NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Power Train complaints
508 reportsClear category filter55,131 miles · Jul 5, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
AS I WAS TRAVELING DOWN THE ROAD AND WAS SLOWING DOWN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACTED LIKE TRANSMISSION KICKED INTO NEUTRAL BUT WHEN I LOOKED DOWN I SAW OPEN WRENCH SYMBOL IN CLUSTER LIT UP AND RPM WAS AT IDLE AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO THROTTLE BEING APPLIED AND ENGINE WAS RUNNING AWFUL. I HAD TO PULL OFF ONTO SHOULDER AND CUT IGNITI…
Read full complaint
AS I WAS TRAVELING DOWN THE ROAD AND WAS SLOWING DOWN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACTED LIKE TRANSMISSION KICKED INTO NEUTRAL BUT WHEN I LOOKED DOWN I SAW OPEN WRENCH SYMBOL IN CLUSTER LIT UP AND RPM WAS AT IDLE AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO THROTTLE BEING APPLIED AND ENGINE WAS RUNNING AWFUL. I HAD TO PULL OFF ONTO SHOULDER AND CUT IGNITION OFF AND RESTART VEHICLE BUT WAS ONLY ABLE TO MAKE IT A BOUT A 100 YDS. WHEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN. WE CAUGHT A RIDE HOME AND I CAME BACK WITH MY SCANNER AND DROVE IT DOWN THE HIGHWAY AND IT DID IT AGAIN AT 55 MPH. SO I PULLED OFF THE ROAD AND SCANNED FOR CODES AND IT HAD PENDING CODE P2111- THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL SYSTEM STUCK OPEN. I PURCHASED NEW THROTTLE BODY AND INSTALLED MYSELF AT A COST OF 171.68 LESS TAX. NOT COVERED BY POWERTRAIN WARRANTY. CAR OPERATES FINE SO FAR. 2010 FORD ESCAPE 3.0LITER V-6 WITH 55 THOUSAND MILES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523414
58,000 miles · Jul 5, 2013
Power Train
THE CAR HAD BEEN PARKED AND WHEN I STARTED IT AND BACKED UP THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON AND IT HAD NOT POWER THE SECOND TIME I WAS STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT AND WHEN THE LIGHT CHANGED I STEPPED ON THE GAS AND HAD NO POWER AND THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON IT WAS HAPPEN SEVERAL TIMES I TURN THE CAR OFF AND RESTART IT AND IT DRIVES FINE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523377
87,000 miles · Jul 4, 2013
Power Train
ON 06/12/2013 WHILE DRIVING ON A 2 LANE HIGHWAY THE ENGINE WENT INTO THE "LIMP" MODE WITH ROUGH IDLE AND NO POWER. THE WRENCH LIGHT ON THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER CAME ON. WE WERE ABLE TO STOP ON A SIDE STREET TO CHECK THE VEHICLE OUT. AFTER RESTARTING THE VEHICLE, IT RAN FINE FOR SEVERAL DAYS, THEN REPEATED THE SAME "LIMP" MODE TWIC…
Read full complaint
ON 06/12/2013 WHILE DRIVING ON A 2 LANE HIGHWAY THE ENGINE WENT INTO THE "LIMP" MODE WITH ROUGH IDLE AND NO POWER. THE WRENCH LIGHT ON THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER CAME ON. WE WERE ABLE TO STOP ON A SIDE STREET TO CHECK THE VEHICLE OUT. AFTER RESTARTING THE VEHICLE, IT RAN FINE FOR SEVERAL DAYS, THEN REPEATED THE SAME "LIMP" MODE TWICE IN A FEW MILES WITH A SHUT DOWN AND RESTART OF THE ENGINE CLEARING THE SYMPTOM. TODAY 07/04/2013 ON A 20 MILE TRIP THE VEHICLE WENT INTO THE "LIMP" MODE 6 DIFFERENT TIMES. A COUPLE OF THESE TIMES WERE ON A BUSY 2 LANE ROAD WITH NO SHOULDER ALMOST RESULTING IN BEING HIT IN THE REAR. THE VEHICLE CURRENTLY HAS 93500 MILES ON IT AND WILL BE PARKED UNTIL REPAIRS CAN BE MADE. FROM READING OTHER COMPLAINTS THIS ALSO SOUNDS LIKE A THROTTLE BODY ISSUE THAT OTHERS ARE HAVING. WE WERE FORTUNATE NOT TO BE INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT ON EACH OF THESE STALLS. I URGE THAT CONTINUED INVESTIGATION GO INTO THIS PROBLEM SO THAT IF IT IS THE ISSUE WITH OTHER VEHICLES THAT CAUSES THE STALLS THESE VEHICLES CAN BE RECALLED AND THE ISSUE CORRECTED BEFORE SOMEONE IS INVOLVED IN AN INJURY OR WORSE ACCIDENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523211
