NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
558 reportsClear category filter47,785 miles · Aug 22, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
WHILE BEING DRIVEN ON A LOCAL 45 MPH STREET, OUR ESCAPE APPEARED TO STALL AS IF IT WERE NOT GETTING GAS. THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO "BABY" THE CAR TO A LESS BUSY STREET WHERE THE CAR COULD NOT INCREASE SPEED MORE THAN ABOUT 15 MPH. THE DRIVER THEN TURNED OFF THE ENGINE FOR A FEW MINUTES. THE ENGINE WAS RESTARTED AND CAR SPEED WAS…
Read full complaint
WHILE BEING DRIVEN ON A LOCAL 45 MPH STREET, OUR ESCAPE APPEARED TO STALL AS IF IT WERE NOT GETTING GAS. THE DRIVER WAS ABLE TO "BABY" THE CAR TO A LESS BUSY STREET WHERE THE CAR COULD NOT INCREASE SPEED MORE THAN ABOUT 15 MPH. THE DRIVER THEN TURNED OFF THE ENGINE FOR A FEW MINUTES. THE ENGINE WAS RESTARTED AND CAR SPEED WAS ABLE TO INCREASE TO 45 MPH. WE THEN DROVE THE CAR TO A LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP WHERE IT WAS REPAIRED BY REPLACEMENT OF THE THROTTLE BODY A COUPLE OF DAYS LATER. WE ASKED IF IT COULD BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE THROTTLE BODY BUT WERE INFORMED BY THE DEALERSHIP THAT IT WAS TYPICAL OF A FORD 2010 ESCAPE TO HAVE THE THROTTLE BODY REPLACED WITH MILEAGE CLOSE TO THAT OF OUR CAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536827
57,000 miles · Aug 22, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
CAR WOULD OCCASIONALLY LURCH FORWARD WHILE DRIVING, THEN ON AUGUST 21ST 2013, CAR LURCHED FORWARD THEN FELT LIKE IT STALLED OUT. TOOK IT TO FORD DEALERSHIP THEY STATED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY WENT OUT AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536797
48,000 miles · Aug 22, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE ON THE HIGHWAY AT AROUND 65MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER AND THE GAS PEDAL BECAME USELESS. I WAS FORCED TO PULL OVER AND TURN OFF THE CAR. AFTER RESTARTING THE CAR APPEARED TO GO BACK TO NORMAL, BUT THE SAME THING HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS. WHEN I FINALLY GOT AN APPO…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE ON THE HIGHWAY AT AROUND 65MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER AND THE GAS PEDAL BECAME USELESS. I WAS FORCED TO PULL OVER AND TURN OFF THE CAR. AFTER RESTARTING THE CAR APPEARED TO GO BACK TO NORMAL, BUT THE SAME THING HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS. WHEN I FINALLY GOT AN APPOINTMENT WITH FORD TO HAVE IT FIXED THEY CHARGED ME $623 TO REPLACE THE THROTTLE BODY BECAUSE MY VEHICLE IS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY. I TOLD THEM I HAD NEVER HEARD OF A THROTTLE BODY NEEDING TO BE REPLACED ON A VEHICLE WITH LESS THAN 50,000 MILES WITHOUT HAVING SOME TYPE OF MANUFACTURES DEFECT. THE FORD SERVICE TECH DIDN'T SEEM TO CARE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536794
34,000 miles · Aug 22, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE AFTER REPEATED ATTEMPTS. THE VEHICLE WAS COASTED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WHERE THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF. UPON RESTARTING, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED NORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE AFTER REPEATED ATTEMPTS. THE VEHICLE WAS COASTED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WHERE THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF. UPON RESTARTING, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED NORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER AND A CHIP WAS REPLACED IN THE TRANSMISSION, WHICH DID NOT CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THE FAILURE RECURRED AND THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED FOR THE MOST RECENT FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 34,000.
