NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
558 reportsClear category filter75,000 miles · Sep 29, 2014
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING INTO WORK WITH MY CRUISE CONTROL SET AT 60MPH, MY VEHICLE SUDDENLY SPUTTERED AND THE CRUISE CONTROL DISENGAGED AND THERE SEEMED TO BE A LOSS OF POWER. I REMEMBER THIS DESCRIPTION FROM THE THROTTLE BOTTLE NOTIFICATION I RECEIVED FROM FORD A FEW MONTHS BACK. I HAD TAKEN MY ESCAPE INTO THE DEALERSHIP ON 9/11/14 TO H…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING INTO WORK WITH MY CRUISE CONTROL SET AT 60MPH, MY VEHICLE SUDDENLY SPUTTERED AND THE CRUISE CONTROL DISENGAGED AND THERE SEEMED TO BE A LOSS OF POWER. I REMEMBER THIS DESCRIPTION FROM THE THROTTLE BOTTLE NOTIFICATION I RECEIVED FROM FORD A FEW MONTHS BACK. I HAD TAKEN MY ESCAPE INTO THE DEALERSHIP ON 9/11/14 TO HAVE THIS TAKEN CARE OFF AND NOW 2 WEEKS LATER MY VEHICLE NOW HAS THE THROTTLE CONTROL/POWERTRAIN WARNING LIGHT ON AND IS SHOWING ALL SIGNS OF THE NOTIFICATION FROM FORD. I KNOW THIS ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED, BUT NOW I AM QUESTIONING AS TO WHETHER OR NOT FORD IS ACTUALLY FIXING THE PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10639699
88,500 miles · Sep 25, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control
ACCELERATION ABILITY STOPPED ABRUPTLY ON THE INTERSTATE; HAD TO COAST TO SHOULDER. ENGINE TROUBLE/WRENCH LIGHT ILLUMINATED. HAD IT TOWED TO TRANSMISSION SHOP. HAVE FULLY DOCUMENTED P2112 CODE INDICATING THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY PROBLEM. VEHICLE HAS EXPERIENCED OTHER SHUDDERING/GEAR CHANGING IN THE PAST, DOCUMENTED WITH THE DEALER…
Read full complaint
ACCELERATION ABILITY STOPPED ABRUPTLY ON THE INTERSTATE; HAD TO COAST TO SHOULDER. ENGINE TROUBLE/WRENCH LIGHT ILLUMINATED. HAD IT TOWED TO TRANSMISSION SHOP. HAVE FULLY DOCUMENTED P2112 CODE INDICATING THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY PROBLEM. VEHICLE HAS EXPERIENCED OTHER SHUDDERING/GEAR CHANGING IN THE PAST, DOCUMENTED WITH THE DEALERSHIP. FORD REFUSES TO SERVICE IT UNDER RECALL EXTENDED WARRANTY BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SEE THE CODE. I DID NOT KNOW IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN TOWED DIRECTLY TO THEM. WOULD BE NICE TO RECEIVE THIS INFORMATION FROM THE DEALERSHIP BEFORE IT OCCURS. DEALERSHIP TOLD ME "NEXT TIME" IT HAPPENS TO PULL OVER, TURN IT OFF, RESTART IT AND DRIVE IT IN TO THEM FOR THE NECESSARY SERVICE. FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE TOLL FREE REPRESENTATIVE SAID THAT IT IS NOT SAVE ONCE THE LIGHT IS ON AND SHOULD NOT BE RESTARTED AND DRIVEN AGAIN. THIS IS LUDICROUS: THEY ARE NOT TAKING RESPONSIBILITY NOR PROVIDING SAFE AND ACCURATE INFORMATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10639135
26,000 miles · Sep 23, 2014
