit another vehicle at about 35mph,it was a frontal impact,and airbags did not deploy.

Consumers vehicle front end hit the passengers side of another vehicle at 30 mph, and neither drivers side or passenger side airbag deployed.also had previously been rear-ended by a vehicle traveling at 65-70mph and pushed into a truck, and airbag did not deploy then,dealer has vehicle. *jg

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria. While attempting to accelerate, the vehicle stalled without warning. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where the tires, tie rods, ball joints, brakes, and battery were replaced.however, the failure kept recurring. On another occasion, the vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic and the vehicle was diagnosed with an unknown electric failure that was not repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 200,000.

Possible electrical failure, causing horn to beep when parked.

1997 ford crown victoria caught fire. Customer states that car was checked by the dealer for the defective part for the recall regarding the speed control deactivation switch and the mechanic told him everything was fine. Fire department stated the fire started in the engine compartment.according to the report, the fire was determined to be electrical.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that when the headlights were activated, the instrument panel, clock, and radio lights failed to illuminate. The vehicle was not taken to be diagnosed nor repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 151,000.

Was driving along and the headlights flickered and went out. Over the pass year it has intermittently done the same. It happened again about a month ago and fortunately i had just stopped at a red light. Each time it took about 3 to 5 minutes to come back on. It is very disconcerting since this is a very serious safety issue. So please do not take this lightly, i use the expressway a lot and am driving in very congested traffic most of the time. I do not know what ford has done about this problem since there are so many occurrences with these type of vehicles online. It needs to be addressed before a major accident occurs. Also most people like me cannot afford these expensive repairs that are not due to ordinary wear and tear, but a manufacturer's problem. If no action is taken it will bequite a disappointment because these cars are very popular and younger people are buying them whichbecomes more scary in light of the kind of drivers they are.

1997 ford crown victoria. Vehicle has had repairs done in the past and still receives same problems due to recall. *tathe consumer stated the vehicle intermittently shut down.a diagnose revealed a problem with the lighting control module. Once it was replaced, the consumer did not experience any more problems until the summer 2014 when the same problem recurred. Again, the lighting control module was replaced.

No summary listed for above vehicle.

The horn / cruise control / and hazard lights have quit working i have been able to get it repaired yet.

Vehicle experiences stalling at slow speeds in traffic and at stop signs, dealer has replaced idle air control and fuel pump and has reprogrammed the computer, however the stalling still occurs and the dealer can not remedy, consumer has almost been rear ended on two occasions, when stalling occurs, all power steering is lost, possibly engine or computer related.

Police department- east hampton town police: when traveling the vehicle caught on fire under the hood. Cause of the fire is undetermined.vehicle is awaiting service at a ford dealer. Please provide any further details.

While driving taxi to garage transmission would keep slipping, even on the streets. The vehicle caught onfire while in motion & vehicle stopped. Firedepartment extinguished the flames.driver was informed location from engine after noticing smoke coming from under the hood.

While parked a fire erupted under the hood. Dealer stated the fire started around the cruise control wiring. No injuries reported. The items under the hood were replaced and there have been no further problems.

Had a previous problem withalways blowing a fuse. Vehicle was parked in driveway.caught on fire. The cause was a short circuit in the heating system. Dealer was contacted. Referenced in ea02-025

Electronic digital instrumentation failure.

The car has a fiber glass intake and my car has about 75,000 miles..a fiberglass intake is adefected product for this part of aengine,because of theheat.i bought this car new andeven paid for theextended warrenty..ford motor co. Should replace this defect part,,for free..i had to park my car over 3 years ago..

Dt:the vehicle is a 1997 ford crown victoria. On 6-12-05 the consumer was driving onroute i40 when he smelled an odor coming from the vehicle. He called the highway patrol which arranged to have him towed to barstow. The vehicle broke down because the plastic intake manifold cracked.the vehicle lost all the coolant which caused the engine to overheat. When the mechanic from castners auto service 214 south bradford avenue,placentia, ca 92870 telephone #714-528-1311 was removing the spark plugs he noticed that there was aluminum flaking on them.there was no compression.he replaced the engine and all the parts that went with it on 6-15-05 through 6-30-05. Mechanic told the consumer that it would cost more to repair the engine than to buy a new one.the replaced engine was ford manufactured.consumer has not contacted the manufacturer as of now. Vehicle was manufactured in october 1996.

The composite intake manifolds developed fatigue cracks,resulting in total engine coolant leakage. Complete loss of coolantresulted in engine failure, owner was lucky to be on local street and near to a car repair shop, spent $1100 on repair.

I was driving down the highway when suddenly the passenger compartment began to fill with a white smoke and smoke came from under the hood of my car. I was able to get off the road and let the car cool off. I had the vehicle repaired at a ford dealership to the cost of $1100 for a cracked intake manifold which i was told was a common problem thatford was aware of and would only pay for the repair if my car was a taxi cab or a police car!!!!!

While checking the oil in the car, we noticed a crack in the intake. I was wondering if there has been a recall for this problem like with the firebird intake recalls.

97 ford crown victoria and 97 mercury grand marquis with 4.6 v8 engines have both had the plastic intake manifold replaced due to cracking and leaking coolant and resulting in considerable expense.this owner joined a class-action suit held in federal court in oakland calif. And on 12-16-05 issued a judgment ruling that ford would reimburse for this problem.a very short three month period was provided for owners to claim this reimbursement.it is not known if the court required notification of the owners of this ruling.if it did this owner did not receive notification.the expense for both cars was $1500.ford notified fleet owners and offered replacement of the manifold.however, private owners were excluded.in view of this notification and the court ruling, reimbursement of this expense should apply to private owners.

The manifold cracked, engine overheated,blew heater core had to tow car miles for replacement. Parts included manifold,gaskets, heater core and hoses. This at 84000 miles and no warranty.

While driving in nj, the manifold blew and made the vehicle inoperative. Luckily, my mechanic came and towed the car to his garage. The mechanic performed a pressure test and determined that the 'plastic manifold' had blown. The origin of the fluid leak was behind the alternator.then we did some research and found out that this was a problem back in 2004-5. I never knew, nor was i notified about this problem. I am the original owner of the car. The car was just into the ford dealership to diagnose a "check engine" light on, no discussion was made about this manifold problem ... They even checked for any previous technical bulletins.so, now what happens?

While driving 60 mph the temperature gauge went into the red and the vehicle began to overheat.the consumerwas forced to pull to the side of the road.the vehicle was towed to the dealer where the technician diagnosed the problem was a cracked manifold and block. *nlm

I was driving along the highway and my car started to overheat very quickly, within 2 minutes.the temperature got so hot smoke poured out, and the car staled.after a couple of minutes it cooled down enough to get it home, and then to the repair shop.smoke was everywhere.the repair person sighted that the intake manifold assembly was responsible, and that he has seen a lot of such problems in crown victoria's of the same year 1997.the repair was $989.54, and the milage on the vehicle is considerably low for the year.it only has 69, 500 miles.the repair shop has the defective manifold.

1997 crown victoria technical bulletin 05n04 nhtsa 10018959date of bulletin: dec, 14, 2005 /incident june 12, 2006this settlement extended the coverage of all composite intake manifold 7 years from the original warranty....where does that leave 1997 owners? the bulletin wasreleased a year after the extended warranty coverage ended!? one year late for 1997 owners. What should we do because it ispast the extended warranty?a defect is a defect with or without a time limit. We did not choose to have it break when it did....the defectivepart did that for us! what can we do to get this part/service covered?thank you for your time!

I own a 1997 crown vic less than 100 thousand miles. Bought the car 2 years ago at dealership in louisville ky. Found out there was recalls on vehicle after purchase was told carmax was good. Now here i sit with a cracked intake manifold which was recalled, but noone every fixed it. Someone should be responsible for this, yes was a recall shouldn't there be a law to make someone stand behind the crack intake manifold this was a 1 owner when i bought it with only like 60000 miles,.

Coolant sprayed out of enginewhich created stream to come from hood.consumer pulled to the side and allowed vehicle to cool down, and sit over night.he then had vehicle towed to a mechanic, who told him that his intake manifold was blown, and that he would have to replace it.

I was referred by mr. Michael j. Sacks at [email protected] response: it sounds like you are getting the run around and i would recommend you contact nhtsa in washingtondc if the company is not willing to follow through with recalls.website iswww.nhtsa.govproblem details:recently i received an estimate for work for $899.14 to fix a crackedmanifold along with gaskets, and seals on my 1997 ford crown victoria, thati purchased from a used car dealership in baltimore, md in 2003. This piece was originally recalled by ford company, but never replaced by it's original owner, nor the dealership that i purchased the vehicle from. When this breakdown occurred i contacted the company where i purchased my extendedwarranty from in september of 2005. The claim was denied because they do not cover items that were recalled. I was then directed by the warranty company to call ford company directly, i followed up and made the call to find that the manifold that was recalled had a seven year warranty from ford company that had expired. I am now stuck with an $899.14 bill out of pocket expense for something i knew nothing about until it occurred. I feel that before selling me the vehicle this should have been investigated and taken care of by the dealership bruns motors. I am yet to be able to repair this problem, because i do not have the funds. Please advise me in anyway that you can, your help is greatly appreciated. If i am not able to answer the phone please don't hesitate to leave a message. Thankyou for your attention to this matter.

