NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Power Train complaints
508 reportsClear category filter48,000 miles · Jun 10, 2013
EnginePower Train
I WAS DRIVING AT 45 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE SHUDDERED AND LOST POWER. IT BEGAN COASTING AND I HAD NO RESPONSE FROM THE GAS PEDAL. I PULLED THE VEHICLE OVER AND PUT IT IN PARK. I REALIZED IT WAS STILL RUNNING, JUST VERY ROUGHLY. I SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF AND RESTARTED IT, AFTER WHICH IT DROVE FINE. SINCE THEN, IT HAS HAPPENED BETW…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING AT 45 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE SHUDDERED AND LOST POWER. IT BEGAN COASTING AND I HAD NO RESPONSE FROM THE GAS PEDAL. I PULLED THE VEHICLE OVER AND PUT IT IN PARK. I REALIZED IT WAS STILL RUNNING, JUST VERY ROUGHLY. I SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF AND RESTARTED IT, AFTER WHICH IT DROVE FINE. SINCE THEN, IT HAS HAPPENED BETWEEN 5-6 TIMES IN A 2 WEEK PERIOD. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TO BE DIAGNOSED AND THEY TOLD ME I NEEDED A NEW THROTTLE BODY, WHICH IS NOT COVERED UNDER THE POWER-TRAIN WARRANTY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10516156
32,000 miles · Jun 10, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
5/17 WHILE STARTING FROM A RED LIGHT STOPPED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED BUT SUDDENLY LOST ACCELERATION. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. I WAS ABLE TO MOVE THE VEHICLE TO A PARKING LOT AND CALL FOR A TOW. THE TECHNICIAN SAID THE ISSUE WAS WITH THE FUEL LINE AND I HAD MY VEHICLE BACK. 6/7 SIMILAR DECELERATION HAPPENED AND THIS TIME THE VEH…
Read full complaint
5/17 WHILE STARTING FROM A RED LIGHT STOPPED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED BUT SUDDENLY LOST ACCELERATION. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. I WAS ABLE TO MOVE THE VEHICLE TO A PARKING LOT AND CALL FOR A TOW. THE TECHNICIAN SAID THE ISSUE WAS WITH THE FUEL LINE AND I HAD MY VEHICLE BACK. 6/7 SIMILAR DECELERATION HAPPENED AND THIS TIME THE VEHICLE STARTING KNOCKING A LOT AT LOW SPEEDS. WRENCH AND ENGINE LIGHT CAME ONE. AFTER TURNING OFF AND STARTING AGAIN, THE VEHICLE DROVE FINE. I BROUGHT IT HOME AND ONE MONDAY (6/10) STARTED IT AGAIN TO TAKE IT TO THE DEALER. THE VEHICLE DROVE FINE FOR HALF A MILE BEFORE EXHIBITING THE SAME BEHAVIOR OR DECELERATION AND FREQUENT KNOCKING. I PULLED THE VEHICLE OVER AND CALLED THE TOW. I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY THE MECHANIC THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDS REPLACING AND IT IS BACK ORDERED NATIONALLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10516130
69,900 miles · Jun 8, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
THE FIRST TIME I HAD JUST LEFT A STOP LIGHT AND WAS ACCELERATING AND SUDDENLY THE VEHICLE LOST ACCELERATION AND EVEN WITH MY FOOT PUSHING THE GAS PEDAL TO THE FLOOR, IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. I PULLED OVER, LET THE CAR SIT FOR A FEW MINUTES, CRANKED IT BACK UP AND IT DROVE FINE FOR 2-3 WEEKS. (6/7/13) THEN AFTER DRIVING FOR 4 …
Read full complaint