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING TO GO TO LUNCH WHEN MY THROTTLE BODY JUST STOPPED WORKING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. I WAS UNABLE TO DRIVE MY VEHICLE TO A SAFE LOCATION OUT OF THE WAY OF TRAFFIC. I HAD TO SHUT IT OFF SEVERAL TIMES TO JUST GET IT A SIDE ROAD. I HAVE CONTACTED FORD IN REGARDS TO BEING REIMBURSED FOR HAVING THIS PART REPLACED WHICH …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING TO GO TO LUNCH WHEN MY THROTTLE BODY JUST STOPPED WORKING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. I WAS UNABLE TO DRIVE MY VEHICLE TO A SAFE LOCATION OUT OF THE WAY OF TRAFFIC. I HAD TO SHUT IT OFF SEVERAL TIMES TO JUST GET IT A SIDE ROAD. I HAVE CONTACTED FORD IN REGARDS TO BEING REIMBURSED FOR HAVING THIS PART REPLACED WHICH I PAID FOR OUT OF MY OWN POCKET AND THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO REIMBURSE ME STATING THAT THE DATE FOR REIMBURSEMENT WAS OVER JULY 31ST 2014. I HAVE FOUND ON THE NHTSA THAT THE WARRANTY IS GOOD FOR 10 YEARS OR 150,000 MILES FROM THE DATA OF ORIGINAL PURCHASE, WHICH I PURCHASED THE CAR IN NOVEMBER 2012 AND THERE IS ONLY 55,000 MILES ON IT WHICH IS CLEARLY UNDER THE WARRANTY. I HAD THE PART REPLACED AT BARTOW FORD IN BARTOW, FL AND THE ARE REFUSING TO REIMBURSE ME AS WELL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10638320
67,000 miles · Sep 4, 2014
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
WHILE ON A BUSY 6 LANE HWY., I WAS AT A CENTER TURN LANE AND COMPLETED MY TURN WHEN LIGHT CHANGED, THEN WENT TO MAKE MY RIGHT TURN ON TO THE NEXT ROAD.... WHEN MY CARS STARTED TO SHAKE VERY BADLY AND LOST ALL POWER DOWN TO A CRAWL, AND THEN STALL, WITH CARS BEHIND ME ALMOST REAR ENDING MYSELF!! WITH HORNS BLARING I WAS ABLE TO …
Read full complaint
WHILE ON A BUSY 6 LANE HWY., I WAS AT A CENTER TURN LANE AND COMPLETED MY TURN WHEN LIGHT CHANGED, THEN WENT TO MAKE MY RIGHT TURN ON TO THE NEXT ROAD.... WHEN MY CARS STARTED TO SHAKE VERY BADLY AND LOST ALL POWER DOWN TO A CRAWL, AND THEN STALL, WITH CARS BEHIND ME ALMOST REAR ENDING MYSELF!! WITH HORNS BLARING I WAS ABLE TO RESTART IT TO ONLY HAVE IT DO IT AGAIN, ONLY THIS TIME I WAS ABLE TO PULL INTO THE OIL CHANGE SHOP THERE ON THAT CORNER, WHERE THEY CHECKED FOR CODES & FOUND THE "TAC SYSTEM STUCK OPEN"... THEY CHECKED ALL FLUIDS AND I DROVE TO THE LOCAL REPAIR SHOP AND WENT ON TO WORK TO START RESEARCHING THE PROBLEM!! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10630583
69,000 miles · Aug 26, 2014
EngineVehicle Speed Control
ME AND MY SON WERE OUT I WAS DRIVING AROUND 35- 40 MPH AND MY CAR STARTED TO FEEL STRANGE OUT OF THE BLUE MY WRENCH LIGHT COMES ON AND THEN MY ENGINE LIGHT I LOSE ALL POWER I AM HITTING GAS PEDAL NOTHING HAPPENS. JUST STOPS ON BUSY STREET . I WAS TERRIFIED FOR OUR SAFETY. I TURN OFF CAR WAIT A FEW MINS AND START AGAIN IT HAPPENE…
Read full complaint
ME AND MY SON WERE OUT I WAS DRIVING AROUND 35- 40 MPH AND MY CAR STARTED TO FEEL STRANGE OUT OF THE BLUE MY WRENCH LIGHT COMES ON AND THEN MY ENGINE LIGHT I LOSE ALL POWER I AM HITTING GAS PEDAL NOTHING HAPPENS. JUST STOPS ON BUSY STREET . I WAS TERRIFIED FOR OUR SAFETY. I TURN OFF CAR WAIT A FEW MINS AND START AGAIN IT HAPPENED 3 TIMES IN A 3 MILE RADIUS. ITS PARKED AND NOT RISKING MY LIFE OR SOMEBODY ELSE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10628603