Cracked intake manifold discovered when car began to overheat, thermostat was replaced thinking it was a bad seal, only to discover the manifold was cracked. New manifold is on order $285 dollars, still waiting on the repair bill.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.while driving 50 mph, the contact noticed smoke coming from the vents.she pulled over and exited the vehicle before it caught fire.the vehicle did not have insurance and was taken to the junk yard.the current and failure mileages were 100,000.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.while driving approximately 45 mph, the engine warning light illuminated on the instrument control panel.the engine then began to overheat.the contact pulled over to further inspect the vehicle and noticed steam near the engine.the vehicle was towed to a dealer and they stated that because the intake manifold was made out of plastic, it failed.the contact would have to pay over $3,000 to have the engine replaced.the vehicle has not been repaired.the failure and current mileages were 91,000.

Dt*:the contact stated while driving 2 mph slowing to a stop, steam was noticed coming from the vehicle.the vehicle was taken to the dealership for inspection.upon inspection, the dealership determined the intake manifold was leaking and the intake manifold, thermostat, water pump and hoses needed to be replaced.the manufacturer was notified however, no repairs were made.

I recently determined that i now have a leaking front cover/intake manifold gasket/cracked intake manifold on my 1997 ford crown victoria 4.6 liter v-8 which will require immediate repair. Had this defect manifested itself back in 2005, i would have been covered by the chamberlan v. Ford settlement but class members had to seek reimbursement by march 16, 2006. Since my 1997 ford crown victoria has only recently started leaking coolant, i guess i will have to fork over the repair monies myself. Is there any chance of ford repairing this manufacturing defect gratis?f

I was heading home from the grocery store when i got three to four miles of my home when i noticed from my rearview mirror, that there was a heavy mist billowing from behind my car. Then i began to smell the coolant fluid soon after. I managed to pull into the next closest grocery to investigate. Heavy stem from the coolant billowed up from the middle of my engine which soaked wires and other electrical instruments. I let it cool down for some time before i could add more water and set for home which was only less than a mile away. The next day i got the car to a mechanic so he could investigate to what the problem was. It was the intake manufold which was made of all things...plastic!!! the mechanic contacted and picked up the replacement that was made of metal. He had discovered that he was told that ford co. Never sent out recall notices to crown victoria owners about the maifolds cracking. I had to pay over $500 for the part. Along with parts and labor costs adding up to over $800. I am apsolutely buggered to put it nicely that they never said anything!!! knowing that there was a problem with the part! they just lost a steady ford customer not just because of my plight, but because other people were left in the dark about this serious problem! and yes! i have the old manifold and photos!

Plastic intake manifold failed causing engine coolant loss and engine overheating. Repair bill was $721.55. Replacement manifold is a re-designed, two component palstic intake manifold/metal cross-over coolant tube. Contacted ford for reimbursement but ford refused. Wrote numerous letters and emails to ford but ford refused to take responsibility for the faulty engineering. I still have the defective manifold and continue to drive this sorry excuse of "ford quality". What a joke.

No summary listed for above vehicle.

The plastic coolant crossover on the intake manifold ruptured causing my wife to make an emergency stop on the side of the highway. My mechanic told me that ford was having a lot of these to fail. The new manifold is made with metal on the water crossover, the instructions with the new manifold even told the mechanics where to look for a coolant leak. This was a very expensive repair that i believe ford motor company should cover at least partly under a recall.nlm

While driving at 70 miles per hour the engine overheated.steam was coming from the radiator area and the fluid had boiled over.the vehicle was towed to the nearest ford dealership for repair.the cause was a cracked intake manifold and the whole engin needed to be replaced.the replacement manifold has been reinforced at the point of failure.i understand ford recalled police and taxis manufactured in this period but did not notify private owners of a possible defect.

This is a known ford issue, yet they deny responsibility. No safety defect listed.

Intake manifold is leaking radiator fluid.my mechanic said a recall was issued for this exact problem, but ford refused responsibility.10 complains(same) listed on defective investigation for same car and date.

Ford motor company is aware that a crack is likely in the plastic front coolant crossover on the intake manifold assembly (4.6l engines).this is listed as a ford technical service bulletin dated 02-02-02 and as a ford special service message #10379.when the crack occurred on my vehicle,it stranded my wife and i in the florida everglades on a hot sunday afternoon.total costs incurred were over $1,000 of which maroone ford charged me $773.75 to replace the intake manifold.the replacement crossover is made of metal, not plastic.not only was this a financial liability, it is a safety hazard.anyone who inspects the engine compartment at the time of initial trouble shooting will become severely burned by hot coolant boiling out of the crack of the plastic crossover.

Engine has never overheated.cooling system very clean. Spontaneous crack developed in plastic intake manifold croosover tube, directly behind alternator. Immediate coolant loss through 3.5" crack. Replacement part looks identical, no visible improvement.ford admits to faulty component through service bulletins,and has made repairs to fleet vehicles. Dealer states they will do nothing for individual owners.

While drivingthe consumer noticed steam coming from the front of the hood. The vehicle was taken to the dealer for inspection.the mechanic informed the consumer that the intake manifold was crack and needed to be replaced.

Driving on higway at 65 mph began to smell a burning odor, after pulling over to a safe location smoke came from under hood. When hood was opened for inspection it emitted a noxious odor and it was spraying hot engine coolant from the top of the engine. After engine cooled down coolant was added and car was driven a short distance home. Vehicle was towed into the dealer expecting the repair to be covered by warranty either by the recall that is out (apparently currently only applies to police and taxis) or as listed in the owners manual for california emissions components defects. The dealer said this was not covered either way. A call to ford customer relations (edith) initiated a claim. Edith said she would contact the dealer for assistance but my vehicle was not recalled. The dealer representative was recontacted and refused to offer any assistance whatsover. This issue is well established as nhtsa has the bulletins listed and there a numerous complaints documented. Some people could drive their vehicle unknowingly with this defect which could result in fire or burning from escaping steam. Ford motor company must reimburse me and others who have had expenses to repair their problem of a poor original design. The new part has been updated with an aluminum coolant crossover instead of plastic.dt

Composite intake manifold developed fatigue cracks at the coolant crossover duct which created a loss of engine coolant ,heating the engine and cracking the heads.ford knows about this problem(ford tech bulletin dated 02/02/02 & special service message #10379) ford admits to faulty component and has made repairs to taxi`s & police vehicles ,but will do nothing for an individual with the same engine! *nlm

Car was running normally when i gradually started to smell coolant coming from under the hood.i looked and saw coolant leaking from around the thermostat housing.i went and replaced the gasket for the thermostat and added silicone.the coolant than started to leak even worse.i looked at the manifold and it appeared that there was a small crack on the housing.i found out that via the internet and a public works tech that the plastic manifolds were defective.i called a ford dealership and they said that it was out of their 7 year warranty.they said that i would have to pay for it.a kit costs around $589 and chevron quoted parts and labor at $1,050.

Sole owner 1997 ford crown vic lx;intake manifold failed - april 16, 2003;tsb report issued by ford motor company;cost incurred - $1170.00.

Intake plastic manifold cracked causing loss of coolant. Vehicle had 67660 miles on it.this is the second crown vic we have owned and it will be the last. The first one's transmission went out just after the warranty ran out. We had to buy a second crown vic due to the steering modifications necessary for my wife to drive and the crown vic is the only car at the time that could be modified to the necessary standards.

Cracked intake manifold.

The following is a well known and well documented design crown victoria 4.6 engine failure, which ford has ignored and claimed it is "investigating" for the ordinary consumer, while providing extended warranties for police cars and taxis.obviously, they don't want to lose this fleet market.there have even been news stories on this via nbc.the failure relates to a plastic intake manifold cracking prematurely, causing complete loss of coolant fluids, extreme consequent engine overheating, and resultant catastrophic engine failure. They sell the replacement and re-engineered part for nearly 600 dollars and charge almost 500 dollars additional to install it.this is a non-moving part which should not fail under normal use!there is even an entire aftermarket business making these parts as a replacement for less money...although i suspect most folks just pay ford to do the repair.queries to dealers meet with a reiteration of the above information and a kind "sorry, it's not covered" reply.i believe this is a case of fraud and misrepresentation of fitness, as opposed to the normal risks of wear and tear...their policy regarding lucrative fleet extended repairs speaks to this, in my opinion. This is a safety hazard defect due to engine stalling and power assist loss.

The contact's son owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the vehicle caught on fire under the hood while parked.the owner of the vehicle noticed smoke filling up inside of the vehicle, then lifted the hood and flames began to rise.the wires to the master cylinder and brakes were damaged.the contact notified ford and they stated that there were no recalls for the vehicle and that it was out of warranty.however, there were recalls for trucks of that line.the vehicle is currently at the ford dealer.the power train and mileage information were unknown.

The class action suit that was won regarding 1997 ford crown vic (and other makes) defective manifold part was handled incorrectly.mine just went and is well past the march 16th, 2006 deadline and over 7 years old which makes recourse exempt.my car is currently in the shop getting a $1300 + engine repair. And i am not the only one that this has happened to.definitely not fair!!!

This is a complaint about my 4.6 v-8 crown vic. The intake manifold cracked resulting in a loss of coolant and a 750.00 repair bill. The manifold is made of a composite not metal.so this could happen again. Sounds like a design flaw. Also, why is ford replacing the police and municipal cars manifolds and not private citizens?? this information came straight from the mechanic at the ford dealership.