48,000 miles · Jul 4, 2013
Power Train
THE CAR STALLED IN AN INTERSECTION. NO LIGHT OR WARNING, JUST INSTANTLY STOPPED. CALLED THE DEALER, HE SAID NO LIGHT, NO CODE, NO IDEA. AFTER MULTIPLE MORE TIMES, IT FINALLY DID IT AND ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. IT INDICATED A BAD THROTTLE BODY. TOOK IT TO THE DEALER. HE CALLED A DAY LATER AND SAID PART WOULD NOT BE IN FOR OVER A MON…
Read full complaint
THE CAR STALLED IN AN INTERSECTION. NO LIGHT OR WARNING, JUST INSTANTLY STOPPED. CALLED THE DEALER, HE SAID NO LIGHT, NO CODE, NO IDEA. AFTER MULTIPLE MORE TIMES, IT FINALLY DID IT AND ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. IT INDICATED A BAD THROTTLE BODY. TOOK IT TO THE DEALER. HE CALLED A DAY LATER AND SAID PART WOULD NOT BE IN FOR OVER A MONTH. ALTHOUGH THE VEHICLE IS STILL UNDER EMISSIONS AND DRIVE TRAIN WARRANTY, APPARENTLY THE THROTTLE BODY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EITHER. I FEEL FORD SHOULD RECALL, PAY FOR REPAIR AND COMPENSATE IF PART IS UNAVAILABLE FOR OVER A MONTH. THERE IS NOT MUCH INCENTIVE TO PURCHASE NEW AS THIS IS THE NEWEST VEHICLE I OWN. CURRENTLY RELYING ON 15 YEAR OLD TRUCK TO GET TO WORK. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523184
75,000 miles · Jul 4, 2013
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
WHILE DRIVING OUR ESCAPE, YOU TRY TO ACCELERATE AND THERE IS NOTHING THERE. YOU CAN PUSH THE GAS PEDAL TO THE FLOOR AND THE ENGINE DOES NOT RESPOND. THIS HAS HAPPENED 4 TIMES IN ABOUT 6 DAY PERIOD. WE HAVE HAD TO PULL OUR VEHICLE TO SIDE OF THE ROAD/HIGHWAY AND SHUT IT OFF AND THEN RESTART IT. IT DOES STARTS WORKING AGAIN BUT WE…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING OUR ESCAPE, YOU TRY TO ACCELERATE AND THERE IS NOTHING THERE. YOU CAN PUSH THE GAS PEDAL TO THE FLOOR AND THE ENGINE DOES NOT RESPOND. THIS HAS HAPPENED 4 TIMES IN ABOUT 6 DAY PERIOD. WE HAVE HAD TO PULL OUR VEHICLE TO SIDE OF THE ROAD/HIGHWAY AND SHUT IT OFF AND THEN RESTART IT. IT DOES STARTS WORKING AGAIN BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. WE TOOK IT TO HARROLD ZEIGLERS IN KALAMAZOO MICHIGAN, AND THEY TOLD US IT WAS A ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY AND THERE WAS 8013 OF THEM ON BACK ORDER AND NO ETA ON WHEN THEY WILL BE IN. I CALLED FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY TOLD ME THE SAME STORY.[XXX], AND [XXX] WERE THE FIRST TO AGENTS I SPOKE WITH. I TOLD THEM THAT THEIR ANSWERS WERE NOT GOOD ENOUGH AND I WANTED TO SPEAK TO THEIR MANAGER. HE CALLED ME BACK 2 HOURS LATER(TERRY BADGE#62889) AND HE TOLD ME THEY WERE ALREADY AWARE OF THIS ISSUE AND THEY COULD NOT HELP ME BECAUSE I HAD TOO MANY MILES ON MY ESCAPE(75000) WHICH I TOLD HIM I WANTED TO SPEAK TO HIS SUPERVISOR. HE TOLD ME HIS BOSS WOULD GIVE ME THE SAME ANSWER. I ASKED HIM IF THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY SAFETY COMMISSION WAS AWARE OF THIS ISSUE AND HE SAID THEY WERE AND THAT MY ISSUE AND CONVERSATION WOULD ALSO BE REPORTED. I AM NOT SURE WHY THERE IS NOT A RECALL FOR THIS ISSUE AS THERE ARE CURRENTLY 8013 ON BACK ORDER. I WONDER HOW MANY HAVE ALREADY BEEN REPLACED. THIS ISSUE COULD CAUSE A SERIOUS ACCIDENT FOR SOMEONE ELSE OR MY WIFE AS SHE IS THE DRIVER OF OUR ESCAPE. WE ARE CURRENTLY WITHOUT A VEHICLE TO DRIVE BECAUSE OF THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523163
60,000 miles · Jul 3, 2013
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train
