NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
245 reportsClear category filter41,000 miles · Aug 12, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2011 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED AND WENT INTO LIMP MODE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY WAS DEFECTIVE AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2011 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED AND WENT INTO LIMP MODE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY WAS DEFECTIVE AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 41,000. UPDATED 10/17/13*LJ UPDATED 10/25/2013 *JS
NHTSA ODI #10534831
31,000 miles · Aug 8, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
AT A STOP LIGHT. STEP ON GAS PEDAL WHEN LIGHT TURNS GREEN, NOTHING HAPPENS. ABLE TO GET CAR TO SIDE OF RODE. WRENCH LIGHT ON. TURN CAR OFF AND ON. WRENCH LIGHT GONE AND CAR DRIVES FINE. TOOK CAR TO MY MECHANIC THAT SAME DAY AND NOTHING "REGISTERED" ON THE CAR'S COMPUTER SO NO PROBLEM IDENTIFIED, ALTHOUGH I WAS TOLD IT "MIG…
Read full complaint
AT A STOP LIGHT. STEP ON GAS PEDAL WHEN LIGHT TURNS GREEN, NOTHING HAPPENS. ABLE TO GET CAR TO SIDE OF RODE. WRENCH LIGHT ON. TURN CAR OFF AND ON. WRENCH LIGHT GONE AND CAR DRIVES FINE. TOOK CAR TO MY MECHANIC THAT SAME DAY AND NOTHING "REGISTERED" ON THE CAR'S COMPUTER SO NO PROBLEM IDENTIFIED, ALTHOUGH I WAS TOLD IT "MIGHT" BE THE "THROTTLE BODY," AS HE'D JUST REPLACED ONE ON ANOTHER FORD. AS A "SAFETY PRECAUTION" I WAS TOLD THAT I COULD PUT THE CAR IN NEUTRAL AND TURN IT ON/OFF TO GET IT GOING IF IT SHOULD HAPPEN ON THE HIGHWAY. CALLED THE FORD SERVICE PEOPLE AND TOLD THEM EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED - THEY ALSO TOLD ME THAT THEY CAN NOT FIX ANYTHING IF NOTHING REGISTERED ON THE CAR'S COMPUTER., I WOULD HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL IT HAPPENED AGAIN. TWO-THREE WEEKS GO BY - CAR DRIVING OK (WHEN GOING TO WORK I MAKE SURE TO DRIVE IN RIGHT LANE "JUST IN CASE" AND I NO LONGER CAN DRIVE ON HIGHWAY WITH MY CHILD IN CAR). THEN, IT HAPPENS: WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH THE CAR LOSES POWER AGAIN. I GET OFF THE ROAD. ENGINE LIGHT AND WRENCH LIGHT ARE ON. CAR TOWED TO DEALER. THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH THE THROTTLE BODY. I AM DRIVING A RENTAL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10534387
57,500 miles · Aug 8, 2013
Fuel System, GasolineVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING ON A RESIDENTIAL STREET WHEN MY CAR SHUDDERED, AND I NO LONGER HAD ANY GAS WHEN I PUSHED THE PEDAL DOWN. THE CAR WAS STILL ON, SO I WAS ABLE TO GUIDE THE CAR TO THE SIDE OF THE STREET, TURN THE CAR OFF AND THEN RESTART THE CAR. THE NEXT DAY, THE SAME THING HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES--ALWAYS A SHUDDER AND THEN NO GAS--B…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ON A RESIDENTIAL STREET WHEN MY CAR SHUDDERED, AND I NO LONGER HAD ANY GAS WHEN I PUSHED THE PEDAL DOWN. THE CAR WAS STILL ON, SO I WAS ABLE TO GUIDE THE CAR TO THE SIDE OF THE STREET, TURN THE CAR OFF AND THEN RESTART THE CAR. THE NEXT DAY, THE SAME THING HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES--ALWAYS A