NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
493 reportsClear category filter27,500 miles · Dec 11, 2013
Engine
THREE TIMES MY CAR GAS DIED WITH ONLY 28K MILES ON IT. FIRST TIME I START THE CAR PROCEED TO DRIVE UP TO FOVE MPH AND HAVE A TOTAL LOSS OF POWER. PEDAL TO THE FLOOR AND THE RPMS DO NOT RAISE. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES, BOTH ON THE EXPRESSWAY WHERE I HAD TO COAST TO A STOP IN THE FAR LEFT LANE AND I WAS ALMOST REAR ENDED. …
Read full complaint
THREE TIMES MY CAR GAS DIED WITH ONLY 28K MILES ON IT. FIRST TIME I START THE CAR PROCEED TO DRIVE UP TO FOVE MPH AND HAVE A TOTAL LOSS OF POWER. PEDAL TO THE FLOOR AND THE RPMS DO NOT RAISE. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES, BOTH ON THE EXPRESSWAY WHERE I HAD TO COAST TO A STOP IN THE FAR LEFT LANE AND I WAS ALMOST REAR ENDED. TURN THE CAR ON AND OFF AND THE PROBLEM WENT AWAY THE FIRST TWO TIMES, INCLUDING THE WRENCH LIGHT. THIRD TIME THE ENGINE LIGHT IS STILL ON. OWNED THE CAR FOR A SMIDGE OVER THREE YEARS AND MY WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER THIS. THIS IS UNBELIEVABLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10555692
41,270 miles · Dec 8, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING ON FOUR LANE ROAD WHEN LOST ENGINE POWER TO IDLE. ACCELERATOR PEDAL NON-RESPONSIVE. DROVE VEHICLE FOUR MILES BACK TO HOME. HAD TO RESTART ENGINE SEVEN TIMES TO RETURN HOME. PLUGGED IN CODE READER, IT STATED THE THROTTLE BODY ACTUATOR STICKING CLOSED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10555226
26,500 miles · Dec 6, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
OCCASSIONALLY, WHEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATES, USUALLY BETWEEN 0-50 MPH, THE GAS PEDAL LOCKS, THE ENGINE STALLS, AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT APPEARS. THE VEHICLE MUST THEN BE PLACED INTO PARK AND TURNED OFF. WHEN TURNED BACK ON, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT DISAPPEARS AND THE VEHICLE FUNCTIONS NORMALLY. THIS HAS OCCURRED THREE TIMES I…
Read full complaint
OCCASSIONALLY, WHEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATES, USUALLY BETWEEN 0-50 MPH, THE GAS PEDAL LOCKS, THE ENGINE STALLS, AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT APPEARS. THE VEHICLE MUST THEN BE PLACED INTO PARK AND TURNED OFF. WHEN TURNED BACK ON, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT DISAPPEARS AND THE VEHICLE FUNCTIONS NORMALLY. THIS HAS OCCURRED THREE TIMES IN THREE MONTHS, ONCE WHILE MERGING ONTO A HIGHWAY AND TWICE WHILE ACCELERATING FROM A STOP. FORD SERVICE EXPLAINED THIS COULD BE DUE TO A FAILED THROTTLE BODY PART. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10555024
67,151 miles · Dec 5, 2013
EnginePower Train
BEGAN TO RUN VERY ROUGH. ON JULY 13, 2013, I EXPERIENCED A SIMILAR PROBLEM. MALLOY FORD IN WINCHESTER, VA, CHARGED ME $310 TO CLEAN THE THROTTLE BODY. AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH, I SEE THIS IS A KNOWN PROBLEM, I'M DISGUSTED WITH FORD AND THE DEALERSHIP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10554887
50,800 miles · Dec 3, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System
WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE ON THE INTERSTATE AT ABOUT 60 MPH AND EXITED SAFELY. WENT THROUGH TYPICAL STOP-AND-GO RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC FOR ABOUT 2 MINUTES UNTIL REACHING WORK, IN WHICH THE CAMPUS' SPEED IS SET TO 25 MPH THROUGHOUT. VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING ON WORK CAMPUS A LITTLE UNDER 30 MPH. SUDDENLY, THE CAR STALLED AND THE BATTERY AND…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE ON THE INTERSTATE AT ABOUT 60 MPH AND EXITED SAFELY. WENT THROUGH TYPICAL STOP-AND-GO RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC FOR ABOUT 2 MINUTES UNTIL REACHING WORK, IN WHICH THE CAMPUS' SPEED IS SET TO 25 MPH THROUGHOUT. VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING ON WORK CAMPUS A LITTLE UNDER 30 MPH. SUDDENLY, THE CAR STALLED AND THE BATTERY AND OIL WARNING LIGHTS HAD COME ON. STEERING THE VEHICLE TO A SAFE PARKING PLACE WAS DIFFICULT AS THE STEERING WHEEL HAD BECOME TIGHT. ONCE SAFELY PARKED, THE VEHICLE WAS TURNED OFF AND AFTER 5 SECONDS TURNED BACK ON. THE ENGINE STARTED UP NORMALLY. STARTED DRIVING THE VEHICLE CLOSER TO WHERE IT WAS NEEDED TO BE PARKED AND THE ENGINE STALLED AGAIN AFTER 1000 FEET AND THE STEERING WENT TIGHT AGAIN. TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE AGAIN AND AFTER 5 SECONDS ATTEMPTED TO TURN IT BACK ON. THE ENGINE HAD TROUBLE STARTING BUT AFTER AN ABNORMAL AMOUNT OF TIME TRYING TO TURN OVER, THE ENGINE DID. WAS ABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE IN THE APPROPRIATE PARKING AREA. VEHICLE HAS FULL TANK OF GASOLINE, 2000 MILES OVER OIL CHANGE RECOMMENDATION BY DEALER, AND FACTORY BATTERY. VEHICLE HAS NEVER BEEN OFF-ROAD BUT HAS BEEN SUBJECT TO EASY SNOW ACCUMULATIONS SINCE PURCHASED FROM DEALERSHIP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10554644
50,000 miles · Dec 3, 2013
EnginePower Train
I WAS DRIVING DOWN A VERY BUSY 5-LANE ROAD WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN A WRENCH APPEARED ON MY DASHBOARD AND MY CAR HAD ABSOLUTELY NO POWER IN THE ACCELERATOR. IT BEGAN IDLING IRRATIONALLY AND MY CAR WAS SHAKING. I HAD IT TOWED TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP TO BE FIXED. IT IS THE THROTTLE BODY THAT IS MALFUNCTIONING, AND THEY GUARANTEED TO…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING DOWN A VERY BUSY 5-LANE ROAD WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN A WRENCH APPEARED ON MY DASHBOARD AND MY CAR HAD ABSOLUTELY NO POWER IN THE ACCELERATOR. IT BEGAN IDLING IRRATIONALLY AND MY CAR WAS SHAKING. I HAD IT TOWED TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP TO BE FIXED. IT IS THE THROTTLE BODY THAT IS MALFUNCTIONING, AND THEY GUARANTEED TO ME THAT IT WOULD HAPPEN AGAIN IF NOT FIXED. THEY INFORMED ME THAT THERE HAVE BEEN MANY VEHICLES WITH THIS SAME PROBLEM. SOMEONE IS GOING TO BE KILLED DUE TO THIS! I WAS LUCKY THAT NO ONE HIT ME- I COULD NOT EVEN GET OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD- MY VEHICLE JUST HAD NO POWER AT ALL. IF THIS HAPPENS ON A HIGHWAY, THIS COULD BE HORRIFIC! I AM EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED AND UPSET THAT A RECALL HAS NOT BEEN ISSUED. THERE HAVE BEEN THOUSANDS OF COMPLAINTS, AND NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. SOMEONE IS GOING TO BE SEVERELY HURT OR BE KILLED DUE TO THIS ISSUE! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10554640
45,900 miles · Dec 1, 2013
EnginePower Train
