NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Fuel/propulsion System complaints
440 reportsClear category filter43,000 miles · Sep 14, 2013
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Fuel/propulsion System
CAR THROTTLE ALMOST STALLS TO ROUGH IDLE , SPUTTERS BUT CANNOT GIVE IT GAS OR REV ENGINE WRENCH SYMBOL LIGHTS UP YOU MUST TURN OFF CAR TO RESTART AFTER ABOUT 10 TIMES AND IT HAPPENING EVERY MILE OR SO THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON AND STAYS ON EVEN AFTER RESTARTING. THIS WILL HAPPEN OUT OF NOWHERE WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED BUT I…
Read full complaint
CAR THROTTLE ALMOST STALLS TO ROUGH IDLE , SPUTTERS BUT CANNOT GIVE IT GAS OR REV ENGINE WRENCH SYMBOL LIGHTS UP YOU MUST TURN OFF CAR TO RESTART AFTER ABOUT 10 TIMES AND IT HAPPENING EVERY MILE OR SO THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON AND STAYS ON EVEN AFTER RESTARTING. THIS WILL HAPPEN OUT OF NOWHERE WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED BUT IDLES JUST ENOUGH TO PULL OVER TO SAFETY ! RESTART AND DRIVE A MIKE AND EITHER JUST IDLING OR ACCELERATING IT JUST QUITS GOING . I CALLED TAYLOR FORD AND WAS TOLD I WAS OUT OF WARRANTY BUT NEED THROTTLE BODY AND APPROX $450 ! SO THEY TOO KNOW IT'S AN ISSUE! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10543605
63,000 miles · Sep 11, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
STOPPED AT LIGHT. GOT TO 20 MPH THEN ENGINE SHUT OFF. COASTED 50 FEET SHIFTED TO NEUTRAL RESTARTED CAR SHOOK, BUT GOT ME TO SAFETY. GOT TOWED. ERROR CODE P2112. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10543164
50,000 miles · Sep 11, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
AFTER STOPPING AT A STOP LIGHT I PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE THROUGH THE INTERSECTION WHEN MY FORD ESCAPE BEGAN TO JERK, THEN SEEMED TO DIE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INTERSECTION. THERE WAS NO CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AND AFTER LISTENING TO THE ENGINE I REALIZED THAT IT WAS STILL RUNNING, BUT THERE WAS NO GAS GETTING TO THE ENGINE WHEN I P…
Read full complaint
AFTER STOPPING AT A STOP LIGHT I PROCEEDED TO ACCELERATE THROUGH THE INTERSECTION WHEN MY FORD ESCAPE BEGAN TO JERK, THEN SEEMED TO DIE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INTERSECTION. THERE WAS NO CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AND AFTER LISTENING TO THE ENGINE I REALIZED THAT IT WAS STILL RUNNING, BUT THERE WAS NO GAS GETTING TO THE ENGINE WHEN I PRESSED ON THE ACCELERATOR. I LET THE CAR ROLL OUT OF THE INTERSECTION, TURNED OFF THE ENGINE AND RESTARTED IT. AFTER ANOTHER MILE UPON STOPPING BEFORE MAKING A LEFT HAND TURN IT STOPPED AGAIN AFTER GAINING UP TO ABOUT 10 MPH. I TURNED THE ENGINE OFF AGAIN AND WHEN ATTEMPTING TO START IT CRANKED, BUT WOULD NOT TURN OVER. ON MY THIRD ATTEMPT TO RESTART THE ENGINE IT TURNED OVER AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10543017