I WAS DRIVING ON I35 E IN LEWISVILLE, TX WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY STOPPED ACCELERATING, I HAD BEEN TRAVELING AT APPROX 40 MPH IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. THE VEHICLE/ENGINE WAS STILL ON BUT I COULD NOT CONTINUE FORWARD. I EXITED THE HIGHWAY AND GLIDED INTO A PARKING LOT ( AFTER NEARLING BEING KILLED BY A LARGE TRUCK ON THE SERVICE RO…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ON I35 E IN LEWISVILLE, TX WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY STOPPED ACCELERATING, I HAD BEEN TRAVELING AT APPROX 40 MPH IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. THE VEHICLE/ENGINE WAS STILL ON BUT I COULD NOT CONTINUE FORWARD. I EXITED THE HIGHWAY AND GLIDED INTO A PARKING LOT ( AFTER NEARLING BEING KILLED BY A LARGE TRUCK ON THE SERVICE ROAD) THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AS WELL AS THE ENGINE LIGHT. I PULLED INTO A PARKING SPACE AND THE VEHICLE STARTED TO VIOLENTLY SHAKE. I PUT IN PARK AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF. I WAITED A FEW MINUTES AND STARTED THE VEHICLE WITH NO ISSUES. THE VEHICLE IDLED FINE AND I COULD REV UP THE ENGINE. I DROVE AROUND THE PARKING LOT WITH NO ISSUES HOWEVER THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS STILL ON. I TRIED GOING ONTO A RESIDENTIAL STREET AND WHEN I ACCELERATED ABOVE 20MPH THE VEHICLE WOULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE AND HAD TO PULL OVER AND HAD THE SAME BEFORE MENTIONED RESULTS. I CALLED A TOW TRUCK AND HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED. I CALLED A LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP AND I WAS ADVISED IT WAS MOST LIKELY AN ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY ISSUE AND THEY HAVE THEM COME IN ALL THE TIME. THIS NEEDS TO BE RECALLED IMMEDIATELY AS THIS VERY WELL COULD HAVE CAUSE A MAJOR ACCIDENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523128
70,000 miles · Jul 3, 2013
Power Train
GETTING ONTO THE EXPRESSWAY AT ABOUT 55MPH WHEN THE CARS ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. SHORTLY AFTER THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON THE CAR THUDDED FORWARD AND LOST POWER. VERY SCARY, EASILY COULD HAVE CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. WE WERE ABLE TO START THE CAR IMMEDIATELY AFTER AND START GOING BUT THE CAR WOULDN'T MAKE IT A MILE BEFORE LOSING POWER AG…
Read full complaint
GETTING ONTO THE EXPRESSWAY AT ABOUT 55MPH WHEN THE CARS ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. SHORTLY AFTER THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON THE CAR THUDDED FORWARD AND LOST POWER. VERY SCARY, EASILY COULD HAVE CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. WE WERE ABLE TO START THE CAR IMMEDIATELY AFTER AND START GOING BUT THE CAR WOULDN'T MAKE IT A MILE BEFORE LOSING POWER AGAIN. NEXT DAY TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP TO FIND THE PART WAS ON BACK ORDER AND IT MAY BE WEEKS BEFORE THE DEALER CAN GET IT IN. A COUPLE WEEKS AND $525 LATER WE ARE NOT HAPPY CAMPERS. THIS SHOULD BE A SAFETY RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523084
40,000 miles · Jul 3, 2013
Power Train
FORD ESCAPE APPROX 40,000 MILES. TRAVELING 50 MPH WHEN CAR LOST ALL ACCELERATION POWER. ENGINE STILL RUNNING, HAD TO COAST OFF OF THE HIGHWAY. DASH BOARD EMBLEM WAS THE WRENCH - REFERRED TO OWNERS MANUAL WHICH INDICATED A PROBLEM WITH THE POWER TRAIN OR THROTTLE. TURNED ENGINE OFF, RESTARTED THE CAR AND SUCCESFULLY TRAVELED …
Read full complaint