WHILE DRIVING APPROX 20 MPH IN A COMMUNITY TO CAR SLOWED DOWN TO A CRAWL. IT WOULD NOT TRAVEL FASTER THAN APPROX 5 MPH. HAPPENED AGAIN A WEEK LATER. TOOK IT TO GARAGE THE COMPUTER READ P2111 - THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL TAC SYSTEM - STUCK OPEN. DESCRIPTION; THIS POWERTRAIN CONTROL MODULE PCM FAULT STATUS INDICATES THE THROTTL…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING APPROX 20 MPH IN A COMMUNITY TO CAR SLOWED DOWN TO A CRAWL. IT WOULD NOT TRAVEL FASTER THAN APPROX 5 MPH. HAPPENED AGAIN A WEEK LATER. TOOK IT TO GARAGE THE COMPUTER READ P2111 - THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL TAC SYSTEM - STUCK OPEN. DESCRIPTION; THIS POWERTRAIN CONTROL MODULE PCM FAULT STATUS INDICATES THE THROTTLE PLATE IS AT A GREATER ANGLE THAN COMMANDED. POSSIBLE CAUSES; BINDING THROTTLE BODY STUCK OPEN, TAC MOTOR CIRCUIT OPEN, TAC MOTOR CIRCUITS ARE CROSS-WIRED, TAC MOTOR HARNESS CIRCUITS ARE SHORTED TOGETHER, DAMAGE PCM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10554233
59,900 miles · Nov 29, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING ON FREEWAY, AT ABOUT 65MPH, WHEN ALL OF THE SUDDEN THE ENGINE STALLED AND POWER WAS CUT DRAMATICALLY FROM THE ENGINE. UNABLE TO CONTROL SPEED AND INSTANTLY STARTED STOPPING. HAD TO PULL OVER SHARPLY AND UNSAFELY ON THE SIDE OF AN ON-RAMP NARROWLY HAVING CAR BEHIND US MISS US. TURNED OFF VEHICLE AND HAD TO WAIT ABOUT 2…
Read full complaint
DRIVING ON FREEWAY, AT ABOUT 65MPH, WHEN ALL OF THE SUDDEN THE ENGINE STALLED AND POWER WAS CUT DRAMATICALLY FROM THE ENGINE. UNABLE TO CONTROL SPEED AND INSTANTLY STARTED STOPPING. HAD TO PULL OVER SHARPLY AND UNSAFELY ON THE SIDE OF AN ON-RAMP NARROWLY HAVING CAR BEHIND US MISS US. TURNED OFF VEHICLE AND HAD TO WAIT ABOUT 20 SECONDS BEFORE RESTARTING THE CAR. IT THEN WORKED OK. HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES ON ONE TRIP OF ABOUT 20 MILES. TOOK TO A DEALER AND THEY DIAGNOSED IT AS THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDING TO BE REPLACED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10554155
43,000 miles · Nov 26, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
OUR 2010 FORD ESCAPE HAS HAD THE EXACT PROBLEM DESCRIBED IN THE NHTSA CASE NUMBER PE 13003. OUR VEHICLE HAS 43,000 MILES ON IT AND DRIVING TO WORK ON A FAST MOVING CITY STREET AT APPROX 45-50 MPH AND THE CAR LOST ALL THROTTLE CONTROL AND WENT INTO THE DESCRIBED "LIMP MODE", NO WARNING OR CHECK ENGINE LIGHTS CAME ON. WE HAD A VER…
Read full complaint
OUR 2010 FORD ESCAPE HAS HAD THE EXACT PROBLEM DESCRIBED IN THE NHTSA CASE NUMBER PE 13003. OUR VEHICLE HAS 43,000 MILES ON IT AND DRIVING TO WORK ON A FAST MOVING CITY STREET AT APPROX 45-50 MPH AND THE CAR LOST ALL THROTTLE CONTROL AND WENT INTO THE DESCRIBED "LIMP MODE", NO WARNING OR CHECK ENGINE LIGHTS CAME ON. WE HAD A VERY DIFFICULT TIME CONTROLLING THE CAR AND GETTING IT OFF THE ROAD WHILE TRYING TO DODGE TRAFFIC. LIMP MODE DOES NOT DESCRIBE THE AVAILABLE POWER. AT 900 RPM YOU CAN WALK FASTER THAN THE CAR WILL DRIVE... THE TRANSMISSION IS ALSO ACTING AS AN ENGINE BRAKE AND SLOWING THE CAR EVEN FASTER SO I POPPED IT INTO NEUTRAL AND WAS ABLE TO COAST TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. WE TURNED OFF THE IGNITION AND RESTARTED AND THE CAR STARTED FINE. PUT IT IN GEAR AND ACCELERATED TO APPROX 20 MPH AND IT WENT INTO LIMP MODE AGAIN AND THIS TIME THE SMALL WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON IN THE