47,700 miles · Sep 10, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING APPROX. 40MPH OVER A FREEWAY OVERPASS, THE CAR LURCHED REPEATEDLY, AND SLOWED WAY DOWN. I COULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. I WAS ABLE TO EVENTUALLY GET IT PULLED OVER, TURN IT OFF AND RESTART IT. FOR THE NEXT DAY AND A HALF, IT WOULD DIE ALMOST EVERY TIME I CAME TO A STOP FOR MORE THAN 30 SECONDS,…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING APPROX. 40MPH OVER A FREEWAY OVERPASS, THE CAR LURCHED REPEATEDLY, AND SLOWED WAY DOWN. I COULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. I WAS ABLE TO EVENTUALLY GET IT PULLED OVER, TURN IT OFF AND RESTART IT. FOR THE NEXT DAY AND A HALF, IT WOULD DIE ALMOST EVERY TIME I CAME TO A STOP FOR MORE THAN 30 SECONDS, OR ANY TIME I TRIED TO DRIVE UP MY INCLINED DRIVEWAY. I RESTED IT THE NEXT DAY (SUNDAY) AND MONDAY MORNING DROVE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR REPAIR. IT DID NOT DIE ON THE WAY TO THE DEALERSHIP. NOW THE DEALERSHIP HAS IT AND THEY HAVE ROAD TESTED IT 2 OR 3 TIMES AND CAN'T GET IT TO REPEAT THE PROBLEM OR SHOW CODES. I'VE FOUND SEVERAL LINKS ONLINE TO PEOPLE HAVING THE EXACT SAME PROBLEM AND IT TURNS OUT TO BE THE THROTTLE BODY. HOWEVER, THE FORD DEALER SAYS THEY CANNOT FIX IT UNDER WARRANTY UNLESS IT SHOWS THEM CODES OR REPEATS THE BEHAVIOR FOR THEM. THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO JUST TAKE MY WORD FOR IT THAT THIS HAPPENED. AS IT'S APPARENTLY AN INTERMITTENT PROBLEM, WHO KNOWS WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN? SO IF IT DOESN'T DO IT FOR THEM IN THE NEXT DAY, I'LL HAVE TO PICK THE CAR BACK UP UNFIXED, AND AM TERRIFIED TO DRIVE IT ON THE FREEWAY FOR FEAR OF BEING KILLED WHEN IT LOSES POWER AT 65MPH AND CAUSES AN ACCIDENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542952
61,478 miles · Sep 10, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE, WOULD MISS FIRE AND STOP RUNNING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542878
52,000 miles · Sep 9, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING ALONG & SUDDENLY LOST ALL THROTTLE. A WRENCH APPEARED ON MY INSTRUMENT PANEL & IT WAS RUNNING VERY ROUGH. I WAS ABLE TO IDLE OVER INTO A PARKING LOT, BUT HAD NO THROTTLE POWER. I SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF & JUST SAT THERE, THINKING ABOUT MY OPTIONS. I TRIED TO START IT & IT STARTED, SO I DROVE IT STRAIGHT TO A SHOP,…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ALONG & SUDDENLY LOST ALL THROTTLE. A WRENCH APPEARED ON MY INSTRUMENT PANEL & IT WAS RUNNING VERY ROUGH. I WAS ABLE TO IDLE OVER INTO A PARKING LOT, BUT HAD NO THROTTLE POWER. I SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF & JUST SAT THERE, THINKING ABOUT MY OPTIONS. I TRIED TO START IT & IT STARTED, SO I DROVE IT STRAIGHT TO A SHOP, WHERE THEY HOOKED IT UP TO THEIR DIAGNOSTIC MACHINE. THE WRENCH IN THE INSTRUMENT PANEL WAS NO LONGER THERE & THE VEHICLE DIDN'T THROW ANY CODES. THE MECHANIC TOLD ME TO DRIVE IT & CONTACT FORD THAT NEXT DAY. I CALLED THE FORD DEALER & WAS TOLD THERE ARE NO RECALLS ON THIS. SINCE JUNE, THIS HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES & IT FINALLY THREW A CODE IN WHICH THE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON, SO I HAD MY MECHANIC TAKE A LOOK AT IT. HE REMOVED THE THROTTLE BODY & CLEANED THE PLATES. IT SEEMED TO DO MUCH BETTER, UNTIL A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. IT'S STARTED IT AGAIN & IS NOW HAPPENING MUCH MORE FREQUENTLY. ON 08/27/2013, I WAS DRIVING ON A HIGHWAY IN THE PASSING LANE, GOING ABOUT 60 MPH WHEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN. I COULD HAVE BEEN