← New search

2010 Ford Escape

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Escape years

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

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,764 reports with mileage · 305 unknown

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

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

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

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

29 crash reports3 fire reports19 injury reports

Power Train complaints

508 reports
Clear category filter
41,900 miles · Jun 2, 2013
Power Train

I HAVE BEEN A FORD OWNER FOR YEARS, AND THIS IS THE FIRST COMPLAINT I AM FILING. MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER AND I HAD TO PULL IT TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. IT RESTARTED AND RESUMED DRIVING NORMALLY. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD IT WAS THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY. SINCE I WAS ON THE INTERS…

Read full complaint

I HAVE BEEN A FORD OWNER FOR YEARS, AND THIS IS THE FIRST COMPLAINT I AM FILING. MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER AND I HAD TO PULL IT TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. IT RESTARTED AND RESUMED DRIVING NORMALLY. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD IT WAS THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY. SINCE I WAS ON THE INTERSTATE OUTSIDE A MAJOR CITY, I FEEL THIS IS A REAL SAFETY HAZARD. I HAD NO ABILITY TO POWER THE VEHICLE OTHER THAN ITS OWN MOMENTUM. I REALLY WANT TO SEE THIS PART RECALLED! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10514738

61,000 miles · Jun 1, 2013
Power Train

I WAS DRIVING AND MY VEHICLE JUST STOPPED WORKING AT LEAST I WAS ABLE TO COAST TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE PART IS NOT IN STOCK AT ANY FORD DEALER AND HAS BEEN BACK ORDERED SO TO ME THAT MEANS IT IS A REGULAR PROBLEM ON THIS VEHICLE. I NEED TO KNOW IF OTHER CARS HAD THIS PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10514635

56,800 miles · May 31, 2013
Power Train

TRAVELING IN THE LEFT LANE AT 70MPH DOWN I696 IN OAKLAND COUNTY MICHIGAN, VEHICLE WENT DEAD. "WRENCH" LIGHT CAME ON. I PULLED OVER TO THE RIGHT SHOULDER. CAR WAS RUNNING, HOWEVER NO POWER. I TURNED THE CAR OFF AND RE-STARTED. IT RAN FINE AFTER THAT. ONE MONTH LATER THE SAME ISSUE OCCURRED. THIS TIME TRAVELING 45MPH DOWN THE ROA…

Read full complaint

TRAVELING IN THE LEFT LANE AT 70MPH DOWN I696 IN OAKLAND COUNTY MICHIGAN, VEHICLE WENT DEAD. "WRENCH" LIGHT CAME ON. I PULLED OVER TO THE RIGHT SHOULDER. CAR WAS RUNNING, HOWEVER NO POWER. I TURNED THE CAR OFF AND RE-STARTED. IT RAN FINE AFTER THAT. ONE MONTH LATER THE SAME ISSUE OCCURRED. THIS TIME TRAVELING 45MPH DOWN THE ROAD, VEHICLE WENT DEAD, I PULLED OVER , RE-STARTED. TRAVELLED ANOTHER 100FT, SAME ISSUE. TRIED AGAIN, THIS TIME WENT ABOUT 200FT, DIED. THE WRENCH LIGHT AND AMBER ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. THIS TIME THE ENGINE LIGHT REMAINED ON AND THE ESCAPE WAS TOWED TO THE FORD DEALER ON MAY 18, 2013. AS OF MAY 31, 2013, THE THROTTLE BODY HAS BEEN ON BACK ORDER. VEHICLE SITS IN THEIR LOT AWAITING PART. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10514518

48,280 miles · May 30, 2013
Engine And Engine CoolingPower TrainVehicle Speed Control

AS VEHICLE WAS PROCEEDING FORWARD FROM A STOP ONTO A FOUR LANE ROAD WITH THE SPEED LIMIT OF 35 MPH, IT ROLLED FORWARD AND NO POWER WAS PROVIDED. NO WARNING LIGHTS PRIOR TO THIS. THE THROTTLE CONTROL / POWER TRAIN LIGHT CAME ON AND WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO GO APPROXIMATELY 20 -30 YARDS ONTO THE SHOULDER ATTEMPTING TO GO AROUND THE C…