While driving, the plastic intake manifold cracked. This caused coolant to leak from the intake manifold.the factory intake manifold included the thermostat housing as one piece.the crack developed at the thermostat housing which required the entire manifold to be replaced.

I bought a used 1997 crown vic in 2005 and i noticed coolant leakage on jan 16, 2005. The leakage might have happened before i bought the car, but it was not obvious enough for people to notice the problem.

I was driving home from work and thought a coolant hose had ruptured but after having the vehicle towed tomy mechanic's place of business was told that the intake manifold had cracked and required replacement.after researching i found that ford had issued a recall for only a few models even though most of their 8 cylinder 4.6 engines utilized the same defective "composite" intake manifold. My crown victoria is a 1997 with 60,000 original miles!

Body mounts are collapsing causing under carriage to rub flat spots on steel brake lines.

My 1997 ford crown victoria blewout a kit intake manifold on the interstate and i had to have it towed to coastal ford for repairs in mobile alabama after looking on the internet i find that this was not a uncommon fault of the automobile. Also a friend of mine had a 1997 ford thunderbird that had the same type problem and it was covered under a recall. After emailing ford i was informed by dereck #2132 at ford customer relations that my car was not covered but to keep the receipt in case of a recall.

Engine fire.

Catastophic cooling failure. Intake manifold replaced for $900.mechanic noted that this was common on ford crown vics with defective plastic intake manifolds (they now use metal).understand this has been recalled in crown vic taxis and police cars, but not in other crown vics.why not?won't buy a ford again.ford owes me for the cost of the failure of this defective part.

While drivingvehicle caught on fire fromplastic manifold, and engine shut down.. Dealer has been notified. Any additional information feel free to add.

Faint sudden noise from the engine compartment (coolant causing serpentine belt slippage, i believe) and then the engine overheated.due to roughly a 3 inch crack in the intake manifold plastic composite which dumped coolant into the back of the alternator.i was able to pull off before the engine was damaged.both the dealer, who is to be commended for a quick and effective repair (makes one wonder if the mechanics have had a lot pf practice with this repair), and ford motor company tell me there is no relief for repairs on a car with my vin although the replacement part is constructed of metal and composite rather than composite alone.i appreciate this design change which hopefully will ward off another similar failure but doesn't changing the design recognize that there was a weakness?on this same web-site i read that some ford fleet vehicles were recalled and repaired.concerning safety, the only issue this senior citizen faced was the stress of walking four tenths of a mile in the june heat and humidity to call for help and in paying the tow and repair expense.one is not surprised or greatly upset when the alternator wears out - but the intake manifold?what kind of stress testing did this non-moving part get when approved for production?

Engine check light onandrun rough due to maf sensor failure.the hood would pop up while driving due to hood latch malfunctioning.

The intake manifold is made of plastic. It splits at the casing seams, which causes anti-freeze to shoot all over the engine.

While driving intake manifold assembly exploded, causing the vehicle to stall. Manifold assembly was replaced by an independent mechanic.

Dt*:the contact stated while driving the vehicle the heat hand started to rise.the contact drove the vehicle to an independent repair shop.upon inspection there was water leaking from under the vehicle. The mechanic found the problem to be the intake manifold was broken. Repairs have been made.the manufacturer has not been alerted. Updated 03/22/06.

1997 4.6 v-8 crown victoria plastic intake manifold... Cracked while driving on highway resulting in coolant loss and repair cost of $779.repair was made by ford dealer quoting a service bulletin # tsb-02-02-02.internet inquires show widespread failures of these manifolds in ford and mercury engines, with a supposedly "extended warranty" for the repair however only law enforcement and cab fleets are covered at no cost. Individuals must pay for repairs, towing, rental cars, etc.

I own a !997 crown victoria, which overheated due to a crack in the intake manifold. I have owned this vehicle since 4-06-2002, and did not know about the recall until i looked it up on the internet! i had to pay for the repair myself, i think i should have been notified by ford!

Intake manifold failed prior to recall.

Intake manifold has cracked, he had it towed , checked out, and repaired. It cost him$600.00 plus. Consumer thinksthatthat this sould be a recall because it should not have happened.

Intake manifold cracked. *mr

Consumer states that the plastic intake manifold is split.

The manifold in my 1997 crown victoria cracked.i understand that this is a defect particular to the4.6 liter engine which my car has.my car is low mileage (about 47,000) is six years old and i am the second owner having had it for 4 years.i have had regular service by the dealer from whom the car was purchased.i understand that the manifold on this particular size engine has been found defective in other model cars and although a recall was issued my vin no. Does not match a specific list and therefore, i have to cover the $1000 expense.i will not buy another ford when i sell the one i now own and i will strongly encourage others not to buy any model car with this engine.i plan to file a small claims lawsuit against ford when i have all the repairs completed.fortunately, i had only driven a mile from home and my husband was with me when this occurred.had it not been for his attention to details things would likely have been really bad.

We were traveling on i-15 in a remote area of utah.when our car's intake manifold ruptured but didn't know it at the time and lost all of the coolant -stranding us.the failure of the manifold led us to be towed to beaver and then from beaver to st. George utah. We learned the ford motor company knew there was a problem with this particular engine 4.6 liter and it happen quite frequently.they were replacing the defective manifold on an as needed basis.we left the car to be repaired at the st. George ford dealership and had to rent another car.st georgefordtold me that they would put on a new manifold which was not all plastic, but that they would not help me off set the cost of replacement.st. George ford said because i had more then 75,000 miles on the car, that they wouldn't help with the expense of the $1093.00 repair plus $ 347.00 towing fee.i think a part that is this defective should be a voluntary replacement by the ford company for the life of the car.this is an all plastic part they knew it was defective because they have retooled and made a cast metal replacement.i think that when this happens it is an unsafe situation and it also leaves you stranded on the freeway or back country where we live.ford also told me they were replacing the manifold on an as needed basis on police cars and other vehicles with the 4.6 liter engine for unlimited mileage.

While driving my 1997 ford crown victoria down the highway there was a gush of smoke behind my car and it started to over heat.stopped and found anti freeze spraying out of exhaust manifold.had it towed to a mechanic that advised me thatford had updated plastic manifold part with an aluminum part but did not do a recall. $1,000 dollars later i was back on the road.we are ford people and very disappointed in ford for not recalling this item. I had my whole family with me and 3 hours from home, had to pay for another night of lodging and food on top of the whole experience being stressful i am out $1,000 dollars. We are going towrite to ford and better business bureau.after that we will go to small claims court.*nlm

While in motion, there was an explosion under the hood.the intake manifold had blew out.the mechanic who worked on the vehicle, showed consumer a recall notice for the exact incident.consumer is requesting a refund minus the labor.*jg

-the contact states that there was a recall on his 1997 crown victoria.the contact said that 8:20 amon 12/19/06 while attempting to pass another vehicle when he notice a large trail of steam and smoke coming from the rear of his vehicle.the contact pulled to side of road and steam and smoke stopped, at which time he opened hood of vehicle and noticed coolant running on top of the engine. Contact called the ford dealership of kansas.the ford dealership informed contact that the intake radiator had cracked.the representative then asked questions regarding the problem and told him that there was a recall on the intake fuel manifold but,that the recall had expired in 2004.the representative also told the contact that the intake had to have a crack in it in order for them to have repairs done.

The manifold cracked, engine overheated,blew heater core had to tow car miles for replacement. Parts included manifold,gaskets, heater core and hoses. This at 84000 miles and no warranty.

While driving consumer noticed an unknown aroma inside the vehicle.consumer had vehicle inspected, and a technician determined intake manifold as the cause.

Plastic intake manifold cracked 8" below alternator.

- the contact stated that the intake manifold cracked and leaked coolant. The vehicle has approximately 89,000.the contact was driving 55-60 mph on the interstate, and the weather conditions were fair.the contact saw a plume of white smoke following behind him. The contact immediately drove the vehicle to a repair shop.there were no warning signs or signs of overheating.the dealer removed and replaced the intake manifold and added engine coolant. Updated 01/26/07.

Plastic intake manifold on 4.6l cracked.r&r cost $1000.00.part was $500+.

1997 ford crown victoria w/61,705 miles was making a strange sound. Thinking it might be the brakes, i took it to a service center.while they were testing it smoke started poured out of the hood.the result indicated there was a crack in the plastic' manifold which had to be replaced w/a ford part that was a metal part.i understood there was a recall that only included police or fleet cars.it seemed to me that there should be some recourse toward the ford motor company.this car had only 61,705 miles on it.who would think a plastic manifold would hold up at all?not me certainly.

Intake manifold cracked causing plug sockets to fill with water causing vehicle to stall.

(1) we were driving on the freeway and my car sounded like something exploded and it got so hot and lost all of the fluids in the car. (2).we had to get it off the freeway and have it towed into mccoy mills ford.the intake manifold, was made of plastic and it cracked and the car was burning hot. It could have very easily caused and accident. Defect in the intake manifold. It was replaced , total expense - $1028.54.they would not replace it free,but i feel ford should have to refund me for fixing it, since it was a defect and made from plastic.i didn't think to ask for old parts.the service man told me it was made of plastic and that they were using metal now.i also found out that a lot of the police cars,the crown victoria's, have done the very same thing.i would like to know if a lawsuit has been started against ford, if so,i would like to join it.

Coolant was leaking from vehicle.dealer determined that intake manifold was cracked. There was a recall 01f02500on for this part, but only police cruisersand taxi vehicles were affected.dealer replaced cracked intake manifold, also the fuel filter was replaced.