REAR-ENDED! I WAS ABLE TO LIMP IT OVER TO THE SHOULDER, WHERE I SHUT IT OFF, WAITED, & THEN STARTED IT BACK UP AGAIN. IT HAPPENED THREE TIMES IN ABOUT A 15 MILE PERIOD ON 09/06/2013 & TWO TIMES ON 09/08/2013. ON 09/06/2013, I AGAIN CALLED THE LOCAL FORD DEALER & SPOKE TO SOMEONE IN PARTS. I WAS TOLD THE PART I NEEDED WAS RECALLED & WAS ALSO ON BACK ORDER (3,800 PARTS BEHIND). I CALLED BACK TO SPEAK TO SOMEONE IN THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT & WAS TOLD THE PARTS PERSON WAS WRONG, BECAUSE THE PART HAD NOT BEEN RECALLED, ALTHOUGH HE HAD THREE CARS THERE WAITING ON THE SAME PART FOR THE SAME EXACT PROBLEM. IF THIS IS A KNOWN CONSTANT PROBLEM, WHY HASN'T THERE BEEN A RECALL? SOMEONE IS GOING TO GET HURT IN A REAR-ENDER ACCIDENT & I HOPE IT'S NOT ME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542586
61,000 miles · Sep 8, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING HOME WITH MY FIVE YEAR OLD SON WHEN I NOTICED MY VEHICLE SEEM TO BE RUNNING ROUGH. FIRST, I NOTICED A ROUGH IDLE WHEN I STOPPED AT A STOP LIGHT. THEN, WHILE TURNING ACCROSS ON COMING TRAFFIC THE VEHICLE LOOSES ALL POWER WITH NO THROTTLE RESPONSE AND THE ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. AT THIS POINT I WAS STILL IN THE WAY…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING HOME WITH MY FIVE YEAR OLD SON WHEN I NOTICED MY VEHICLE SEEM TO BE RUNNING ROUGH. FIRST, I NOTICED A ROUGH IDLE WHEN I STOPPED AT A STOP LIGHT. THEN, WHILE TURNING ACCROSS ON COMING TRAFFIC THE VEHICLE LOOSES ALL POWER WITH NO THROTTLE RESPONSE AND THE ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. AT THIS POINT I WAS STILL IN THE WAY OF ON COMING TRAFFIC AND COULD NOT ACCELERATE TO FINISH THE TURN. THANK GOD I DID IDLE TO SAFETY. I THEN STOPPED ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND PUT THE VEHICLE IN PARK AND OBSERVED A VERY ROUGH IDLE AND NO THROTTLE RESPONSE AT ALL. I SHUT OFF THE VEHICLE AND RESTARTED IT AFTER THIRTY SECONDS AND IT RAN NORMAL AGAIN WITH THE ENGINE LIGHT OFF. I IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A PARTS STORE TO HAVE THE THE ECM SCANNED FOR TROUBLE CODES. THE TECH COULD NOT RECOVER OR READ ANY CODES AT THAT TIME. I FOUND THAT TROUBLING AT THE TIME BUT FOUND OUT LATER THAT NOT ALL SCAN TOOLS CAN ACCESS STORED CODES. I HAD THIS OCCUR TWICE THE NEXT DAY WHILE DRIVING TO WORK. I THEN CALLED MY LOCAL FORD DEALER TO SCHEDULE SERVICE AND WHEN I TOLD HIM THE SYMPTOMS HE IMMEDIATELY KNEW THE PROBLEM. I ORDERED A NEW THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY PER THEIR INSTRUCTION AND ASKED IF THERE ARE ANY RECALLS OR TSB'S ON THIS ISSUE IF IT'S THAT COMMON. THE DEALER CHECKED AND FOUND A TSB ON THIS PROBLEM BUT NO RECALLS. I PERSONALLY FEEL THIS IS DEFINATELY A SAFETY CONCERN AND SHOULD TREATED AS THAT BEFORE SOMEONE DOES GET HURT OR WORSE, KILLED IN AN ACCIDENT. I CALLED FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE THE NEXT DAY TO FILE A COMPLAINT AND FIND OUT WHY THEY AREN'T BEING PROACTIVE WITH THIS SERIOUS ISSUE. I WAS TOLD THAT THEY HAVE NO KNOWN SAFETY RECALLS OR TSB'S AT THIS TIME. I WAS ALSO TOLD THAT THIS PROBLEM WAS NOT SOMETHING THEY HAD ENCOUNTERED VERY OFTEN. SINCE THEN, I HAVE RESEARCHED THIS AND FOUND THAT IT IS VERY KNOWN AND BEING INVESTIGATED AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU.