DASH. A GEARBOX OR TRANSMISSION PROBLEM? LUCKILY WE WERE STILL ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD SO WE AGAIN TURNED OFF THE CAR AND RESTARTED TO RESET (WRENCH LIGHT WENT OUT) AND IT WORKED FINE FOR THE NEXT 14 MILES AS WE WERE GOING TO THE FORD DEALER. JUST AS WE WERE ARRIVING IT DID IT A THIRD TIME, THIS TIME THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON AND THEY WERE ABLE TO RETRIEVE THE DTC CODE OF 2112 AND DIAGNOSED A DEFECTIVE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY. THE SERVICE MANAGER WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY RECALL AND CHARGED US $589 DOLLARS FOR THE REPAIR (PART, LABOR, DIAGNOSTIC TEST AND CALIBRATION OF THE COMPUTER). WE HAVE BEEN THE ONLY OWNERS OF THIS CAR AND IT HAS HAD ALL OF ITS NORMAL SERVICE DONE. AT 43K MILES IT IS, FOR ALL PURPOSES, STILL A NEW CAR. LUCKY FOR US IT HAPPENED ON CITY STREETS AND NOT AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. HOPEFULLY FORD WILL ISSUES A RECALL ON THESE TO REPAIR THEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10553815
77,410 miles · Nov 25, 2013
EnginePower Train
I HEARD A POP SOUND AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE WHEN PRESSING ON THE ACCELERATOR. IDLE WAS ROUGH, I WAS ABLE TO COAST INTO A PARKING LOT.I LET IT IDLE AND TRIED TO INCREASE RPM. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE TO PEDAL. THE CAR IDLE ROUGHLY. I SHUT CAR OFF AND RESTARTED. IT CRANKED LONGER THAN NORMAL, LIKE IT WASN'T GETTING FUEL. THEN IT …
Read full complaint
I HEARD A POP SOUND AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE WHEN PRESSING ON THE ACCELERATOR. IDLE WAS ROUGH, I WAS ABLE TO COAST INTO A PARKING LOT.I LET IT IDLE AND TRIED TO INCREASE RPM. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE TO PEDAL. THE CAR IDLE ROUGHLY. I SHUT CAR OFF AND RESTARTED. IT CRANKED LONGER THAN NORMAL, LIKE IT WASN'T GETTING FUEL. THEN IT RAN FINE. AFTER ABOUT 20 MORE MILES IT REPEATED PROCESS, LEAVING ME TO COAST OFF THE ROAD IN TRAFFIC. I HAVE A WARNING LIGHT (WRENCH) MEANING THROTTLE BODY OR DRIVE TRAIN ON MY DASH DURING THE SHUT DOWN. I HAVE HAD THIS VEHICLE IN FORD REPAIR SHOPS OVER FOUR TIMES FOR POWERTRAIN REPAIRS, STARTING BEFORE WARRANTY WAS EXPIRED. THE LAST ONE FORD WOULD NOT COVER THE REPAIR UNDER PREVIOUS WARRANTY, EVEN THOUGH THE FIRST REPAIR DURING WARRANTY PERIOD WAS NEVER FIXED. NOW I AM ENDANGERING MYSELF AND ALL THOSE AROUND ME BY THE NEW PROBLEM. IF THE VEHICLE DOES THIS IN A CENTER LANE A PILE UP COULD OCCUR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10553767
Official recalls
3Oct 26, 2016
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2010-2012 Ford Escape vehicles manufactured February 26, 2009, to April 29, 2012, and 2010-2011 Mercury Mariner vehicles manufactured February 25, 2009, to December 12, 2010. On vehicles with a 3.0L engine, the Fuel Delivery Module (FDM) may crack, causing a fuel leak.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source increases the risk of a fire.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the FDM flange with one that has a redesigned fuel supply port, free of charge. Remedy parts are currently unavailable. Interim notices were mailed to owners on December 13, 2016. Owners will receive a second notice when remedy parts become available. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 16S41.
