Ford and Mercury preliminary evaluation PE12005
Stuck throttle. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened this preliminary evaluation about the cables on 5 model years (2004–2006). Opened Mar 7, 2012, closed Oct 22, 2012 after 8 months without a recall. closed
What NHTSA says
Source: Office of Defects Investigation, as filedPreliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles. The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal. Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive. A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition. The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident. Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle. One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition. ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year. A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted. Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation do
A Preliminary Evaluation is the first formal stage: NHTSA has decided the complaints and other information it screened are worth a closer look, and asks the manufacturer for its own data on the condition. The summary is the agency’s own text from its investigation file, unedited; the opening and closing resumes with the full reasoning are on NHTSA’s site under this number.
What this means for an owner
Source: and what happens nextAn investigation is not a finding that a defect exists, and it puts no duty on anyone. NHTSA opens a Preliminary Evaluation when complaints and other reports suggest a condition worth asking the manufacturer about; it upgrades to an Engineering Analysis when the answers warrant testing; it closes either when it recommends a recall, when the manufacturer recalls on its own, or when no defect trend is found. The agency’s own goals are about four months for a petition, eight for a Preliminary Evaluation or a Recall Query and eighteen for an Engineering Analysis; many run longer.
This one closed without a recall. That means NHTSA found no defect trend it chose to act on at the time, or the manufacturer addressed the condition another way (a service campaign or a bulletin, which have their own pages). A closed file can be reopened if new reports arrive.
Model years it names
Source: as NHTSA filed themAlso named: 2004 Ford Taurus; 2005 Ford Taurus; 2006 Ford Taurus; 2004 Mercury Sable; 2005 Mercury Sable.
A vehicle page’s investigation list carries the same action; a name here is the scope NHTSA opened, not a list of affected VINs.
Common questions
Source: NHTSA Office of Defects InvestigationIs PE12005 a recall?
No. A preliminary evaluation is NHTSA asking questions, not a recall. A safety recall carries an NHTSA campaign number and a duty to repair for free; this one closed without one. Whether one particular vehicle has an open recall is a VIN question at nhtsa.gov/recalls.
Is PE12005 still open?
No. It closed on Oct 22, 2012 without a recall.
Which vehicles does PE12005 cover?
NHTSA opened it on 5 model years: 2004 Ford Taurus, 2005 Ford Taurus, 2006 Ford Taurus, 2004 Mercury Sable, 2005 Mercury Sable. That is the scope of the inquiry, not a list of affected vehicles; a recall, if one follows, defines its own population by VIN.