NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
558 reportsClear category filter58,000 miles · May 19, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
WHILE TRAVELING ON A BUSY INTERSTATE, THE ACCELERATOR SUDDENLY STOPPED RESPONDING WITHOUT ANY WARNING. THE GAS PEDAL DID NOT WORK AND THE VEHICLE IMMEDIATELY STARTED SLOWING DOWN AT AN ALARMING RATE. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT DISPLAYED FOR THE FIRST TIME DURING THIS AUTOMATIC SHUTDOWN. LUCKILY WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE OVE…
Read full complaint
WHILE TRAVELING ON A BUSY INTERSTATE, THE ACCELERATOR SUDDENLY STOPPED RESPONDING WITHOUT ANY WARNING. THE GAS PEDAL DID NOT WORK AND THE VEHICLE IMMEDIATELY STARTED SLOWING DOWN AT AN ALARMING RATE. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT DISPLAYED FOR THE FIRST TIME DURING THIS AUTOMATIC SHUTDOWN. LUCKILY WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE OVER TO THE SHOULDER OF THE HIGHWAY WITHOUT AN ACCIDENT. THERE WERE NO SYMPTOMS OR WARNINGS BEFORE THE VEHICLE DANGEROUSLY SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY. THIS SAME ISSUE HAS RANDOMLY HAPPENED 5-6 MORE TIMES THE PAST FEW MONTHS. WE PULL THE VEHICLE TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURN IT OFF EACH TIME. AFTER WAITING A FEW MINUTES, WE START THE VEHICLE, ENGINE LIGHT GOES OFF AND SO FAR HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET TO OUR DESTINATION. THE MOST RECENT INCIDENT HAPPENED A FEW DAYS AGO AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT REMAINED ON AFTER RESTARTING THE VEHICLE. WE JUST HAD THE VEHICLE CHECKED FOR ERROR CODES AND IT SHOWS P2112 THROTTLE ACTUATOR STUCK CLOSED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10512732
75,000 miles · May 18, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
VEHICLE LOST POWER WHILE DRIVING APPROX 40 MPH. NO RESPONSE FROM THE GAS PEDAL. SHUT IGNITION OFF AND CAR RAN FINE FOR A WHILE. HAPPENED THREE MORE TIMES. TOOK VEHICLE TO FORD DEALER FOR REPAIR, THEY SAID IT WAS A FAULTY THROTTLE BODY. VEHICLE IS STILL IN SHOP AS THERE APPARENTLY IS A "NATIONAL BACKORDER" ON THE PART - NONE…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE LOST POWER WHILE DRIVING APPROX 40 MPH. NO RESPONSE FROM THE GAS PEDAL. SHUT IGNITION OFF AND CAR RAN FINE FOR A WHILE. HAPPENED THREE MORE TIMES. TOOK VEHICLE TO FORD DEALER FOR REPAIR, THEY SAID IT WAS A FAULTY THROTTLE BODY. VEHICLE IS STILL IN SHOP AS THERE APPARENTLY IS A "NATIONAL BACKORDER" ON THE PART - NONE AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10512629
65,000 miles · May 15, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING ON INTERSTATE 4 (FLORIDA) LOST ALL ACCELERATION OF ESCAPE WHILE DRIVING MIDDLE LANE (70 MPH). I CONTACTED THE DEALERSHIP AND PAID FOR IT TO GET FIXED (THEY SAID IT WAS A BATTERY CABLE) . I HAD TWO CARS SWERVE TO MISS ME AS THE CAR TOTALLY SHUT DOWN AS I WAS TRYING TO GET OVER TO SHOULDER. I CONTACTED FORD VIA …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING ON INTERSTATE 4 (FLORIDA) LOST ALL ACCELERATION OF ESCAPE WHILE DRIVING MIDDLE LANE (70 MPH). I CONTACTED THE DEALERSHIP AND PAID FOR IT TO GET FIXED (THEY SAID IT WAS A BATTERY CABLE) . I HAD TWO CARS SWERVE TO MISS ME AS THE CAR TOTALLY SHUT DOWN AS I WAS TRYING TO GET OVER TO SHOULDER. I CONTACTED FORD VIA EMAIL AND RECEIVED EMAILS BACK INDICATING (AND I HAVE THEM ON FILE) THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL OR NOTICE OF THIS KIND OF ISSUE. THE VEHICLE CONTINUES TO HAVE ISSUES WILL ACCELERATING AND DECELERATING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10512122