Safety defect with intake manifold.*mrthe intake manifold on certain passenger vehicles manufactured by the ford motor company has failed. Once this failure occurs the intake manifold may cause the engine to seize and fail and may cause an accident. When notifying ford theyrefused to reimburse the consumer for repairs on defective parts.please respond promptly in resolving matters.

Loss of coolant is due to a cracked enginemanifold. Manufacturer was notified. Feel free to provide any further information.

1997 crown victoria lx - 4.6 l engine with 99,000 miles.my manifold intake cracked and failed, resulting in rapid and complete loss of engine coolant.required towing.repair estimated to cost $1,100.ford has been aware of this issue since 1996 and has recalled 1996-2001 crown victoria taxis, limos, and police cruisers for this very same problem, but did not recall private vehicles with the same faulty part.ford did not even notify owners of this defect.i request an investigation be made into the reason why private vehicles were excluded from this recall, as there can be no technical reason.i would also request that ford be compelled to pay for repairs made to cars previously repaired.

1997 ford crown vic traveling east of austin tx at posted highway speed when a crack developed in the intake manifold with resulted in loss of coolant , andsubsequently motorfunction. Towed to authorized lincoln mercury dealer in austin, and was informed by tow truck driver that this was very common defect for this model car , and suggestedi contact ford people for a recall notice. Was advised by the ford representative at the 800 telephonenumber provided in the owners manuel that no recall was in effect however, no cost repair was available to those vehicle seven years or under. A further program throughthe dealers may also be available named customer satisfaction programmability this had restriction of eight years and 80000 miles. My car didn't qualified for either program due to age and mileage even though thecar has meticulous being taken care of and was under 82000 miles. Upon completion of a new intake manifold installation at a cost of $1029.98 dollars it was determined theengine was a totallossas the engine must have been damaged due to loss of coolant and resultant overheating. A replacement motor was quoted at $6000 dollars on top of the already incurred $1029.98 dollar expence. The car was junk!!! i find it difficult to understand why no recall was in effect since ford knew there was a problem.the mechanic told me they had many similar repairs in their shop. Also informed all similar police models were repaired without restrictions. If this is so i can't understand why i am discriminated. I would like the ford corporation reimburse my expensesand/or give me a voucher for a substanial discount on a new ford vehicle.

Intake manifold had cracked and anti-freeze has leaking out.

Intake manifold on my 1997 ford crown victoria cracked allowing coolant to leak into manifold.there was a class action suit in 2005 which i never was told about.

I own a 1997 ford crown victoria and while driving on expressway the car overheated and i immediately pulled of the road.after towing to mechanic he immediately diagnosed the problem as a very common one.that being the plastic engine manifold that has been a part of a fully covered warranty/recall item if your vehicle was a police or fleet vehicle.the fact that it is not covered to the private car owner does not make sense.who would think such a important component make of plastic would be acceptable to any car owner.

While driving steam came from under the hood, and the temperature gauge read hot.this occurred because the intake manifold cracked and anti freeze leaked out.dealership replaced the cracked intake manifold with a new redesigned intake manifold.

Consumer was told the intake manifold in the vehicle is made of plastic.consujmer states' manifold cracks causing vehicle to overheat and destroy engine.consumer has to replace the engine.please provide any furthert information.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.while driving approximately 55 mph, the contact felt a strong gust of heat coming through her vents.she pulled over to the side of the road and had the vehicle towed back to her residence.the vehicle was unable to be driven.a local mechanic came to service the vehicle and informed her that the plastic intake manifold cracked and needed to be replaced with an iron intake manifold.the vehicle was repaired at the contact's expense.the manufacturer has not yet been notified.the failure and current mileages were 100,000. Updated 06/17/08.*lj

Defective intake manifoldcaused coolant to leak .

Engine manifold developed a crack and started to spit out anti-freeze and water.consumer stated that dealer replacedengine intake manifold. Consumer was told there was a recall on some models, however his was not included, consumer is requesting reimbursement.front brake rotors and front brake pads replaced.

We have had multiple problems with the electronic climate control system on this vehicle.the tie rods wore out at 70k miles (unusual since most of the miles are on flat interstate highway).the engine since about 25k miles has had a consistant knocking sound that the dealer indicates is common to all crown victorias, but provides no solution.i have not been contacted by the dealer woody anderson ford regarding any of three recalls on this vehicle that i see on your website.

At 1:15 a.m. On december 27, 2006, i drove my 1997 crown victoria for aproximatly 20 miles and parked in my driveway. About an hour and thirty minutes later, i was awaken by a popping sound and the dog barking. I looked out the window to find the car's engine compartment fully engulfed in flames. I then called 911 and ran out to try to extinguish the fire with a garden hose. The heat from the fire burned through the hood on the drivers side in the area of the braking systems master cilinder, then ignited the drivers side tire and all plastic components rendering the hoseinefective. By the time the fire truck arrived, the flames had spread to the passenger side of the car and a massive plastic / rubber fire ensued.the firemen doused it with water for about fifteen minutes then used a foaming agent to extinguish what was left of the vehicle. After inspecting the remains, it was obvious that the fire started in the engine compartment because the interior of the car was mostly intact.i had owned this vehicle for a number of years and had it maintained on a regular basis. The only major repair performed on the car was replacing a defective intake manifold (that too should have been recalled, due to the high number of incidents involving that perticular manifold design). After further research into the cause of this fire, i discovered that this was not an isolated incident. It would seem that this is a common problem in several models made by the ford motor company. To research this problem go to www.vehicle-injuries.com and look under "ford expedition cruise control switch fires".

The horn / cruise control / and hazard lights have quit working i have been able to get it repaired yet.

Dt: the consumer stated that the flashing hazard warning lightsand the turn signals malfunctioned.this occurred without prior occurrences or warning.the contact discovered that the lights were connected to a large control module instead of a simple fuse.the vehicle had not been to a dealer for repairs.there was no explanation as to why this problem occurred.(11/17/05)the consumer would have to wiggle the signal lever and press on the hazard warning switch to get them to work, but the bright lights had to be held in position.*sc

Head lights failed.

Plastic headlight assembly has disintegrated. Dealer has been notified, and will perair the vehicle at the owner's expense.

Headlight lenses are gradually turning yellow, causing reduced visibility at night.

97 ford crown victoria plastic headlight assemblies fogged over and became useless and dangerous..tried various cleaning agents to no avail..had to replace both headlamp assemblies..

Plastic intake manifold cracked for no apparent reason.

The intake manifold failed and coolant leaked from crack in the intake manifold.ford knows of the problem and has several recalls for the problem that covers only the fleet cars (taxi and police).the same defective part is used on consumer vehicles.i think that all 4.6l sohc v8 engines with this design defect should be covered.

Sudden structural rupture of plastic intake manifold with resultant sudden lost of coolant. Also, false coolant temperature reading due to no coolant. Passing motorist alerted driver of depending problems.

While driving at highway speed vehicle started to shutter, and smokewas coming from engine. Took vehicle to a mechanic, and they stated intake manifold was cracked.there is a recall 01 f 025 000 for same problem consumer's vehicle was not included due to vin. Please provide any further information.

Intake manifold cracked causing vehicle to overheat, tsb 01m02, consumer requests reimbursement since there is a service bulletin regarding the problem.

When traveling on the highway about 50mph the intake manifold developed a crack, causing the anti-freeze to leak onto the engine compartment, resulting in an overheating conditions.consumer has contacted the dealer. Please provide any further details.

While drivingvehicle caught on fire fromplastic manifold, and engine shut down.. Dealer has been notified. Any additional information feel free to add.

Intake manifold cracked where alternator is mounted.had noticed minilmal coolant leak and gradual increase in temp over the last year.finally found crack in plastic intake manifold.

The consumer stated that under moderate acceleration front panel of the intake manifold water passage crossover failed and water sprayed under the vehicle resulting in temporary loss of control.

Intake manifold leak.

The consumer stated that under moderate acceleration front panel of the intake manifold water passage crossover failed and water sprayed under the vehicle resulting in temporary loss of control.

Consumer states while driving 50mph the intake manifold cracked.

Intake manifold developed a crack and i lost all of the coolant @ 65 mph, causing the vehicle to overheat.ford has issued a recall for fleet vehicles (taxis, police, limos) but does not cover the same part (same part #) on civilian vehicles.the replacement part is the same poorly designed unit, which over time, will most likely fail again.

Ford knows about this defect but will not offer any assistance to customers who own residential crown victorias.the design flaw (fatigue crack in composite intake manifold coolant crossover passage) affects vehicles with the 4.6 liter engines assembled between 8/8/95 and 11/22/97 at the st. Thomas plant.the crack causes a rapid loss of coolant directly behind the alternator and can result in severe engine damage due to overheating.i was able to pull over after the engine started to overheat.the tow truck took it to the ford dealer where a redesigned manifold was installed at my cost.

Intake manfold split. This is not the only problem with this vechile, but there is a vibration inthe transmission. This car was purchased under warranty, but because it's out ford motor co. Doesn't want to respond in good faith.

Plastic intale manifold water tubes failed.cory ford binghamton, ny. Parts dept related that this is a high rate failure mode.on ford & mercury "w" setries engines.re-engineered replacement manifold kit cost aprox $500.00 kit includes re designed intake manifold with aluminum encapsulated tubing , new gaskets & new design alternator bracket. Total cost of repair over 1,000.00.this should be a recall it is a design error.it is not covered by warranty.with a heart condition i was fortunate that this failure did not occur in a remote area.this is a failure is directly related to an inherrant design deficiency.one only has to compare the kit to the oem part to verify this.