Read full complaint

AS VEHICLE WAS PROCEEDING FORWARD FROM A STOP ONTO A FOUR LANE ROAD WITH THE SPEED LIMIT OF 35 MPH, IT ROLLED FORWARD AND NO POWER WAS PROVIDED. NO WARNING LIGHTS PRIOR TO THIS. THE THROTTLE CONTROL / POWER TRAIN LIGHT CAME ON AND WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO GO APPROXIMATELY 20 -30 YARDS ONTO THE SHOULDER ATTEMPTING TO GO AROUND THE CORNER AND UP A HILL THE VEHICLE WAS UNABLE TO DO THIS WE ROLLED BACK TO THE SHOULDER THEN TURNED THE CAR OFF RESTARTED AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED AND WERE ABLE TO GET THE CAR UP THE HILL AND HOME. CAR WAS TOWED TO FORD DEALERSHIP WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED AS A FAILED THROTTLE BODY WHICH WAS THEN REPLACED.

NHTSA ODI #10515253

67,100 miles · May 30, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

WHILE I WAS DRIVING, THE CAR STARTED STALLING : THE SPEED INDICATOR STARTED COMING DOWN AND EVEN PRESSING ON THE ACCELERATOR, THERE WAS NO PICK UP AND THE WRENCH SIGN LIT UP INDICATING THE POWER TRAIN DEFECT.I MOVED THE CAR TO THE SHOULDER AND WAITED FOR SOME ASSISTANCE. I MECHANIC FRIEND OF MINE CAME AFTER ABOUT 45 MIN. HE STAR…

Read full complaint

WHILE I WAS DRIVING, THE CAR STARTED STALLING : THE SPEED INDICATOR STARTED COMING DOWN AND EVEN PRESSING ON THE ACCELERATOR, THERE WAS NO PICK UP AND THE WRENCH SIGN LIT UP INDICATING THE POWER TRAIN DEFECT.I MOVED THE CAR TO THE SHOULDER AND WAITED FOR SOME ASSISTANCE. I MECHANIC FRIEND OF MINE CAME AFTER ABOUT 45 MIN. HE STARTED THE CAR AND THE WRENCH SIGN WAS NO LONGER THERE. RODE THE CAR FOR ABOUT 10 MILES TO GET TO MY HOUSE. RAN SOME ERRANDS (ABOUT 20 ROUND TRIP MILES) LATER AND THE CAR RODE FINE. ON 5/30/2013 MORNING (TODAY) ON MY WAY TO WORK, THE TRUCK STALLED AGAIN WITH THE LIT UP WRENCH SIGN. PULLED ON TO THE SHOULDER, TURNED OFF ENGINE AND GOT THE TRUCK TOWED TO THE CLOSEST FORD DEALER - BOB DAVIDSON FORD,, PARKVILLE, MARYLAND 21234 (410-661-6400). THEY PERFORMED DIAGNOSTICS FOR A FEE OF $123.00 AND SAID THAT THE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE SERVICE DEPT INDICATED THAT THEY WERE OUT OF THESE PARTS AND IS BACKORDERED. THEY WERE NOT SURE WHEN THEY WILL GET THE PART. I DROVE THE SUV HOME WITH NO FURTHER PROBLEMS. I CALLED FORD MOTOR CO. CUSTOMER RELATIONS AND COMPLAINED. THEY ISSUED A CLAIM NUMBER CAS[XXX]. I AM UNABLE TO RENT A CAR AS I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT WOULD BE UNTIL THEY GET THE PART TO FIX. I SEARCHED AND FOUND THAT THIS HAD BEEN A RECURRING PROBLEM FOR THE ESCAPE 2010. FORD SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO REPAIR THIS PROBLEM, I ASKED THE CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE "IS FORD WAITING UNTIL PEOPLE GET KILLED TO FIX THIS DANGEROUS DEFECT?". IT IS QUITE DANGEROUS IF IT HAPPENS WHILE DRIVING IN THE EXPRESS WAY AT 55-60 MPH IN AN INSIDE LANE. GOD HELP THE ESCAPE OWNERS. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10514340

69,000 miles · May 26, 2013
Electrical SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control