34,736 miles · May 11, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
I WAS TRAVELING ON A FOUR LANE HIGHWAY IN SOUTHERN ILLINOIS WITH MY CRUISE CONTROL ON WHEN MY ESCAPE ACCELERATED SUDDENLY THEN JUST AS SUDDENLY LOST ALL ACCELERATION. I COASTED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WITH MY FLASHERS ON. I SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF DUE TO IT SURGING. LEFT IT OFF CALLED MY DEALER AND WHILE ON HOLD JUST TRIED TO SEE …
Read full complaint
I WAS TRAVELING ON A FOUR LANE HIGHWAY IN SOUTHERN ILLINOIS WITH MY CRUISE CONTROL ON WHEN MY ESCAPE ACCELERATED SUDDENLY THEN JUST AS SUDDENLY LOST ALL ACCELERATION. I COASTED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WITH MY FLASHERS ON. I SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF DUE TO IT SURGING. LEFT IT OFF CALLED MY DEALER AND WHILE ON HOLD JUST TRIED TO SEE IF IT WOULD RESTART. IT THEN RESTARTED FINE AND I PROCEEDED TO MY DESTINATION. RETURNED TO MY TOWN OF RESIDENCE AND TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALERSHIP THEY KEPT IT THE REST OF THE DAY AND REPORTED " NO CODES, NO SSMS, NO TSB, RANT ETB TEST PASSED NO PROBLEMS FOUND AT THIS TIME. THE NEXT DAY I WAS IN TOWN GOING UP A HILL WHEN MY ESCAPE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED UP HILL AND AGAIN SUDDENLY LOST ALL ACCELERATION. I THIS TIME COASTED INTO PARKING LOT. AGAIN VEHICLE WAS SURGING. I PLACED VEHICLE IN PARK WITH PARKING BREAK ON DUE TO THE POWER OF THE SURGES. CALLED DEALERSHIP EXPLAINED ISSUES AND MADE THEM LISTEN TO VEHILE WHILE IN PARK. THIS TIME SOMEONE FIGURED ISSUES AS THROTTLE BODY STICKING. THEY REPLACED THROTTLE BODY THAT DAY AND I HAVE NOT HAD TROUBLE SINCE. I AM ONLY FINDING OUT ABOUT THESE ISSUES AFTER SEARCHING WEB FOR SIMILIAR ISSUES AND FOUND THIS SITE AND OTHERS LISTING SAME ISSUES. THIS COULD BE A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION, I HAVE A REPORTED ISSUE TO FORD AND HAVE A CUSTOMER COMPLAINT NUMBER BUT I AM AWAITING A REPRESENTIVE TO RETURN MY CALL AT THIS TIME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10511528
39,110 miles · May 10, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
AFTER DRIVING THE VEHICLE FOR A COUPLE OF HOURS ON SATURDAY MORNING ON THE INTERSTATE I WAS DRIVING IN CITY TRAFFIC. I MADE A RIGHT TURN FROM A STOPPED POSITION. AS I ACCELERATED THE ENGINE BEGAN TO SPUTTER AND ACTED LIKE IT WAS NOT IN GEAR. THE DASHBOARD WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND I HAD NO RESPONSE FROM THE GAS PEDDLE AND THE I…
Read full complaint
