← 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

Steering complaints

422 reports
Clear category filter
52,000 miles · Dec 5, 2018
Steering

EXITING HIGHWAY WHEN POWER STEERING WAS LOST. PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF ROAD AND SHUT OFF VEHICLE FOR A MINUTE OR LESS. RESTARTED VEHICLE AND POWER STEERING RESUMED. CONTACTED DEALER THEY SAID BRING IT IN FOR INSPECTION. COULD FIND NO FAULTS. SAID STEERING COLUMN WOULD NEED REPLACING BUT WASN'T COVERED BY RECALL FOR SAME PROBL…

Read full complaint

EXITING HIGHWAY WHEN POWER STEERING WAS LOST. PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF ROAD AND SHUT OFF VEHICLE FOR A MINUTE OR LESS. RESTARTED VEHICLE AND POWER STEERING RESUMED. CONTACTED DEALER THEY SAID BRING IT IN FOR INSPECTION. COULD FIND NO FAULTS. SAID STEERING COLUMN WOULD NEED REPLACING BUT WASN'T COVERED BY RECALL FOR SAME PROBLEM BECAUSE RECALL STOPPED IN 2014. THIS IS A KNOWN PROBLEM WITH THIS VEHICLE AND DEFINITELY A SAFETY PROBLEM. FORD SHOULD STILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS DEFECT AND TO FIX IT. VEHICLE HAS ONLY 52000 MILES ON IT. VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION WHEN THIS HAPPENED. VEHICLE WAS SERVICED FOR RECALL IN 2014 BUT NO PROBLEM WAS FOUND AT THAT TIME.

NHTSA ODI #11156089

125,000 miles · Dec 4, 2018
Steering

POWER STEERING WENT OUT SPONTANEOUSLY WHILE DRIVING ON CITY STREET. CAR WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO MANEUVER AND HAD TO BE TOWED TO REPAIR CENTER. WAS REPAIRED FOR COST OF $1500. RECALLS WERE CHECKED AS MECHANIC SAID THIS WAS NOT A COMMON PROBLEM, AND MANY RECALLS FOR THIS MAKE, MODEL AND YEAR WERE FOUND, BUT MY VIN NUMBER WAS NOT. CLEARL…

Read full complaint

POWER STEERING WENT OUT SPONTANEOUSLY WHILE DRIVING ON CITY STREET. CAR WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO MANEUVER AND HAD TO BE TOWED TO REPAIR CENTER. WAS REPAIRED FOR COST OF $1500. RECALLS WERE CHECKED AS MECHANIC SAID THIS WAS NOT A COMMON PROBLEM, AND MANY RECALLS FOR THIS MAKE, MODEL AND YEAR WERE FOUND, BUT MY VIN NUMBER WAS NOT. CLEARLY THIS POSES A REAL SAFETY ISSUE AND SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

NHTSA ODI #11155856

120,000 miles · Nov 30, 2018
Steering

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE POWER STEERING WAS FAILING. THE STEERING WHEEL WAS STIFF AND THE STEERING WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE VEHICLE PULLED TO ONE SIDE WHEN THE POWER STEERING MALFUNCTIONED AND THE STEERING WAS VERY RIGID. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT T…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE POWER STEERING WAS FAILING. THE STEERING WHEEL WAS STIFF AND THE STEERING WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE VEHICLE PULLED TO ONE SIDE WHEN THE POWER STEERING MALFUNCTIONED AND THE STEERING WAS VERY RIGID. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS ON THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000.

NHTSA ODI #11154910

150,000 miles · Nov 27, 2018
Steering

TAKATA RECALL THE POWER STEERING ASSIST SYSTEM QUIT WHILE I WAS DRIVING. I ALMOST HIT A CAR HEAD ON. WHEN I LOOKED UP HOW TO FIX THIS PROBLEM I FOUND THAT THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THE ESCAPE WITH THE SAME MODEL YEAR AS MINE. MY ESCAPE WAS BUILT OUT OF THE KC PLANT WERE THE RECALL WAS ISSUED.... THE BAD PART MY VEHICLE IS NOT PART…