WHEN I'M DRIVING MY CAR, IT WILL SUDDENLY STOP ACCELERATING AS THOUGH SOMEONE THREW THE CAR INTO NEUTRAL. WHEN THIS HAPPENS, THE WRENCH LIGHT COMES ON AND I HAVE TO COAST OVER TO A SAFE AREA TO TURN THE CAR OFF AND TURN IT BACK ON. THIS HAPPENED ON THE FREEWAY AT SPEEDS OVER 70MPH, ON STREETS, AFTER A RED LIGHT, TURNING CORNERS.…

Read full complaint

WHEN I'M DRIVING MY CAR, IT WILL SUDDENLY STOP ACCELERATING AS THOUGH SOMEONE THREW THE CAR INTO NEUTRAL. WHEN THIS HAPPENS, THE WRENCH LIGHT COMES ON AND I HAVE TO COAST OVER TO A SAFE AREA TO TURN THE CAR OFF AND TURN IT BACK ON. THIS HAPPENED ON THE FREEWAY AT SPEEDS OVER 70MPH, ON STREETS, AFTER A RED LIGHT, TURNING CORNERS. OVER AND OVER AGAIN THIS HAPPENS AND IT STARTED HAPPENING AT ABOUT 50-THOUSAND MILES AND HAS GOTTEN WORSE. TODAY THIS HAPPENED MORE THAN SIX TIMES IN A TWENTY MILE RADIUS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10513584

61,500 miles · May 24, 2013
Power Train

MONKEY WRENCH WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATES ON THE DASH ACCOMPANIED BY A LOSS OF FUNCTIONALITY OF THE GAS PEDAL. I WAS ABLE TO COAST TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD SINCE THE CAR DID NOT RESPOND AT ALL TO ANY PRESSURE ON THE GAS PEDAL. TURNED THE CAR OFF. RESTARTED THE CAR AFTER A FEW MOMENTS, LIGHT WAS OFF AND CAR FUNCTIONED NORMALLY. …

Read full complaint

MONKEY WRENCH WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATES ON THE DASH ACCOMPANIED BY A LOSS OF FUNCTIONALITY OF THE GAS PEDAL. I WAS ABLE TO COAST TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD SINCE THE CAR DID NOT RESPOND AT ALL TO ANY PRESSURE ON THE GAS PEDAL. TURNED THE CAR OFF. RESTARTED THE CAR AFTER A FEW MOMENTS, LIGHT WAS OFF AND CAR FUNCTIONED NORMALLY. 2ND INCIDENT HAPPENED 5/22 ON THE FREEWAY AT 65 MPH. AGAIN, I WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO COAST TO THE EMERGENCY LANE. TURNED THE CAR OFF, WAITED, BACK ON AND CONTINUED DRIVING. 3RD INCIDENT HAPPENED A MILE FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD. I WAS ALREADY IN THE SLOW LANE SO AGAIN IT WAS EASY TO MANEUVER INTO THE EMERGENCY LANE. MECHANIC INDICATES THE THROTTLE BODY IS FAULTY AND NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10513388

47,567 miles · May 24, 2013
Fuel System, GasolinePower Train

VEHICLE DECELERATED TO 10 MPH, "WRENCH" SERVICE LIGHT APPEARED. I PULLED OVER, PUT VEHICLE INTO PARK, AT WHICH TIME IT BEGAN SHUDDERING. TURNED OFF ENGINE, WAITED A FEW MOMENTS, AND TURNED IGNITION. VEHICLE RESTARTED WITH SOME EFFORT. INCIDENT HAS RE-OCCURRED 7 TIMES SINCE THEN, NOW WITH "ENGINE" SERVICE LIGHT ON. MECHANIC HAS I…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE DECELERATED TO 10 MPH, "WRENCH" SERVICE LIGHT APPEARED. I PULLED OVER, PUT VEHICLE INTO PARK, AT WHICH TIME IT BEGAN SHUDDERING. TURNED OFF ENGINE, WAITED A FEW MOMENTS, AND TURNED IGNITION. VEHICLE RESTARTED WITH SOME EFFORT. INCIDENT HAS RE-OCCURRED 7 TIMES SINCE THEN, NOW WITH "ENGINE" SERVICE LIGHT ON. MECHANIC HAS IDENTIFIED ISSUE AS WORN THROTTLE BODY, ON 2-WEEK BACK ORDER AS OF MAY 10, 2013. TIME FOR A RECALL, FORD. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10513378

