← New search

2009 Ford Fusion

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2009 Ford Fusion do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 1,109.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

624 reports with mileage · 398 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Service Brakes. Review the 473 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 359 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 60 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

65 crash reports5 fire reports25 injury reports

Engine complaints

30 reports
Clear category filter
83,464 miles · Nov 21, 2014
Electrical SystemEngine

2009 FORD FUSION - WHILE DRIVING, ALL OF THE LIGHTS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL LIT UP. DRIVER PULLED OVER TO SAFE AREA & SHUT OFF VEHICLE. VEHICLE WOULD NOT RESTART. LIGHTS, RADIO AND FAN STILL WORKED. VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO GARAGE FOR ASSESSMENT & REPAIRS - THE MAIN POWER CONTROL MODULE AND THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL MODULE WERE …

Read full complaint

2009 FORD FUSION - WHILE DRIVING, ALL OF THE LIGHTS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL LIT UP. DRIVER PULLED OVER TO SAFE AREA & SHUT OFF VEHICLE. VEHICLE WOULD NOT RESTART. LIGHTS, RADIO AND FAN STILL WORKED. VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO GARAGE FOR ASSESSMENT & REPAIRS - THE MAIN POWER CONTROL MODULE AND THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL MODULE WERE BAD, BATTERY WAS AT 9 INSTEAD OF 12 - ALL COMPONENT'S NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10659964

91,000 miles · Nov 16, 2014
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train

I'M GETTING A CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND A WRENCH SYMBOL ON MY DASHBOARD. WHEN I TAKE IT TO GET CHECKED, IT SAYS 'FAULTY THROTTLE BODY' OR THROTTLE CONTROL ACTUATOR. THIS CAUSES MY FORD FUSION TO GO INTO 'LIMP HOME' MODE. THIS IS A MODE THAT CAUSES THAT CAR TO ACCELERATE NO MORE THAN 20 MILES AN HOUR. THE PROBLEM WITH THIS IS TH…

Read full complaint

I'M GETTING A CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND A WRENCH SYMBOL ON MY DASHBOARD. WHEN I TAKE IT TO GET CHECKED, IT SAYS 'FAULTY THROTTLE BODY' OR THROTTLE CONTROL ACTUATOR. THIS CAUSES MY FORD FUSION TO GO INTO 'LIMP HOME' MODE. THIS IS A MODE THAT CAUSES THAT CAR TO ACCELERATE NO MORE THAN 20 MILES AN HOUR. THE PROBLEM WITH THIS IS THAT IT HAPPENS WHEN I'M IN THE MIDDLE OF TRAFFIC, TRAVELING AT SPEEDS OF 55-70 MILES AN HOUR. WHEN THIS HAPPENS, I FEAR FOR MY LIFE. WHEN I CONTACT AUTO CARE CENTERS, THEY ALL TELL ME THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT HAS TO BE HANDLED BY THE DEALERSHIP. WHEN I CONTACT THE DEALERSHIP, THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. I THINK THAT THIS THROTTLE BODY IS DEFECTIVE AND AFTER SOME ONLINE RESEARCH, I SEE THAT I'M ONE OF MANY FORD OWNERS THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO. I WOULD LIKE A THEM RECALL THIS DEFECTIVE AUTO PART. I HOPE NO ONE HAS DIED FROM THEIR CAR SUDDENLY GOING INTO 'LIMP HOME' MODE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10655307

215,000 miles · Nov 15, 2014
Engine

TL-THE CONTACT OWNS A 2009 FORD FUSION. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT NOTICE. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO BE RESTARTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING AND THE ELECTRIC THROTTLE BODY WAS REPLACED. THE CONTACT WAS MADE AWARE OF NHTSA ACTION NUMBER: PE13003 …

Read full complaint

TL-THE CONTACT OWNS A 2009 FORD FUSION. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT NOTICE. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO BE RESTARTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING AND THE ELECTRIC THROTTLE BODY WAS REPLACED. THE CONTACT WAS MADE AWARE OF NHTSA ACTION NUMBER: PE13003 (ENGINE) AND STATED THAT THE VEHICLE DISPLAYED THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 215,000. MF

NHTSA ODI #10655199

95,000 miles · Aug 17, 2014
EngineVehicle Speed Control

ON 8/10/2014, AFTER PULLING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, WE NOTICED A REDUCTION IN ACCELERATION ON OUR 2009 FORD FUSION. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON AND UPON TAKING THE VEHICLE TO AUTOZONE, THE CODES P2112 AND P2104 SHOWED UP INDICATING A DEFECT WITH THE THROTTLE BODY. UPON RESEARCHING THE INTERNET WE FOUND THE NHTSA ACTION NUMBER…

Read full complaint

ON 8/10/2014, AFTER PULLING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, WE NOTICED A REDUCTION IN ACCELERATION ON OUR 2009 FORD FUSION. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON AND UPON TAKING THE VEHICLE TO AUTOZONE, THE CODES P2112 AND P2104 SHOWED UP INDICATING A DEFECT WITH THE THROTTLE BODY. UPON RESEARCHING THE INTERNET WE FOUND THE NHTSA ACTION NUMBER PE13003 WHICH INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THIS PART ON 2009-2013 FUSIONS AND THAT FORD WOULD COVER THE REPAIR WHEN THE PROBLEM OCCURRED. WE TOOK THE CAR TO SOUTHWAY FORD IN SAN ANTONIO ON MONDAY, 8/11/2014. ON FRIDAY, 8/15/2014, THE FORD SERVICE ADVISOR INDICATED THAT THE PROBLEM TRULY WAS THE THROTTLE BODY, BUT WE WERE TOLD THAT FORD WOULD NOT PAY FOR THIS REPAIR. WE HAVE BROUGHT THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE SERVICE MANAGER AT SOUTHWAY FORD AND TO THE CORPORATE CUSTOMER RELATIONS DEPARTMENT AT FORD. OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS A DEFECT IN THIS PART, WHICH CAUSES A POTENTIAL LIFE-THREATENING SAFETY HAZARD BUT FORD DOES NOT SEEM TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CORRECTING THE PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10625819