AFTER DRIVING THE VEHICLE FOR A COUPLE OF HOURS ON SATURDAY MORNING ON THE INTERSTATE I WAS DRIVING IN CITY TRAFFIC. I MADE A RIGHT TURN FROM A STOPPED POSITION. AS I ACCELERATED THE ENGINE BEGAN TO SPUTTER AND ACTED LIKE IT WAS NOT IN GEAR. THE DASHBOARD WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND I HAD NO RESPONSE FROM THE GAS PEDDLE AND THE IDLE WAS EXTREMELY ROUGH. I COASTED TO A STOP AND TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE. AFTER READING IN THE MANUAL ABOUT THE LIGHT (POWER TRAIN ISSUE) I CALLED AND HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO MY DEALER FOR SERVICE. AS IT WAS SATURDAY I HAD TO WAIT FOR SERVICE UNTIL MONDAY. MONDAY MORNING I RENTED A VEHICLE FROM THE DEALER. ON THURSDAY, 10/25/12, MY VEHICLE WAS READY FOR PICKUP. WHEN I SPOKE TO THE SERVICE ADVISER I WAS TOLD IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY WAS STICKING FOR AN UNKNOWN REASON AND THEY REPLACED IT. I WAS INFORMED THAT THIS WAS NOT A POWER TRAIN ISSUE, BUT IT WAS AN EMISSIONS ISSUE. THEY ALSO SAID IT WAS NOT COVERED UNDER THE POWER TRAIN WARRANTY. ACCORDING TO MY SERVICE TICKET THEY ALSO CHARGED ME AN ADDITIONAL $170 ON A MISCELLANEOUS ITEM. ON 11/12/12 THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AGAIN WHEN I STARTED THE VEHICLE IN THE MORNING. I DROVE IT TO MY DEALER AND WAS TOLD IT WAS THE CANISTER PURGE VALVE THAT HAD A LEAK. THIS WAS ALSO NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10511369
38,000 miles · May 8, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
WAS DRIVING AT SPEED OF 65 ON HWY ON 5/3/2013 WHEN VEHICLE LOST ALL POWER, WRENCH LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND VEHICLE CAME ALMOST TO COMPLETE STOP ALTHOUGH I HAD THE ACCELERATOR COMPLETELY DEPRESSED. COULD ONLY DRIVE ABOUT 1 MILE PER HOUR. PULLED TO SIDE OF ROAD AND TRIED TO DRIVE TO REPAIR SHOP BUT COULD NOT SAFELY DRIVE SO STOPPED A…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING AT SPEED OF 65 ON HWY ON 5/3/2013 WHEN VEHICLE LOST ALL POWER, WRENCH LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND VEHICLE CAME ALMOST TO COMPLETE STOP ALTHOUGH I HAD THE ACCELERATOR COMPLETELY DEPRESSED. COULD ONLY DRIVE ABOUT 1 MILE PER HOUR. PULLED TO SIDE OF ROAD AND TRIED TO DRIVE TO REPAIR SHOP BUT COULD NOT SAFELY DRIVE SO STOPPED AND CALLED ROAD SIDE ASSISTANCE. THEY SUGGESTED I CALL FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND WHEN I CONTACTED THEM THEY INSTRUCTED ME TO TURN OFF ENGINE AND RESTART WHICH I DID, WRENCH LIGHT WENT OUT AND WAS THEN ABLE TO PROCEED HOME. TOOK VEHICLE TO FORD MOTOR REPAIR SHOP AND THEY COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG WITH VEHICLE AND THEY DID NOT TELL ME THERE HAVE BEEN ANY PROBLEMS WITH MAKE/MODEL. TALKED TO ANOTHER REPAIR SHOP AND LEARNED ACCORDING TO A TECHNICAL BULLETIN THERE HAVE BEEN PROBLEMS WITH THROTTLE BODY OF 2010 FORD ESCAPES MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 2009 TO OCTOBER 2009. THIS PROBLEM PART WAS SUBSEQUENTLY FIXED ON MODELS MANUFACTURED AFTER THAT TIME. MINE WAS MANUFACTURED IN SEPTEMBER 2009. THIS NEEDS TO BE FIXED ON ALL VEHICLES IN THE IDENTIFIED MANUFACTURED DATES SINCE IT HAS OBVIOUSLY BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE FORD COMPANY AND FORD REPAIR SHOPS SHOULD ADVISE OWNERS OF THE PROBLEM. I HAVE NO OTHER MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION AND LIVE IN THE MEMPHIS AREA WHERE THERE IS HEAVY INTERSTATE TRAFFIC I CAN NOT SAFELY DRIVE THIS CAR IN MULTIPLE LANE TRAFFIC SINCE IT MAY SUDDENLY LOSE POWER TO 1-2 MPH IN THE MIDDLE OF 70 MPH TRAFFIC. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10511053
