← New search

2010 Mercury Mariner

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Mariner years

Owner complaints for the 2010 Mercury Mariner are substantially higher than the model-year median of 63.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Mariner years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

225 reports with mileage · 45 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.

  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 66 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 61 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Steering. Review the 61 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

2 crash reports2 fire reports3 injury reports

Power Train complaints

60 reports
Clear category filter
95,000 miles · Oct 1, 2013
EnginePower Train

I WAS DRIVING ALONG ON THE HIGHWAY (I-77 N) AND ALL OF A SUDDEN MY CAR STARTED TO JERK. THE WRENCH TOOL LIGHT LIT UP ON THE DASH BOARD AND THE CAR IMMEDIATELY BEGAN TO LOOSE SPEED. THE CHANGE IN POWER AND SPEED WAS QUICK AND I HAD TO QUICKLY CHECK THE SURROUNDING TRAFFIC AND PULL THE CAR OVER TO AVOID AND ACCIDENT. AFTER PULL…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ALONG ON THE HIGHWAY (I-77 N) AND ALL OF A SUDDEN MY CAR STARTED TO JERK. THE WRENCH TOOL LIGHT LIT UP ON THE DASH BOARD AND THE CAR IMMEDIATELY BEGAN TO LOOSE SPEED. THE CHANGE IN POWER AND SPEED WAS QUICK AND I HAD TO QUICKLY CHECK THE SURROUNDING TRAFFIC AND PULL THE CAR OVER TO AVOID AND ACCIDENT. AFTER PULLING OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD I CUT THE CAR COMPLETELY OFF AND IT STARTED BACK UP. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER WHERE I PURCHASED THE CAR AND I WAS ADVISED TO REPLACE THE FILTER. I PURCHASED A FILTER FROM FORD AND MY CAR RAN SMOOTHLY FOR ABOUT 2 WEEKS. I WOULD PUSH ON THE ACCELERATOR BUT IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. EACH TIME THE WRENCH TOOL WOULD APPEAR AND THE ENGINE LIGHT WOULD COME ON. I HAVE LOST SPEED IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION. AFTER MY CAR STARTED TO CUT OFF AGAIN FOLLOWING THE INSTALLATION OF THE NEW FILTER I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO THE DEALER AND WAS INSTRUCTED TO PURCHASE THROTTLE BODY SPRAY. THEY CLEANED OUT THE THROTTLE BODY AND THE CAR DROVE FINE FOR A FEW DAYS UNTIL I BEGAN EXPERIENCING THE SAME PROBLEM. SOME TIMES I WOULD HAVE TO CUT MY CAR OFF A FEW TIMES AND RESTART IT ON ONE ROUND TRIP. I KEEP REGULAR MAINTENANCE ON THIS CAR, CHANGING THE OIL AND ROTATING THE TIRES, ETC. I PURCHASED THE CAR IN DECEMBER 2012 BECAUSE THE CAR I HAD OVER $2,500 OF NEEDED MAINTENANCE. I NEEDED A RELIABLE CAR TO GET AROUND AS THE PRIMARY TRANSPORTATION FOR MY FAMILY. I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO THE DEALER A FEW TIMES AND THEY EXPLAINED THE CODE AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM: TROUBLE CODE P2111, THROTTLE BODY ACTUATOR STUCK OPEN AND CLOSED. I REALLY HOPE THIS INVESTIGATION IS EXPEDITED AND THAT FORD RECALLS THE MERCURY MARINER 2010 DUE TO THE FAULTY THROTTLE BOTTLE. I HAVE HAD ZERO MAINTENANCE ISSUES WITH MY VEHICLE OTHER THAN THE THROTTLE BODY ISSUES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10546454

52,000 miles · Sep 26, 2013
Power Train

DRIVING TO WORK ON 1431, THE CAR FELT AS THOUGH IT HIT A BUMP, LOST ALL ABILITY TO DRIVE. PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF ROAD, TURNED CAR OFF FOR ABOUT 10 TO 15 SECONDS AND THEN BACK ON. AT THIS POINT IT SEEM TO OPERATE PROPERLY. THEN ABOUT THREE MILES DOWN THE ROAD IT DID THE SAME THING AGAIN. THIS TIME THERE WAS NO SHOULDER TO PULL OF…

Read full complaint

DRIVING TO WORK ON 1431, THE CAR FELT AS THOUGH IT HIT A BUMP, LOST ALL ABILITY TO DRIVE. PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF ROAD, TURNED CAR OFF FOR ABOUT 10 TO 15 SECONDS AND THEN BACK ON. AT THIS POINT IT SEEM TO OPERATE PROPERLY. THEN ABOUT THREE MILES DOWN THE ROAD IT DID THE SAME THING AGAIN. THIS TIME THERE WAS NO SHOULDER TO PULL OFF ON, SO TRAFFIC WAS TIED UP. WAS TRAVELING AT ABOUT 40 MPH THIS TIME. DID THE SAME THING, TURNED OFF AND THEN BACK ON AND SEEMED TO WORK NORMAL. LATER THAT EVENING GOING HOME FROM WORK THE CAR DID THE SAME THING, TWO MORE TIMES BEFORE I REACHED HOME. ONE TIME AS I WAS GOING FROM PALMER TO 1431 ON A CURVE. THE NEXT TIME IT WAS ON A SLIGHT INCLINE GOING HOME. THE ICON ON DASHBOARD WAS A WRENCH WHICH INDICATES IT HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE THROTTLE CONTROL. TOOK TO DEALER AND THEY CONFIRMED IT WAS A DEFECTIVE THROTTLE CONTROL UNIT, AND CHARGED $650 TO REPAIR. BELIEVE THAT THIS IS/WAS A SERIOUS PROBLEM SAFETY WISE AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED BY FORD. *JS