67,000 miles · May 22, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

AS I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD THE CAR JUST LOST ACCELERATION AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. I WAS ABLE TO GET OFF THE ROAD AND SHUT OFF THE ENGINE. I RESTARTED THE CAR AND WAS ABLE TO DRIVE HOME. JUST TODAY WE HAD THE SAME THING HAPPEN AGAIN. FORD DEALER TELLS ME THERE WAS NO CODE SO THEY CAN'T ORDER THE PART. HOWEVER, THEY BELI…

Read full complaint

AS I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD THE CAR JUST LOST ACCELERATION AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. I WAS ABLE TO GET OFF THE ROAD AND SHUT OFF THE ENGINE. I RESTARTED THE CAR AND WAS ABLE TO DRIVE HOME. JUST TODAY WE HAD THE SAME THING HAPPEN AGAIN. FORD DEALER TELLS ME THERE WAS NO CODE SO THEY CAN'T ORDER THE PART. HOWEVER, THEY BELIEVE THE THROTTLE BODY IS BAD BUT NEED THE CODE TO BE SURE. FROM WHAT I HAVE READ IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY KNOW WHAT IT IS BUT ARE UNWILLING TO FIX THIS. THEY TELL TO JUST RESTART AND KEEP GOING SOONER OR LATER IT WILL TO START AND THEY CAN FIX IT. I AM GOING ON VACATION TOMORROW JUST WHAT I NEED IS THIS TO FAIL AT THE WRONG TIME. DOES SOMEONE NEED TO DIE BEFORE SOMETHING IS DONE. SURE SEEMS TOYOTA WASN'T GIVEN THIS MUCH LEEWAY A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10513165

43,000 miles · May 20, 2013
Power Train

WHILE DRIVING THE CAR SUDDENLY STARTED TO SPUTTER, SHUTTER AND LURCH FORWARD WHILE LOSING SPEED AND MAKING A STRANGE NOISE. THE "WRENCH" LIGHT DISPLAYED WHICH IDENTIFIES A POWER TRAIN/THROTTLE PROBLEM. PULLED OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, TURNED OFF ENGINE, RESTARTED AND ALL APPEARED FINE, WRENCH LIGHT TURNED OFF AND DROVE RES…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING THE CAR SUDDENLY STARTED TO SPUTTER, SHUTTER AND LURCH FORWARD WHILE LOSING SPEED AND MAKING A STRANGE NOISE. THE "WRENCH" LIGHT DISPLAYED WHICH IDENTIFIES A POWER TRAIN/THROTTLE PROBLEM. PULLED OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, TURNED OFF ENGINE, RESTARTED AND ALL APPEARED FINE, WRENCH LIGHT TURNED OFF AND DROVE REST OF WAY HOME. RESEARCHED ONLINE AND THERE ARE HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF COMPLAINS REGARDING THIS PROBLEM WHICH APPEARS TO BE TIED TO THE THROTTLE BODY OR ELECTRIC SYSTEM THAT CONTROLS THE THROTTLE INPUT BETWEEN THE GAS PEDAL AND THE THROTTLE BODY. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS AND SCARY PROBLEM AND I'M VERY CONCERNED IT WILL OCCUR AGAIN SOON. BASED ON ONLINE REPORTS THIS IS A WELL KNOWN PROBLEM THAT FORD APPEARS TO BE WELL AWARE OF BUT WILL NOT COVER EXPENSE TO FIX. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10512923

Official recalls

3

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

Oct 26, 2016

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2010-2012 Ford Escape vehicles manufactured February 26, 2009, to April 29, 2012, and 2010-2011 Mercury Mariner vehicles manufactured February 25, 2009, to December 12, 2010. On vehicles with a 3.0L engine, the Fuel Delivery Module (FDM) may crack, causing a fuel leak.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source increases the risk of a fire.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the FDM flange with one that has a redesigned fuel supply port, free of charge. Remedy parts are currently unavailable. Interim notices were mailed to owners on December 13, 2016. Owners will receive a second notice when remedy parts become available. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 16S41.

