← New search

2010 Ford Escape

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Escape years

Owner complaints for the 2010 Ford Escape are substantially higher than the model-year median of 996.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,764 reports with mileage · 305 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 558 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 508 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 493 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

29 crash reports3 fire reports19 injury reports

Engine complaints

493 reports
Clear category filter
14,499 miles · Nov 6, 2012
EnginePower Train

I HAVE A 2010 FORD ESCAPE THAT SURGES FORWARD WHEN I COME TO A STOP. THE RPM RISES AND I HAVE TO STAND ON THE BRAKE TO KEEP IT GOING FORWARD. NO FAULT LIGHTS COME ON. I HAVE HAD IT CHECKED A WEEK A GO, THEY COULD NOT FIND ANY PROBLEM. NO CODES OR ANYTHING. PLEASE HELP ME WITH THIS MATTER.I,M AFRAID TO HAVE MY WIFE DRIVE THIS CAR…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2010 FORD ESCAPE THAT SURGES FORWARD WHEN I COME TO A STOP. THE RPM RISES AND I HAVE TO STAND ON THE BRAKE TO KEEP IT GOING FORWARD. NO FAULT LIGHTS COME ON. I HAVE HAD IT CHECKED A WEEK A GO, THEY COULD NOT FIND ANY PROBLEM. NO CODES OR ANYTHING. PLEASE HELP ME WITH THIS MATTER.I,M AFRAID TO HAVE MY WIFE DRIVE THIS CAR. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10483489

37,925 miles · Nov 2, 2012
EngineFuel/propulsion System

MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON STEADILY OUT OF THE BLUE. TOOK IT TO FORD DEALER AND WAS TOLD I NEEDED TO REPLACE A FAULTY PURGE VALVE. PART NUMBER:9U5Z-9C915-H. I WAS TOLD THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM FOR ESCAPE'S AND FUSION'S. THERE WERE 3 ESCAPES TODAY HAVING THE SAME PART REPLACED. NOT UNDER WARRANTY AND $300. THERE IS A TE…

Read full complaint

MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON STEADILY OUT OF THE BLUE. TOOK IT TO FORD DEALER AND WAS TOLD I NEEDED TO REPLACE A FAULTY PURGE VALVE. PART NUMBER:9U5Z-9C915-H. I WAS TOLD THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM FOR ESCAPE'S AND FUSION'S. THERE WERE 3 ESCAPES TODAY HAVING THE SAME PART REPLACED. NOT UNDER WARRANTY AND $300. THERE IS A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN ON THIS ISSUE, BUT NOT A RECALL. SEEMS LIKE A COMMON DEFECT COULD HAVE SAFETY REPERCUSSIONS SINCE IS THE FUEL FUMES NOT EXHAUSTING PROPERLY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10483203

22,000 miles · Oct 30, 2012
Engine

FIRST INCIDENT: NOV 2011 - SLOWED TO ENTER ROUND ABOUT AND VEHICLE STALLED/LOST ALL POWER. I DRIFTED ACROSS THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE, PUT IT IN PARK, AND IT RESTARTED. SECOND INCIDENT: OCT 26, 2012 - STOPPED TO MAKE A TURN AND VEHICLE STALLED/LOST POWER. PUT IT IN PARK AND IT RESTARTED, DEALER SAID IT WAS THROTTLE BODY AND R…

Read full complaint

FIRST INCIDENT: NOV 2011 - SLOWED TO ENTER ROUND ABOUT AND VEHICLE STALLED/LOST ALL POWER. I DRIFTED ACROSS THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE, PUT IT IN PARK, AND IT RESTARTED. SECOND INCIDENT: OCT 26, 2012 - STOPPED TO MAKE A TURN AND VEHICLE STALLED/LOST POWER. PUT IT IN PARK AND IT RESTARTED, DEALER SAID IT WAS THROTTLE BODY AND REPLACED IT (AND CHARGED ME) AND SAID THERE WERE NO TECHNICAL BULLETINS ON THIS PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10482602

45,862 miles · Oct 9, 2012
EnginePower Train

MY WIFE AND I EACH DRIVE A FORD ESCAPE, ONE A 2010 AND THE OTHER A 2009. IN THE LAST MONTH WE HAVE EACH EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN AND UNEXPECTED COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER. IN HER CASE, SHE WAS DRIVING ON AN INTERSTATE AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS IN MODERATE TRAFFIC. I WAS DRIVING IN SUBURBAN TRAFFIC AT 40 MPH. IN EACH CASE, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY S…