Read full complaint

TAKATA RECALL THE POWER STEERING ASSIST SYSTEM QUIT WHILE I WAS DRIVING. I ALMOST HIT A CAR HEAD ON. WHEN I LOOKED UP HOW TO FIX THIS PROBLEM I FOUND THAT THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THE ESCAPE WITH THE SAME MODEL YEAR AS MINE. MY ESCAPE WAS BUILT OUT OF THE KC PLANT WERE THE RECALL WAS ISSUED.... THE BAD PART MY VEHICLE IS NOT PART OF THE RECALL

NHTSA ODI #11154287

197,000 miles · Nov 24, 2018
Steering

MY STEERING WHEEL STARTED TO SHAKE REAL BAD WHEN DRIVING, PARKED, AND WHEN JUST SITTING AND NOW IT IT SAYING THE POWER STEERING ASSIST IS AT FAULT AND I CAN NOT MOVE MY WHEEL AT ALL I WAS GETTING READY TO LEAVE WORK

NHTSA ODI #11153527

72,024 miles · Nov 19, 2018
Steering

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. BEFORE PARKING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT HEARD AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE STEERING WHEEL AREA. UPON DRIVING THE VEHICLE AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED. THE STEERING WHEEL WAS EXTREMELY TIGHT AND DIFFICULT TO MANEUVER, WHICH CAUSED THE CONTACT TO BRIEFLY COAST…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. BEFORE PARKING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT HEARD AN ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE STEERING WHEEL AREA. UPON DRIVING THE VEHICLE AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED. THE STEERING WHEEL WAS EXTREMELY TIGHT AND DIFFICULT TO MANEUVER, WHICH CAUSED THE CONTACT TO BRIEFLY COAST THE VEHICLE OFF THE ROAD. THERE WAS NO WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS TURNED OFF AND RESTARTED, THE COMPUTER TO RELEASE THE STEERING WHEEL ABILITY WAS RESET. THE VEHICLE WAS SAFELY DRIVEN TO THE CONTACT'S RESIDENCE AND PARKED. AN APPOINTMENT WAS SCHEDULED ON NOVEMBER 13, 2018 WITH BOMMARITO FORD (675 DUNN RD, HAZELWOOD, MO 63042, (314) 895-0600), BUT THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DETERMINED. THE VEHICLE WAS EXCLUDED FROM NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 14V284000 (STEERING); HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE EXHIBITED THE SAME FAILURE LISTED IN THE RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 72,024. *TT*JB

NHTSA ODI #11152452

156,000 miles · Nov 18, 2018
Steering

WHILE DRIVING AT A LOW RATE OF SPEED THE POWER STEERING MALFUNCTIONED AND THE STEERING WHEEL PULLS EXTREMELY HARD TO THE LEFT.I WAS ON A CITY STREET AND THANKFULLY NOT ON THE HIGHWAYNOW EVERY TIME THE VEHICLE IS STARTED THE STEERING AUTOMATICALLY (AND BY IT'S SELF) TURNS HARD AND FAST ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT. THIS HAPPENED AT AB…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING AT A LOW RATE OF SPEED THE POWER STEERING MALFUNCTIONED AND THE STEERING WHEEL PULLS EXTREMELY HARD TO THE LEFT.I WAS ON A CITY STREET AND THANKFULLY NOT ON THE HIGHWAYNOW EVERY TIME THE VEHICLE IS STARTED THE STEERING AUTOMATICALLY (AND BY IT'S SELF) TURNS HARD AND FAST ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT. THIS HAPPENED AT ABOUT 156,000 MILES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A FORD MECHANIC BUT COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED. THERE ARE NO CODES OR INDICATOR FAULT LIGHTS OR WARNINGS. IT WS MADE AT THE KANSAS CITY PLANET BUT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALLS. I GUESS SOMEONE WILL HAVE TO DIE OR WORSE TAKE THE LIFE OF SOMEONE ELSE BECAUSE OF THIS MALFUNCTION.ALL OF THE COMPLAINTS ABOUT FORD'S ELECTRONIC STEERING AND STILL NOTHING BEING DONE. MAKES YOU WONDER WHO'S REALLY CALLING THE SHOTS HERE.