52,500 miles · May 7, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING TO WORK GOING ABOUT 40MPH WHEN MY ESCAPE LOST POWER TO THE THROTTLE. I HAD TO PULL OVER AND SHUT IT OFF. I WAITED A FEW MINUTES TO START IT AGAIN. IT STARTED AND DROVE WITH NO PROBLEM FOR A FEW MINUTES AND THEN THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN. AFTER LOOKING FOR SIMILIAR PROBLEMS ONLINE I FOUND THAT IT IS THE THROTTLE…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING TO WORK GOING ABOUT 40MPH WHEN MY ESCAPE LOST POWER TO THE THROTTLE. I HAD TO PULL OVER AND SHUT IT OFF. I WAITED A FEW MINUTES TO START IT AGAIN. IT STARTED AND DROVE WITH NO PROBLEM FOR A FEW MINUTES AND THEN THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN. AFTER LOOKING FOR SIMILIAR PROBLEMS ONLINE I FOUND THAT IT IS THE THROTTLE BODY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10510895
52,000 miles · May 6, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
WHILE GOING ABOUT 65 TO 70 MPH ON AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, I SUDDENLY STARTED TO LOSE SPEED AND WAS UNABLE TO ACCELERATE USING GAS PEDAL. I PULLED OVER TO THE BERM AND STOPPED THE CAR, BUT LEFT ENGINE RUNNING. I THEN TRIED TO SLOWLY ACCELERATE ON THE BERM, BUT CAR STARTED "BUCKING". WE WERE ON A TRIP AND NOT PARTICULARLY CLOSE TO …
Read full complaint
WHILE GOING ABOUT 65 TO 70 MPH ON AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, I SUDDENLY STARTED TO LOSE SPEED AND WAS UNABLE TO ACCELERATE USING GAS PEDAL. I PULLED OVER TO THE BERM AND STOPPED THE CAR, BUT LEFT ENGINE RUNNING. I THEN TRIED TO SLOWLY ACCELERATE ON THE BERM, BUT CAR STARTED "BUCKING". WE WERE ON A TRIP AND NOT PARTICULARLY CLOSE TO HOME, SO WE HAD THE CAR TOWED TO A FORD DEALERSHIP. THEY "PULLED THE CODES" AND COULD FIND NOTHING WRONG. THEY THEN TEST DROVE IT AND SAID IT SEEMED OK. WE HAD NO PROBLEM AFTER THAT UNTIL 4/29/13. MY WIFE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM ON WAY TO WORK, PULLED OVER, AND TURNED THE CAR OFF. SHE THEN RESTARTED IT AND HAD NO PROBLEM. IT HAPPENED TO HER AGAIN YESTERDAY (5/5/13). FRANKLY, ALL 3 INCIDENTS PUT US IN A DANGEROUS PREDICAMENT AND WE WERE LUCKY NOT TO HAVE HAD A MORE SERIOUS INCIDENT. WE ARE NOW AFRAID TO DRIVE THE CAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10510749
42,500 miles · May 4, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
I WAS ACCELERATING UP THE ON-RAMP TO THE BAY BRIDGE FROM SAN FRANCISCO LATE THIS AFTERNOON. THE CAR WAS RESPONDING TO MY FOOT ON THE PEDAL AS THE ENGINE REVVED AND I GAINED SPEED, THEN SUDDENLY IT STOPPED RESPONDING AND SLOWED TO A CHUG WITH MY FOOT STILL ON THE PEDAL. THE WRENCH LIGHT ILLUMINATED AS I PRACTICALLY CAME TO A STOP…
Read full complaint