THE FIRST TIME I HAD JUST LEFT A STOP LIGHT AND WAS ACCELERATING AND SUDDENLY THE VEHICLE LOST ACCELERATION AND EVEN WITH MY FOOT PUSHING THE GAS PEDAL TO THE FLOOR, IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. I PULLED OVER, LET THE CAR SIT FOR A FEW MINUTES, CRANKED IT BACK UP AND IT DROVE FINE FOR 2-3 WEEKS. (6/7/13) THEN AFTER DRIVING FOR 4 HOURS AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, THIS PROBLEM OCCURRED AGAIN. IT OCCURRED THREE TIMES BEFORE I GOT TO MY DESTINATION, ALL WITHIN A 30 MINUTE TIMEFRAME. EACH TIME IT WAS ABLE TO BE CORRECTED BY TURNING IT OFF AND RESTARTING. UPON ARRIVAL AT MY DESTINATION I LET THE CAR SIT FOR ABOUT 15 MINUTES THEN WE TOOK THE CAR OUT AGAIN. IT DE-CELERATED ONE TIME AT HIGHWAY SPEED AND ONE TIME AT APPROXIMATELY 45 MILES AN HOUR. IN THIS LAST SET OF OCCURRENCES THE EMISSION/CHECK ENGINE LIGHT SYMBOL CAME ON AS WELL AS THE WRENCH SYMBOL. BOTH TIMES IT WAS AGAIN ABLE TO BE RESTARTED - THE TWO TIMES IN THIS ROUND OF OCCURRENCES HAPPENED WITHIN 10 MINUTES OF EACH OTHER. THE CAR THEN SAT OVERNIGHT (6/8/13) AND AS I PULLED OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY TO TAKE IT TO A MECHANIC YET ANOTHER OCCURRENCE HAPPENED. AGAIN IT WAS ABLE TO BE RESTARTED AND I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE TO THE MECHANIC AND BACK (ROUND TRIP OF ABOUT 30 MILES). WHILE AT THE MECHANIC SHOP THEY RAN A DIAGNOSTIC AND IT CAME UP AS A PROBLEM WITH THE THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL SYSTEM. I DO NOT HAVE THE ERROR NUMBERS AT THIS TIME TO NOTATE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10515817
78,000 miles · Jun 7, 2013
EnginePower Train
THE ENGINE STALLED WHILE I WAS DRIVING ON THE EXPRESS WAY. WITH NO POWER I COASTED (LUCKILY) TO THE SHOULDER. THE SAME THING HAPPENED TO MY WIFE IN THE SAME VEHICLE THE PREVIOUS MONDAY. IT WAS TOWED TO A MECHANICS GARAGE WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED WITH A THROTTLE BODY PROBLEM. HE CLEANED IT, TEST DROVE IT AND SENT HER ON HER WAY…
Read full complaint
THE ENGINE STALLED WHILE I WAS DRIVING ON THE EXPRESS WAY. WITH NO POWER I COASTED (LUCKILY) TO THE SHOULDER. THE SAME THING HAPPENED TO MY WIFE IN THE SAME VEHICLE THE PREVIOUS MONDAY. IT WAS TOWED TO A MECHANICS GARAGE WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED WITH A THROTTLE BODY PROBLEM. HE CLEANED IT, TEST DROVE IT AND SENT HER ON HER WAY. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS STILL A PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10515765
46,124 miles · Jun 6, 2013
Power Train
I PULLED OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY AND AROUND THE CORNER WHEN THE CAR WOULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE AND A WRENCH WARNING LIGHT APPEARED ON DASHBOARD. I PULLED TO SIDE AND CHECKED THE OWNER'S MANUAL TO FIND OUT THE WRENCH MEANT SOMETHING WAS WRONG WITH THE THROTTLE/POWERTRAIN. I TURNED THE CAR OFF THEN BACK ON. THE WRENCH DISAPPEARED AN…
Read full complaint
I PULLED OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY AND AROUND THE CORNER WHEN THE CAR WOULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE AND A WRENCH WARNING LIGHT APPEARED ON DASHBOARD. I PULLED TO SIDE AND CHECKED THE OWNER'S MANUAL TO FIND OUT THE WRENCH MEANT SOMETHING WAS WRONG WITH THE THROTTLE/POWERTRAIN. I TURNED THE CAR OFF THEN BACK ON. THE WRENCH DISAPPEARED AND I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE IT HOME. WHEN I GOT HOME, I CALLED OUR USUAL FORD SERVICE