FORD ESCAPE APPROX 40,000 MILES. TRAVELING 50 MPH WHEN CAR LOST ALL ACCELERATION POWER. ENGINE STILL RUNNING, HAD TO COAST OFF OF THE HIGHWAY. DASH BOARD EMBLEM WAS THE WRENCH - REFERRED TO OWNERS MANUAL WHICH INDICATED A PROBLEM WITH THE POWER TRAIN OR THROTTLE. TURNED ENGINE OFF, RESTARTED THE CAR AND SUCCESFULLY TRAVELED THE 6 MILES TO MY HOUSE. SAME EVENING ATTEMPTED TO DRIVE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP - 10 MILES AWAY....GOT 1 MILE DOWN THE HIGHWAY, CAR LURCHED, ACCELERATION LOST, ENGINE STILL RUNNING, COASTED TO SIDE OF ROAD, TURNED OF IGNITION, RESTARTED AND SUCCESSFULLY DROVE THE MILE BACK TO MY HOUSE. HAD CAR TOWED ON THE FOLLOWING DAY. ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY REPLACED....UNDER EXTENDED WARRANTY WITH $200 DEDUCTIBLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523083
64,000 miles · Jul 2, 2013
EnginePower Train
ON 6/18/13 DRIVING ON A 45 MPH ROAD SLOWED TO MAKE A TURN AND LOST ALL POWER TO BY 2010 FORD ESCAPE, ALSO THE WRENCH SHOWED UP ON MY DASH. I TURNED IT OFF AND BACK ON AGAIN AND IT RAN FINE. THE NEXT DAY TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL DEALER IN CLARION, PA AND THEY COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS. ON 7/1/13 I EXPERIENCED THE SA…
Read full complaint
ON 6/18/13 DRIVING ON A 45 MPH ROAD SLOWED TO MAKE A TURN AND LOST ALL POWER TO BY 2010 FORD ESCAPE, ALSO THE WRENCH SHOWED UP ON MY DASH. I TURNED IT OFF AND BACK ON AGAIN AND IT RAN FINE. THE NEXT DAY TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL DEALER IN CLARION, PA AND THEY COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS. ON 7/1/13 I EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM, DRIVING 45 MPH WHEN I EXPERIENCED COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER. THIS TIME THE VEHICLE WAS SPUTTERING, TURNED IT OFF & BACK ON BUT HAD TO GIVE IT GAS TO START. THE WRENCH SHOWED UP AGAIN. CALLED THE LOCAL DEALER IN CLARION, PA AND STATED I HAD RESEARCHED THIS ON THE INTERNET & FOUND 21 PAGES OF OTHER PEOPLE EXPERIENCING THE SAME EXACT PROBLEM WITH THE MAJORITY HAVING TO HAVE THE THROTTLE BODY CHANGED. ALSO FOUND THAT NHTSA IS INVESTIGATING THE COMPLAINTS. I DON'T APPRECIATE IT WHEN THE DEALERSHIP DOES NOT TAKE THE SEVERITY OF THIS PROBLEM SERIOUSLY. THEY STATED THEY WOULD ORDER PART BUT DIDN'T KNOW WHEN IT WOULD COME IN. I CALLED ANOTHER LOCAL DEALERSHIP & THEY SAID THEY COULD HAVE THE PART IN 3 DAYS. WHAT'S UP WITH THAT? REALLY DON'T LIKE DRIVING THIS VEHICLE SINCE YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN IT IS GOING TO OCCUR. THIS IS DEFINITELY A SAFETY ISSUE AND FEEL IT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED BY FORD. DO WE NEED TO HAVE NUMEROUS PEOPLE GETTING KILLED BEFORE SOMETHING IS DONE ABOUT IT? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522842
31,590 miles · Jul 2, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control
DROVE ABOUT AN HOUR AWAY FROM HOME, MOSTLY HIGHWAY. WHEN I GOT INTO THE CITY TOWARDS THE END OF THE TRIP, THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND THE CAR STOPPED ACCELERATING. I PULLED OVER AND RESTARTED THE CAR AND WAS ABLE TO GO A FEW HUNDRED FEET BEFORE I LOST ACCELERATION AGAIN. THIS TIME THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. I PULLED OVER, …
Read full complaint
DROVE ABOUT AN HOUR AWAY FROM HOME, MOSTLY HIGHWAY. WHEN I GOT INTO THE CITY TOWARDS THE END OF THE TRIP, THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND THE CAR STOPPED ACCELERATING. I PULLED OVER AND RESTARTED THE CAR AND WAS ABLE TO GO A FEW HUNDRED FEET BEFORE I LOST ACCELERATION AGAIN. THIS TIME THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. I PULLED OVER, WAITED ABOUT 10 MINUTES, RESTARTED THE CAR, AND WAS ABLE TO DRIVE THE REST OF THE WAY (LESS THAN A MILE). THE CAR WAS TOWED TO THE NEAREST DEALER WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. I AM CURRENTLY ON A LONG WAITING LIST FOR PARTS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522836
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.