Read full complaint

MY WIFE AND I EACH DRIVE A FORD ESCAPE, ONE A 2010 AND THE OTHER A 2009. IN THE LAST MONTH WE HAVE EACH EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN AND UNEXPECTED COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER. IN HER CASE, SHE WAS DRIVING ON AN INTERSTATE AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS IN MODERATE TRAFFIC. I WAS DRIVING IN SUBURBAN TRAFFIC AT 40 MPH. IN EACH CASE, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY STOPPED, NO POWER, AND THE WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON. AFTER ABOUT FIVE MINUTES, YOU WERE ABLE TO RE-START, BUT THE PROBLEM PERSISTS, SO IT IS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE THE CAR. THE REPAIR COSTS ABOUT $550 FOR EACH ONE, THE DEALER INDICATED IT WAS A THROTTLE BODY AND MOTOR ASSEMBLY.. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10479355

35,000 miles · Oct 7, 2012
EnginePower Train

AS I WAS DRIVING THE CAR THE THROTTLE SUDDENLY WOULD NOT LET ME 'GO' ANY FURTHER AND THE CAR SLOWED TO A STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. WHEN STOPPED, IT SHUDDERED IN PLACE UNTIL I TURNED THE CAR OFF. THIS HAPPENED ANOTHER TIME JUST AFTER A BUSY INTERSECTION, BUT FORD APPARENTLY DOES NOT DEEM THIS A SAFETY CONCERN, EVEN THOUGH T…

Read full complaint

AS I WAS DRIVING THE CAR THE THROTTLE SUDDENLY WOULD NOT LET ME 'GO' ANY FURTHER AND THE CAR SLOWED TO A STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. WHEN STOPPED, IT SHUDDERED IN PLACE UNTIL I TURNED THE CAR OFF. THIS HAPPENED ANOTHER TIME JUST AFTER A BUSY INTERSECTION, BUT FORD APPARENTLY DOES NOT DEEM THIS A SAFETY CONCERN, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A FAMILY VEHICLE AND THE CONSEQUENCES FOR PROBLEMS LIKE THIS COULD BE TERRIBLE. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN IN THE SHOP 5 TIMES IN THE LAST YEAR FOR THE ABOVE PROBLEM TWICE, ANOTHER COUPLE OF TIMES FOR LEAKING TRANSMISSION FLUID (WHICH I AM ALSO LED TO BELIEVE COULD CAUSE THE CAR TO STOP IN TRAFFIC IF THE LEAK REMAINS UNDETECTED ONE OF THESE TIMES), AND ANOTHER FOR HARD SHIFTS BOTH ACCELERATING AND DECELERATING. ALL OF THESE PROBLEMS ARE ONES THAT FORD SEEMS UNABLE TO FIX AND DOESN'T SEEM TO CARE HAPPENED. I KEEP WAITING FOR A RECALL TO BE ISSUED FOR AT LEAST SOME OF THESE PROBLEMS, SINCE IN SEVERAL SITUATIONS I DO FEEL VERY STRONGLY THIS WAS A SAFETY ISSUE AND DO NOT APPRECIATE MY CHILDREN HAVING TO RIDE IN AN UNRELIABLE CAR. I ALSO DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY TO THROW AT A 2010 CAR EVERY COUPLE OF MONTHS. I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR LOOKING INTO THESE PROBLEMS. THANKS! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10478933

41,990 miles · Oct 6, 2012
EngineVehicle Speed Control

MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING TO SCHOOL AND AS SHE WAS PULLING OFF THE HIGHWAY HER ESCAPE STOPPED RESPONDING TO THE ACCELERATOR, SO SHE PULLED OFF THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, TRYING HER BEST TO NOT GET HIT BY CARS GOING MUCH FASTER THAN SHE COULD MOVE, AND PUT THE TRUCK INTO PARK. I WAS NOW TALKING TO HER OVER HER CELL AND I ASKED TRIED TO…