GUY AND WAS TOLD IT COULD HAVE BEEN SOMETHING LODGED IN THE AIR FILTER BUT THAT IF IT HAPPENED AGAIN TO CALL THEM. I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE IT TO WORK AND RUN SOME ERRANDS HOWEVER I FELT LIKE IT WAS JERKING. THEN LATER THAT AFTERNOON, WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH ON A MAIN ROAD, IT HAPPENED AGAIN. ONCE AGAIN, I WAS ABLE TO PULL TO THE SIDE SOMEWHAT (IT WAS A LONG RIGHT HAND TURN LANE). I TURNED OFF THE CAR AND BACK ON, THE WRENCH WENT AWAY SO I TRIED TO MOVE FORWARD AND IT HAPPENED AGAIN JUST AFTER A FEW FEET. I TURNED THE CAR OFF AND ONE AGAIN AND THIS TIME THE WRENCH DISAPPEARED HOWEVER THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING LIGHT CAME ON AND THAT'S WHEN I KNEW I COULD NOT TRUST DRIVING THIS CAR ANY LONGER. I CALLED FORD, CALLED A TOW TRUCK AND IT IS AT THE DEALER NOW. WE WERE INFORMED IT WAS A BAD THROTTLE BODY. I HAD DONE SOME ONLINE RESEARCH AFTER IT HAPPENED THAT MORNING AND FOUND OUT THERE WERE MANY, MANY INSTANCES JUST LIKE MINE SO WHEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN IN THE AFTERNOON, I PRETTY MUCH KNEW THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE OUTCOME. WE WERE TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THEY'VE BEEN HAVING AN ISSUE GETTING THE PART LATELY SO IT'LL BE ANOTHER 5 DAYS BEFORE THEY'LL RECEIVE IT AND IT'LL COST $488+TAX BECAUSE IT'S NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10515447
29,500 miles · Jun 6, 2013
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN THE MOTOR IN THE ESCAPE JUST DIED, I WAS FORCED TO MOVE FROM THE LEFT LANE OF THE HIGHWAY TO THE RIGHT WITH ALMOST NO POWER. NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED I TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAY THAT PART IS ON NATIONAL BACKORDER FORD IS MAKING 4000 OF THE THROTTLE BODIES IN ORDER TO KEEP …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN THE MOTOR IN THE ESCAPE JUST DIED, I WAS FORCED TO MOVE FROM THE LEFT LANE OF THE HIGHWAY TO THE RIGHT WITH ALMOST NO POWER. NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED I TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAY THAT PART IS ON NATIONAL BACKORDER FORD IS MAKING 4000 OF THE THROTTLE BODIES IN ORDER TO KEEP WITH THE DEMAND. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10515413
51,000 miles · Jun 5, 2013
Fuel System, GasolinePower Train
WHILE DRIVING AT ROUGHLY 25-30 MPH VEHICLE STOPPED ACCELERATING AND COASTED REGARDLESS OF PRESSURE TO GAS PEDAL. I WAS IN A BUSY INTERSECTION AND WAS UNABLE TO GET OUT OF THE WAY. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON WHEN VEHICLE STOPPED ACCELERATING. I COASTED TO A DRIVEWAY (NO SHOULDER) AND SHUT OFF THE ENGINE AND RESTARTED THE VEHICLE. A…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING AT ROUGHLY 25-30 MPH VEHICLE STOPPED ACCELERATING AND COASTED REGARDLESS OF PRESSURE TO GAS PEDAL. I WAS IN A BUSY INTERSECTION AND WAS UNABLE TO GET OUT OF THE WAY. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON WHEN VEHICLE STOPPED ACCELERATING. I COASTED TO A DRIVEWAY (NO SHOULDER) AND SHUT OFF THE ENGINE AND RESTARTED THE VEHICLE. AT THIS TIME, THE ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON WITH NO WRENCH LIGHT. CAR ACCELERATED FINE SO I CONTINUED HOME. IN THE SPAN OF 5 MILES, THIS SAME INCIDENT OCCURRED 4 TIMES. TURNING THE CAR OFF AND ON WOULD TEMPORARILY FIX THE ISSUE, BUT THE ENGINE LIGHT NEVER LEFT. IN ROUTE, I STAYED ON ROADS WITH SHOULDER ALLOWANCES OR FREQUENT TURNOFFS, WHERE POSSIBLE. THE FOLLOWING DAY, I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A MECHANIC WHO RAN DIAGNOSTIC AND DETERMINED IT WAS THE THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL SYSTEM. CURRENTLY HAVING TROUBLE FINDING THE PART TO FIX THE ISSUE, BECAUSE OF ITS CURRENT HIGH DEMAND. I'M TOLD IT COULD BE A MONTH. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10515370
49,800 miles · Jun 5, 2013
EnginePower Train
I PURCHASED A 2010 FORD ESCAPE LIMITED IN OCTOBER 2010. IN JUST TWO AND HALF OF YEARS OF HAVING THE VEHICLE AND UNDER 50,000 MILES, I HAD TO REPLACE THE THROTTLE BODY COSTING ME $385 (AFTER TALKING THE SERVICE GUY DOWN TO THAT PRICE). THE INCIDENT OCCURRED ON APRIL 24, 2013 WHILE DRIVING HOME FROM WORK FOR LUNCH. I WAS DRIVING…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A 2010 FORD ESCAPE LIMITED IN OCTOBER 2010. IN JUST TWO AND HALF OF YEARS OF HAVING THE VEHICLE AND UNDER 50,000 MILES, I HAD TO REPLACE THE THROTTLE BODY COSTING ME $385 (AFTER TALKING THE SERVICE GUY DOWN TO THAT PRICE). THE INCIDENT OCCURRED ON APRIL 24, 2013 WHILE DRIVING HOME FROM WORK FOR LUNCH. I WAS DRIVING ON A BUSY ROAD WHEN MY CAR'S SPEED STARTED TO SLOW DOWN AUTOMATICALLY. I TRIED TO PRESS THE GAS BUT IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE ALTHOUGH THE ENGINE WAS STILL ON. THERE WERE NO LIGHTS ON INDICATING A PROBLEM, SO I PULLED INTO THE FIRST PLACE I COULD, TURNED OFF THE CAR AND TURNED IT BACK ON. IT STARTED RIGHT BACK UP SO I DIDN'T THINK ANYTHING OF IT AND PULLED BACK OUT ONTO THE STREET. IT HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES ON MY WAY HOME BEFORE I SAW THE FIRST MECHANIC SHOP AND TURNED IN. BY THE THIRD TIME THE (WRENCH) LIGHT CAME ON. SINCE I WAS STILL UNDER THE POWERTRAIN WARRANTY THE MECHANIC TOLD ME IT WAS BEST TO GO TO THE CLOSEST FORD LOCATION. AFTER LOOKING AT MY CAR THEY TOLD ME THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AND DUE TO WHAT TYPE OF PART IT WAS, THE REPAIR WAS NOT COVERED UNDER MY WARRANTY SO I HAD TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT. THIS DOES NOT SEEM NORMAL GIVEN THAT THE CAR IS ONLY A FEW YEARS OLD AND LESS THAN 50,000 MILES. I AM FEARFUL THAT MORE PROBLEMS ARE TO COME... *TR
NHTSA ODI #10515316
40,000 miles · Jun 3, 2013
Power Train
AS I WAS DRIVING MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE ON THE HIGHWAY, IT STARTED TO BUCKLE AND IT EVENTUALLY TURNED OFF BY ITSELF. THE ONLY THING THAT WAS REMAINING ON WAS MY RADIO. I HAD NO STEERING, AND THE GAS PEDAL DID NOT EVEN WORK. ON A BUSY HIGHWAY, I HAD TO SOME HOW PULL OVER, PUT THE CAR IN PARK, AND, HAD TO RESTART IT. I DID NOTICE…
Read full complaint