38,000 miles · Jul 28, 2014
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control

WHILE MERGING ONTO A FREEWAY MY CAR EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER WHILE DRIVING. SHORTLY AFTERWARDS MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON AND I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER TO SEE WHAT IT WAS. IT WAS A BAD CATALYTIC CONVERTER I WAS TOLD THAT IT WOULD TAKE 4 WEEKS TO GET ONE IN. MEANWHILE IT BEING MY ONLY CAR I ASKED AND WAS DENIED A LOANE…

Read full complaint

WHILE MERGING ONTO A FREEWAY MY CAR EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER WHILE DRIVING. SHORTLY AFTERWARDS MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON AND I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER TO SEE WHAT IT WAS. IT WAS A BAD CATALYTIC CONVERTER I WAS TOLD THAT IT WOULD TAKE 4 WEEKS TO GET ONE IN. MEANWHILE IT BEING MY ONLY CAR I ASKED AND WAS DENIED A LOANER VEHICLE FROM FORD MOTOR CO. AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE VEHICLE WAS STILL SAFE TO DRIVE AS LONG AS I DID NOT LET IT GOO TOO LONG WITHOUT THE REPAIR. I CALLED BACK 4 WEEKS LATER AND WAS TOLD THAT IT WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 4-8 WEEKS AS THERE WERE "NO" PARTS TO BE FOUND ANYWHERE. THIS WORRIED ME GREATLY AS THEY EVEN SAID PROBLEMS COULD ARISE IF DRIVEN TOO LONG WITHOUT BEING FIXED. SO I FILED A COMPLAINT WITH FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND WAS TREATED LIKE CRAP BY THEM. THEY TOLD ME THEY WERE WILLING TO HELP BUT "NOT" WILLING TO DO ANYTHING. SO I CALLED A LOCAL NEWS STATION WHO PUT ME IN TOUCH WITH THEIR EXECUTIVE OFFICES WHERE I GOT THE SAME RESPONSE. NO LOANER VEHICLE AND NO COMPENSTAION FOR THE EXTRA GAS I HAD TO BUY AS IT SUCKED IT DOWN. WHENEVER SOMEONE FROM FORD'S CALLS ME I AM LUCKY TO GET A SENTENCE IN BEFORE THEY HUNG UP ON ME! THANKFULLY TO MY CONTACTING A LOCAL NEWS STATION THEY MADE ENOUGH HEADWAY WITH FORD THAT MY PART "FINALLY" ARRIVED TODAY ON 07/28/14 BUT I AM EXTREMELY UPSET THAT FORD WOULD PUT ME IN THE SITUATION WHERE MYSELF AND MY FAMILY COULD BE IN DANGER BY DRIVING AN AUTOMOBILE THAT IS NOT SAFE. DRIVING WITH BAD CATALYTIC CONVERTERS IS NOT SAFE AND COULD CAUSE ALL SORTS OF OTHER ISSUES AND THE FACT THAT FORD'S ENCOURAGED ME TO DO SO IS FRIGHTENING. THIS FOR ONE ALONG WITH THE GM ISSUES HAS ME SERIOUSLY THINKING OF BUYING A FOREIGN AUTOMOBILE FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER. IT WAS WRONG WHAT FORD MOTOR COMPANY DID TO MYSELF AND MY FAMILY AND I HOPE THAT THIS COMPLAINT WILL PREVENT THEM FROM DOING THIS AGAIN IN THE FUTURE! *JS

NHTSA ODI #10616773

81,000 miles · Jun 10, 2014
Engine

I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC AT 70 MPH WHEN THE WRENCH LIGHT TURNS ON THE DANS AND THE ENGINE JUST QUIT. VERY SCARY SO I PUT ON MY HAZARD LIGHTS AND COASTED TO THE MEDIAN . I TRIED TO RESTART THE CAR AND THE THEFT LOCK LIGHT STARTED FLASHING AND THE CAR WOULDN'T EVEN CRANK THE MOTOR. HAD THE CAR TOWED TO …

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC AT 70 MPH WHEN THE WRENCH LIGHT TURNS ON THE DANS AND THE ENGINE JUST QUIT. VERY SCARY SO I PUT ON MY HAZARD LIGHTS AND COASTED TO THE MEDIAN . I TRIED TO RESTART THE CAR AND THE THEFT LOCK LIGHT STARTED FLASHING AND THE CAR WOULDN'T EVEN CRANK THE MOTOR. HAD THE CAR TOWED TO A LOCAL SHOP IT STARTED RIGHT UP AT THE SHOP AND THERE WERE NO CODES IN THE COMPUTER THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON AND THE MESSAGE CENTER SAYA POD DATA ERROR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10597509

164,381 miles · Mar 5, 2014
EngineFuel System, Gasoline

ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED, CAR SEEMED TO CHUG OR LURCH OR ENGINE FELT LIKE IT WAS SLIPPING WHILE DRIVING ON HIGHWAY. THAT HAPPENED A NUMBER OF TIME, WAS TOLD IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE SEVERE COLD WEATHER. THE WRENCH LIGHT WOULD COME ON AND THEN WHEN I SHUT THE CAR OFF IT WOULD NOT COME BACK ON FOR A FEW DAYS. THE MECHANIC SAID THER…

