6.7

fairly significant
Crashes / Fires:
0 / 0
Injuries / Deaths:
0 / 0
Average Mileage:
9,715 miles

About These NHTSA Complaints:

This data is from the NHTSA — the US gov't agency tasked with vehicle safety. Complaints are spread across multiple & redundant categories, & are not organized by problem.

So how do you find out what problems are occurring? For this NHTSA complaint data, the only way is to read through the comments below. Any duplicates or errors? It's not us.

2013 Lincoln MKT fuel system problems

fuel system problem

Find something helpful? Spread the word.
Get notified about new defects, investigations, recalls & lawsuits for the 2013 Lincoln MKT:

Unsubscribe any time. We don't sell/share your email.

2013 Lincoln MKT Owner Comments

problem #5

Dec 012016

MKT

  • miles

A D V E R T I S E M E N T S

The contact owns a 2013 Lincoln Mkt. The contact received notification of NHTSA campaign number: 16V621000 (fuel system, gasoline); however, the part to do the repair was unavailable. The contact stated that the manufacturer exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure. Parts distribution disconnect.

- Mesa, AZ, USA

problem #4

Aug 312016

MKT

  • miles
The contact owns a 2013 Lincoln Mkt. The contact received a notification of NHTSA campaign number: 16V621000 (fuel system) however, the part to do the repair was unavailable. The contact stated that the manufacturer exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was not made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced any failures. Parts distribution disconnect.

- Boca Raton, FL, USA

problem #3

Dec 012016

MKT

  • miles
The contact owns a 2013 Lincoln Mkt. The contact stated that the recall notice for NHTSA campaign number: 16V6210000 (fuel system, gasoline) was received in August. After contacting the dealer and the manufacturer on multiple occasions, the contact was informed that the parts needed for the recall remedy were still not available and no estimated time for receiving the parts could be provided. The contact had not experienced a failure. VIN tool confirms parts not available.

- Iduyllwild, CA, USA

problem #2

Nov 302015

MKT

  • 20,000 miles
This vehicle was modified by small volume manufacturer baf technologies (now westport) with an epa-approved CNG conversion package. The fuel filler receptacle, however, was not securely mounted to the frame. It was merely mounted on a plastic disc and glued to a plastic interior body panel. That glued mounting has now failed within the 'bumper to bumper' warranty period, but westport/baf has refused to repair it under warranty. Their los angeles warranty service provider has also refused to perform this repair even if I pay for it. The original mounting method is extremely weak and would result in serious or catastrophic damage (e.g. gas leak, fire, explosion) if the user were to 'drive off' with the dispenser hose attached. All of these vehicles need to be retrofitted to meet nfpa requirements for mobile CNG systems, including the ability to survive a 'drive-off' without serious or catastrophic damage. See nfpa section 52 6.9.2 "the fueling connection receptacle shall be mounted to withstand the breakaway force specified in 7.11.6.2. (150 pounds in any direction the vehicle can move)" in addition, I believe this mounting violates nfpa 6.9.3 (receptacle not installed in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations) and 6.9.4 (insufficient clearance to prevent interference with operation of the fueling nozzle). This failure occurred when the vehicle was being refueled. The only damage in this case was to the receptacle mounting. The mounting was apparently not even strong enough to withstand the forces of connecting and disconnecting the fueling hose and nozzle during normal fueling operations.

- Sylmar, CA, USA

problem #1

Aug 112014

MKT 6-cyl

  • 28,573 miles
Received recall notice 14S10, NHTSA 14V-393 from Lincoln and took vehicle to dealer for inspection. Object of recall was found defective. Left vehicle on 12 August, after being told the vehicle was safe to drive even with the defective parts. I did not feel comfortable driving the car after reading what the defect could cause. After 2 weeks, was told some of the parts were not available to complete the repair. I consider this not responsive to the public.

- Woodway, TX, USA

Not what you are looking for?