1997 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS Complaints

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING AT 65 MPH, THE TEMPERATURE GAUGE ROSE QUICKLY AND THE VEHICLE OVERHEATED. HOT WATER LEAKED OUT FROM UNDER THE HOOD AND THE UNDERSIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A PRIVATE REPAIR SHOP, WHO DETERMINED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD HAD CRACKED. UPDATED 8/30/2006 - *NM

DURING A RECENT TRIP THE INTAKE MANIFOLD DEVELOPED A CRACK CAUSING ANTI-FREEZE TO LEAK. THE MANIFOLD WAS REPLACED AND THE COOLANT PASSAGE IS NOW ALUM. INSTEAD OF PLASTIC. SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM HERE AND A RECALL NEEDS TO BE IN PLACE. *JB

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE ATTEMPTING TO PARK THE VEHICLE THE BRAKES FAILED. THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS SPONGY AND HAD TO BE DEPRESSED TO THE FLOOR TO STOP THE VEHICLE WITHOUT INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP FOR INSPECTION. UPON INSPECTION IT WAS DETERMINED THE BRAKE LINES FRACTURED CAUSING THE BRAKE FLUID LEAKED OUT ONTO THE GROUND. THERE IS A NHTSA RECALL, # 05V086000, REGARDING THE SERVICE BRAKES, HOSES, LINES AND FITTINGS. THE VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. THE MANUFACTURER WAS ALERTED. THE BRAKE LINES HAD RUSTED. UPDATED 07/05/06. *JB

RE: OBJECTION TO PROPOSED SETTLEMENT ON SUSAN CHAMBERLAN ET AL. V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, CASE NO.[XXX] TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I AM THE OWNER OF A 1997 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS, [XXX], THAT EXPERIENCED CATASTROPHIC FAILURE OF THE INTAKE MANIFOLD IN QUESTION. I OBJECT TO THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR THE ADDITIONAL DAMAGE THAT IS LIKELY TO OCCUR WHEN THERE IS CATASTROPHIC FAILURE OF THIS PART. AFTER HAVING THE INTAKE MANIFOLD REPLACED WE EXPERIENCED ABNORMAL PERFORMANCE, WHICH INCLUDED ABNORMALLY HIGH COOLANT TEMPERATURES DURING A ROAD TRIP, WHICH CAUSED US TO HAVE TO HAVE THE CAR TOWED FROM OUT OF THE AREA TO THE LOCAL MERCURY DEALER. THEY DISCOVERED NO PROBLEM WITH THE REPLACEMENT OF THE INTAKE MANIFOLD, BUT THE HEADS AND BLOCK HAD WARPED AT THE TIME OF THE FAILURE REQUIRING A COMPLETE ENGINE REPLACEMENT. IF THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN UNDER WARRANTY THEN THE TOTAL COST OF ENGINE REPLACEMENT AND THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED. FOR THIS REASON THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF JUST RETROACTIVELY PROVIDING AN EXTENDED WARRANTY ON THE MANIFOLD ALONE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. IF THE VEHICLE WARRANTY HAD BEEN IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF THE FAILURE THEN ALL REPAIR COSTS WOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED. AS A RESULT OF POOR ENGINEERING, DESIGN, AND LACK OF NOTIFICATION OF THE DEFECT BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY IT HAS COST ME $6082.00, NOT INCLUDING THE AGGRAVATION, TOWING, AND OTHER FEES ASSOCIATED WITH FORD'S NEGLIGENCE. PLEASE ADVISE ME HOW I CAN GET THE REIMBURSEMENT I DESERVE. *NM UPDATED 07/16/2012 *JS INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I HAVE 3 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS, 1997, 1996, & 1992. WITHIN THE LAST 14 MONTHS, 5 OF THE 12 WINDOW REGULATORS HAVE FAILED. ALL VEHICLES HAVE BEEN GARAGE KEPT FOR THE MOST. NO UNUSUAL OR EXCESSIVE USAGE TO ANY OF THESE WINDOWS. 1992-HAS ~162K MILES-HAD 2 WINDOW REGULATORS FAIL-DRIVER & FRONT PASSENGER SIDE 1996-HAS ~33K MILES-HAD 1 WINDOW REGULATOR FAIL-DRIVER DOOR 1997-HAS ~62K MILES-HAD 2 WINDOW REGULATORS FAIL-DRIVER DOOR & REAR DRIVER SIDE TWO OF THESE WINDOWS (1997) HAVE BEEN REPAIRED BY A LOCAL FORD DEALER AT APPROX $190.00 EACH. THIS IS A VERY POOR RECORD (42% FAILURE RATE) FOR THESE PARTS AND I BELIEVE THERE MUST BE A MANUFACTURING DEFECT AND SOME MEDIATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. *JB

PLASTIC HEADLIGHT COVERS HAVE DEVELOPED A DEEP HAZE, SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING LIGHT OUTPUT. *JB