Read full complaint

ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED, CAR SEEMED TO CHUG OR LURCH OR ENGINE FELT LIKE IT WAS SLIPPING WHILE DRIVING ON HIGHWAY. THAT HAPPENED A NUMBER OF TIME, WAS TOLD IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE SEVERE COLD WEATHER. THE WRENCH LIGHT WOULD COME ON AND THEN WHEN I SHUT THE CAR OFF IT WOULD NOT COME BACK ON FOR A FEW DAYS. THE MECHANIC SAID THERE WERE NO REPORTS THAT HE COULD PULL FROM THE COMPUTER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10567513

153,100 miles · Jan 1, 2014
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control

SLOWED DOWN TO TURN IN A PARKING LOT AND CAR JUST STALLED AND CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND TOOL LIGHT CAME ON. I HAD A DIAGNOSTIC RSN AND GOT CODE 2104 & 2112 MEANING THROTTLE BODY FAILURE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10558111

51,000 miles · Sep 10, 2012
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train

WHEN DRIVING AT A NORMAL SPEED, THE IDLE OF THE CAR QUICKLY DROPS AND YOU ARE UNABLE TO MAINTAIN YOUR SPEED. YOU IMMEDIATELY ARE FORCED TO STOP THE CAR, TURN IT OFF AND LET IT SIT TO RESET IT'S SELF WHERE EVER ON THE ROAD YOU ARE. THIS HAS HAPPEN RANDOMLY LAST FEW WEEKS. JUST A FEW DAYS AGO IT GOT INCREASINGLY WORSE. WAS ENTERIN…

Read full complaint

WHEN DRIVING AT A NORMAL SPEED, THE IDLE OF THE CAR QUICKLY DROPS AND YOU ARE UNABLE TO MAINTAIN YOUR SPEED. YOU IMMEDIATELY ARE FORCED TO STOP THE CAR, TURN IT OFF AND LET IT SIT TO RESET IT'S SELF WHERE EVER ON THE ROAD YOU ARE. THIS HAS HAPPEN RANDOMLY LAST FEW WEEKS. JUST A FEW DAYS AGO IT GOT INCREASINGLY WORSE. WAS ENTERING HIGHWAY OFF AN EXIT TRYING TO MERGE. WAS UNABLE TO GET THE SPEED BECAUSE THE IDLE DROPPED. LUCKILY HAD JUST ENOUGH TIME TO GET TO SHOULDER TO SIT AND WAIT. HAD IT BEEN FEW SECONDS LONGER WOULD OF MERGED WITH HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AND THEN CAR WOULD OF CAME TO A QUICK HALT. THE DIAGNOSIS TO THIS PROBLEM THE THROTTLE BODY WENT BAD. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10474501

52,000 miles · Jun 1, 2012
Engine

I WAS DRIVING TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THEM CHECK A TAPPING SOUND COMING FROM THE ENGINE THAT I HAD HEARD EARLIER THAT DAY. I MADE IT ABOUT 5 MILES FROM HOME, AND THE ENGINE HAD BLOWN, NO WARNING LIGHTS, NOTHING OTHER THAN THE SOUND THAT HAD JUST OCCURRED THAT MORNING. NOW I HAD MADE IT ABOUT 90K AFTER THE NEW ENGINE WAS INSTALLED …

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THEM CHECK A TAPPING SOUND COMING FROM THE ENGINE THAT I HAD HEARD EARLIER THAT DAY. I MADE IT ABOUT 5 MILES FROM HOME, AND THE ENGINE HAD BLOWN, NO WARNING LIGHTS, NOTHING OTHER THAN THE SOUND THAT HAD JUST OCCURRED THAT MORNING. NOW I HAD MADE IT ABOUT 90K AFTER THE NEW ENGINE WAS INSTALLED (NOW AT 139000), AND AGAIN THE ENGINE HAS BLOWN. THIS TIME IT WAS A LITTLE WORSE, THE CAR HAD A SUDDEN INCREASE OF POWER, AND THEN ALL THE SUDDEN THERE WAS A LOUD BANG, AND A CLOUD OF WHITE SMOKE FOLLOWED BY SMOKE COMING FROM THE HOOD AND THE REAR OF THE CAR. WHEN I PULLED ONTO THE SHOULDER I LOOKED UNDER THE CAR AND SAW A PIECE OF THE ENGINE FALL OUT AND THEN ALL OF THE OIL AS WELL. I TAKE VERY GOOD CARE OF EVERY VEHICLE I OWN, THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED THE DEALERSHIP TOLD ME IT LOOKED LIKE I HADN'T CHANGED MY OIL EVER. IT WAS JUST A SLUDGE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10460295

Official recalls

6

21V158000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Mar 10, 2021

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2007-2011 Ranger, 2006-2012 Fusion, Lincoln Zephyr, Lincoln MKZ, 2006-2011 Mercury Milan, 2007-2010 Ford Edge, and Lincoln MKX vehicles. The driver's side air bag inflator may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, high temperatures, and high temperature cycling.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants, resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the driver-side airbag inflator or module with an alternate one, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed on April 9, 2021 for the passenger side, and November 14, 2022 for the driver side. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 21S12.

21V081000 · Air Bags:frontal; Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Feb 16, 2021

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2005-2014 Mustang, 2004-2011 Ranger, 2009-2011 Mercury Milan, 2006 Ford GT, 2008-2012 Fusion, 2007-2010 Edge and Lincoln MKX, and 2009-2010 Lincoln MKZ vehicles. These vehicles may be equipped with a driver or passenger frontal air bag inflator used as a replacement service part, that may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the frontal air bag, an inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver and passenger air bag module, and replace either the module or the inflator, if necessary, free of charge. The recall began March 17, 2021. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 21S05.