Read full complaint

MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING TO SCHOOL AND AS SHE WAS PULLING OFF THE HIGHWAY HER ESCAPE STOPPED RESPONDING TO THE ACCELERATOR, SO SHE PULLED OFF THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, TRYING HER BEST TO NOT GET HIT BY CARS GOING MUCH FASTER THAN SHE COULD MOVE, AND PUT THE TRUCK INTO PARK. I WAS NOW TALKING TO HER OVER HER CELL AND I ASKED TRIED TO PUSH ON THE ACCELERATOR, BUT NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN, AS IF THE GAS PEDAL WAS BROKEN. SHE SAW A LITTLE WRENCH IN THE LOWER LEFT SIDE OF THE DASH, SO I ASKED HER TO TURN THE TRUCK OFF. AFTER A MINUTE I HAD HER TURN THE KEY BACK ON, AND THE LIGHT WENT OFF AND THE TRUCK WORKED FINE. PLUS, THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS OFF. TWO DAYS LATER THE SAME THING HAPPENED, BUT THIS TIME SHE WAS DRIVING DOWN A RESIDENTIAL STREET. TRUCK LOST POWER, AND THE GAS PEDAL HAD NO CONTROL AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. SHE MANAGED TO AVOID GETTING HIT AS SHE SLOWED DOWN AND CARS CAME UPON HER QUICKLY. SHE MANAGED TO CRUISE LONG ENOUGH TO GET NEAR OUR HOUSE AND JUMPED IN AND SAW THE SAME THING SHE WAS EXPERIENCING. WE PARKED THE ESCAPE IN THE DRIVEWAY AND THE IDLE SEEMED FINE, BUT THE ACCELERATOR HAD NO RESPONSE. I THEN TURNED THE KEY OFF AND BACK ON AND THE LITTLE WRENCH LIGHT WAS GONE AND THE ACCELERATOR WAS FULLY FUNCTIONAL AGAIN. I DECIDED TO TAKE IT IN TO FORD, AS IT HAS AN EXTENDED WARRANTY ON IT. THEY CALLED US BACK LATER ON THAT DAY AND SAID THERE IS NOTHING THEY COULD DO, AS THEY COULD NOT SEE ANY CODES IN THE COMPUTER. I HAVE READ THIS IS A FAIRLY COMMON PROBLEM, AND IN MY OPINION, VERY UNSAFE. WHEN THE TRUCK GOES INTO THIS "LIMP MODE"YOU CANNOT GET OUT OF THE WAY OF ONGOING TRAFFIC. PLUS, NOW I AM AFRAID TO HAVE HER DRIVE THIS FAR FROM MY HOME. I DON'T WANT HER TO GET STRANDED, AND IF THE DEALER CAN'T FIX IT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T FIND A PROBLEM. WHAT AM I TO DO? I HOPE SOMETHING GETS FIGURED OUT SOON. THIS IS NOT SAFE, NOR AN ACCEPTABLE SERVICE RESPONSE! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10478838

21,133 miles · Oct 6, 2012
Engine

IN THE SPAN OF 4 DAYS MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE XLS ENGINE FAILED TO TURN OVER 3 TIMES. THE FIRST TWO INCIDENTS WERE RESOLVED BY JUMP STARTING PROBABLY DUE TO LOW BATTERY OUTPUT. SO YESTERDAY, I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL MECHANIC SHOP AND REPLACED THE FACTORY-INSTALLED BATTERY THINKING THIS WAS IT. TODAY THIS MORNING, AS MY FAMIL…

Read full complaint

IN THE SPAN OF 4 DAYS MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE XLS ENGINE FAILED TO TURN OVER 3 TIMES. THE FIRST TWO INCIDENTS WERE RESOLVED BY JUMP STARTING PROBABLY DUE TO LOW BATTERY OUTPUT. SO YESTERDAY, I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL MECHANIC SHOP AND REPLACED THE FACTORY-INSTALLED BATTERY THINKING THIS WAS IT. TODAY THIS MORNING, AS MY FAMILY AND I WERE ABOUT TO HEAD OUT FOR GROCERY SHOPPING, THE IGNITION WON'T START AGAIN. SO I CALLED FOR A JUMP STARTING SERVICE THROUGH MY INSURANCE AND THIS TIME IT WON'T START AT ALL. IT WAS TOWED AND MOVED TO THE MECHANIC SHOP FOR FURTHER INSPECTION. SINCE IT WASN'T A FORD DEALERSHIP, THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO DO A COMPLETE DIAGNOSIS. BUT BASED ON WHAT THEY WERE ABLE TO DO, IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN IGNITION AND ENGINE. I HAD THIS FOR TWO YEARS NOW ORIGINALLY PURCHASED FROM AAFES MILITARY SALES KOREA AND THE VEHICLE HAS NEVER BEEN IN A MAJOR ACCIDENT. I AM COMPLETELY BAFFLED AND IRRITATED BY ALL THIS EVENT BECAUSE THERE SHOULD BE NO REASON FOR THE CAR TO STALL LIKE THAT. CURRENTLY I AM OVERSEAS IN KOREA WITH THE US ARMY AND THERE ARE ONLY A COUPLE OF FORD DEALERSHIPS OVER AND THEY ARE NOT NEAR BY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10478825

