[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 138 (Monday, July 20, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38874-38875]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19152]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, DP98-004
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), United
States Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect investigation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a
petition submitted to NHTSA under 49 U.S.C. 30162, requesting that the
agency commence a proceeding to determine the existence of a defect
related to motor vehicle safety. The petition is hereinafter identified
as DP98-004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George Chiang, Office of Defects
Investigation (ODI), NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC
20590. Telephone: (202) 366-5206.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Mr. Edward J. Lucas of Richardson, Texas,
submitted a petition dated May 4, 1998, requesting that an
investigation be initiated to determine whether Model Year (MY) 1995
Ford Windstar minivans contain a defect related to motor vehicle safety
within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301. The petition alleges that
MY 1995 Ford Windstars have a defective automatic transmission that can
fail, creating a safety hazard. In support of his petition, the
petitioner included not only a description of the problems he
experienced with his vehicle, but also a printout of transmission
complaints registered by other Windstar owners on one Internet website.
MY 1995 Ford Windstars equipped with an AX4S automatic transaxle
are the subject vehicles. The transaxle combines a torque converter,
fully automatic 4-speed transmission, final drive gearing, and
differential into a front wheel drive system.
A review of agency data files, including information reported to
NHTSA's Auto Safety Hotline by consumers, indicated that aside from the
petition, there were 27 reports concerning failure or malfunction of
the transmission in the subject vehicles. These reports address issues
of inadvertent downshifting, transmission gear slippage, difficult
shifting, noise, and economic/quality problems. There were no reports
of injuries or crashes resulting from these transmission failures.
These reports appear to be similar in nature to those Internet
complaints included with the petition.
It appears that the failure or malfunction of the transmission on
the subject vehicles primarily resulted from a cracked forward drive
clutch aluminum piston inside the transaxle assembly. Ford Motor
Company (Ford) addressed this issue in Technical Service Bulletin (TSB)
No. 94-24-7.
The forward clutch piston may crack on its outside diameter, seal
groove or bottom. The crack allows transmission fluid to leak through
the crack, causing slippage in forward drive and disability of forward
drive.
When the transmission is hot, the transmission fluid viscosity
becomes low. When the clutch piston is cracked
[[Page 38875]]
at a high temperature inside the transaxle, it can lead to faster
transmission fluid leaks through the crack. At the same time, the
hydraulic pressure decreases until the clutch begins to slip. At worst,
the hydraulic pressure in the transmission could drop to a level that
could not hold the forward drive clutch engaged, causing no forward
drive. Ford was aware of the cracking piston problem, as shown by TSB
No. 94-24-7, and replaced the aluminum piston with a steel one for 1996
and later model Windstars.
The petitioner alleged that the cracked piston is a safety hazard
because it can disable forward drive function of the transmission and
cause sudden loss of drive and subsequent unexpected engagement of the
transmission.
Loss of forward drive function due to the cracked piston is not a
sudden occurrence. Many transmission slippages will occur prior to the
loss of forward drive. Further, this type of clutch disengagement is
generally temporary. If the temperature inside transmission drops and
the hydraulic pressure in the transmission increased, the forward drive
clutch may engage again. The clutch re-engagement is noticeable to the
driver, who is able to control the vehicle.
The agency has analyzed the available information concerning the
problem alleged in the petition. Based on the information obtained from
the evaluation of the ODI complaints and analysis of potential failure
modes of the transmission, NHTSA believes that cracking of the forward
clutch piston on the subject transaxle does not constitute a safety
hazard within the meaning of Chapter 301.
For the reasons presented above, it is unlikely that NHTSA would
issue an order for the notification and remedy of a safety-related
defect in the subject vehicles at the conclusion of the investigation
requested in the petition. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate
and prioritize NHTSA's limited resources to best accomplish the
agency's safety mission, the petition is denied.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR
1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: July 9, 1998.
Kenneth N. Weinstein,
Associate Administrator for Safety Assurance.
[FR Doc. 98-19152 Filed 7-17-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