NHTSA ODI #11152265

96,000 miles · Nov 17, 2018
Steering

RECENTLY I'VE NOTICED ISSUES WITH MY POWER STEERING. I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS A RECALL FOR CERTAIN ESCAPES, BUT MINE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT RECALL, DESPITE BEING FROM THE SAME PLANT. I HEAR A CLICK AND THEN MY POWER STEERING GOES OUT. THERE IS A CLICK RIGHT BEFORE IT GOES OUT, AND A CLICK RIGHT BEFORE IT COMES BACK ON. IT HA…

Read full complaint

RECENTLY I'VE NOTICED ISSUES WITH MY POWER STEERING. I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS A RECALL FOR CERTAIN ESCAPES, BUT MINE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT RECALL, DESPITE BEING FROM THE SAME PLANT. I HEAR A CLICK AND THEN MY POWER STEERING GOES OUT. THERE IS A CLICK RIGHT BEFORE IT GOES OUT, AND A CLICK RIGHT BEFORE IT COMES BACK ON. IT HAPPENS MULTIPLE TIMES WHILE DRIVING. THIS LOSS OF POWER STEERING AT FIRST LASTED ONLY A FEW SECONDS WHEN I FIRST NOTICED IT LAST WEEK, BUT JUST IN THAT SHORT PERIOD, THE TIME HAS INCREASED AT EACH OCCURRENCE. I'VE ONLY DRIVEN MY CAR THREE TIMES IN THAT WEEK, AND AT THE LAST OCCURRENCE, THE POWER STEERING WAS OUT FOR CLOSER TO A MINUTE. THIS ONLY OCCURS WHILE I AM IN MOTION, AND HAPPENS WHETHER I AM TURNING OR NOT AND SHOWS NO DISCRETION WHETHER I AM ON A CITY STREET GOING 30 MPH OR HIGHWAY GOING 55-65 MPH.

NHTSA ODI #11152153

98,000 miles · Nov 16, 2018
Steering

LOSS OF POWER STEERING. FORD CLOSED THE RECALL ON THE VEHICLE AFTER HAVING IT CHECKED BUT NOTHING HAD BEEN REPLACED. NOW VEHICLE LOSES POWER STEERING IN THE MIDDLE OF A TURN AND FORD REFUSES TO MAKE UPDATES TO REPLACE THE STEERING COLUMN OR UPDATE THE SOFTWARE. ALL AMERICAN FORD IN PARAMUS, NJ AGREED THAT MY VEHICLE SHOULD BE FI…

Read full complaint

LOSS OF POWER STEERING. FORD CLOSED THE RECALL ON THE VEHICLE AFTER HAVING IT CHECKED BUT NOTHING HAD BEEN REPLACED. NOW VEHICLE LOSES POWER STEERING IN THE MIDDLE OF A TURN AND FORD REFUSES TO MAKE UPDATES TO REPLACE THE STEERING COLUMN OR UPDATE THE SOFTWARE. ALL AMERICAN FORD IN PARAMUS, NJ AGREED THAT MY VEHICLE SHOULD BE FIXED UNDER THE RECALL BUT FORD CORPORATION REFUSED TO REOPEN THE RECALL EVEN THOUGH NOTHING HAD EVER BEEN REPLACED OR REPAIRED UNDER THE RECALL. RECALL NUMBER IS 14S05

NHTSA ODI #11151928

120,000 miles · Nov 14, 2018
SteeringUnknown Or Other

I WAS BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE WHEN A BEEP SOUNDED AND MESSAGE "STEERING ASSIST LIGHT CAME UP. I WENT TO BRANFORD (CONNECTICUT) FORD AND THEY SAID THE STEERING COLUMN NEEDED REPLACING. WITHOUT THIS IT COULD JAM AND CAUSE AND ACCIDENT. CAR ALSO HAD STRAINED STARTING. THEY SAID BATTERY WAS WEAK. REPLACED BATTERY. NEXT DA…

Read full complaint

I WAS BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE WHEN A BEEP SOUNDED AND MESSAGE "STEERING ASSIST LIGHT CAME UP. I WENT TO BRANFORD (CONNECTICUT) FORD AND THEY SAID THE STEERING COLUMN NEEDED REPLACING. WITHOUT THIS IT COULD JAM AND CAUSE AND ACCIDENT. CAR ALSO HAD STRAINED STARTING. THEY SAID BATTERY WAS WEAK. REPLACED BATTERY. NEXT DAY SAME PROBLEM STARTING. OBVIOUSLY NOT THE NEW BATTERY. .

NHTSA ODI #11151438

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