36,000 miles · Sep 28, 2012
EnginePower Train

WHILE TRAVELING ABOUT 20 MPH DOWN THE STREET, THE VEHICLE COMPLETELY LOST RESPONSIVENESS TO PRESSURE ON THE GAS PEDAL. THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON INDICATED A POWER TRAIN MALFUNCTION. I DRIFTED OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED THE CAR OFF. I THEN WAITED ABOUT A MINUTE AND TURNED THE CAR BACK ON AGAIN. EVERYTHING WAS FINE …

Read full complaint

WHILE TRAVELING ABOUT 20 MPH DOWN THE STREET, THE VEHICLE COMPLETELY LOST RESPONSIVENESS TO PRESSURE ON THE GAS PEDAL. THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON INDICATED A POWER TRAIN MALFUNCTION. I DRIFTED OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED THE CAR OFF. I THEN WAITED ABOUT A MINUTE AND TURNED THE CAR BACK ON AGAIN. EVERYTHING WAS FINE AND THE WRENCH LIGHT WENT AWAY. THE CAR DROVE FINE FOR ANOTHER 50 MILES OR SO. THEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN. THERE IS NO WARNING AND WHEN IT HAPPENS NOTHING YOU DO CAN MAKE THE CAR RESPOND. TURNING THE CAR OFF THEN ON AGAIN SOLVED THIS PROBLEM. THROUGH SEARCHING THROUGH THIS DATABASE, IT IS APPARENT THIS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH FORD ESCAPE THROTTLE BODIES. MOST LIKELY A DEFECT IN THE PART. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10477350

47,428 miles · Sep 11, 2012
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

THE PROBLEM WAS RANDOMLY DEMONSTRATED SEVERAL TIMES BETWEEN 8/31/12 AND 9/4/12. THE ACCELERATOR WOULD SEEM TO STOP WORKING OR BECOME UNRESPONSIVE, MOST OFTEN AT SPEEDS OF 20-30 MPH. THERE WOULD BE SPUTTERING, STALLING, AND THEN TOTAL STOPPAGE.. THE MOTOR WAS RUNNING BUT THERE SEEMED TO BE NO FUEL FLOW. I WOULD TURN IT OFF, W…