SHUDDER AND THEN NO GAS--BEFORE I WAS FINALLY ABLE TO DRIVE THE CAR TO MY FORD DEALERSHIP TO SEE WHAT WAS WRONG. THEY TOLD ME THE THROTTLE BODY WAS BAD. THEY LOOKED FOR A REPLACEMENT, BUT THEY SAID THE PART WAS ON A NATIONWIDE BACKORDER. THEY SAID I COULD GET THE PART CLEANED (AT MY EXPENSE), BUT THEY WOULDN'T GUARANTEE IT. SINCE I FREQUENTLY HAVE MY GRANDCHILDREN IN MY CAR, AND SINCE I AM FREQUENTLY ON THE INTERSTATE AT MUCH, MUCH HIGHER SPEEDS, I THINK I'LL WAIT FOR THE NEW PART--WHICH I HAVE BEEN TOLD HAS BEEN REDESIGNED. OF COURSE INSURANCE AND EXTENDED WARRANTIES WON'T PAY FOR A RENTAL CAR WHILE WAITING FOR A PART, SO I'M AT HOME--WRITING YOU! THE REAL REASON THAT I'M WRITING, OF COURSE, IS THAT THIS IS SUCH A SAFETY ISSUE. FOR MY CAR TO STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD WAS A LITTLE SCARY. SINCE THERE IS A BACKORDER ON THE PART NATIONWIDE, I ASSUME I'M NOT THE FIRST, OR EVEN THE SECOND, PERSON TO HAVE THIS PROBLEM WITH THEIR FORD CAR. BTW, I CALLED NHTSA, AND MY REFERENCE NUMBER IS [XXX]. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10534334
45,000 miles · Aug 8, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN LOST POWER AND ACCELERATOR BECAME INOPERATIVE AND SMALL WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON INDICATING A PROBLEM.. PULL OVER TO SIDE OF HIGHWAY AND TURNED OFF MOTOR. WAITED SEVERAL MINUTES AND STARTED VEHICLE BACK UP AND WAS FINE AGAIN. DROVE VEHICLE SEVERAL DAYS LATER IN CITY TRAFFIC AND SA…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN LOST POWER AND ACCELERATOR BECAME INOPERATIVE AND SMALL WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON INDICATING A PROBLEM.. PULL OVER TO SIDE OF HIGHWAY AND TURNED OFF MOTOR. WAITED SEVERAL MINUTES AND STARTED VEHICLE BACK UP AND WAS FINE AGAIN. DROVE VEHICLE SEVERAL DAYS LATER IN CITY TRAFFIC AND SAME THING OCCURRED. TOOK VEHICLE TO FORD DEALER AND THEY SAID IT NEEDED AN ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY. THIS IS DEFINITELY A SAFETY ISSUE AND NEEDS AN IMMEDIATE RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10534276
40,000 miles · Aug 7, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
WHEN TRYING TO ACCELERATE INTO TRAFFIC, THE ENGINE DROPPED TO IDLE AND THE GAS PEDAL HAD NO AFFECT. TEMPORARY SOLUTION WAS TO PULL OVER, TURN ENGINE OFF, RESTART (WHICH REQUIRED EXCESSIVE CRANKING) WHICH SEEMED TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE. THROTTLE WORKS AGAIN. THIS ISSUE HAS NOW HAPPENED 3 ADDITIONAL TIMES AND WE HAVE PARKED THE CA…
Read full complaint
WHEN TRYING TO ACCELERATE INTO TRAFFIC, THE ENGINE DROPPED TO IDLE AND THE GAS PEDAL HAD NO AFFECT. TEMPORARY SOLUTION WAS TO PULL OVER, TURN ENGINE OFF, RESTART (WHICH REQUIRED EXCESSIVE CRANKING) WHICH SEEMED TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE. THROTTLE WORKS AGAIN. THIS ISSUE HAS NOW HAPPENED 3 ADDITIONAL TIMES AND WE HAVE PARKED THE CAR AS IT IS UNSAFE AND UNRELIABLE. FORD DEALER HAS NO CLUE ABOUT THE ISSUE AND CAN'T SCHEDULE GETTING IT INTO THE SHOP FOR AT LEAST 2 WEEKS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10534029