NHTSA ODI #10545509

Mileage unknown · Sep 10, 2013
Power Train

9/8/2013 DRIVING 60MPH I FELT A SLIGHT JOLT AND NOTICE A YELLOW WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON DASHBOARD.THEN THE MERCURY MARINER DECELERATED AND STALLED TO WHERE I WAS ABLE TO MOVE TO SHOULDER OFF ROAD, AND TURN ENGINE OFF. AT THIS POINT NOT KNOWING WHAT TO DO I JUST TURNED CAR OFF FOR ABOUT 5 MINUTES AND THEN RE-START. THERE WAS NO WREN…

Read full complaint

9/8/2013 DRIVING 60MPH I FELT A SLIGHT JOLT AND NOTICE A YELLOW WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON DASHBOARD.THEN THE MERCURY MARINER DECELERATED AND STALLED TO WHERE I WAS ABLE TO MOVE TO SHOULDER OFF ROAD, AND TURN ENGINE OFF. AT THIS POINT NOT KNOWING WHAT TO DO I JUST TURNED CAR OFF FOR ABOUT 5 MINUTES AND THEN RE-START. THERE WAS NO WRENCH LIGHT, BUT I DID NOTICE A HESITATION FOR THE CAR TO CATCH. I DROVE HOME ABOUT 20 MILES AND THE CAR DROVE ROUGH AS IF IT WAS HAVING A HARD TIME SHIFTING AND NOTICE THE RPM DANCING BACK AND FORTH FROM 3-1 ON ROAD INCLINES. TOOK IT TO MECHANIC AND HAD A DIAGNOSTIC TEST READ NO STORED CODES.WHAT??? THIS HAPPEN WITHIN A 2 DAY PERIOD, CAR WOULD STALL, YELLOW WRENCH LIGHT WOULD APPEAR ON DASH. TOOK IT TO A FORD AUTHORIZED DEALER, AND HE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT IS WAS THROTTLE BODY MALFUNCTIONING. PAID. $301FOR PARTS AND LABOR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10542853

46,345 miles · Aug 31, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control

I WAS LEAVING A SOCCER GAME AND THE CAR WENT TO ABOUT 40 MPS AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND THE PEDAL WENT LIMP. I PULLED OVER AND STOPPED THE CAR AND THE CAR STARTED SHAKING LIKE IT WAS OUT OF TIME. I PUT IT IN PART AND SHUT OFF THE CAR WHEN I TURNED THE CAR BACK ON THE LIGHT WAS OFF. I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE 20 MILES BACK AND FOR…

Read full complaint

I WAS LEAVING A SOCCER GAME AND THE CAR WENT TO ABOUT 40 MPS AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND THE PEDAL WENT LIMP. I PULLED OVER AND STOPPED THE CAR AND THE CAR STARTED SHAKING LIKE IT WAS OUT OF TIME. I PUT IT IN PART AND SHUT OFF THE CAR WHEN I TURNED THE CAR BACK ON THE LIGHT WAS OFF. I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE 20 MILES BACK AND FORTH AND THEN IT DID THE SAME THING AGAIN. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO RUN THE CODES AND THERE WERE NONE. TODAY 8/31/13 IT DID THE SAME THING AGAIN AND NOW FINALLY THE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. CODES WERE RAN AT AUTOZONE AND P1212 THROTTLE BODY SENSOR FINALLY SHOWED UP. I HAD ALREADY CHECKED THE WEB THE FIRST TIME THAT IT DID IT AFTER TALKING WITH A MECHANIC THAT WORKS AT FORD AND HE TOLD ME WHAT IT WAS AND THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL. I AM VERY UPSET. I JUST PURCHASED THIS CAR LESS THAN THREE MONTHS AGO!!! SINGLE MOM SOMEONE HELP!!! *JS

