NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
493 reportsClear category filter45,140 miles · Jun 19, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
THE VEHICLE EITHER STALLED OR WENT INTO SAFE OR LIMP HOME MODE WHILE TRAVELING AROUND 70 MPH ON THE INTERSTATE. THIS HAPPENED DURING A BUSY TRAFFIC TIME CAUSING OTHER VEHICLES TO BRAKE HARD TO AVOID AN ACCIDENT. I WITH MY 3 YEAR OLD SON WERE STRANDED ON THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY UNTIL SOMEONE WAS ABLE TO GET THE CAR BACK HOME FOR…
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE EITHER STALLED OR WENT INTO SAFE OR LIMP HOME MODE WHILE TRAVELING AROUND 70 MPH ON THE INTERSTATE. THIS HAPPENED DURING A BUSY TRAFFIC TIME CAUSING OTHER VEHICLES TO BRAKE HARD TO AVOID AN ACCIDENT. I WITH MY 3 YEAR OLD SON WERE STRANDED ON THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY UNTIL SOMEONE WAS ABLE TO GET THE CAR BACK HOME FOR ME. IT WAS A SCARY AND DANGEROUS SITUATION. P2112 WAS THE CODE THAT WAS READ WHEN WE HAD IT LOOKED AT. APPARENTLY AN ISSUE WITH THE THROTTLE BODY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520797
59,837 miles · Jun 19, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE STREET WHEN MY CAR STOPPED AND CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON WRENCH ICON ALSO CAME ON AS I TRIED TO ACCELERATE CAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520634
68,500 miles · Jun 18, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
MY VEHICLE LOSES ALL POWER WHILE PRESSING THE ACCELERATOR. I HAD IT DIAGNOSED WITH PROBLEM CODE P2111. A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION TO BE PUT IN WHILE OPERATING A VEHICLE. THE ONLY WAY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM IS TO STOP THE ENGINE, THEN RESTART. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520586
66,424 miles · Jun 18, 2013
EnginePower Train
EXPERIENCED REPEATED STALLING OF ENGINE WHILE GOING 40+ MILES PER HOUR. ENGINE WOULD RUN FOR APPROX. ONE BLOCK THEN STALL. VEHICLE WENT TO LIMP MODE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520541
52,500 miles · Jun 18, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
VEHICLE (2010 FORD ESCAPE) TRAVELING AT APPX. 20MPH ON FREEWAY WHEN IT STARTED BUCKING, LOST SOME BUT NOT ALL POWER. PULLED VEHICLE TO SIDE OF FREEWAY, SHUT OFF ENGINE. RESTARTED 30 SECONDS LATER. RESTART WAS DIFFICULT BUT SUCCESSFUL. SUCCESSFULLY DROVE VEHICLE TO DEALER FOR REPAIR. DEALER CLAIMS THIS IS ELECTRONIC THROTTLE…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE (2010 FORD ESCAPE) TRAVELING AT APPX. 20MPH ON FREEWAY WHEN IT STARTED BUCKING, LOST SOME BUT NOT ALL POWER. PULLED VEHICLE TO SIDE OF FREEWAY, SHUT OFF ENGINE. RESTARTED 30 SECONDS LATER. RESTART WAS DIFFICULT BUT SUCCESSFUL. SUCCESSFULLY DROVE VEHICLE TO DEALER FOR REPAIR. DEALER CLAIMS THIS IS ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY ISSUE. CANNOT REPAIR UNTIL PART ARRIVES IN APPROXIMATELY ONE WEEK. VERY SIMILAR BEHAVIOR FROM CAR IN TWO SEPARATE INCIDENTS LAST WEEK - BOTH HAPPENED IMMEDIATELY UPON START UP IN MY DRIVEWAY. I SHUT ENGINE OFF EACH TIME AND RESTARTED. RESTART WAS DIFFICULT BUT NOT SUCCESSFUL. SIMILAR INCIDENT 9 MONTHS AGO (SEPT. 2012). VEHICLE TRAVELING AT APPX. 65MPH ON FREEWAY WHEN IT NOTICEABLY JUMPED, IMMEDIATELY LOST MOST BUT NOT ALL POWER. TOWED TO DEALERSHIP. DEALER COULD NOT REPEAT NOR VERIFY CONCERN IN 4 DAYS / 150 MILES OF TESTING. RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT NHTSA IS INVESTIGATING SIMILAR ISSUES ON THIS AND OTHER MODEL YEAR FORD ESCAPES. MY EXPERIENCE SOUNDS VERY SIMILAR TO COMPLAINTS FROM OTHER DRIVERS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520390
200,000 miles · Jun 17, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineUnknown Or Other