Read full complaint

THE PROBLEM WAS RANDOMLY DEMONSTRATED SEVERAL TIMES BETWEEN 8/31/12 AND 9/4/12. THE ACCELERATOR WOULD SEEM TO STOP WORKING OR BECOME UNRESPONSIVE, MOST OFTEN AT SPEEDS OF 20-30 MPH. THERE WOULD BE SPUTTERING, STALLING, AND THEN TOTAL STOPPAGE.. THE MOTOR WAS RUNNING BUT THERE SEEMED TO BE NO FUEL FLOW. I WOULD TURN IT OFF, WAIT SEVERAL SECONDS, RESTART IT, AND EVERYTHING WOULD WORK SMOOTHLY UNTIL, WITH NO WARNING, THE PATTERN WOULD REPEAT ITSELF. IT OCCURRED FIVE TIMES /3 MILES, TWO TIMES/1 MILE, AND TWO TIMES/0.5 MILE. EARLY ON 9/4, THE PATTERN REPEATED THREE TIMES ON THE WAY TO THE REPAIR SHOP. THESE INCIDENTS PRODUCED ANXIETY FOR ME AND I WAS GOING SLOW. WE DID NOT DRIVE THE VEHICLE OVER THE HOLIDAY WEEKEND AS WE WERE CONCERNED THAT THIS WOULD HAPPEN ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS WHEN WE WOULD BE TRAVELING AT HIGH SPEEDS.THE ERROR TROUBLE CODES WERE PO685, P2111, P2112. HE SAID THE CAR WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE UNTIL IT WAS REPAIRED. SINCE THE MECHANIC REPORTED "THROTTLE BODY" BEING THE PROBLEM I RESEARCHED THE THROTTLE BODY AS IT RELATES TO THE FORD ESCAPE. IT CAUSES ME GREAT CONCERN THAT THIS HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED TO BE A DANGEROUS AND POTENTIALLY LIFE-THREATENING PROBLEM ON THE ESCAPE SINCE 2000 AND I BOUGHT 3 NEW ESCAPES WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD; A 2002, A 2007, AND THE 2010 ESCAPE, AND THERE HAS BEEN NO EFFECTIVE, CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN TO RESOLVE THIS. THE DEALERSHIP HAS SAID THERE WILL BE NO REIMBURSEMENT OF THE $475.00 AND THIS PART IS NOT UNDER ANY WARRANTY. ALTHOUGH THE MONEY IS AN ISSUE, THE GREATER ISSUE IS THE NEED TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS. I HAVE THE OLD PART THAT WAS REPLACED AND I AM WILLING TO DO WHATEVER I CAN TO FORCE THIS PROBLEM TO BE RESOLVED.IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC SAFETY I URGE YOU TO ISSUE AN IMMEDIATE RECALL UNTIL THIS PROBLEM IS RESOLVED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10475123

42,000 miles · Sep 5, 2012
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

THE VEHICLE'S ACCELERATOR (GAS) PEDAL RANDOMLY STOPS WORKING RESULTING IN IMMEDIATE LOSS OF SPEED AND POWER TO THE ENGINE. ACCELERATOR IS UNRESPONSIVE AND VEHICLE WILL SPUTTER/CRAWL TO 5 MPH UNTIL IGNITION IS TURNED OFF AND CAR RESTARTED. AFTER RESTART, VEHICLE RUNS NORMAL UNTIL PROBLEM OCCURS AGAIN (SOMETIMES WITHIN MINUTES).…

Read full complaint

THE VEHICLE'S ACCELERATOR (GAS) PEDAL RANDOMLY STOPS WORKING RESULTING IN IMMEDIATE LOSS OF SPEED AND POWER TO THE ENGINE. ACCELERATOR IS UNRESPONSIVE AND VEHICLE WILL SPUTTER/CRAWL TO 5 MPH UNTIL IGNITION IS TURNED OFF AND CAR RESTARTED. AFTER RESTART, VEHICLE RUNS NORMAL UNTIL PROBLEM OCCURS AGAIN (SOMETIMES WITHIN MINUTES). PROBLEM OCCURS RANDOMLY AS LITTLE AS 1 TIME PER TRIP TO AS MANY AS 8 TIMES IN A 25 MINUTE COMMUTE. PROBLEM OCCURRED 12 TIMES THE OTHER DAY WITH MANY OF THEM ON A MULTILANE INTERSTATE WHILE TRAVELING 65 MPH IN THE FAR LEFT LANE WITH NOWHERE TO QUICKLY PULL-OFF THE ROAD. VERY DANGEROUS WHEN IT OCCURS ON THE INTERSTATE AND YOU QUICKLY HAVE TO MANEUVER TO CHANGE LANES AND PULL OFF THE ROAD OR RISK COMING TO A STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUSY HIGHWAY. THIS PROBLEM ALSO CAUSES THE VEHICLE TO SOMETIMES RUN ROUGH AND NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE EMISSIONS. THE ERROR CODE FROM THE VEHICLE'S COMPUTER IS P2112 WHICH IS RELATED TO THE THROTTLE BODY. I HAVE RESEARCHED THIS PROBLEM ON THE INTERNET AND DISCOVERED IT'S AN EXTREMELY COMMON AND VERY SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH THIS VEHICLE. A RECALL NEEDS TO BE ISSUED BEFORE SOMEONE GETS KILLED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10473925

Official recalls

3

16V777000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump

Oct 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.

14V284000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System

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.

10V222000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission

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

4

DP15001 · 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.

Go deeper into Ford Escape problems