Consumer contacted dealership for recall 01f025000 repairs concerning intake manifold leak, but was unable to have work completed for lack of parts. Please provide further details.

Brake lines mounted under left of vehicle rubbed through causing brake failure.

A pin hole size leak developed in the high pressure fuel line, and was replaced along with the brake hydraulic line.mrscc

Brake line forward of rear axle and above fuel filter rubs on car body, resulting in a hole in brake line.

Vehicle caught on fire due to a faulty fuel line. No prior warning.

Brake line forward of rear axle and above fuel filter rubs on car body, resulting in a hole in brake line.

This is apparentlya widespread problem on 1996 and newer crown vics, t-birds, mustangs and lincolns. Ford knows there is a design problem, but refuses to bear the cost. Plenty of complaint info can be found on the web - see www.thecomplaintstation.com a ford recall is in effect for 96-98 crown vic taxis made in their st. Thomas plant. Very frustrating - my failure happened on the interstate at 75+ mph with no warning. Luckily i could pull off the highway. Going to cost $600+ to repair. Ford doesn't seem to care. Our city garage has replaced at least 5 failed manifolds on cv police cruisers with redesigned manifolds (ford must know there is an issue here to redesign the manifolds). Mine is not an isolated incident - look at your complaint database and the website i referenced. Please do something!!!no safety defec tlisted.

Consumer state while traveling 60 mph notice anti freeze burning smell inside vehicle. Consumer stopped a service station and notice anti freeze all over engine. Vehicle was service by technician and replace intake manifold. Nlm heater hose leaking coolant, also the brake lines were repaired. Referenced in rq03-004

I experienced the failure of both front hydraulic brake system and rear hydraulic brake system due to corroded(rusted) brake line (piping) within one year.i also experienced fuel tank failure due to rust at tank seam at approximately the same time.tank failed 11/30/03, front brake system failure 03/16/04, rear brake system failure 12/04, both due to piping rust out.

Email fm ellen row (nc) inquiring about the safety of her 1997 ford crown victoria, wants to know why recall was only for the police cars.*mrthe consumers vehicle was identical to the police vehicles being recalled for fuel tank problems.the consumer paid to have the repairs made but cannot understand why her vehicle was not covered under the recall.*nlm *scc

Problems with police crusiers and rear end collision explosions. *mr the consumer was concerned her vehicle being the same as the police vehicle's.the vehicle was made at the same plantas the police cruisers).the consumer had the repair done to her vehicle but wondered why ford covered the police vehicle's even though they had higher mileage.the consumer requested to be treated fairly and equally. *scc

I recently spent over $1,000 having theengine check light fixed along with other repairs.i took the car back to super lowe ford several times after i purchased it because the light stayed on.super lowe said it was "gas cap is loose" and "it's a short, we can disconnet it if you want us to"etc.it would be off for a few days, then right back on.i was also informed that it really doesn't mean anything, just don't drive in california.why does the light stay on?

The hood cover came loose while the car was moving on the highway, but was caught by a latch at the horizontal position.

Engine check light onandrun rough due to maf sensor failure.the hood would pop up while driving due to hood latch malfunctioning.

While driving my wife's 1997 ford crown vic at approx 55 mph the hood flew open.the latch separated from the hood.the only damage was to the car and our nerves.i will have it repaired at a local body shop this week.

Emergency brake locked.

While driving the emergency brake pad flew off, lodging itself into the right rear braking system , causing the rear brakes to lock up.consumer got into an accident. Dealer has been contacted. *ml

Parking brake shoes failed to retract when parking brake was released. Shoes wore down to metal base and damaged rear drums. Both rear brake rotors and parking brake shoe kits had to be replaced at owner's expense.

Vehicle is in park position with engine on. Vehicle came out of gear into reverse, causing damage to vehicle.

At 19 thousand miles transmission was replaced due to a torque converter which need replacing. Also,at 42 thousand and 47 thousandmiles transmission was rebuilt.there is atsbdealing withsame type of problem. Dealer has made repairs, and noted the problemwas common. Please provide any further details.

Experiencing vibration-shudder during 2-3 upshift.this is occurring with the fdq 4r70w.the original 4r70w had to be replaced around 50,000 miles.

Transmision jerks when you try to accelerate in a high gear,if you make it downshift it will stop jerking and drive smoothly.

While driving, transmission jerks.owner took vehicle to dealer, and transmission fluid was changed and filter was replaced. Problem was corrected.owner also notes that torque converter is faulty.

Whenelectronic transmission is shiftingvehicle begins to shutter in between gears. Ford has been contacted.

While driving, transmission jerks.owner took vehicle to dealer, and transmission fluid was changed and filter was replaced. Problem was corrected.owner also notes that torque converter is faulty.

Seat belts infront & rear will not retract back to original position after being used.rear right was replaced bydealership, but not the other three seat belts.

The rear seat belt didn't work.when the belt was pulled out it only came out part of the way.both rear shoulder belt suffered the same condition. *sc

Arm rest paint/stain wearing off. Mjs

The driver seat slide track failed.

Floor at attachment point of front seat anchor bolt has cracked so that the front seat can rock up and down (this is described in ford tsb 98-24-5 for 1992-1997 ford crown victorias);will this defect affect occupant's protection in a crash, as the seat is now permitted to move in a larger range of motion during an impact than its original design specifications?ford tsb lists this repair as applicable under its bumper-to-bumper warranty, but this defect may exist in out-of-warranty vehicles as well.

Hydraulic line to rear brake failed (ruptured) causing immediate release of brake fluid underneath driver front floor pan at location of interest mentioned in recall/"safety improvement program".owner was not contacted regarding notice which includes inspection of brake lines, replacement of clips (to avoid wear) and possible replacement of brake line and bleeding if needed.

Power assist on the brake system failed while making a "u" turn and braking at 20mph.the pedal almost went to the floor without slowing the vehicle.the vehicle struck a curb and traversed the side walk.

Brake cooster failed to assist the hydraulic brake system, and driver was unable to slow down resulting in a rear-ended crash.driver stated that the pedal was going to the floor.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria that is equipped with a police interceptor.while driving approximately 2-3 mphthe brakes failed. She applied pressure to the brakes in order to stop the vehicle but it did not stop. When the vehicle did stop in the middle of the street it had to be pushed onto the side of the road. The vehicle was towed to her residence. The vehicle was taken to a local mechanic who advised her of recall 98i001000,service brakes, hydraulic foundation, hoses, lines/piping, and fittings. She called the manufacturer and the dealer who advised her that her vehicle was not part of the recall. The vehicle was not repaired. The vehicle was not drivable. The pre-owned vehicle was purchased in january 2005. The failure and current mileages were approximately 167,000.

Steel brake line on 1997 ford crown victoria rusted out.brake fluid leaked out making the brakes inoperative.had repairs done at local mechanic who said this is a frequent occurrence.this is definitely a safety issue.

Brake line is not coverer to protect if vehicle is driven on unpaved area.

While going down a slight enbankment,brakes applied and locked up.vehicle almost hit a tree. Mechanic said it was the abs. *ml

Brake failure.

Abs applied brakes with car in cruise control at 65 mph, than brakes were applied to right front which caused the car to pull to the right, left front brakes were applied which caused the car to pull to the left, also lost brake power where you had to really get on the brakes to get the car to stop like the car had no power brakes at all, car right now sets in the driveway as my wife drives the cars and i feel it is a matter of time before this car is involved in a serious crash and i feel it is to dangerous to allow my family to be in the car.

While driving my car i applied the brakes and the pedal went to the floor. I had to pump the brakes to stop. I took it to my mechanic who found that the brake line had worn through. It cost me about $81.00 to have repaired.

No summary listed for above vehicle.

Complete brake failure on two crown victoria vehicles.

Vehicle suddenly accelerated after leaving gas station. Unable to stop vehicle in approximately 200 feet. Lost control, resultin gin a crash. 3 passengers were injured. Also, brake failure.

Disc brake rotors warping,causing vibration during braking. Third incidence in 35,500 miles.

When applying the brakes there is noise.the calipers were not tightened which may cause more wear and tear on the braking system.please provide details.

The brake line that goes to the rear brakes, rubbed on the underside of the floor board until it wore through. This caused spontaneous brake failure similar to that described in two other incidents with identical vehiclesin our fleet .

Brake line worn from rubbing against vehicles body parts, resulting in brake failure.

I am a mechanic for the city and want to report this to you as all of our cars have the line rubbing the frame at the rear and one has rubbed through.ford has a recall for the brake line that rubs at the crossmember in the front.ford factory rep. Was contacted and stated he has had other complaints but, the recall only covers the front.as a mechanic for the police dept. We see alot of problems before the public and feel that this is a real danger as the line will fail withoutwarning.thank you.

The brake line rusted, which caused the rear brakes to fail.referenced in rq03-004

Brake line forward of rear axle and above fuel filter rubs on car body, resulting in a hole in brake line.