NHTSA ODI #10536713
7,700 miles · Aug 22, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE FREEWAY WHEN SUDDENLY, MY ENGINE LOST POWER. A WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, AND MY THROTTLE WAS COMPLETELY UNRESPONSIVE. FORTUNATELY, I WAS IN THE RIGHT LANE, SO I WAS ABLE TO COAST SAFELY OFF THE FREEWAY AND ONTO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. I SHUT MY CAR OFF, WAITED A MINUTE OR TWO, AND THEN RESTARTED MY CAR. EVE…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE FREEWAY WHEN SUDDENLY, MY ENGINE LOST POWER. A WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, AND MY THROTTLE WAS COMPLETELY UNRESPONSIVE. FORTUNATELY, I WAS IN THE RIGHT LANE, SO I WAS ABLE TO COAST SAFELY OFF THE FREEWAY AND ONTO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. I SHUT MY CAR OFF, WAITED A MINUTE OR TWO, AND THEN RESTARTED MY CAR. EVERYTHING SEEMED FINE AFTER THAT. THIS HAPPENED AGAIN, NOW TOTALING 6 TIMES, ALL WHILE I WAS DRIVING. WENT TO THE MECHANIC, HE CALLED THE DEALERSHIP. HE WAS TOLD THAT THIS WAS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM AND THAT HE COULD PUT A RUSH ORDER ON IT FOR AN ADDITIONAL 15% OF THE PRICE, AND IT WOULD STILL TAKE 2 WEEKS. THROUGH NORMAL CHANNELS, IT WOULD WAKE SEVERAL MONTHS. I NEED MY CAR TO WORK, AND TWO THINGS BOTHER ME THE MOST: A RUSH ORDER WOULD STILL TAKE 2 WEEKS TO BE DELIVERED, AND IF IT'S A COMMON PROBLEM, IT FEELS AS THOUGH FORD IS DOING NOTHING TO ALLEVIATE IT, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT IMPAIRS MY ABILITY TO DRIVE SAFELY ON THE ROAD. I AM CONSTANTLY PARANOID WHILE DRIVING ON THE ROAD, AND I HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE BUT TO CONTINUE TO DRIVE MY CAR, SINCE IT'S MY ONLY MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536613
49,900 miles · Aug 21, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
AS I WAS ENTERING MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE'S GAS PEDAL WAS NO LONGER WORKING. I LOOKED AT THE DASH AND NOTICED THAT A WRENCH ICON ON THE LOWER LEFT OF THE INSTRUMENT PANEL WAS LIT. THE ESCAPE WAS STILL GOING, BUT WAS NOT RESPONDING TO THE GAS PEDAL. I TURNED ON THE HAZARD LIGHTS AND PULLED UP TO THE CURB AN…
Read full complaint
AS I WAS ENTERING MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE'S GAS PEDAL WAS NO LONGER WORKING. I LOOKED AT THE DASH AND NOTICED THAT A WRENCH ICON ON THE LOWER LEFT OF THE INSTRUMENT PANEL WAS LIT. THE ESCAPE WAS STILL GOING, BUT WAS NOT RESPONDING TO THE GAS PEDAL. I TURNED ON THE HAZARD LIGHTS AND PULLED UP TO THE CURB AND PUT THE VEHICLE IN PARK. I TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF, COUNTED TO 10 AND THEN STARTED IT AGAIN. I WAS ABLE TO CONTINUE DRIVING AND THE VEHICLE AGAIN RESPONDED TO THE GAS PEDAL. AFTER SOME RESEARCH, I FOUND THAT MY EXPERIENCE IS TERMED "LIMP MODE" AND IS ITSELF A SAFETY FEATURE. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO AN AUTO PARTS STORE WHO HOOKED IT UP TO THEIR DIAGNOSTIC EQUIPMENT AND COULD NOT PULL AN ERROR CODE OFF OF IT. THE TECHNICIAN RECOMMENDED I LOOK INTO THE THROTTLE BODY AND THROTTLE POSITION SENSOR. DURING THAT RESEARCH, I FOUND THAT OTHER FORD ESCAPE DRIVERS HAVE HAD THE SAME EXPERIENCE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536555
10,000 miles · Aug 21, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING THE CAR AT APPROXIMATELY 40 MILES PER HOUR, THE CAR SUDDENLY JUST STALLED. I PUT ON MY HAZARD LIGHTS, PUT THE CAR IN PARK, RESTARTED THE ENGINE. THE CAR RESTARTED FINE. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWICE--ONCE WHEN THE CAR HAD APPROXIMATELY 10,000 MILES AND MORE RECENTLY AT 51,000. FORTUNATELY, THERE WERE NO OTHER CARS BE…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING THE CAR AT APPROXIMATELY 40 MILES PER HOUR, THE CAR SUDDENLY JUST STALLED. I PUT ON MY HAZARD LIGHTS, PUT THE CAR IN PARK, RESTARTED THE ENGINE. THE CAR RESTARTED FINE. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWICE--ONCE WHEN THE CAR HAD APPROXIMATELY 10,000 MILES AND MORE RECENTLY AT 51,000. FORTUNATELY, THERE WERE NO OTHER CARS BEHIND ME AT THE TIME THIS HAPPENED, OTHERWISE THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A SERIOUS ACCIDENT. THE CAR HAS BEEN TAKEN TO A FORD DEALERSHIP BOTH TIMES THAT THIS PROBLEM OCCURRED. BECAUSE IT IS A VERY RANDOM PROBLEM (IT HAS HAPPENED TWICE IN 3 YEARS), FORD CANNOT REPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THEY ALSO SAY THAT THERE ARE NO DIAGNOSTIC CODES INDICATING A PROBLEM. FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, THIS IS AN ACTIVE PROBLEM WITH THESE CARS. THE ONLY FORD RESPONSE REGARDING THIS STALLING PROBLEM THAT I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO UNCOVER IS A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN WHICH INDICATES A FAULTY CIRCUIT BOARD ON FORD ESCAPES BUILT BETWEEN JUNE 22 AND OCT 15, 2009, WHICH IS THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THIS CAR WAS BUILT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536541