PURCHASED MAY 30, 2012....LESS THAN ONE MONTH LATER, I WAS DRIVING ONTO A RAMP AND COULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE CAR JUST STOPPED BUT I COULD STEER SO I WAS ABLE TO PULL IT OVER. A STATE POLICEMAN CAME BY AND I SAID I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH MY MECHANIC. APPARENTLY, THE COMPUTER HAD SHUT DOWN AND THE ISSUE MAY HAVE BEEN THAT THE KEY I…
Read full complaint
PURCHASED MAY 30, 2012....LESS THAN ONE MONTH LATER, I WAS DRIVING ONTO A RAMP AND COULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE CAR JUST STOPPED BUT I COULD STEER SO I WAS ABLE TO PULL IT OVER. A STATE POLICEMAN CAME BY AND I SAID I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH MY MECHANIC. APPARENTLY, THE COMPUTER HAD SHUT DOWN AND THE ISSUE MAY HAVE BEEN THAT THE KEY I WAS USING WAS NOT PROGRAMMED?. I FOLLOWED STEPS TO PROGRAM KEYS AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE FOR MONTHS UNTIL THIS PAST APRIL, 2013. DRIVING ALONG ON A MAIN ROAD, THE CAR DID IT AGAIN. COULD STEER IT BUT COULD NOT REPAIR SAME WAY AS BEFORE. I KNOW COMPUTERS AND SAY THAT WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, DISCONNECT IT. SO WE DISCONNECTED BATTERY AND WERE ABLE TO START CAR AND GET HOME BUT THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN WHEN ARRIVING AT MY HOUSE. OF COURSE THE WARRANTY RAN OUT BACK IN FEBRUARY. MY MECHANIC COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND THEREFORE DID NOT KNOW WHY IT HAPPENED. I DO REGULAR MAINTENANCE THAT IS REQUIRED AND TAKE CARE OF THE CAR. I ALSO KEEP A LOG. IT HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES SINCE, YESTERDAY AND TODAY, JUNE 17, 2013. I HAVE SEEN SEVERAL COMPLAINTS ONLINE ABOUT A SIMILAR PROBLEM WITH THE SAME MAKE, MODEL AND YEAR. THERE SHOULD BE A RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED USED AND WAS TWO YEARS OLD. THE PREVIOUS DRIVER DID NOT HAVE IT FOR VERY LONG BEFORE TURNING IT IN. I ASKED FOR THE CAR FACTS FROM THE DEALERSHIP AND THE CAR WAS BROUGHT IN SEVERAL TIMES WITH NO REPAIRS DONE. NOT EVEN SURE IF THEY WERE THE ACTUAL CAR FACTS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520163
31,000 miles · Jun 16, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
AS I WAS DRIVING THE CAR DID A RPM SURGE AND WHILE MY FOOT WAS ON THE GAS, THE CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE UNTIL I PULLED OVER AND TURNED THE CAR OFF AND RESTARTED IT. THE PART HAD TO BE REPLACED. MY CAR IS CURRENTLY DOING THE SAME THING AGAIN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520045
62,000 miles · Jun 16, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
WHILE GETTING ON THE FREEWAY THE CAR SLOWED DOWN ON ITS OWN AND ALMOST STALLED OUT (THIS OCCURRED TWICE). IT ALSO OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING AND SPEEDING UP ON THE FREEWAY WHERE IT SLOWED DOWN TO WHERE IT FELT LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL OUT. IT ALSO OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING ON A STREET IN THE CITY AFTER STOPPING AT A STOP LIGHT TRIE…
Read full complaint
WHILE GETTING ON THE FREEWAY THE CAR SLOWED DOWN ON ITS OWN AND ALMOST STALLED OUT (THIS OCCURRED TWICE). IT ALSO OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING AND SPEEDING UP ON THE FREEWAY WHERE IT SLOWED DOWN TO WHERE IT FELT LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL OUT. IT ALSO OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING ON A STREET IN THE CITY AFTER STOPPING AT A STOP LIGHT TRIED TO HIT THE GAS AND THE CAR FELT LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL OUT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520005
68,955 miles · Jun 15, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