The hydraulic line between the master cylinder and the rear brakes had a hole rubbed through where it was contacting the frame. This is was verified by the ford dealership that performed the repairs. I have the line itself as evidence. I brought this to the attention of both gregg motors and the ford customer service office and that didn't seem to alarm them. I am a mechanical engineer and feel that the line was either installed too close to the frame at assembly or it was designed without the proper spacers to keep it from rubbing. Ford customer service stated that they were unaware of this problem and that they would forward the information to the engineers. I asked if someone could get back to me and they stated this was not possible. I was charged a $100.00 deductible for the work. The vehicle is leased to my employer bergstrom, inc. Can you please investigate this problem ? i am concerned about other vehicles that may experience brake failure on the highway. I have never heard of a brake line failing after 3 years due to rubbing on the frame. There was no evidence of damage to the line or to the vehicle. I can send some digital pictures of the brake line if it helps your investigation.referenced in rq03-004

Brake required replacement due to contamination of brake fluid. Mjs

Brake line has 1 1/4 long chaffing or rub area causing line to fail. Under black rubber pad design to eliminate chaffing problem. Area is next to drivers side of transmission cross member.appears black rubber pad did not prevent chaffing.made temperory roadside repair to keep car home.reported to ford motor company customer service on 8/27/2001. Assigned reference number 9005812234.i have faied brake line available for investigation.referenced in rq03-004

Brake line forward of rear axle and above fuel filter rubs on car body, resulting in a hole in brake line.

Brake line installed too close to floor pan,brake line rubs against floor,causing hole in brakes line, this defect can result in accident.

Brake line located near transmission has sheared through, causing total loss of brakes, massive failure. Brakes went to floor. Driver had to pump brakes ,was able to come to a stop. This defect can result in an accident.

Notice loss of brake fluid. Manfacture has been contacted. Please provide further informaton.

Brakelinesare rubbing through in two places under the car this is the third crown vic that has done this in pasttwo weeks.i have called ford but they keep giving me the run around.i;m afraid that some one is going to get hurt or killed .can you please let me know whats going on.

Rear brake lines rub on body on driver's side above transmission cross member due to design location.

(1) out of (10) vehicles in fleet lost brakes completely because the brakes lines crossed the frame, causing a hole to rub in brake line. Other (9) vehcle were checked and flat spots were found, but had not worn into holes. All vehicles in the fleet were repaired.

Metal hydraulic brake lines corroded and leaking to loss of brake lines tobe replaced.

The brake line is mounted so close to the floor and the transmission that a hole was rubbed through by the metal on the vehicle. The vehicle has not been repaired. Shop unable to find hose to replace.referenced in rq03-004

Consumer had experienced the same problem as in recall 98i001000 concerning the brake line.the dealer refused to repair because the vehicle identification number was not included in the recall.*scc

While driving 20-25 mph, the consumer depressed the brake pedal, and the brake pedal descended to the floorboard. Afterwards, extended stopping distance was required to stop the vehicle. Oncethe vehicle was serviced techniciandetermined that the brake linewore out,causing the master cylinder to lose brake fluid.recall#98i001000.the consumer's vehicle wasn't included in the recall.both brake lines of the rear wheels were replaced, one was worn completely through and the other was worn but not completely through. *sc

Consumerhad experienced problems withbrakes just like mentione dinrecall 98 i 001 000. Brake line wore out,this could lead to brake fluid loss forrear brakes. Referenced in rq03-004

Steel brake fluid line rubbed floor, causing steel line to wear through and leak.

Hydraulic brake line(s) rubbed against body parts causing loss of brake fluid.dealer will not consider as a manufacturing defect.there appears to be several many complaints concerning this problem, but dealer says warranty repairs only apply to police vehicles.what about the rest of us?referenced in rq03-004

The consumer stated the brake line had rusted completely.*ph

The brake line on the left side, midway of the vehicle, rubs against the frame, causing a hole and the brake fluid to leak,which could cause an accident.

Brake lines mounte under left front rear rubbed through, causing leakage of brake fluid/brake failure.

Brake line forward of rear axle and above fuel filter rubs on car body, resulting in a hole in brake line.

Cars brake line has rubbed through.

While driving 20-25 mph consumer depressed the brake pedal and it descended to the floorboard, resulting in extended stopping distance.once the vehicle was serviced, and technician determined that the brake line wore out, causingmaster cylinder to lose brake fluid.

Brake line worn from rubbing against vehicles body parts, resulting in brake failure.referenced in rq03-004

While driving, driver applied the brakes.they did not hold, which resulted in the vehicle having an extended stopping distance. This almost caused an accident.upon inspection of vehicle, the driver noticed that the brake fluid had leaked out because of a hole in the brake line. Mra recall was issued, but has not been extended to the general public.*jgreferenced in rq03-004

Your agency has contacted me twice, concerning a brake failure on my 1997 ford crown victoria.i have located the defective brake line that you inquired about, the piece that was cut out for the repairs.this number may be associated with my compliant ea03012.i just can not remember the gentlemans name that first called me.later an attorney called representing herself as being with your agency.please contact me again.

This is a sheriffs' patrol vehicle. The brake line to the rear brakes rubbed the underside of the floor-board on the driver's side until it wore through. The brakes failed at this point. We have confirmed this problem on two more identical patrol units. No injuries have been reported yet but the potential is there. Brake loss is reported as spontaneous and fortunatly, in our three incidents, it has occured at relatively low speed.

- the contact stated that while drivingthe 1997 ford crown victoria at 45 mph and coming to a stop light the brake pedal was almost to the floor slowing the vehicle down. , then the front brakes engaged and stopped the vehicle.the contact looked into the rearview mirror and noticed fluid on the ground behind the vehicle.the contact drove the vehicle home and later took the vehicle in to be repaired.the mechanic stated thatbrakelinerotted.

On 10-24-04 our vehicle had this problem as descriped on your website.ford refuses to cover. Make: ford model: crown victoria type: any year: 1997 recall number: 98i001000 summary: 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 vehicles may have insufficient clearance between the brake line and the underbody front floor pan assembly which could cause wear of the brake lines. Consequence: this could lead to brake fluid loss for the rear brakes and, potentially, increased stopping distances. Remedy: 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. Notes: note: ford has decided to conduct a safety improvement service campaign to inspect the brake lines without charge. Owners can contact ford at 1-800-392-3673. Http://www-sa.dot.gov/cars/problems/recalls/results.cfm.

Brake cooster failed to assist the hydraulic brake system, and driver was unable to slow down resulting in a rear-ended crash.driver stated that the pedal was going to the floor.

Brake failure- 97 crown victoria. Brake line rubbed through by transmission crossmember- causing brakes to fail during driving.ford motor company would not stand behind faulty line or reimburse for the repairs.vehicle only has 36,000 miles on and should not have worn through already.

When the brakes were applied, there was a delay in braking, which resulted in extended stopping distance.the consumer stated the brake line was worn and caused brake fluid to leak.

Steering wheel locked while driving.

The three bolts holding the steering gear box to the frame failed due to corrosion allowing the unit to become separated from the frame leading to a loss of steering control.

Driving east on allen street in springfield massachusetts steering control locked up resulting in a crash with a gas station pump police crash report id 15-3725-ac car was totalled out when it caught fire no noise was heard seconds before crash. I have noticed that there was a recall on the replacement parts but wonder if the oem parts could fail resulting in crash.

Consumer was accelerating from a stop and was turning wheel to left, but vehicle kept going straight. A plastic nylon bushing broke from steering wheel, causing loss of steering control.

The ignition key can be removed from the steering column ignition switch when the switch is not in the off position: this is the same type defect that was found in the ford taurus (nhtsa campaign id number: 85v172000)

Power steering shaft came out of pump with the pulley on it while vehicle was being operated.vehicle was stopped, steering control lost - drive belt shredded.pump had to be replaced.

Power steering failed. Mjs

Consumer states that the steering wheel is overly sensitive in normal driving condition, may cause an accident, since it has so much power assit it makes changing lanes or other steering condition hazardous.nlmthe vehicle has a steering box ratio of 14 to 1 which was much faster than the desired ratio of 17 to 1 or 18 to 1.

All items listed are design flaws and could cause serious if not fatal injuries to occur..turn signals will not stay on if they will hold on at all. Twice repaired..steering wheel and column jump and vibrate on bump impact at mid to highway speeds.car swerves. Have not yet lost control!! rear shocks cannot stabilise rear end..windshieldhas ripple distortion. Has caused vision problems. Both front doors will not stay open..both my wife and i have been injured by these doors..service dept claims doors are within tolerences..not mine!! hope ypu can assist me. Thanks,,paul silberman.

Tie-rod assembly was not properly lubricated and sealed by manufactured leading to premature failure.nlm

Consumer noticed that the floorboards were always moist.the dealer determined that the leaf screen gasket was defective and allowed water to leak into the duct.the duct then filled then emptied onto the floor of the vehicle.the leaf screen was situated under the air vents at the front of the window.

Consumer complains that front doors are too large and difficult to maneuver around.

Design of front doors have injuried 3 people due to the sharp edges.

Noticeable deterioration rust throughof right front passenger side frame rail assembly forward of the shock tower and spring assembly.*2 part frame rail, outside assembly no apparent deterioration but passenger side inner assembly hidden by plastic cover has severe rust and some areas complete through.

While drivingleft front assembly broke off.also,entireframe assemblycollapsed.vehicle came to a halt, and there was no braking.

The water township police department has 30 additional complaints on the same type of vehicle, and will send additional documents regarding other complaints. .

The three bolts holding the steering gear box to the frame failed due to corrosion allowing the unit to become separated from the frame leading to a loss of steering control.