AS I WAS DRIVING MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE ON THE HIGHWAY, IT STARTED TO BUCKLE AND IT EVENTUALLY TURNED OFF BY ITSELF. THE ONLY THING THAT WAS REMAINING ON WAS MY RADIO. I HAD NO STEERING, AND THE GAS PEDAL DID NOT EVEN WORK. ON A BUSY HIGHWAY, I HAD TO SOME HOW PULL OVER, PUT THE CAR IN PARK, AND, HAD TO RESTART IT. I DID NOTICE A WRENCH SYMBOL ON MY DASHBOARD THAT LIGHTED UP. DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IT MEANT, SO, I WENT AHEAD AND GOT MY MANUAL OUT. THE SYMBOL HAS STATED THAT IT WAS "THE THROTTLE/POWERTRAIN" AND I NEEDED TO SEE A DEALER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THIS INCIDENT HAS HAPPENED BEFORE, I JUST DID NOT KEEP TRACK OF IT. THIS TIME IT WAS MORE WORSE THAN THE OTHERS. ON JUNE 1ST 2013 IT ACTUALLY DID IT TWICE IN ONE DAY. THANKFULLY THE SECOND TIME AROUND I WAS IN THE CLEAR AND PULLED OVER INTO AN OFFICE COMPLEX. HAD TO DO THE SAME THING OVER AGAIN. PLEASE CHECK INTO THIS DEFECT. IT IS REALLY DANGEROUS, SCARY, AND ITS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. LUCKILY FOR ME, THAT THIS DID NOT HAPPEN. AS OF JUNE 3RD 2013 THE DEALER REPLACED MY THROTTLE AUTO BODY. I AM HOPING THAT THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN TO ANYBODY ELSE. IT CAN CAUSE SERIOUS DAMAGE TO ANOTHER PERSON, IF, THEY ARE NOT CAREFUL, AND, DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. THANK GOD, I HAD MY HUSBAND WITH ME WHEN THIS HAPPENED. THE OTHER TIMES, I WAS ACTUALLY BY MYSELF AND SCARED OUT OF MY MIND . I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD AND ON A BUSY BRIDGE WHEN MY TRUCK COMPLETELY STALLED ON ME. I COULD HAVE KILLED SOMEBODY OR MYSELF. MY TOTAL BILL FOR THIS PART TO BE REPLACED WAS $455.00. I AM HOPING YOU CAN CHECK INTO THIS PROBLEM FOR OTHER DRIVERS AS WELL. ONE DAY THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO SOMEBODY, AND, IT WILL CAUSE A VERY SERIOUS ACCIDENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10514915
39,000 miles · Jun 3, 2013
Power Train
I WAS DRIVING DOWN 128 (A MAJOR HIGHWAY) , WHEN MY CAR 'APPEARED' TO DOWNSHIFT ALL ON IT'S OWN. THE 'WRENCH' APPEARED ON THE DASHBOARD AND I MANAGED TO COAST INTO A REST AREA BEFORE THE CAR EVENTUALLY STALLED. I WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AND AT FIRST IT SEEMED LIKE EVERYTHING WAS FINE AGAIN. I ATTEMPTED TO DRIVE IT HOME, B…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING DOWN 128 (A MAJOR HIGHWAY) , WHEN MY CAR 'APPEARED' TO DOWNSHIFT ALL ON IT'S OWN. THE 'WRENCH' APPEARED ON THE DASHBOARD AND I MANAGED TO COAST INTO A REST AREA BEFORE THE CAR EVENTUALLY STALLED. I WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AND AT FIRST IT SEEMED LIKE EVERYTHING WAS FINE AGAIN. I ATTEMPTED TO DRIVE IT HOME, BUT 4-5 MINUTES IN THE SAME THING HAPPENED. IT HESITATED, LIGHT CAME ONE, CAR STALLED, I DANGEROUSLY COASTED INTO THE BREAKDOWN LANE. THIS HAPPENED 3 TIMES BEFORE I THEN DECIDED TO GET IT TOWED SINCE IT WAS STALLING IN DANGEROUS PLACES AND I DIDN'T THINK I WOULD MAKE IT HOME. I HAD IT TOWED TO A MECHANIC THAT NIGHT. NEXT DAY I WAS TOLD IT'S THE ETB, BUT IT'S NOT COVERED. I WAS ALSO TOLD THAT THIS PART IS NOT IN STOCK SINCE THERE ARE SO MANY BEING SOLD. THIS APPEARS TO BE A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR A RECALL, SINCE IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING COMMON AND CAN RESULT IN SERIOUS INJURY OR WORSE. THIS IS MY 5TH FORD, I'VE HAD THE EXPLORER, MUSTANG, FORD 250, FORD 150 AND NOW THE ESCAPE. AS A LOYAL CONSUMER I WOULD EXPECT THE MANUFACTURER TO DO THE PROPER THING AND MAKE THIS MORE THAN TSB SINCE IT'S A DEFINITE DANGER. I'M JUST HAPPY MY KIDS WERE NOT IN THE CAR AT THE TIME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10514809
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.