1998 FORD MUSTANG GT Complaints

I HAVE A 1998 FORD MUSTANG. I NOW HAVE A CRACKED INTAKE MANIFOLD. FORD MOTOR COMPANY KNOWS THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLDS ARE SUBJECT TO FAILURE. THEY ALSO RECALLED SOME OF THE VEHICLES WITH THE SAME INTAKE MANIFOLD THAT I HAVE IN MY CAR. I WAS TOLD, BY FORD THAT SINCE MY CAR WAS MADE A FEW MONTHS AFTER THOSE BEING RECALLED THAT I DO NOT QUALIFY. THE PART IN QUESTION IS AN INTAKE MANIFOLD MADE OUT OF PLASTIC. THE MANIFOLDS THAT WERE REPLACED BY FORD NOW HAVE ALUMINUM IN PLACE OF THE PLASTIC IN THE AREA OF THE CRACK. I LEARNED OF A FORD DOCUMENT # 97M91 WHICH SHOWS THAT FORD KNOWS OF THE PROBLEM. I NEED TO KNOW WHAT I CAN DO TO TRY AND GET FORD TO FIX THIS PROBLEM.*AK

INTAKE MANIFOLD CRACKED. WAS TOLD NEW ONE WAS REDESIGNED. SPOKE WITH SEVERAL AUTO PARTS DEALERS AND FOUND THIS COMPONENT BREAKS IN SAME LOCATION ON ALL. THIS IS A MANUFACTURER DEFECT AND FORD WILL NOT REPLACE FOR FREE OUTSIDE OF WARRANTY.*AK

THE PLASTIC INTAKE ON THE ENGINE (4.6 SOHC), CRACKED IN THE WATER JACKET AREA CAUSING, AN ANTI-FREEZE FLUID LEAK. *JB

PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD CRACKED. HAPPENS ON MOST 1996-1998 MUSTANG GT 4.6. NEW PART FROM FORD REPLACES PLASTIC PART PRONE TO CRACKING WITH ALUMINUM PART. FORD HAS A SERVICE PROGRAM # 97M91 RELATED TO 4.6 ENGINES FOR CARS BUILT 07/1995 - 06/1997. CARS BUILT AFTER THIS END DATE STILL EXPERIENCE PROBLEMS DUE TO DEFECTIVE PART. *AK

1) VEHICLE STARTED LOSING RADIATOR FLUID THEN 'CHECK ENGINE' LIGHT CAME ON. 2) TOOK VEHICLE TO MECHANIC WHO STATED THERE IS A CRACK IN THE FRONT PLASTIC PART ON THE ENGINE. MECHANIC STATED HE HAS REPLACED A COUPLE DOZEN OF THESE PARTS ON OTHER NEWER MUSTANGS AND IT WAS COVERED BY WARRANTY. MECHANIC STATED TO TAKE TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP, THIS WAS A DEFECTIVE PART AND IS BEING REPLACED WITH AN ALUMINUM PART INSTEAD OF PLASTIC BECAUSE OF THIS DEFECT. 3) TOOK VEHICLE TO COLUMBIA, SC DEALERSHIP. THEY STATED OTHER MECHANIC WAS CORRECT AND WOULD IT COST $780 TO REPLACE PART. 4) I FEEL FORD SHOULD PAY FOR THIS SINCE IT IS A DEFECTIVE PART. *AK

CAR IS A 1998 FORD MUSTANG GT WITH THE SOHC 4.6L ENGINE. AT AROUND 105K MILES, COOLANT LEVELS STARTED DROPPING RAPIDLY, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ENGINE WAS REVVED ABOVE 3000 RPMS. EVENTUALLY, LEVELS DROPPED MORE QUICKLY THAN COOLANT COULD BE REPLACED AND CAR OVERHEATED. FOUND A LARGE POOL OF COOLANT IN ENGINE VALLEY BETWEEN CYLINDERS. FOUND RECALL ON COMPOSITE INTAKES FOR 1996 AND 1997 MUSTANG GT'S WITH 4.6L SOHC ENGINE BUT NOT ON 1998 VEHICLES. INTAKE WAS REPLACED WITH NEW VERSION WITH CAST ALUMINUM CROSSOVER TUBE AT OWNER'S EXPENSE. *AK