I HAVE A 1997 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS [XXX]THE BRAKES FAILED EXACTLY AS DESCRIBED IN THEIR RECALL 04B26 FOR 97 MERC MARQUIS. THE DEALER AND FORD MOTOR CO. REP CURLINE #2139 SAID THAT EVEN THOUGH THE FAILURE IS EXACTLY AS DESCRIBED IN THE RECALL, AND THAT MY MODEL AND YEAR MATCHES THE RECALL, THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPAIR. I SUGGEST THAT THE PROBLEM IS WIDER THAN THEY WILL ADMIT AND THINK MY REPAIR FALLS UNDER THIS RECALL. *NM UPDATED 07/17/2012 *JS INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

RE-FORD INTAKE MANIFOLDS: THE INTAKE MANIFOLD ON MY 1997 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS FAILED ON 12/23/05. ONLY THEN DID I LEARN OF THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT FORD JUST LOST. MY CAR IS OUTSIDE THE ARBITRARY 7 YEAR LIMIT AND THEREFORE IT COST ME $711.12 TO HAVE IT REPLACED. I WAS ON THE ROAD TRAVELING FROM GEORGETOWN TEXAS TO PHOENIX FOR CHRISTMAS. THE PART IS CLEARLY DEFECTIVE. FORD KNEW THAT. IT REPLACED ALL MANIFOLDS, EVEN THOSE THAT HAD NOT FAILED YET, ON SOME LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES AS FAR BACK AS 2002. I THINK MY VEHICLE SHOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED. I THINK FORD SHOULD REIMBURSE ME FOR THE REPAIR. THERE MUST BE MANY OTHERS IN MY SITUATION. *JB

DT: THE CONSUMER OWNS A 1997 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS. WHILE DRIVING AND USING THE STEERING WHEEL THERE WAS A SQUEAKING NOISE. THE CONSUMER HAD TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO THE MECHANIC WHO SUGGESTED THAT THERE WAS NO LUBRICATION ON THE BALL JOINTS NOR WAS THERE ANY WAY TO LUBRICATED THEM DUE TO THE DESIGN. THE MECHANIC SAID THAT THE BALL JOINTS SHOULD BE ALRIGHT FOR A WHILE. NO REPAIRS OR CORRECTIONS WERE MADE AT THAT TIME. ON ANOTHER OCCASION WHILE DRIVING 29 MPH UPHILL, THE LEFT FRONT BALL JOINT CRACKED AND DROPPED TO THE GROUND DAMAGING THE TIE ROD AND BALL JOINT ASSEMBLY AND THE LEFT FRONT TIRE. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO TRAVEL FOR APPROXIMATELY 20 TO 30 FEET AFTER THE VEHICLE DROPPED TO THE GROUND AND THE DRIVER LOST DIRECTIONAL CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THIS HAPPENED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP. THE DEALER SAID THAT THE OTHER SIDE WAS AFFECTED AS WELL. THE DEALER REPAIRED BOTH FRONT BALL JOINTS ALONG WITH THE TIE ROD ASSEMBLY. *AK NOTE: FAILED COMPONENTS ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION UPON REQUEST. *MJJ (11/211/05) THE CONSUMER FOUND THE COOLANT CROSSOVER CRACKED ON INTAKE. *SC *NM

DROVE APPROX. SIX MILES FROM HOME TO CHRISTMAS EVE. CHURCH SERVICE WITH FAMILY. WHEN ARRIVED, STEAM AND SMOKE WERE COMING FROM FRONT GRILLE, AND AROUND ENGINE HOOD. THOUGHT THE CAR WAS GOING TO START ON FIRE. ALSO MAKING A HISSING AND GURGLING NOISE. WAS QUITE AN "EVENT" IN THE PARKING LOT! HAD INSPECTED TWO DAYS LATER (AFTER CHRISTMAS) AND FOUND FRONT INTAKE MANIFOLD (PLASTIC?) PASSAGE CRACKED AND LEAKING ENGINE COOLANT ONTO TOP OF ENGINE BLOCK. ALSO COOLING FAN WAS BLOWING LEAKING COOLANT OVER THE PASSENGER SIDE, ENTIRE TOP OF ENGINE. NO COOLANT LEFT IN COOLANT RESERVOIR AND NO COOLANT FLOW THROUGH ENGINE; DUE TO AIR BUBBLE / LOSS OF VACUUM? I NOW HEAR MERCURY HAS A "SECRET RECALL" ADMITTING THIS IS A COMMON FAILURE AND REPAIRING VEHICLES LESS THAN SEVER YEARS OLD FOR FREE, ALSO HAVE READ THAT "FLEET" VEHICLES ARE BEING REPAIRED FOR FREE, BUT DENYING OWNER ASSISTANCE TO SAME VEHICLE, ENGINE AND INTAKE MANIFOLD TYPE TO "OLDER" MODELS. *NM