WHILE DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE IN MORNING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST POWER AND THROTTLE CONTROL (WENT INTO LIMP MODE). I HAD TO MOVE OVER TO THE EMERGENCY WITHOUT POWER AND STOP THE VEHICLE. AFTER TURNING THE VEHICLE OFF FOR A FEW MINUTES, IT STARTED AND RAN OK. THEN ON 10 JUNE, THE SAME ISSUES OCCURRED AGAIN …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE IN MORNING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST POWER AND THROTTLE CONTROL (WENT INTO LIMP MODE). I HAD TO MOVE OVER TO THE EMERGENCY WITHOUT POWER AND STOP THE VEHICLE. AFTER TURNING THE VEHICLE OFF FOR A FEW MINUTES, IT STARTED AND RAN OK. THEN ON 10 JUNE, THE SAME ISSUES OCCURRED AGAIN AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS BUT IN LITTLE TRAFFIC. AGAIN ON 14 JUNE IT HAPPENED 3 TIMES WITHIN DRIVING 10 MILES AGAIN ON THE INTERSTATE AT HIGHWAY SPEED AND IN AFTERNOON RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. THE THIRD TIME AN OBD II DTC WAS ISSUED. UPON ARRIVAL HOME I SCANNED THE CODE AND IT WAS P2112 THROTTLE BODY STUCK CLOSED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10519936
70,500 miles · Jun 14, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System
MY VEHICLE IS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE 6 CYC WITH 4 WD. THIS WAS A NEW VEHICLE PURCHASED IN EARLY 2010 AS IT HAD 4.7 MILES ON IT WHEN PURCHASED AND I PUT MOST OF THOSE MILES ON IT DURING THE TEST DRIVE. WHEN TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEED RECENTLY IN HEAVY TRAFFIC THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST ALL ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. IT WAS AS IF THERE…
Read full complaint
MY VEHICLE IS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE 6 CYC WITH 4 WD. THIS WAS A NEW VEHICLE PURCHASED IN EARLY 2010 AS IT HAD 4.7 MILES ON IT WHEN PURCHASED AND I PUT MOST OF THOSE MILES ON IT DURING THE TEST DRIVE. WHEN TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEED RECENTLY IN HEAVY TRAFFIC THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST ALL ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. IT WAS AS IF THERE WAS NO GAS PEDAL IN THE VEHICLE AT ALL. NO SHUDDERING, OR CHUGGING AFTER THIS OCCURRED AND ABSOLUTELY NO WARNING AT ALL BEFORE IT OCCURRED. IT WAS EXTREMELY LUCKY THAT NO ONE WAS INJURED AS I ATTEMPTED TO MAKE MY WAY ACROSS 4 LANES OF TRAFFIC TO THE SHOULDER. THE VEHICLE NEVER SHUT OFF WHEN THIS OCCURRED. I THEN TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF, WAITED, AND THEN RESTARTED AND IT SEEMED TO RUN FINE. I TOOK IT TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP WHERE IT WAS PURCHASED TO ASSESS THE SITUATION. I WAS TOLD THE BATTERY WAS BAD WHICH THEY REPLACED. I QUESTIONED AS TO HOW A BATTERY COULD CAUSE THIS TYPE OF PROBLEM AS I UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE VEHICLE MECHANICS AND MY RESEARCH SHOWED THAT IT WAS MORE THAN LIKELY A THROTTLE BODY ISSUE AND I WAS ASSURED THAT BATTERY WAS MOST CERTAINLY THE ISSUE DUE TO THE COMPLEX NATURE OF VEHICLES TODAY AND THEIR ON BOARD COMPUTERS. WHEN THE BATTERY WAS REPLACED MY WIFE PICKED UP THE VEHICLE AND HAD JUST ENTERED THE INTERSTATE WHEN AT HIGHWAY SPEED THE SAME EXACT PROBLEM OCCURRED WHERE AN ACCIDENT WAS ALMOST CAUSED BY HER EFFORTS TO EXIT THE ROAD. AGAIN NO WARNING. WHEN IT WAS RESTARTED IT WAS DRIVEN BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP. TODAY, IT WAS CONFIRMED BY THE FORD DEALERSHIP THAT IN FACT IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY ISSUE THAT MY RESEARCH HAD SHOW IT TO BE, AND MORE SO, THE PART, WHICH IS SOMEHOW NOT A SAFETY RECALLED ITEM BY THE NHTSA, IS ON BACK-ORDER BY FORD BECAUSE OF THE SHEAR NUMBER OF THESE PARTS GOING BAD AND NEEDING TO BE REPLACED IN SO MANY VEHICLES. I NOW OWN A VEHICLE THAT CANNOT BE OPERATED SAFELY WITHOUT A SAFETY RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10519853
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.