44,800 miles · Aug 6, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING MY 2011 FORD ESCAPE LATE AT NIGHT, WHEN I COMPLETELY LOST POWER ON MY VEHICLE. I WAS ABLE TO SAFELY PULL OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. AS I BROUGHT THE CAR TO A STOP (BRAKING), THE CAR JERKED FORWARD BEFORE STOPPING. I SHUT OFF THE CAR, AND SAT FOR A FEW MOMENTS, WONDERING WHAT TO DO. THE DASH SHOWED A WRENCH SYMBOL…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY 2011 FORD ESCAPE LATE AT NIGHT, WHEN I COMPLETELY LOST POWER ON MY VEHICLE. I WAS ABLE TO SAFELY PULL OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. AS I BROUGHT THE CAR TO A STOP (BRAKING), THE CAR JERKED FORWARD BEFORE STOPPING. I SHUT OFF THE CAR, AND SAT FOR A FEW MOMENTS, WONDERING WHAT TO DO. THE DASH SHOWED A WRENCH SYMBOL, SO I CHECKED THE MANUAL TO SEE WHAT IT MEANT. IT SAID SOMETHING ABOUT A FAULT AND THE POWERTRAIN. I CHECKED TO SEE IF THE CAR WOULD RESTART AND IT DID. I CONTINUED TO DRIVE, AND APPROXIMATELY 10-15 MINUTES LATER IT DID IT AGAIN. THIS TIME AT A SPEED OF OVER 60MPH. I MADE IT TO MY DESTINATION AND CALLED MY HUSBAND. HE CHECKED THE INTERNET TO SEE IF ANYONE ELSE HAD THIS PROBLEM AND WAS SHOCKED TO SEE ALL THE COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS. THANKFULLY, HE READ THAT IF I STAYED UNDER 60 MPH AND DIDN'T DRIVE TOO LONG IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN AGAIN. I TOOK THE BACK WAY HOME AND ALTHOUGH IT WAS MUCH LONGER I MADE IT WITHOUT A FURTHER PROBLEM. WHY IS THIS PROBLEM PART(THROTTLE VALVE) NOT RECALLED. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, AND FOR SAFETY REASONS WHY AREN'T THE OWNERS OF THESE 2011 ESCAPE'S MADE IMMEDIATELY AWARE OF THIS HAZARD. THIS WAS THE CLOSEST I CAME TO A FATAL ACCIDENT AND NOT NECESSARILY MY OWN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10533902
41,000 miles · Aug 6, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
I WAS MAKING A RIGHT HAND TURN. THEN AS I CAME OUT OF THE TURN THE CAR STALLED I COULD NOT GO. I PRESSED ON THE GAS BUT NOTHING HAPPENED. I TURNED THE CAR OFF AND RESTARTED IT. IT WORKED FINE UNTIL I WENT AROUND ANOTHER RIGHT TURN, AND IT DID THE SAME THING THAT'S WHEN I TOOK IT TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10533829
40,329 miles · Aug 6, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING IN THE FAR LEFT HAND LANE ON A HIGHWAY AT ABOUT 65 MPH WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN MY VEHICLE LOST POWER AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE WHEN I PUSHED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. I IMMEDIATELY PUT ON MY FLASHERS AND BEGAN MOVING OVER ONE LANE AT A TIME UNTIL FINALLY REACHING THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD. WHILE DOING SO, WHEN THE VEHICLE …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING IN THE FAR LEFT HAND LANE ON A HIGHWAY AT ABOUT 65 MPH WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN MY VEHICLE LOST POWER AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE WHEN I PUSHED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. I IMMEDIATELY PUT ON MY FLASHERS AND BEGAN MOVING OVER ONE LANE AT A TIME UNTIL FINALLY REACHING THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD. WHILE DOING SO, WHEN THE VEHICLE SPEED WAS DOWN TO ABOUT 20 