88,000 miles · Aug 4, 2014
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
WHILE TRAVELING ABOUT 65 MPH DOWN THE HIGHWAY MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE'S ENGINE STOPPED COMPLETELY. A WARNING LIGHT (THE WRENCH ON THE FORD MODELS) CAME ON AS A I COASTED TO A SAFE SPOT ON THE HIGHWAY. STEERING GAVE OUT A BIT TOO. CAR STARTED RIGHT BACK UP AFTER I FOUND A SAFE LOCATION TO STOP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10618661
Mileage unknown · Jul 31, 2014
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING ALONG AND MY CAR STOPPED RECEIVING INPUT FROM THE GAS PEDAL AT 50 MPH ENTERING THE HIGHWAY. THIS HAPPENED A MONTH AGO. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWICE AS WELL AS MY CAR TAKING OFF WHEN I ACCELERATE FROM STOPPED POSITION. TODAY 7/31/14 THE GAS PEDAL FAILED TO WORK AGAIN WHEN IN A TURN THANK GOD NOBODY WAS BEHIND ME. YOU …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ALONG AND MY CAR STOPPED RECEIVING INPUT FROM THE GAS PEDAL AT 50 MPH ENTERING THE HIGHWAY. THIS HAPPENED A MONTH AGO. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWICE AS WELL AS MY CAR TAKING OFF WHEN I ACCELERATE FROM STOPPED POSITION. TODAY 7/31/14 THE GAS PEDAL FAILED TO WORK AGAIN WHEN IN A TURN THANK GOD NOBODY WAS BEHIND ME. YOU GUYS KNOW THERE IS A THROTTLE BODY ISSUE WITH ALL THESE FORD ESCAPES BUT YET YOU LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS. DOES SOMEONE HAVE TO DIE FROM A REAR END COLLISION BECAUSE THE THROTTLE STAYS CLOSED ON THE HIGHWAY? PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE AT STAKE HERE. MY WIFE AND KID ARE IN THIS CAR WHAT HAPPENS I GO TO PULL OUT AND IT DECIDES TO JUST STAY STUCK HALFWAY INTO THE LANE BAM I GET T BONED THEN HAVE TO SUE EVERYONE THAT KNEW ABOUT THIS ISSUE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10618061
96,632 miles · Jul 30, 2014
Electrical SystemFuel System, GasolineVehicle Speed Control
VEHICLE HAD EXITED FROM FREEWAY AND WAS STOPPED ON AN EXIT RAMP STOP LIGHT. WHEN GAS WAS PUSHED TO MOVE VEHICLE FROM STOPPED POSITION, THE ENGINE ACCELERATED BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT MOVE FORWARD. INITIALLY, THE WRENCH LIGHT APPEARED ON DASH AND THEN LATER, THIS DISAPPEARED AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. VEHICLE WAS …
Read full complaint
VEHICLE HAD EXITED FROM FREEWAY AND WAS STOPPED ON AN EXIT RAMP STOP LIGHT. WHEN GAS WAS PUSHED TO MOVE VEHICLE FROM STOPPED POSITION, THE ENGINE ACCELERATED BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT MOVE FORWARD. INITIALLY, THE WRENCH LIGHT APPEARED ON DASH AND THEN LATER, THIS DISAPPEARED AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A NEARBY AUTO PARTS FACILITY WHERE A COMPUTER CODE EVALUATION WAS COMPLETED- THIS YIELDED THE SAME CODE APPEARING 3 TIMES: A PROBLEM INVOLVING THE THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL SYSTEM SENSOR. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT WHEN THE SAME PROBLEM CODE APPEARS 3 TIMES DURING THE CHECK, THIS ACCURATELY PIN-POINTS THE PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10617790