Additional source detail variants (3)

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2005-2014 Mustang, 2004-2011 Ranger, 2009-2011 Mercury Milan, 2006 Ford GT, 2008-2012 Fusion, 2007-2010 Edge and Lincoln MKX, and 2009-2010 Lincoln MKZ vehicles. These vehicles may be equipped with a driver or passenger frontal air bag inflator used as a replacement service part, that may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the frontal air bag, an inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver and passenger air bag module, and replace either the module or the inflator, if necessary, free of charge. The recall began March 17, 2021. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 21S05.

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2005-2014 Mustang, 2004-2011 Ranger, 2009-2011 Mercury Milan, 2006 Ford GT, 2008-2012 Fusion, 2007-2010 Edge and Lincoln MKX, and 2009-2010 Lincoln MKZ vehicles. These vehicles may be equipped with a driver or passenger frontal air bag inflator used as a replacement service part, that may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the frontal air bag, an inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver and passenger air bag module, and replace either the module or the inflator, if necessary, free of charge. The recall began March 17, 2021. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 21S05.

Air Bags:frontal

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2005-2014 Mustang, 2004-2011 Ranger, 2009-2011 Mercury Milan, 2006 Ford GT, 2008-2012 Fusion, 2007-2010 Edge and Lincoln MKX, and 2009-2010 Lincoln MKZ vehicles. These vehicles may be equipped with a driver or passenger frontal air bag inflator used as a replacement service part, that may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the frontal air bag, an inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver and passenger air bag module, and replace either the module or the inflator, if necessary, free of charge. The recall began March 17, 2021. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 21S05.

19V904000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module

Dec 18, 2019

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2006-2010 Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zephyr and MKZ vehicles. The valves within the ABS Hydraulic Control Units (HCU) may react with brake fluids containing specific corrosion preventative additives. This reaction may cause the valves to not close properly.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the valves do not properly close, additional brake pedal travel may be required to stop the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will flush the brake system with DOT 4 fluid and install a new brake fluid reservoir cap. In addition, the HCU will be tested to detect a possible stuck valve condition, replacing the HCU as necessary. All services will be performed free of charge. The recall began April 1, 2021. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 19S54.

18V046000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Jan 11, 2018

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2013 Ford Mustang vehicles sold, or ever registered in the states of Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands (Saipan), and the U.S. Virgin Islands or "Zone A." Additionally, Ford is recalling certain 2010 Ford Edge, Fusion, Mustang and Ranger, Lincoln MKX and Zephyr/MKZ, and Mercury Milan vehicles ever registered in the states of Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia or "Zone B." Ford is also recalling certain 2009 Ford Edge, Fusion, Mustang and Ranger, Lincoln MKX and Zephyr/MKZ, and Mercury Milan vehicles ever registered in the states of Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming or "Zone C." These vehicles are equipped with air bag inflators assembled as part of the passenger frontal air bag modules, used as original equipment or replacement equipment (such as after a vehicle crash necessitating replacement of the original air bags), that may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Owners are advised not to drive their vehicles until the repair has been performed. Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the passenger frontal air bag inflator, free of charge. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 19S01.

17V024000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Jan 10, 2017

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2012 Ford Fusion and Mustang and Lincoln Zephyr and MKZ vehicles originally sold, or ever registered, in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands (Saipan), and the U.S. Virgin Islands, or "Zone A." Additionally, unless included in "Zone A" above, Ford is recalling certain 2009 Ford Ranger, Edge, Fusion and Mustang, Lincoln MKX, MKZ and Zephyr and Mercury Milan vehicles originally sold, or ever registered, in Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia, or "Zone B." Additionally, unless included in "Zone A" or "Zone B" above, Ford is recalling certain 2007-2008 Ford Ranger, Edge and Lincoln MKX, 2006-2008 Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zephyr and MKZ, 2005-2008 Ford Mustang and 2005-2006 Ford GT vehicles originally sold, or ever registered, in the states of Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming. These vehicles are equipped with certain air bag inflators assembled as part of the passenger frontal air bag modules used as original equipment or replacement equipment. In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger frontal air bag, these inflators may rupture due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to absolute humidity and temperature cycling.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An inflator rupture may result in metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Owners are advised not to drive their vehicles until the repair has been performed. Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the passenger frontal air bag inflator, free of charge. Interim letters informing owners of the recall and that parts are not yet available began mailing March 1, 2017. 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 19S01.

16V384000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

May 31, 2016

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2007-2011 Ford Ranger vehicles, 2006-2011 Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan and Lincoln Zephyr/MKZ vehicles, 2007-2010 Ford Edge, Lincoln MKX vehicles, 2005-2006 Ford GT vehicles, and 2005-2011 Ford Mustang vehicles originally sold, or ever registered, in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands (Saipan), and the U.S. Virgin Islands, or "Zone A." Additionally, unless included in "Zone A" above, Ford is recalling certain model year 2007-2008 Ford Ranger, Edge and Lincoln MKX vehicles, 2006-2008 Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan and Lincoln Zephyr/MKZ vehicles, 2005-2006 Ford GT vehicles and 2005-2008 Ford Mustang vehicles originally sold, or ever registered, in Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia, or "Zone B." Any vehicle not included in "Zone A", or "Zone B" is not included in the safety recall. These vehicles are equipped with certain air bag inflators assembled as part of the passenger frontal air bag modules, and used as original equipment or replacement equipment. In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the front air bags, these inflators may rupture due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to absolute humidity and temperature cycling.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An inflator rupture may result in metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Owners are advised not to drive their vehicles until the repair has been performed. Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the passenger frontal air bag inflator, free of charge. Ford mailed interim letters informing owners that parts are not yet available on July 15, 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 19S01.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

4

EA18002 · Extended Braking Distance

Opened Apr 18, 2018 · Closed Jan 15, 2021

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Air:antilock:control Unit/module