MPH, IT STARTED SHAKING (LIKE A JERKING BACK AND FORTH MOTION). AFTER LETTING THE CAR REST FOR ABOUT 10 MINUTES I TRIED TO START IT UP. THE VEHICLE STARTED, BUT THE CHECK ENGINE INDICATOR LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED. I FOLLOWED THE DIRECTIONS IN THE VEHICLES MANUAL AND DROVE SLOWLY TO MY MECHANIC, NOT ACCELERATING OR DECELERATING ABRUPTLY. THE INITIAL DIAGNOSTIC TEST INDICATED THAT THE MASS AIR FLOW SENSOR NEEDED TO BE CLEANED AND THIS WAS PERFORMED. THE VEHICLE SEEMED TO BE RUNNING NORMALLY FOR ABOUT ONE WEEK, BOTH ON HIGHWAY AND LOCAL CITY ROADS. ONE WEEK LATER, DRIVING ABOUT 20 MPH ON A LOCAL STREET, THE SAME THING HAPPENED. I BROUGHT THE VEHICLE BACK TO MY MECHANIC WHO AFTER DOING THE DIAGNOSTICS TOLD ME THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. APPARENTLY THE MECHANIC FOLLOWED THE BULLETINS WHICH WERE ISSUED BY THE VEHICLE MANUFACTURER, WHICH BY VIRTUE OF ISSUING THESE BULLETINS KNEW OF THE POTENTIAL PROBLEM. I BELIEVE THAT THIS ISSUE IS A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN. I WAS LUCKY, I WAS ABLE TO MOVE MY VEHICLE TO THE SHOULDER OF THE HIGHWAY BECAUSE AT THE TIME THERE WAS NOT MUCH TRAFFIC. DEFINITELY, IF I WAS DRIVING AT 65MPH, AND THERE WAS A CAR BEHIND ME TRAVELING AT THE SAME SPEED, THERE WOULD BE KNOW WAY FOR THEM TO STOP, WHEN MY CAR DECELERATED SO RAPIDLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10533805
33,275 miles · Aug 5, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
THE CAR IS RUNNING THEN THE ACCELERATOR STOPS WORKING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10533769
46,055 miles · Aug 5, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS FROM 50 - 65 MPH, MY ESCAPE WILL SUDDENLY LOSE POWER. THE ENGINE REMAINS RUNNING, BUT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL HAS NO EFFECT. THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO MOVE VERY SLOWLY AFTER MOVING TO THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD. THE "WRENCH" LIGHT IS INDICATED ON THE DASH. AFTER COMING TO A STOP, TURNING THE ENGI…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS FROM 50 - 65 MPH, MY ESCAPE WILL SUDDENLY LOSE POWER. THE ENGINE REMAINS RUNNING, BUT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL HAS NO EFFECT. THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO MOVE VERY SLOWLY AFTER MOVING TO THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD. THE "WRENCH" LIGHT IS INDICATED ON THE DASH. AFTER COMING TO A STOP, TURNING THE ENGINE OFF AND RESTARTING, THE PROBLEM IS TEMPORARILY RESOLVED. AFTER SOME RESEARCH ON THE NHTSA SITE, THIS SAME PROBLEM OCCURS IN THE ESCAPE AND FORD FUSION. FORD IS COMPLETELY AWARE OF THE PROBLEM, BUT HAS NOT ISSUED A RECALL. THE PROBLEM IS THE THROTTLE CONTROL BODY. A LOCAL FORD DEALER OFFERED TO REPLACE THE PART FOR APPROXIMATELY $600. I PURCHASED THE PART FOR $350 AND WILL REPLACE MYSELF AS IT IS A SIMPLE 10 MINUTE JOB. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS DEFECT AND I WISH THAT FORD WOULD TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10533690
Official recalls
2Oct 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.
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.
Illustration