I WAS ACCELERATING UP THE ON-RAMP TO THE BAY BRIDGE FROM SAN FRANCISCO LATE THIS AFTERNOON. THE CAR WAS RESPONDING TO MY FOOT ON THE PEDAL AS THE ENGINE REVVED AND I GAINED SPEED, THEN SUDDENLY IT STOPPED RESPONDING AND SLOWED TO A CHUG WITH MY FOOT STILL ON THE PEDAL. THE WRENCH LIGHT ILLUMINATED AS I PRACTICALLY CAME TO A STOP WITH SPEEDING TRAFFIC SLAMMING ON BRAKES BEHIND ME. I PUT ON HAZARDS, STOPPED CAR, TURNED OFF ENGINE, RESTARTED CAR AND THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS OFF BUT THE ENGINE LIGHT REMAINED ON FOR THE ENTIRE TIME AFTERWARDS. WHEN I WOULD ACCELERATE IN DRIVE, IT WOULD LIMP AT ABOUT 4 MPH. I COULD NOT GO ANY FASTER. I WAS ABLE TO GET OVER TO THE SLOW LANE AND TRIED TO KEEP GOING. THE CALTRANS SERVICE PATROL TRUCK PULLED UP BEHIND ME AND ESCORTED ME OVER TO THE LEFT LANE WHERE I PROCEEDED SLOWLY TO THE NEXT EXIT. I EVENTUALLY WAS TOWED TO THE FORD DEALER (WHERE I BOUGHT THE CAR) AND HAD TO LEAVE IT OVER THE WEEKEND. THEY CHARGE A FEE FOR DIAGNOSIS, BUT CAN'T DO IT UNTIL MONDAY, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'LL FIND. FROM WHAT I'VE READ, OTHER PEOPLE DESCRIBE VERY SIMILAR SYMPTOMS. THIS WAS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS SITUATION IN THE MIDDLE OF FRIDAY RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. I WAS LUCKY NO ONE WAS HURT. SINCE WE BOUGHT THE CAR NEW, THE ACCELERATION SOUND HAS ALWAYS BEEN LOUD, AND SOMETIMES PASSING GEAR SOUNDS LIKE IT'S OVER-SHOOTING. AFTER I STOP ACCELERATING, IT STILL KEEPS REVVING. HOWEVER, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IT HAS STALLED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10510596
39,400 miles · May 2, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING 70 MPH IN LEFT LANE OF 4 WAY INTERSTATE IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC, MY CAR SUDDENLY LOST ALL ACCELERATION AND I COASTED TO A STOP ON THE LEFT SHOULDER. ENGINE STILL RAN, BUT CAR IDLED ROUGHLY AND LURCHED FORWARD. TURNED ENGINE OFF AND CALLED 911 AND AAA (WAS SITTING ON NARROW LEFT SHOULDER OF BUSY INTERSTATE AT RUSH HOUR). A…
Read full complaint
DRIVING 70 MPH IN LEFT LANE OF 4 WAY INTERSTATE IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC, MY CAR SUDDENLY LOST ALL ACCELERATION AND I COASTED TO A STOP ON THE LEFT SHOULDER. ENGINE STILL RAN, BUT CAR IDLED ROUGHLY AND LURCHED FORWARD. TURNED ENGINE OFF AND CALLED 911 AND AAA (WAS SITTING ON NARROW LEFT SHOULDER OF BUSY INTERSTATE AT RUSH HOUR). AFTER 10 MINUTES, CALLED 911 AGAIN AND THEY SAID HELP WAS STILL FAR AWAY SO I STARTED CAR AND WAS ABLE TO DRIVE THE CAR AS NORMAL SO MERGED INTO TRAFFIC FROM LEFT SHOULDER. BY GRACE OF GOD I WAS IN THE LEFT LANE WHEN POWER WAS LOST, NOT SURE I COULD HAVE MADE IT TO EITHER SHOULDER HAD IT HAPPENED WHILE I WAS IN ONE OF THE MIDDLE LANES. ALSO GLAD MY 17 MONTH OLD SON WASN'T WITH ME, AS I WAS ON WAY TO PICK HIM UP FROM DAYCARE. TODAY (MAY 2), I DROVE CAR TO DEALER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE PROBLEM IS A FAULTY THROTTLE BODY. AM HAVING IT REPLACED. WAS TOLD THERE IS NOT A RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM. SCARY, THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO DIE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10510395
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.