On April 18, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Engineering Analysis (EA) 18-002 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year (MY) 2006-12 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ, and MY 2006-11 Mercury Milan vehicles manufactured with Continental Automotive System?s ABS hydraulic control units (HCUs). Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (initiated by slippery or uneven surfaces) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the vehicle stopping distance increased beyond driver expectations.Inside the HCU are four hydraulic normally closed (NC) valves with zinc-coated moving armatures that control the flow of brake fluid. Unstable brake fluid can degrade over time, allow the brake fluid to gel, and corrosion to form on the armatures. The high-viscosity gelation and corrosion can cause the armatures to become stuck (open). In some cases, braking returns to normal when the armature(s) subsequently become unstuck. The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose with complainants reporting having (non-HCU) repairs conducted only to have the condition return.During the investigation, 14 HCUs from complaint vehicles were recovered, including seven from reported crashes. NHTSA?s Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) disassembled the HCUs, removed the four NC valves in each, and confirmed 22 of the 56 NC valves contained stuck armatures. On seven of the 14 HCUs, both front wheel armatures were stuck, on nine of the 14 HCUs two or three armatures were stuck. And 52 of the 56 NC armatures exhibited corrosion of the zinc coating. Forces required to extract stuck armatures from the valve sleeve were measured to range from 1.1 to 18.0 lbs. VRTC also conducted ABS braking tests on a variety of test surfaces that showed HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel and braking distances. Testing also showed that if the driver was able to apply four times the brake pedal force and two times the brake pedal travel, then high-vehicle decelerations could be achieved, however, single or multiple wheel lockups were also occurring.Based on Ford?s response to ODI?s July 20, 2018 information request letter, and complainants' reports to NHTSA, ODI identified a population of vehicles with an elevated level of field failure compared to vehicles produced both before and after.Further evaluation of Ford?s response identified that the brake fluid used to produce these vehicles, a specific formulation of a DOT3 fluid provided by CCI Corporation between February 2006 and July 2009, differed from the brake fluid used in other vehicle populations. ODI used the correlation of fluid specification and elevated field failures to identify a vehicle population exhibiting a defect trend. The complaints, crashes and injuries cited above, and the 14 recovered HCUs involve vehicles from this population.On December 18, 2019, Ford submitted safety recall (19V-904) to remedy HCU failures on the MY 2006-2010 Ford Fusion, Lincoln MKZ, and Mercury Milan vehicles manufactured with the suspect CCI brake fluid formulation. Ford will function test the HCU and replace the DOT 3 brake fluid with an improved DOT 4 brake fluid. If the HCU fails the function test, Ford will install an HCU with a different armature coating (black oxide). HCUs with black oxide coating were fully phased into Ford?s new vehicle production by MY 2016; these HCUs do not appear to be experiencing armature corrosion. ODI notes that the non-recalled EA18-002 subject vehicles, which were manufactured with a different specification brake fluid, did not display an elevated level of field failures like the recalled vehicles.Based on available information, Ford?s rec

PE16017 · Extended Braking Distance

Opened Dec 20, 2016 · Closed May 4, 2018

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes; Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module

On December 20, 2016, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 16-017 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year 2007 through 2009 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles.Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (caused by braking on a slippery or uneven surface) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the distance in which the vehicle stopped increased beyond what was expected by the driver.The cause of the problem appears to be the Antilock Braking System (ABS) Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU), a component manufactured for Ford by Continental Automotive Systems.Hydraulic control valves within the HCU can experience corrosion and become stuck.In some cases, braking returns to normal when the valve(s) subsequently become unstuck.The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose and complainants report having several brake system components replaced only to have the condition return.ODI has identified 544 reports submitted to the agency that relate to this issue in model year 2006-2012 Ford Fusion/MKZ and MY 2006-2011 Mercury Milan, the subject vehicles.Complainants report an increase in pedal travel which in some cases resulted in going past expected stopping points or having to steer to avoid contacting another vehicle; twenty six report a crash with 3 injuries alleged.The Ford reports shown above, which are from PE16-017 and involved the scope discussed above, were similar in content and identified 7 crashes without injury.During PE16-017, ODI was able to recover HCUs from some complaint vehicles, including some from the reported crashes.The recovered HCUs were sent to NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) in East Liberty, Ohio for evaluation.VRTC was able to confirm stuck valves and corrosion of the zinc coated control valves, and it's testing indicates that HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel that may affect braking distance.According to Ford, newer version HCUs have a different coating on the affected valves that do not currently appear to be experiencing corrosion.In it's response to ODI's information request letter, Ford described analysis of two failed HCUs removed from complainant vehicles.In both cases, a gelatinous material found inside the HCU prevented control valves from properly returning to the closed position after actuation.Ford found that an interaction between the valve coating and brake fluid was the likely source of the gelatinous material.It acknowledged that stuck valves can result in increased pedal travel but maintains the affected brake circuit will develop pressure and respond if the brake pedal is pressed sufficiently.While it has not identified an unreasonable risk to safety due to this issue, Ford states that it continues to investigate the possible causal and contributory factors including additional engineering evaluations and testing.An Engineering Analysis has been opened to assess the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequence of the alleged defect.Based on information received during PE16-017, the scope of the investigation has been increased to include another model, the Lincoln MKZ, and to expand the model years of the subject vehicles.