14V284000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System

May 29, 2014

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2008-2011 Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner vehicles manufactured August 18, 2006, through September 11, 2010. The affected vehicles have a steering torque sensor that may not be able to properly detect driver steering input. As a result, the system could remove the Electric Power Steering (EPS) assist.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If power steering assist is lost, greater driver effort would be required to steer the vehicle at low speeds, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will update the software for the power steering control module (PSCM) and the instrument cluster module, free of charge. If a vehicle shows a history of a loss of the torque sensor signal or fault codes relating to the PSCM when the vehicle is brought in for the recall remedy, the affected components will be replaced, free of charge. The recall began on July 18, 2014. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-800-392-3673. Ford's number for this recall is 14S05.

10V222000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission

May 24, 2010

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2010 FUSION, MILAN, AND ESCAPE VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM FEBRUARY 27, THROUGH MARCH 26, 2010. THE PARK ROD GUIDE RETENTION PIN MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PROPERLY INSTALLED WHICH FAILS TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENT OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 114, "THEFT PROTECTION AND ROLLAWAY PREVENTION".

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A VEHICLE PARKED WITHOUT AN ENGAGED PARK PAWL AND WITHOUT AN APPLIED PARKING BRAKE MAY HAVE UNINTENDED MOVEMENT WHICH MAY CAUSE A CRASH.

Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND DEALERS WILL REPAIR THE VEHICLES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 28, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332 AND FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED CALL 1-800-232-5952 (TDD). REPRESENTATIVES ARE AVAILABLE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY: 8:00AM - 5:00PM.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

4

DP15001 · Loss Of Power Steering While Driving

Opened Apr 1, 2015 · Closed Jun 14, 2018

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering:electric Power Assist System

On May 27, 2014, amended June 2, 2014, Ford Motor Company (Ford) submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) to NHTSA describing a safety defect that may result in a sudden loss of power steering assist while driving in approximately 746,067 model year (MY) 2008 through 2011 Ford Escape vehicles equipped with electric power assisted steering (NHTSA 14V-284, Ford 14S05). Ford's DIR described the defect condition as a poor signal to noise ratio [SNR] in the torque sensor within the Electric Power Assisted Steering (EPAS) system [which] does not allow the PSCM to determine the driver's steering input. When the system detects this fault condition, it transitions the EPAS system to the fail-safe/manual steering mode.Ford's DIR indicates that loss of power steering assist while driving would require higher steering effort at lower vehicle speeds, which may result in an increased risk of a crash.Ford's remedy instructs dealers to check the Power Steering Control Module (PSCM) for Diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTCs) to determine the proper repair procedure. If no DTCs are present, dealers are to update the PSCM and instrument cluster module software. The updated PSCM software changes the torque sensor fault strategy so that the SNR condition does not result in a loss of power steering assist while driving.In addition, audible and visual warnings are provided for torque sensor faults.If DTCs indicating faults in the torque sensor, PSCM or Power Steering Motor (motor) are present in the initial recall inspection, the dealer performs the following repairs: 1) replaces the torque sensor for torque sensor faults (DTC B2278); or 2) replaces the steering column for faults related to the PSCM (DTC B1342) or motor (DTC B2277).Continued in attachment pages

PE13003 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction

Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Feb 28, 2014

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine

On February 21, 2013, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 to investigate allegations of electronic throttle body (ETB) failures resulting in sudden reduction of engine power in model year (MY) 2009-2013 Ford Escape, Fusion, Mariner and Milan vehicles. During this investigation, Ford identified a condition in subject vehicles equipped with 2.5L and 3.0L engines that may result in a sudden reduction of engine power.According to Ford, the ETB internal motor contacts may develop a high resistance material buildup condition on the commutator, resulting in intermittent electrical connectivity and reduced engine power. When this condition occurs, the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) or Wrench light will illuminate and the vehicle may enter a limited limp home mode.Ford?s trade name for the feature is Failure Mode Effects Management (FMEM) mode.In this mode, engine power and vehicle speed are reduced, while full function of the power steering, power braking, lighting, and climate control systems are maintained.ODI?s complaint analysis indicate that the predominant failure mode involved reduced motive power associated with the limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Analysis of warranty claims provided by Ford identified 59,807 claims related to ETB replacements and approximately 50 percent of claims are associated with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed.Ford described several factors where the ETB motor may fail resulting in DTCs P2111 or P2112 but the failure is not an existing stuck open or closed ETB valve position.According to Ford, the ETB control strategy provides the driver with three FMEM modes that allow varying degrees of vehicle mobility depending on the severity of the fault detected.DTCs associated with stuck open or closed throttle valves are designated the highest failure severity resulting in engine speeds limited to high idle corresponding to the limited limp home mode.Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability.Other FMEM limp modes may result in reduced engine performance but will maintain vehicle speed above 20mph. During this investigation, Ford and its suppliers, Delphi and Igarashi, updated the powertrain control module (PCM) software to include a throttle body motor cleaning cycle during key-on and modified the ETB internal motor components design, surface finish and material composition to improve durability. Additionally, Ford developed a remedy procedure and issued a special Customer Satisfaction Program (CSP) 13N03 extending the ETB warranty coverage and instructing dealers to update the powertrain calibration to improve vehicle performance in the event that intermittent electrical connectivity of the throttle body motor contacts occurs. The program extends the coverage for up to 10 years of service or 150,000 miles from the warranty start date of the vehicle, all vehicles are eligible for the program through January 31, 2015 regardless of mileage.Owners of the affected vehicles will be contacted by mail to take their vehicle to a Ford dealer who will reprogram the PCM to the latest calibration. The bulletin was sent to dealers on January 17, 2014 and the owner letter mailing began on January 27, 2014. See the investigative file for copies of Ford's bulletin and owner letter. This preliminary evaluation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding that