57,000 miles · Aug 21, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
ON 2 OCCASIONS MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE LOST THROTTLE POWER WHILE DRIVING. THIS HAS HAPPENED ONCE WHILE STARTING TO ACCELERATE AND ONCE WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH. THE YELLOW TOOLBAR LIGHTS UP ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND THE CAR ESSENTIALLY LOSES POWER AND I'M UNABLE TO DRIVE FORWARD. AFTER FURTHER INVESTIGATION WE NEED TO REPLACE THE T…
Read full complaint
ON 2 OCCASIONS MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE LOST THROTTLE POWER WHILE DRIVING. THIS HAS HAPPENED ONCE WHILE STARTING TO ACCELERATE AND ONCE WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH. THE YELLOW TOOLBAR LIGHTS UP ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND THE CAR ESSENTIALLY LOSES POWER AND I'M UNABLE TO DRIVE FORWARD. AFTER FURTHER INVESTIGATION WE NEED TO REPLACE THE THROTTLE BODY WHICH COST $345 (NOT COVERED BY WARRANTY AND NO RECALL). IN MY OPINION THIS SHOULD BE A RECALLED PART CONSIDERING HOW COMMON THIS PROBLEM APPEARS TO BE AND MORE IMPORTANTLY THE EXTREMELY DANGEROUS POSITION IT LEAVES YOU ON THE ROAD WHEN THE THROTTLE BODY FAILS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536509
48,000 miles · Aug 21, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE LOST ACCELERATION POWER WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS. THE WRENCH WARNING ICON ILLUMINATED AFTER THE FAILURE OCCURRED. THE VEHICLE RESUMED NORMAL FUNCTION AFTER THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF FOR A MOMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE LOST ACCELERATION POWER WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS. THE WRENCH WARNING ICON ILLUMINATED AFTER THE FAILURE OCCURRED. THE VEHICLE RESUMED NORMAL FUNCTION AFTER THE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF FOR A MOMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE A DIAGNOSTIC WAS PERFORMED, WHICH LOCATED THE FAILURE AT THE THROTTLE BODY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 48,000.
NHTSA ODI #10536507
52,000 miles · Aug 21, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING THE VEHICLE NORMALLY WHEN SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER (LIMP MODE) THE LADY IN THE VEHICLE BEHIND ME ALMOST HIT ME THEN SHE WENT OFF THE ROAD HERSELF. I HAD TO PULL OVER I SHUT THE ENGINE OFF AND WENT TO CHECK ON THE LADY IN THE OTHER VEHICLE AND LUCKILY HER AND HER VEHICLE WERE FINE,UNFORTUNATELY I DID NOT GET HER NAME OR NU…
Read full complaint
DRIVING THE VEHICLE NORMALLY WHEN SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER (LIMP MODE) THE LADY IN THE VEHICLE BEHIND ME ALMOST HIT ME THEN SHE WENT OFF THE ROAD HERSELF. I HAD TO PULL OVER I SHUT THE ENGINE OFF AND WENT TO CHECK ON THE LADY IN THE OTHER VEHICLE AND LUCKILY HER AND HER VEHICLE WERE FINE,UNFORTUNATELY I DID NOT GET HER NAME OR NUMBER. WHEN I RESTARTED THE VEHICLE IT OPERATED NORMALLY, THE THROTTLE WAS RESPONSIVE AGAIN. I DROVE ABOUT 3 MORE MILES AND IT HAPPENED AGAIN AS I WAS MAKING A LEFT HAND TURN. AGAIN SHUT THE ENGINE OFF AND RESTARTED AGAIN OPERATED NORMALLY. I LATER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL CAR PARTS STORE AND HAD THEM CHECK THE CODES. THE CODES THEY GOT WERE P2111 AND P2112 THROTTLE BODY STUCK OPEN, STUCK CLOSED RESPECTIVELY. I CONTACTED A FORD SERVICE CENTER AND THEY INFORMED ME THAT THEY CAN SCHEDULE SERVICE NEXT WEEK BUT THEY HAVE SO MANY OF THESE BAD THAT THE PARTS ARE ON BACK ORDER. SINCE THIS CAUSED A NEAR MISS I FELT COMPELLED TO REPORT IT AS WELL AS IT SEEMS TO BE A PRETTY SIZABLE ISSUE SINCE THE PARTS ARE DIFFICULT FOR FORD TO GET. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536484
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.