When driving at high speedvehicle vibrates,and moves from side to side. Consumerbrought vehicle torepair shop twice for service, but dealer can't determine the problem.

When driving the vehicle veers to the left, and when turning corners the car fishtails. Dealer says that is how the vehicle is suppose to be.

Recall 98v322000, the other vehicle vin# [xxx], both of these vehicle which are police packaged. The dealer does not have the parts yet, and the police station needs the vehicle to be repaired as soon as possible. Please provide further information.information redacted pursuant to the freedom of information act (foia), 5 u.s.c. 552(b)(6).

A recall on ford crown victoria 1996-1999 built from march 15 1996 - december 14 1998 at the st.thomas assembly plant were produced with a lower control arm ball joint containing a one piece bearing. The lower control arm ball joint separation had reported incidents.after speaking with ford it is unknown why my vehicle that was built during time frame at the st thomas assembly plant was not included on the recall.it should of been.after speaking with ford it is unknown why it was not included.the parts mentioned above failed and nearly causing a accident lucky that i was not traveling at a high speed when incidenttook place.i addressed the safety issues for vehicles that failed to be included. Ford advised me that there was no reporting agency that could add my vehicle. There was every bit of proof that indeed it should of been included on that list. The agent verified my vehicle information and had no reason of why it had not been included.if you have a vehicle built between the above time frame.at the assembly plant mentioned in this recall.make sure that take action regarding these parts to avoid serious accidents. Error was made on that recall.

When driving 45 mphand without warning vehicle would start to shimmy distracting the driver. Dealer has been notified.

Suspension vibrates when hitting bumps or ruts on the freeway causing the steering to "shimmy" forcing the vehicle to move from left to right uncontrolably.

While drivingleft front assembly broke off.also,entireframe assemblycollapsed.vehicle came to a halt, and there was no braking.

This vehicle swerves side to side when i go over a pot hole or bump, causing vehicle's steering wheel to move as well. Outcome is loss of steering and vehicle control.( dot number: )

While driving ball joint failed causing right front wheel to collapse and fall off. *nlm

This appears to be a failure of the front suspension ball joint which i just had repaired under recall at springfield ford, rincon, ga.according to banner ford in decatur, ga where the current repair is underway, the retaining nut was not installed properly.it came lose and the rod punctured the right front tire.i own a second crown victoria lx, vin [xxx].i have written ford concerning the need to have a similar repair made on this car, but they have not responded in the past month.i would like to bring these two problems to your attention, and ask for any advice or direction you may have to offer.information redacted pursuant to the freedom of information act (foia), 5 u.s.c. 552(b)(6).

Front suspension was totally trashed, it was tough driving it home from the dealer. Car was all over the road.*la

Front suspension system bracket (shock absober) collapsed. Please provide further information.*mr

No summary listed for abov evehicle.

The front end suspension out of alignment caused wear of tires.

I own a 1997 crown victory , with 98015 miles, andwithin 6 mo. Of each event i have had 3 lower ball joints to falling out. Please tell me if ford doing anything to keep people driving 1997 ford crown victory safe? this is very dangerous for the person that is driving and the on coming person, which could be ford motor company ceo, or worst his wife, or my wife !!!!!!!!

The passenger side control arm on front wheel of 1997 ford crown victoriahas rusted to the point of the vehicle being un-drivable and a danger. Ford has said this issue is due to the air conditioner moisture tube that dumps on the iron frame. They had at one time offered to repair some defects but will not any more.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.while driving 25 mph, the driver's side control arm separated from the ball joint.as a result, the vehicle was scraping the ground.the contact is in the process of taking the vehicle to the dealer for inspection.the manufacturer stated that no compensation would be provided because the vehicle was not included in the current recall regarding the failure.the failure and current mileages were 85,000.

The lower control arm bracket does not appear to be adequately welded to the frame(i.e. There is no weldat the lower bracket contact point). This has resulted in the bracket cracking at the upper weld point. This will lead to separation of the lower control arm bracket from the frame. Due to the nature of the high speed use of a police vehicle this could lead to an accident and loss of life, if separation should occurduring high speed pursuit maneuvers.

Recall 98 v 322 000/lower control arm:lost control while driving at 35 mph. Vehicle taken to a independent repair shop, and informed consumer of a lower ball joint failure.manufacturer was notified andadvised consumer that this vehicle was not covered underrecall due to vin.feel free to provide any further information.

The contact owns a 2007 crown victoria. During an oil change, the mechanic stated that the bracket that attaches to the front lower control arm was broken. The contact also spoke with the dealer about nhtsa#98v322000 since the bracket is attached. The vehicle has not been repaired. The vehicle does not have anti lock brakes. The failure mileage was 143,995 and the current mileage was 144,000.updated 3/7/08 the local dealer stated poor factory weld led to stress which facilitated the failure.

While driving could heard noise coming from frontlike grinding, andsteering wheel could not align with vehicle.also, will make a clicking noise on the right side.consumer noticed that vehicle was on the ground, and technician said that there was a problem with the lower control arm ball joint.like recall 98 v 322 000 lower control arm.

While braking vehicle pulled to the right, mechanic determined lower control arm bracket weld had broken on right side.*yd

Consumer states that when making a turn the ball joints and the bushing squeak. The dealer has been contacted. Nlmthere is a recall, 98v322, regarding this problem, however consumers vehicle is not included.

I own a 1997 ford crown victoria.i was pulling out of a parking spot in a mini mall when the front right tire fell off my vehicle.it turns out that the ball joint had snapped.had this happened 10 minutes earlier, i would have been seriously hurt as i was driving on the new jersey turnpike doing 65 mph.it has come to my attention that this has happened on other ford products as well and as such i think that your agency is responsible.in addition, a previous letter to this defect was submitted, but i have not had any reply.

The consumer was backing out of the garage andwithout warning the front end collapsed to the ground.the consumer had the vehicle towed to the dealer for inspection.the mechanic informed the consumer that both driver and passenger side lower ball joints needed to be replaced.please fill in additional information.

Subject:ford crown vic lower ball joint comments: i have a 1997 ford crown vic manufactured in ontario. The lower right ball joint came apart in the fall of 2002 and was replaced. It is now 14 months later and it was replaced again. On your site i found that there was a recall for that issue. I have never received any information about it and have had to pay the full cost of repairs each time. What is my recourse?*la

Sedona police department having problems with the lower passenger sidecontrol arm came off the vehicle when travling at 10 mph, puncturing the front tire, resulting in the tire blowing off the vehicle. Consumer has contacted the dealer, dealer replaced parts. Please provide any further details.

Dt: the contact states there isnhtsa recall campaign98v322000 concerning the lower ball joint. This vehicle is experiencing the sameproblems as indicated in the recall, but is not included in the recall due to vin.the contact repaired the vehicle at his own expense.updated 12/27/2005 - the passenger side lower ball joint failed.

While backing up the right lower ball joint snap causing the front end to collapse.the dealer has neen notified.*nlm

Dt*:the contact stated while driving at 30 mph, the right front lower ball joint fractured and the control arm dropped to the ground.the vehicle was pulled to the side of the road and towed to the local dealership for repair.

While driving 15 mph lower ball joints separated from the vehicle. As a result, the steering failed, and the front end collapsed.

While driving 5 mphvehicle dropped on right side. Towed to dealer,and lower ball joint was replaced.

Ball joint failure.

While driving there was a severe vibration in the front end. Consumer found on nhtsa web site recall 98v322000 which applied to the problem on this vehicle.the consumer was concerned with the following recalls:981001000, 00v157001, 03v47200000v152002, 98v322000, 97v024000 and tsb's 01m02, 99m01, and 97m91. *sc

While backing out of the driveway, the front driver side lower ball joint snapped. The consumer had the vehicle towed.

98v322 000/lower control arm : both sides lower control arm/ball joints failed at 42,000 miles.dealer notified, and repairs/replacement was done at consumer'scost.

While traveling 55 mph,the frame control arm bracket pulled away from the vehicle and caused a collision.(pulled a "big chunk" out of the frame) the consumer requested that ford cover the expenses for the repair.recall#98v322000. *scc

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that while driving 25 mph the front end of the vehicle collapsed. The vehicle was towed to a local mechanic. The mechanic replaced the lower and upper ball joints on the passenger side of the vehicle. The contact called the manufacturer regarding the dangers of thelower and upper ball joints. The manufacturer informed the contact that since there isn't a recall there was nothing they could do.the failure could have caused a crash to occur. The failure mileage was 50,017. Updated 04/01/10. *ljthe lower suspension support stuck the pavement and the wheel became detached from the steering mechanism, which made the vehicle uncontrollable. Updated 06/07/10the consumer no longer owns the vehicle as it was involved in an accident and totaled.the accident was not related to the ball joint failure. Updated 06/30/10.

The incident consisted of a sudden lower ball joint failure, resulting in the vehicle skidding to a stop on the a frame. Damage estimate is based on the cost of new ball joints, tie rod, fender, and tire replacement costs

While driving lower ball joints broke ,and consumer could no longer control vehicle. Contacted dealer ,and the dealerwas taking a look at vehicle.

The spring on the right hand side of the vehicle keeps popping out of the holding mechanism and is hitting the frame of the vehicle, causing an excessive grinding noise.took vehicle to the dealer and has repaired.the vehicle has been repaired twice for this problem.

Rear suspension control arm brackets have cracked where theywere welded toframe, causingloss of vehicle control.vehicle was towed.consumer also states welds also cracking where rear cross member is welded to frame.