Additional source detail variants (4)

Service Brakes

On December 20, 2016, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 16-017 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year 2007 through 2009 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles.Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (caused by braking on a slippery or uneven surface) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the distance in which the vehicle stopped increased beyond what was expected by the driver.The cause of the problem appears to be the Antilock Braking System (ABS) Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU), a component manufactured for Ford by Continental Automotive Systems.Hydraulic control valves within the HCU can experience corrosion and become stuck.In some cases, braking returns to normal when the valve(s) subsequently become unstuck.The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose and complainants report having several brake system components replaced only to have the condition return.ODI has identified 544 reports submitted to the agency that relate to this issue in model year 2006-2012 Ford Fusion/MKZ and MY 2006-2011 Mercury Milan, the subject vehicles.Complainants report an increase in pedal travel which in some cases resulted in going past expected stopping points or having to steer to avoid contacting another vehicle; twenty six report a crash with 3 injuries alleged.The Ford reports shown above, which are from PE16-017 and involved the scope discussed above, were similar in content and identified 7 crashes without injury.During PE16-017, ODI was able to recover HCUs from some complaint vehicles, including some from the reported crashes.The recovered HCUs were sent to NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) in East Liberty, Ohio for evaluation.VRTC was able to confirm stuck valves and corrosion of the zinc coated control valves, and it's testing indicates that HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel that may affect braking distance.According to Ford, newer version HCUs have a different coating on the affected valves that do not currently appear to be experiencing corrosion.In it's response to ODI's information request letter, Ford described analysis of two failed HCUs removed from complainant vehicles.In both cases, a gelatinous material found inside the HCU prevented control valves from properly returning to the closed position after actuation.Ford found that an interaction between the valve coating and brake fluid was the likely source of the gelatinous material.It acknowledged that stuck valves can result in increased pedal travel but maintains the affected brake circuit will develop pressure and respond if the brake pedal is pressed sufficiently.While it has not identified an unreasonable risk to safety due to this issue, Ford states that it continues to investigate the possible causal and contributory factors including additional engineering evaluations and testing.An Engineering Analysis has been opened to assess the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequence of the alleged defect.Based on information received during PE16-017, the scope of the investigation has been increased to include another model, the Lincoln MKZ, and to expand the model years of the subject vehicles.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module

On December 20, 2016, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 16-017 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year 2007 through 2009 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles.Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (caused by braking on a slippery or uneven surface) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the distance in which the vehicle stopped increased beyond what was expected by the driver.The cause of the problem appears to be the Antilock Braking System (ABS) Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU), a component manufactured for Ford by Continental Automotive Systems.Hydraulic control valves within the HCU can experience corrosion and become stuck.In some cases, braking returns to normal when the valve(s) subsequently become unstuck.The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose and complainants report having several brake system components replaced only to have the condition return.ODI has identified 544 reports submitted to the agency that relate to this issue in model year 2006-2012 Ford Fusion/MKZ and MY 2006-2011 Mercury Milan, the subject vehicles.Complainants report an increase in pedal travel which in some cases resulted in going past expected stopping points or having to steer to avoid contacting another vehicle; twenty six report a crash with 3 injuries alleged.The Ford reports shown above, which are from PE16-017 and involved the scope discussed above, were similar in content and identified 7 crashes without injury.During PE16-017, ODI was able to recover HCUs from some complaint vehicles, including some from the reported crashes.The recovered HCUs were sent to NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) in East Liberty, Ohio for evaluation.VRTC was able to confirm stuck valves and corrosion of the zinc coated control valves, and it's testing indicates that HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel that may affect braking distance.According to Ford, newer version HCUs have a different coating on the affected valves that do not currently appear to be experiencing corrosion.In it's response to ODI's information request letter, Ford described analysis of two failed HCUs removed from complainant vehicles.In both cases, a gelatinous material found inside the HCU prevented control valves from properly returning to the closed position after actuation.Ford found that an interaction between the valve coating and brake fluid was the likely source of the gelatinous material.It acknowledged that stuck valves can result in increased pedal travel but maintains the affected brake circuit will develop pressure and respond if the brake pedal is pressed sufficiently.While it has not identified an unreasonable risk to safety due to this issue, Ford states that it continues to investigate the possible causal and contributory factors including additional engineering evaluations and testing.An Engineering Analysis has been opened to assess the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequence of the alleged defect.Based on information received during PE16-017, the scope of the investigation has been increased to include another model, the Lincoln MKZ, and to expand the model years of the subject vehicles.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip

On December 20, 2016, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 16-017 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year 2007 through 2009 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles.Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (caused by braking on a slippery or uneven surface) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the distance in which the vehicle stopped increased beyond what was expected by the driver.The cause of the problem appears to be the Antilock Braking System (ABS) Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU), a component manufactured for Ford by Continental Automotive Systems.Hydraulic control valves within the HCU can experience corrosion and become stuck.In some cases, braking returns to normal when the valve(s) subsequently become unstuck.The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose and complainants report having several brake system components replaced only to have the condition return.ODI has identified 544 reports submitted to the agency that relate to this issue in model year 2006-2012 Ford Fusion/MKZ and MY 2006-2011 Mercury Milan, the subject vehicles.Complainants report an increase in pedal travel which in some cases resulted in going past expected stopping points or having to steer to avoid contacting another vehicle; twenty six report a crash with 3 injuries alleged.The Ford reports shown above, which are from PE16-017 and involved the scope discussed above, were similar in content and identified 7 crashes without injury.During PE16-017, ODI was able to recover HCUs from some complaint vehicles, including some from the reported crashes.The recovered HCUs were sent to NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) in East Liberty, Ohio for evaluation.VRTC was able to confirm stuck valves and corrosion of the zinc coated control valves, and it's testing indicates that HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel that may affect braking distance.According to Ford, newer version HCUs have a different coating on the affected valves that do not currently appear to be experiencing corrosion.In it's response to ODI's information request letter, Ford described analysis of two failed HCUs removed from complainant vehicles.In both cases, a gelatinous material found inside the HCU prevented control valves from properly returning to the closed position after actuation.Ford found that an interaction between the valve coating and brake fluid was the likely source of the gelatinous material.It acknowledged that stuck valves can result in increased pedal travel but maintains the affected brake circuit will develop pressure and respond if the brake pedal is pressed sufficiently.While it has not identified an unreasonable risk to safety due to this issue, Ford states that it continues to investigate the possible causal and contributory factors including additional engineering evaluations and testing.An Engineering Analysis has been opened to assess the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequence of the alleged defect.Based on information received during PE16-017, the scope of the investigation has been increased to include another model, the Lincoln MKZ, and to expand the model years of the subject vehicles.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic

On December 20, 2016, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 16-017 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year 2007 through 2009 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles.Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (caused by braking on a slippery or uneven surface) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the distance in which the vehicle stopped increased beyond what was expected by the driver.The cause of the problem appears to be the Antilock Braking System (ABS) Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU), a component manufactured for Ford by Continental Automotive Systems.Hydraulic control valves within the HCU can experience corrosion and become stuck.In some cases, braking returns to normal when the valve(s) subsequently become unstuck.The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose and complainants report having several brake system components replaced only to have the condition return.ODI has identified 544 reports submitted to the agency that relate to this issue in model year 2006-2012 Ford Fusion/MKZ and MY 2006-2011 Mercury Milan, the subject vehicles.Complainants report an increase in pedal travel which in some cases resulted in going past expected stopping points or having to steer to avoid contacting another vehicle; twenty six report a crash with 3 injuries alleged.The Ford reports shown above, which are from PE16-017 and involved the scope discussed above, were similar in content and identified 7 crashes without injury.During PE16-017, ODI was able to recover HCUs from some complaint vehicles, including some from the reported crashes.The recovered HCUs were sent to NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) in East Liberty, Ohio for evaluation.VRTC was able to confirm stuck valves and corrosion of the zinc coated control valves, and it's testing indicates that HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel that may affect braking distance.According to Ford, newer version HCUs have a different coating on the affected valves that do not currently appear to be experiencing corrosion.In it's response to ODI's information request letter, Ford described analysis of two failed HCUs removed from complainant vehicles.In both cases, a gelatinous material found inside the HCU prevented control valves from properly returning to the closed position after actuation.Ford found that an interaction between the valve coating and brake fluid was the likely source of the gelatinous material.It acknowledged that stuck valves can result in increased pedal travel but maintains the affected brake circuit will develop pressure and respond if the brake pedal is pressed sufficiently.While it has not identified an unreasonable risk to safety due to this issue, Ford states that it continues to investigate the possible causal and contributory factors including additional engineering evaluations and testing.An Engineering Analysis has been opened to assess the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequence of the alleged defect.Based on information received during PE16-017, the scope of the investigation has been increased to include another model, the Lincoln MKZ, and to expand the model years of the subject vehicles.

EA12009 · Floor Mat Interference With Accelerator

Opened Dec 12, 2012 · Closed Jun 12, 2014

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

On May 27, 2014, Ford Motor Company submitted recall 14E-028 (Ford recall #14S07) to correct a safety-related problem with certain driver's side Ford optional all-weather floor mats sold for use in model year 2006 through 2011 model year Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zephyr, and Lincoln MKZ vehicles built at Hermosillo Assembly Plant (HAP) from November 9, 2007, to October 31 ,2010.NHTSA testing determined that the original accessory all-weather mat with a single retention clip (Figure 1), may interfere with accelerator pedal return to idle with the mat retained by the clip and rotated clockwise.Both the single- and double-clip (Figure 2) all-weather floor mats may interfere with the accelerator pedal return to idle when the mats are not secured by the retention clip(s).Testing showed that this can occur if the mats are moved forward from the clipped position approximately two inches into a position in which the rear edge of the mats will abut the retention clip(s) when installed singly and align with the clip(s) when stacked on another floor mat.The pedal interference incidents reviewed by the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) include 1 crash and 9 incidents with allegations of brake friction materials smoking and/or requiring repair for heat related damage.The crash incident occurred after the parking brake was applied at speed, resulting in loss-of-control vehicle yaw event caused by lock-up of the rear tires.The spin-out resulted in a side impact collision with an oncoming vehicle in an opposing lane of traffic. For the 29 incidents with sufficient information available to make an assessment; 23 (79%) were controlled by the driver either shifting to neutral, turning the engine off, or both; 4 (14%) were ended by the driver either kicking the pedal free (2) or pulling the mat away from the pedal (2); and 2 (7%) were ended by the pedal freeing itself from the mat with no apparent driver action.None of the drivers who reacted to the incident by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off reported any difficulties with either action.The subject mats were sold by Ford and Lincoln dealers directly to customers as an optional accessory equipment item or, beginning in November 2007, the mats were also available as a factory installed accessory if ordered with a new vehicle.Ford estimates that approximately 82,579 affected driver's side all weather floor mats were sold worldwide; either over the counter through Ford dealerships or as original equipment.Owners that purchased the subject all-weather floor mats as a factory installed accessory with their new vehicle will be notified to return their all weather floor mats to their Ford or Lincoln Dealership in exchange for replacement mats.Owners of all other potentially affected vehicles will be notified that, if they have an affected Ford driver's side all weather floor mat, they should return their mats to the dealership in exchange for replacement mats.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10327597, 10332233, 10334211, 10335336, 10339330, 10348772 (and duplicate 10342572), 10372674, 10379562, 10415911, 10426255, 10434107, 10521053, 10554966.This investigation is hereby closed.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