I HAVE LOST 1 QUART OF OIL PER 1000 MILES SINCE 40,000 MILES. THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A POOL OF OIL UNDER MY CAR BUT I'VE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO LOCATE THE LEAK. MULTIPLE VISITS TO THE DEALERSHIP HAVE NOT CONFIRMED THIS LEAK. MY NEW MECHANIC FINALLY FOUND THE LEAK TO BE A CRACKED TIMING CHAIN COVER. THERE IS A V-SHAPED CRACK ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE COVER. HE SAYS IT'S PROBABLY A CASTING ERROR. THE CAR NOW HAS 90,000 MILES AND OF COURSE IS NOT UNDER ANY WARRANTY. THIS IS IN ADDITION TO THE CRACKED INTAKE MANIFOLD AND TWO SETS OF WORN REAR-END BEARINGS.*AK

A USED VEHICLE ('98 MUSTANG GT) WAS FINANCED FROM A USED CAR DEALERSHIP BY MY DAUGHTER APPROX. 3 WEEKS AGO. THE SALESMAN WHO CLOSED THE DEAL STATED THAT THE ONLY ITEMS TO BE COVERED UNDER ANY KIND OF WARRANTY WOULD BE THOSE REGARDED AS SAFETY ITEMS. ENGINE FAILURE OR COSMETIC FEATURES WOULD NOT BE COVERED. APPROX. 17 DAYS AFTER FINANCING THE VEHICLE, THE REAR SWAY BAR BROKE WHILE SHE WAS DRIVING IT. THE CAR WAS IMMEDIATELY RETURNED TO THE DEALERSHIP TO DETERMINE THE PROBLEM WHERE IT SAT WITHOUT NOTIFICATION FOR ANOTHER 2 OR 3 DAYS. WE WERE INFORMED BY A REPRESENTATIVE (I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS THE OWNER OR THE MANAGER, DUE TO THE FACT THAT OUT OF THE 4 OR 5 PEOPLE I SPOKE TO, NO ONE WOULD CLAIM MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY) THAT THE PART DOES NOT QUALIFY AS A SAFETY ITEM WHICH MEANS MY DAUGHTER WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENTIRE COST OF THE PART AND THE LABOR. THE SWAY BAR WAS REMOVED BY THE DEALERSHIP MECHANIC AND I CURRENTLY HAVE IT IN MY POSSESSION. THERE ARE DEFINITE SIGNS THAT THE PART WAS CRACKED AND READY TO BREAK LONG BEFORE THE PURCHASE WAS MADE. I ATTEMPTED TO WORK WITH THE MANAGER AND/OR THE OWNER TO GET SOME RESOLUTION. I HAD OFFERED TO REPLACE THE PART MYSELF IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO SIMPLY PURCHASE IT. THE MANAGER SAID THE ONLY THING HE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO IS COVER HALF THE COST OF PARTS AND LABOR ($150). I FEEL THAT THIS PART SHOULD BE COVERED UNDER THE SAFETY CLAUSE THAT THE SALESMAN ORIGINALLY TOLD MY DAUGHTER WOULD BE IN EFFECT. THE COST OF THE PART AND LABOR DOESN'T BOTHER ME NEARLY AS MUCH AS THE FACT THAT THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO STAND BEHIND THE VEHICLES THEY SELL. THEREFORE, I AM REQUESTING THAT A COMPLAINT BE FILED AGAINST BAJA MOTORS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEY INSIST A FULL SAFETY INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED ON THIS VEHICLE, BUT THAT THEY REFUSE TO STAND BEHIND A SAFETY ITEM WHICH WAS CLEARLY DAMAGED PRIOR TO MY DAUGHTER TAKING DELIVERY. SINCERELY, [XXX]. *AK INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

DEFECTIVE DESIGN OF PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD. MANIFOLD DEVELOPED CRACK FOR NO REASON. I FOUND OUT THIS IS A KNOWN PROBLEM FROM FORD AND FORD WILL NOT RECALL THE CARS. THE NEW REPLACMENT INTAKE MANIFOLD IS METAL IN THE AREA THAT DEVELOPS A CRACK AND FORD CHARGES ALOT OF MONEY FOR THE REPLACMENT THAT WAS A BAD DESIGN IN THE FIRST PLACE, BUT REFUSES TO RECALL THIS PROBLEM OR REFUND THE COST OF A NEW INTAKE MANIFOLD. *AK

INTAKE MANIFOLD CRACKED. NOTICED NEW ONE WAS REDESIGNED. WHY REDESIGN IT UNLESS THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE OLD ONE? AND IF THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE OLD ONE WHY NOT A RECALL?