Right rear wheel and part of the axle came off the vehicle.

The tire on the rear passenger side experienced a blowout while consumer was driving on the highway, tire was replaced by spare, about a year later may 13,2000, the spare tire on the rear passenger blewout while driving locally at 30 mph.consumer is concerned because the 3 remaining tires are the same make/model (michelin x1 all season, dot m3c7dax177) as the two that failed.nlm

Belts separated on front tires. (tiresize: 215r15)( dot number:tire size: 215r15 )

1997 ford crown victoria.ph *nlm**dimsii ivoq entry posted after 12/12/02 cut over to artemis**767676

No summary listed for above vehicle.

The floor mats keeps shifting right into & under the gas pedal and/or brakes. This causes an interference with the application of either or both pedals. Will be taking to dealer to get mats more stabilized.

Re;service bulletin #97 for intake manifold replacement for 97 ford crown victoria. *sc

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the contact received a safety recall notice for nhtsa campaign id number 07v336000 (vehicle speed control).the part for the recall repair is unavailable.there had been no failure to date.the purchase date was unknown.the current mileage was 126,000.

Dt*: the contact stated while pulling into the driveway at 5 mph, the vehicle lurched forward and crashed into a tree without warning.although both occupants were wearing their seat belts, minor injuries were sustained.there vehicle was totaled due to the extensive damage.the police were on the scene and a report was taken.updated 5/10/2006 -

1997 ford crown victoria with speed control recall. Consumer states that the dealer did not have the part. Dealer told her they were going to order it. She states as of march 14th dealer still does not have the part.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the contact received a recall notice for nhtsa campaign id number 07v336000 (vehicle speed control).the dealer stated that the part for the recall repair was unavailable.there had been no failure to date.the current mileage was 96,739. Updated 02/15/08.*lj

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the contact had the dealer remove the speed control on the vehicle.he was informed that it would be replaced by mid december of 2007.as of february 20, 2008, the speed control has yet to be replaced.the contact is currently being informed that the part may be available in approximately may or june of 2008.there had been no failure to date.the current mileage was 44,000. Updated 03/11/08

Due to design flaw of the throttle linkage and bracket the linkage was stuck resulting in sudden acceleration and vehicle collision.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the contact received a safety recall notice for nhtsa campaign id number 07v36000 (vehicle speed control) in august of 2007.he was informed that the part would be available in november.since that time, he was informed that the part would be unavailable until march of 2008.he would like his vehicle repaired, but has not had the vehicle speed control disconnected.there had been no failure to date. The current mileage was 68,000.updated 01/07/08. *ljupdated 12/31/07.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the contact received a ford recall notice for the vehicle speed control: cruise control in september of 2007.he immediately scheduled an appointment to have the vehicle repaired and a ford representative informed him that the parts would be unavailable until october.the cruise control was disconnected on september 24, 2007.the contact called back in december and was informed that the parts would be available in january of 2008.the dealer never called him back to inform him that the parts would be available.there had been no failure to date.the powertrain and recall number were unknown.the current mileage was 120,000. Updated 02-21-08

Sudden acceloration- engine went to full uncontrolled acceloration

1997 ford crown victoria cruise control problem *cwthe consumer received a recall notice in the mail regarding the speed control deactivation switch.he went to the dealer to have the replacement part installed which only took a few minutes. While driving, the consumer decided to test the cruise control and soon discovered the cruise control did not work. The cruise on light never came on. After the part was installed, the mechanic did not take the vehicle for a test drive. The consumer immediately turned around and drove back to the dealer. The consumer was informed he would have to pay $87.00 for the diagnostic because the trouble shooting/diagnostic was not authorized/covered by the recall. The consumer stated the cruise control was working perfectly before the replacement part was installed.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the vehicle caught fire while parked and was destroyed.a police report was filed.the fire is related to the recall for the vehicle speed control.the contact received the recall notice after the fire occurred.the vehicle had an intercepting motor and was towed.the vin was not legible due to the fire.the engine size and recall number were unavailable.the failure and current mileages were 120,000.

Cruise control failed.

Fast deceleration from 70-80 km hr over small washboard,caused the fuel reset button to come out, causing a stall.loss of power brakes/steering...if you have heard of this before please let me know.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the dealer stated that the vehicle was included in nhtsa campaign id number 08v051000 (vehicle speed control:cruise control).the speed control switch was deactivated at the cost of $100.she called the manufacturer because the dealer charged her for the repair and was advised to file a complaint with nhtsa.one year later, the contact received another recall notice advising her to return to the dealer to finish the repair.she has not had the repair completed.the contact has a copy of the invoice.the failure and current mileages were unknown.

Unacceptable outcome of 1997 crown victoria ford speed control deactivation program. Consumer states that his speed control was working before being deactivated. *njthe consumer decided to test the cruise control and discovered the cruise onlight did not come on.updated 10/17/08.

Intermittently, while driving the vehicle between 30-40 mph, the vehicle begins to accelerate to a high speed. The accelerator pedal actually leaves the driver's foot on it's own. The condition stops when the driver applies the brake. The dealer is not aware of this condition.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the contact received a ford recall for the vehicle speed control: cruise control in august of 2007.the recall repair has not been performed, but the cruise control was disconnected.there had been no failure to date.the recall number was unknown.the current mileage was 49,500.updated 03-25-08 updated 03/25/08

The horn / cruise control / and hazard lights have quit working i have been able to get it repaired yet.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the contact received a ford recall notice in august of 2007 for the vehicle speed control: cruise control.she immediately scheduled an appointment to have the vehicle repaired.the dealer disconnected the cruise control and advised her that the parts would not be available until december of 2007.she called the dealer back in december and they stated that the parts would be available in may of 2008.the contact has not notified the manufacturer.there had been no failure to date.the powertrain and recall number were unknown.the current mileage was 99,000.

The contact owns a 1997 ford crown victoria.the contact's vehicle caught fire.a local mechanic repaired the heater core and manifold, but now there is an oil leak.the contact received a recall notice stating that the speed control could cause a fire.the dealer stated that because the repairs were made by an unauthorized mechanic, the contact would not be reimbursed for the repairs.the failure mileage was 128,705 and current mileage was 98,000.

Vehicle suddenly accelerated after leaving gas station. Unable to stop vehicle in approximately 200 feet. Lost control, resultin gin a crash. 3 passengers were injured. Also, brake failure.

Wiper live 4 in spot eye level cant see in rain replace arm and wiper blade still have spot.

Heater control door under the dash failed.yh

Had a previous problem withalways blowing a fuse. Vehicle was parked in driveway.caught on fire. The cause was a short circuit in the heating system. Dealer was contacted. Referenced in ea02-025

Voltage drop to 0 and car will stop working while waiting on red light.when electr. Windows activated, voltage drop and will stop working.

This is second time that has accured to my vehicle, ford denied any defect part at my first contact with them about five months ago. I think there is a major component and assembly problem with the electric power window system in this model cars and should be taking care of asap.

Windshield cracked.yh

We have had windshield crack on four of our patrol cars in the last 12 months. Two failures were on 1997 ford crown victoria and two were on 1998 ford crown victorias. All windshields have cracked in the same location (half way up the support pillar). Three have cracked on the drivers side, and went straight across the windshield, the fourth cracked on the passenger's side, halfway up the support pillar and went straight across the windshield.

All the windowsare not working. Consumer brought vehicleinto repair shop forseven times, and the dealer couldn't determine the cause.

Windshield wiper fuse failed. Nm

Wiper motor replaced.

Seems as though when we switced to ford in 1994 we have had this problem ever since in almost all of our squad cars. No safety defect listed in summary.

Read more

2022-07-30 5 min.

Decoding Your Peugeot VIN Number: A Comprehensive Guide

2022-07-30 5 min.

Decoding Your Renault’s VIN Number: A Comprehensive Guide

2023-02-20 5 min.

Learn How to Use CarVertical to Check Your Car’s History Like a Pro

2023-02-22 5 min.

Smart Choice: Advantages & Tips for Purchasing Second-Hand Cars

2023-02-19 5 min.

What Is CarVertical And Why Is It Worth It

2023-02-18 5 min.

Safely Buying a Used Toyota Land Cruiser: Importance of VIN Check

2023-02-21 7 min.

CarVertical vs AutoDNA: Which Car History Check Service Is Better?

2023-02-20 7 min.

Unravel Your SEAT Car: Detailed Guide for Decoding Your VIN Number

2022-07-30 5 min.

Expert Tips: Things to Consider When Buying a Used Vehicle

2023-02-21 5 min.

Unlock Your Mercedes' Secrets: Decoding the VIN Number Explained

2023-02-19 5 min.

Why a Car VIN Check Is Super Important Before Buying a Car

2022-08-10 10 min.

What is CarVertical and Is It Free? Everything You Need to Know

About

This is the most popular VIN decoder tool website in the world, where you will find information about what a VIN code is, where to find a VIN code, what a VIN code means, etc., among other things, the basic VIN check on our website is free. We advise you to use CarVertical services to get accurate vehicle information.

CarVertical

It is the most popular VIN reporting provider in the world. The quality of CarVertical services is already taken advantage of by millions of people around the world. If you are interested in a good quality VIN check tool, then CarVertical is what you are looking for.

Enter VIN number

We found the following complaints for FORD CROWN VICTORIA (1997)

About

CarVertical

VIN check