53,125 miles · Jul 23, 2014
Electrical SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING AT 55MPH ON ROAD. I LOST ALL POWER TO GAS PEDAL THE CAR WAS HARD TO STEER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. PUT CAR IN PARK SHUT CAR OFF .WAITED A FEW MINUTES AN STARTED CAR UP. IT RAN THIS HAPPENS 2 OR 3 TIMES ON THE SAME DAY THEN IT MIGHT NOT HAPPEN AGAIN FOR A WEEK OR TWO THIS A ONGOING PROBLEM THAT FORD SHOULD PLACE A …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING AT 55MPH ON ROAD. I LOST ALL POWER TO GAS PEDAL THE CAR WAS HARD TO STEER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. PUT CAR IN PARK SHUT CAR OFF .WAITED A FEW MINUTES AN STARTED CAR UP. IT RAN THIS HAPPENS 2 OR 3 TIMES ON THE SAME DAY THEN IT MIGHT NOT HAPPEN AGAIN FOR A WEEK OR TWO THIS A ONGOING PROBLEM THAT FORD SHOULD PLACE A SAFETY RECALL NOT ON SOFT CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM#13NO3 THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10615844
89,000 miles · Jul 23, 2014
EngineSteeringVehicle Speed Control
THROUGHOUT ALL OF LAST WINTER, I HAD ISSUES WITH MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE STALLING. THIS OCCURRED COUNTLESS TIMES, AND NEARLY CAUSED MANY ACCIDENTS. IT MOST FREQUENTLY OCCURRED WHEN IT WAS VERY COLD (ZERO OR BELOW), AND ON SOME OCCASIONS WOULD STALL NUMEROUS TIMES IN A ROW, OR FAIL TO RE-START. NO WARNING LIGHT OF ANY SORT EVER CAME …
Read full complaint
THROUGHOUT ALL OF LAST WINTER, I HAD ISSUES WITH MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE STALLING. THIS OCCURRED COUNTLESS TIMES, AND NEARLY CAUSED MANY ACCIDENTS. IT MOST FREQUENTLY OCCURRED WHEN IT WAS VERY COLD (ZERO OR BELOW), AND ON SOME OCCASIONS WOULD STALL NUMEROUS TIMES IN A ROW, OR FAIL TO RE-START. NO WARNING LIGHT OF ANY SORT EVER CAME ON. AFTER PAYING WELL OVER $1000 TO GET VARIOUS THINGS "FIXED" THAT I WAS TOLD WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM, IT CONTINUED HAPPENING. THEN I RECEIVED THE FIRST BULLETIN LETTER REGARDING THROTTLE BODY ISSUES AND TOOK MY CAR TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP IN SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT. THEY PROCEEDED TO TELL ME THAT BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T DUPLICATE THE ISSUE, OR GET A CODE, THEY COULDN'T HELP ME. A FEW WEEKS LATER WHEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN, THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON FOR THE FIRST TIME, SO I DROVE DIRECTLY TO THE DEALERSHIP AGAIN. I WAS TOLD ONCE AGAIN THAT THEY COULDN'T FIX THE THROTTLE BODY ISSUE, AND TRIED CHARGING ME OVER $300 FOR DIAGNOSING MY CAR (LOOKING INTO THE ISSUE OF WHY THE WRENCH WAS ILLUMINATED). I REFUSED TO PAY, BECAUSE THIS IS A FORD ISSUE, IT'S WELL DOCUMENTED ALL OVER THE INTERNET, AND IT'S SOMETHING THEY NEED TO PAY FOR. MY CAR IS STILL NOT FIXED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10615662
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.