May 29, 2014
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2008-2011 Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner vehicles manufactured August 18, 2006, through September 11, 2010. The affected vehicles have a steering torque sensor that may not be able to properly detect driver steering input. As a result, the system could remove the Electric Power Steering (EPS) assist.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If power steering assist is lost, greater driver effort would be required to steer the vehicle at low speeds, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will update the software for the power steering control module (PSCM) and the instrument cluster module, free of charge. If a vehicle shows a history of a loss of the torque sensor signal or fault codes relating to the PSCM when the vehicle is brought in for the recall remedy, the affected components will be replaced, free of charge. The recall began on July 18, 2014. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-800-392-3673. Ford's number for this recall is 14S05.
May 24, 2010
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2010 FUSION, MILAN, AND ESCAPE VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM FEBRUARY 27, THROUGH MARCH 26, 2010. THE PARK ROD GUIDE RETENTION PIN MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PROPERLY INSTALLED WHICH FAILS TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENT OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 114, "THEFT PROTECTION AND ROLLAWAY PREVENTION".
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A VEHICLE PARKED WITHOUT AN ENGAGED PARK PAWL AND WITHOUT AN APPLIED PARKING BRAKE MAY HAVE UNINTENDED MOVEMENT WHICH MAY CAUSE A CRASH.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND DEALERS WILL REPAIR THE VEHICLES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 28, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332 AND FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED CALL 1-800-232-5952 (TDD). REPRESENTATIVES ARE AVAILABLE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY: 8:00AM - 5:00PM.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
4DP15001 · Loss Of Power Steering While Driving
Opened Apr 1, 2015 · Closed Jun 14, 2018
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering:electric Power Assist System
On May 27, 2014, amended June 2, 2014, Ford Motor Company (Ford) submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) to NHTSA describing a safety defect that may result in a sudden loss of power steering assist while driving in approximately 746,067 model year (MY) 2008 through 2011 Ford Escape vehicles equipped with electric power assisted steering (NHTSA 14V-284, Ford 14S05). Ford's DIR described the defect condition as a poor signal to noise ratio [SNR] in the torque sensor within the Electric Power Assisted Steering (EPAS) system [which] does not allow the PSCM to determine the driver's steering input. When the system detects this fault condition, it transitions the EPAS system to the fail-safe/manual steering mode.Ford's DIR indicates that loss of power steering assist while driving would require higher steering effort at lower vehicle speeds, which may result in an increased risk of a crash.Ford's remedy instructs dealers to check the Power Steering Control Module (PSCM) for Diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTCs) to determine the proper repair procedure. If no DTCs are present, dealers are to update the PSCM and instrument cluster module software. The updated PSCM software changes the torque sensor fault strategy so that the SNR condition does not result in a loss of power steering assist while driving.In addition, audible and visual warnings are provided for torque sensor faults.If DTCs indicating faults in the torque sensor, PSCM or Power Steering Motor (motor) are present in the initial recall inspection, the dealer performs the following repairs: 1) replaces the torque sensor for torque sensor faults (DTC B2278); or 2) replaces the steering column for faults related to the PSCM (DTC B1342) or motor (DTC B2277).Continued in attachment pages
PE13003 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Feb 28, 2014
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine
On February 21, 2013, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 to investigate allegations of electronic throttle body (ETB) failures resulting in sudden reduction of engine power in model year (MY) 2009-2013 Ford Escape, Fusion, Mariner and Milan vehicles. During this investigation, Ford identified a condition in subject vehicles equipped with 2.5L and 3.0L engines that may result in a sudden reduction of engine power.According to Ford, the ETB internal motor contacts may develop a high resistance material buildup condition on the commutator, resulting in intermittent electrical connectivity and reduced engine power. When this condition occurs, the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) or Wrench light will illuminate and the vehicle may enter a limited limp home mode.Ford?s trade name for the feature is Failure Mode Effects Management (FMEM) mode.In this mode, engine power and vehicle speed are reduced, while full function of the power steering, power braking, lighting, and climate control systems are maintained.ODI?s complaint analysis indicate that the predominant failure mode involved reduced motive power associated with the limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Analysis of warranty claims provided by Ford identified 59,807 claims related to ETB replacements and approximately 50 percent of claims are associated with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed.Ford described several factors where the ETB motor may fail resulting in DTCs P2111 or P2112 but the failure is not an existing stuck open or closed ETB valve position.According to Ford, the ETB control strategy provides the driver with three FMEM modes that allow varying degrees of vehicle mobility depending on the severity of the fault detected.DTCs associated with stuck open or closed throttle valves are designated the highest failure severity resulting in engine speeds limited to high idle corresponding to the limited limp home mode.Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability.Other FMEM limp modes may result in reduced engine performance but will maintain vehicle speed above 20mph. During this investigation, Ford and its suppliers, Delphi and Igarashi, updated the powertrain control module (PCM) software to include a throttle body motor cleaning cycle during key-on and modified the ETB internal motor components design, surface finish and material composition to improve durability. Additionally, Ford developed a remedy procedure and issued a special Customer Satisfaction Program (CSP) 13N03 extending the ETB warranty coverage and instructing dealers to update the powertrain calibration to improve vehicle performance in the event that intermittent electrical connectivity of the throttle body motor contacts occurs. The program extends the coverage for up to 10 years of service or 150,000 miles from the warranty start date of the vehicle, all vehicles are eligible for the program through January 31, 2015 regardless of mileage.Owners of the affected vehicles will be contacted by mail to take their vehicle to a Ford dealer who will reprogram the PCM to the latest calibration. The bulletin was sent to dealers on January 17, 2014 and the owner letter mailing began on January 27, 2014. See the investigative file for copies of Ford's bulletin and owner letter. This preliminary evaluation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding that
DP12006 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction
Opened Oct 2, 2012 · Closed Feb 21, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine
In a letter dated August 30, 2012, The North Carolina Consumers Council (NCCC) petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to initiate a defect investigation of alleged electronic throttle body failures resulting in engine stall or surge while driving in model year (MY) 2005 through 2012 Ford Escape vehicles. On October 2, 2012 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Defect Petition DP12-006 to evaluate whether to grant or deny the petition. The petition is hereby granted on certain model years. The NCCC letter cites two complaints of stall while driving in MY 2009 Ford Escape vehicles that were diagnosed as failed throttle bodies with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed. The petitioner indicates that the owners of both vehicles reported experiencing repeated incidents of stalling and engine surging. According to Ford, Escape non-hybrid vehicles are equipped with Electronic Throttle Body (ETB) assemblies beginning with MY 2009. Vehicles manufactured between June 22, 2009 and October 15, 2009 may contain contaminated printed circuit boards (PCB) with plating variations. Plating variations could lead to a lack of continuity in the throttle position sensor circuit where P2111 and/or other DTCs would be generated and stored. Ford and its electronic throttle body supplier, Delphi, modified the PCB manufacturing process and issued a technical service bulletin (TSB) 09-23-5. Vehicles produced after October 15, 2009 incorporated ETBs manufactured with a PCB process that resolved this condition. ODI's analysis identified a total of 123 unique reports indicating allegations of reduced motive power or vehicle stall. Depending on the condition of throttle control system malfunction, a driver may experience varying levels of reduced engine performance associated with three limp home modes. In two limp modes, reduced engine performance may maintain vehicle speeds above 20mph while the third is a limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Allegations of stall appear to be related to the limited limp home mode. Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability. Allegations of vehicle surge appear to be related to limp home mode operation. Complaints alleging surge are most likely related to engine RPM fluctuations at low vehicle speeds or idle as the control system engages to prevent engine stall. In limited limp mode, rough-idle conditions may exist while the control system attempts to modulate engine RPMs once the vehicle reaches a reduced speed to maintain approximately 900 RPM. Separately, ODI received 59 complaints alleging incidents of engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2010-2011 Ford Fusion vehicles. Approximately 60 percent (36) of the incidents occurred at speeds of 40 miles per hour or more. Eighty percent of complaints (47) were received beginning March 2012 and 14 complaints reported that the throttle body was replaced or DTCs associated with limp home modes. Additionally, Ford issued TSB 10-21-6 addressing DTCs associated with idle speed drops and limited limp home mode. The petition is granted on certain model years.Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 has been opened to assess the scope, frequency and potential safety consequences associated with the alleged defect.See full copy of the closing resume for this defect petition for list of the VOQs associated with the defect petition analysis.
PE11016 · Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage
Opened Apr 27, 2011 · Closed Aug 18, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut; Visibility; Visibility:glass, Side/rear
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.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 does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Additional source detail variants (5)
Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.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 does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.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 does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.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 does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Visibility
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.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 does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Visibility:glass, Side/rear
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.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 does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.