NHTSA ODI #10542475
75,000 miles · Sep 6, 2013
Fuel/propulsion System
MY SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE SHOP TO GET IT CHECKED OUT & THEY DID A SMOKE TEST & DETERMINED THAT MY CAR WAS LEAKING GAS VAPORS FROM THE VAPOR LOCK SYSTEM - TO BE SPECIFIC THE FUEL FILLER AREA. IT COST ME $500 TO FIX. THE SHOP SAID MY CAR WAS LEAKING A LOT OF GAS VAPORS WHICH IS DANGEROUS. THANK GOO…
Read full complaint
MY SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE SHOP TO GET IT CHECKED OUT & THEY DID A SMOKE TEST & DETERMINED THAT MY CAR WAS LEAKING GAS VAPORS FROM THE VAPOR LOCK SYSTEM - TO BE SPECIFIC THE FUEL FILLER AREA. IT COST ME $500 TO FIX. THE SHOP SAID MY CAR WAS LEAKING A LOT OF GAS VAPORS WHICH IS DANGEROUS. THANK GOODNESS I DONT SMOKE. THERE SEEM TO BE QUITE A FEW OF THESE COMPLAINTS & THERE SHOULD BE A RECALL ON THIS. APARENTLY FROM WHAT I HAVE BEEN TOLD - FORD HAS KNOWN ABOUT THIS ISSUE SINCE 2006 & YET THEY STILL PUT THEM IN VEHICLES.
NHTSA ODI #10542252
70,000 miles · Aug 31, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
THE VEHICLE LOST POWER WHILE DRIVING AT RELATIVELY CONSTANT SPEED. THE ENGINE HESITATED, CAR DID NOT ACCELERATE WHEN THE GAS PEDAL WAS APPLIED. THE ENGINE THEN STALLED. I PULLED OVER, RESTARTED THE ENGINE, AND THE CAR SEEM TO RUN NORMALLY AFTER THIS FIRST INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE HAS CONTINUED TO INTERMITTENTLY HAVE THE SAME I…
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE LOST POWER WHILE DRIVING AT RELATIVELY CONSTANT SPEED. THE ENGINE HESITATED, CAR DID NOT ACCELERATE WHEN THE GAS PEDAL WAS APPLIED. THE ENGINE THEN STALLED. I PULLED OVER, RESTARTED THE ENGINE, AND THE CAR SEEM TO RUN NORMALLY AFTER THIS FIRST INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE HAS CONTINUED TO INTERMITTENTLY HAVE THE SAME ISSUE, ALTHOUGH IT MAY NEED TO BE RESTARTED A FEW TIMES BEFORE ACTING NORMAL AGAIN. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED BECAUSE IT STALLED AND SEEM UNABLE TO MAKE THE DRIVE HOME. THE ENGINE THROTTLE WAS CLEANED IN AUGUST BY A MECHANIC, BUT STALLED REPEATEDLY 3 DAYS LATER. USING DRY GAS AND KEEPING THE TANK NEARLY FULL HAS NOT SOLVED THE ISSUE EITHER. MY EXPERIENCE SEEMS SIMILAR TO MANY COMPLAINTS FOUND AT THIS WEBSITE AND OTHER PLACES ON THE INTERNET. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10538200
84,345 miles · Aug 30, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion System
WHILE DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY, THE ENGINE CUT OUT AND SPIT AND SPUTTERED. VEHICLE RESTARTED AND WENT ABOUT A MILE AND DID THE SAME THING. AT THAT POINT A TOW TRUCK WAS CALLED AND VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A SERVICE SHOP WHERE THE THROTTLE BODY WAS REPLACED.
NHTSA ODI #10538161
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.