On May 27, 2014, Ford Motor Company submitted recall 14E-028 (Ford recall #14S07) to correct a safety-related problem with certain driver's side Ford optional all-weather floor mats sold for use in model year 2006 through 2011 model year Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zephyr, and Lincoln MKZ vehicles built at Hermosillo Assembly Plant (HAP) from November 9, 2007, to October 31 ,2010.NHTSA testing determined that the original accessory all-weather mat with a single retention clip (Figure 1), may interfere with accelerator pedal return to idle with the mat retained by the clip and rotated clockwise.Both the single- and double-clip (Figure 2) all-weather floor mats may interfere with the accelerator pedal return to idle when the mats are not secured by the retention clip(s).Testing showed that this can occur if the mats are moved forward from the clipped position approximately two inches into a position in which the rear edge of the mats will abut the retention clip(s) when installed singly and align with the clip(s) when stacked on another floor mat.The pedal interference incidents reviewed by the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) include 1 crash and 9 incidents with allegations of brake friction materials smoking and/or requiring repair for heat related damage.The crash incident occurred after the parking brake was applied at speed, resulting in loss-of-control vehicle yaw event caused by lock-up of the rear tires.The spin-out resulted in a side impact collision with an oncoming vehicle in an opposing lane of traffic. For the 29 incidents with sufficient information available to make an assessment; 23 (79%) were controlled by the driver either shifting to neutral, turning the engine off, or both; 4 (14%) were ended by the driver either kicking the pedal free (2) or pulling the mat away from the pedal (2); and 2 (7%) were ended by the pedal freeing itself from the mat with no apparent driver action.None of the drivers who reacted to the incident by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off reported any difficulties with either action.The subject mats were sold by Ford and Lincoln dealers directly to customers as an optional accessory equipment item or, beginning in November 2007, the mats were also available as a factory installed accessory if ordered with a new vehicle.Ford estimates that approximately 82,579 affected driver's side all weather floor mats were sold worldwide; either over the counter through Ford dealerships or as original equipment.Owners that purchased the subject all-weather floor mats as a factory installed accessory with their new vehicle will be notified to return their all weather floor mats to their Ford or Lincoln Dealership in exchange for replacement mats.Owners of all other potentially affected vehicles will be notified that, if they have an affected Ford driver's side all weather floor mat, they should return their mats to the dealership in exchange for replacement mats.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10327597, 10332233, 10334211, 10335336, 10339330, 10348772 (and duplicate 10342572), 10372674, 10379562, 10415911, 10426255, 10434107, 10521053, 10554966.This investigation is hereby closed.

Vehicle Speed Control

On May 27, 2014, Ford Motor Company submitted recall 14E-028 (Ford recall #14S07) to correct a safety-related problem with certain driver's side Ford optional all-weather floor mats sold for use in model year 2006 through 2011 model year Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zephyr, and Lincoln MKZ vehicles built at Hermosillo Assembly Plant (HAP) from November 9, 2007, to October 31 ,2010.NHTSA testing determined that the original accessory all-weather mat with a single retention clip (Figure 1), may interfere with accelerator pedal return to idle with the mat retained by the clip and rotated clockwise.Both the single- and double-clip (Figure 2) all-weather floor mats may interfere with the accelerator pedal return to idle when the mats are not secured by the retention clip(s).Testing showed that this can occur if the mats are moved forward from the clipped position approximately two inches into a position in which the rear edge of the mats will abut the retention clip(s) when installed singly and align with the clip(s) when stacked on another floor mat.The pedal interference incidents reviewed by the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) include 1 crash and 9 incidents with allegations of brake friction materials smoking and/or requiring repair for heat related damage.The crash incident occurred after the parking brake was applied at speed, resulting in loss-of-control vehicle yaw event caused by lock-up of the rear tires.The spin-out resulted in a side impact collision with an oncoming vehicle in an opposing lane of traffic. For the 29 incidents with sufficient information available to make an assessment; 23 (79%) were controlled by the driver either shifting to neutral, turning the engine off, or both; 4 (14%) were ended by the driver either kicking the pedal free (2) or pulling the mat away from the pedal (2); and 2 (7%) were ended by the pedal freeing itself from the mat with no apparent driver action.None of the drivers who reacted to the incident by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off reported any difficulties with either action.The subject mats were sold by Ford and Lincoln dealers directly to customers as an optional accessory equipment item or, beginning in November 2007, the mats were also available as a factory installed accessory if ordered with a new vehicle.Ford estimates that approximately 82,579 affected driver's side all weather floor mats were sold worldwide; either over the counter through Ford dealerships or as original equipment.Owners that purchased the subject all-weather floor mats as a factory installed accessory with their new vehicle will be notified to return their all weather floor mats to their Ford or Lincoln Dealership in exchange for replacement mats.Owners of all other potentially affected vehicles will be notified that, if they have an affected Ford driver's side all weather floor mat, they should return their mats to the dealership in exchange for replacement mats.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10327597, 10332233, 10334211, 10335336, 10339330, 10348772 (and duplicate 10342572), 10372674, 10379562, 10415911, 10426255, 10434107, 10521053, 10554966.This investigation is hereby closed.

PE10019 · Accel Pedal Interference - Acc Floormat

Opened May 28, 2010 · Closed Jan 11, 2013

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

Unsecured mats may interfere with accelerator pedal return to idle. A heel blocker in the floor pan provides a platform that may lift an unsecured mat into contact with the pedal. Ford introduced new pedals as a running change early in model year (MY) 2010 vehicles. Analysis of complaints received by ODI and Ford show elevated rates of pedal entrapment incidents in MY 2008 through early 2010 production vehicles. Incidents typically occur following hard pedal applications to pass slower traffic or when merging into faster traffic. Drivers allege continued high engine power after releasing the accelerator pedal and difficulty braking, including reports that the incident was controlled by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off. Drivers and service technicians reference observing evidence of mat interference or note unsecured Ford or aftermarket all weather floor mats in post-incident inspections.Based on information gathered during the Preliminary Evaluation the population being investigated has been narrowed to model years 2008 to 2010.This investigation has been upgraded to an engineering analysis on MY 2008 through early-2010 vehicles (produced through September 2009) to further assess the scope, frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect.The VOQs associated with the opening of this Engineering Analysis are: 10479693, 10415911, 10379562, 10372674, 10345830, 10342572, 10339330, 10335336, 10334211, 10332233, 10331160, 10329659, 10327597, 10320011, 10232027, 10214131