DP12006 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction

Opened Oct 2, 2012 · Closed Feb 21, 2013

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine

In a letter dated August 30, 2012, The North Carolina Consumers Council (NCCC) petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to initiate a defect investigation of alleged electronic throttle body failures resulting in engine stall or surge while driving in model year (MY) 2005 through 2012 Ford Escape vehicles. On October 2, 2012 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Defect Petition DP12-006 to evaluate whether to grant or deny the petition. The petition is hereby granted on certain model years. The NCCC letter cites two complaints of stall while driving in MY 2009 Ford Escape vehicles that were diagnosed as failed throttle bodies with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed. The petitioner indicates that the owners of both vehicles reported experiencing repeated incidents of stalling and engine surging. According to Ford, Escape non-hybrid vehicles are equipped with Electronic Throttle Body (ETB) assemblies beginning with MY 2009. Vehicles manufactured between June 22, 2009 and October 15, 2009 may contain contaminated printed circuit boards (PCB) with plating variations. Plating variations could lead to a lack of continuity in the throttle position sensor circuit where P2111 and/or other DTCs would be generated and stored. Ford and its electronic throttle body supplier, Delphi, modified the PCB manufacturing process and issued a technical service bulletin (TSB) 09-23-5. Vehicles produced after October 15, 2009 incorporated ETBs manufactured with a PCB process that resolved this condition. ODI's analysis identified a total of 123 unique reports indicating allegations of reduced motive power or vehicle stall. Depending on the condition of throttle control system malfunction, a driver may experience varying levels of reduced engine performance associated with three limp home modes. In two limp modes, reduced engine performance may maintain vehicle speeds above 20mph while the third is a limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Allegations of stall appear to be related to the limited limp home mode. Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability. Allegations of vehicle surge appear to be related to limp home mode operation. Complaints alleging surge are most likely related to engine RPM fluctuations at low vehicle speeds or idle as the control system engages to prevent engine stall. In limited limp mode, rough-idle conditions may exist while the control system attempts to modulate engine RPMs once the vehicle reaches a reduced speed to maintain approximately 900 RPM. Separately, ODI received 59 complaints alleging incidents of engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2010-2011 Ford Fusion vehicles. Approximately 60 percent (36) of the incidents occurred at speeds of 40 miles per hour or more. Eighty percent of complaints (47) were received beginning March 2012 and 14 complaints reported that the throttle body was replaced or DTCs associated with limp home modes. Additionally, Ford issued TSB 10-21-6 addressing DTCs associated with idle speed drops and limited limp home mode. The petition is granted on certain model years.Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 has been opened to assess the scope, frequency and potential safety consequences associated with the alleged defect.See full copy of the closing resume for this defect petition for list of the VOQs associated with the defect petition analysis.

PE11016 · Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage

Opened Apr 27, 2011 · Closed Aug 18, 2011

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut; Visibility; Visibility:glass, Side/rear

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Additional source detail variants (5)

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Visibility

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Visibility:glass, Side/rear

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Go deeper into Ford Escape problems