NHTSA ODI #10538244

76,000 miles · Aug 29, 2013
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING MY CAR MERGING ON TO THE EXPRESSWAY IN A CONSTRUCTION ZONE AND AS SOON AS I GOT ON THE CAR COMPLETELY LOST POWER. I COULD NOT PUSH ON THE GAS OR ANYTHING. LUCKILY THERE WAS AN OPENING IN SOME CONES FOR ME TO BARELY HAVE ENOUGH POWER TO GET OUT ON ONE LANE OF TRAFFIC IN A CONSTRUCTION ZONE IN MORNING RUSHING HOUR TR…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING MY CAR MERGING ON TO THE EXPRESSWAY IN A CONSTRUCTION ZONE AND AS SOON AS I GOT ON THE CAR COMPLETELY LOST POWER. I COULD NOT PUSH ON THE GAS OR ANYTHING. LUCKILY THERE WAS AN OPENING IN SOME CONES FOR ME TO BARELY HAVE ENOUGH POWER TO GET OUT ON ONE LANE OF TRAFFIC IN A CONSTRUCTION ZONE IN MORNING RUSHING HOUR TRAFFIC. I HAD TO TURN MY CAR OFF AND LUCKILY IT CAME BACK ON. I HAVE READ ONLINE THAT THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING TO SO MANY PEOPLE THAT THE PART IS ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER. THIS IS CRAZY! I HAD MY 1 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER IN THE CAR AND WE COULD HAVE BEEN HIT. THIS IS COMPLETELY UNSAFE!

NHTSA ODI #10537878

32,000 miles · Aug 12, 2013
EnginePower Train

DRIVING AT APPROX 40 MPH CAR ENGINE REACTS ABNORMALLY AND "WRENCH" WARNING LIGHT APPEARS AND CAR "STALLS" OUT AND, ALTHOUGH FULLY OPERATIONAL WILL NOT DRIVE. TURN THE CAR OFF AND BACK ON AND THE ENGINE EVENTUALLY WILL TURN OVER BUT AGAIN REPEATS THE SAME ISSUE OF "STALLING" OUT. AFTER HAVING THE CAR TOWED, THE DIAGNOSIS IS A D…

Read full complaint

DRIVING AT APPROX 40 MPH CAR ENGINE REACTS ABNORMALLY AND "WRENCH" WARNING LIGHT APPEARS AND CAR "STALLS" OUT AND, ALTHOUGH FULLY OPERATIONAL WILL NOT DRIVE. TURN THE CAR OFF AND BACK ON AND THE ENGINE EVENTUALLY WILL TURN OVER BUT AGAIN REPEATS THE SAME ISSUE OF "STALLING" OUT. AFTER HAVING THE CAR TOWED, THE DIAGNOSIS IS A DEFECTIVE "THROTTLE-BODY". *TR

NHTSA ODI #10534922

48,350 miles · Aug 2, 2013
Power Train

WHILE MY WIFE WERE GOING OUT TO DINNER WE WERE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT 45 MPH. I NOTICED A YELLOW WRENCH WARNING LIGHT APPEAR ON THE DASH. THE CAR STARTED LOSING POWER AND BEGAN JERKING. I COULD NOT ACCELERATE AND THE SPEEDOMETER DROPPED TO 0. I COASTED TO THE SHOULDER AND STOPPED. I HAD TO HAVE AAA TOW THE CAR TO MY MECHANIC.…

Read full complaint

WHILE MY WIFE WERE GOING OUT TO DINNER WE WERE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT 45 MPH. I NOTICED A YELLOW WRENCH WARNING LIGHT APPEAR ON THE DASH. THE CAR STARTED LOSING POWER AND BEGAN JERKING. I COULD NOT ACCELERATE AND THE SPEEDOMETER DROPPED TO 0. I COASTED TO THE SHOULDER AND STOPPED. I HAD TO HAVE AAA TOW THE CAR TO MY MECHANIC. HE RAN DIFFERENT TESTS AND THE READOUT HE GOT FROM THE COMPUTER WAS THE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY. HE HAS A PRIORITY ORDER FOR THE PART AND SAID THERE IS A NATIONAL BACKORDER ON THIS PART. I HAVE AN EXTENDED WARRANTY WITH (NAC) AND THEY TOLD HIM THEY WILL NOT PAY FOR THE PART. I HAVE TO PAY CLOSE TO $820 FOR THE PART AND LABOR. FORD HAS KNOWN ABOUT THIS PROBLEM WITH THE 2010 MARINER BUT WILL NOT HAVE A RECALL. DO PEOPLE HAVE TO DIE BEFORE FORD MOTOR COMPANY ACTS? THIS IS A DISGRACE FOR THE CONSUMER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533175

74,000 miles · Jul 25, 2013
Power Train

THROTTLE BODY,,,, DRIVING DOWN THE STREET..ALL OF THE SUDDEN A WRENCH APPEARS AND THE CAR DOES NOT GO... HAVE TO TRY AND SAFELY PULL OVER...HAVE TO SHUT THE CAR OFF AND RESTART IT,,, THIS HAS HAPPENED 6 TIMES IN THE PAST WEEK...GOING APPROX 30 MPH---. ALSO HAPPENED ABOUT A MONTH AGO ON THE FREEWAY GOING ABOUT 70 MPH....VERY SCAR…

Read full complaint

THROTTLE BODY,,,, DRIVING DOWN THE STREET..ALL OF THE SUDDEN A WRENCH APPEARS AND THE CAR DOES NOT GO... HAVE TO TRY AND SAFELY PULL OVER...HAVE TO SHUT THE CAR OFF AND RESTART IT,,, THIS HAS HAPPENED 6 TIMES IN THE PAST WEEK...GOING APPROX 30 MPH---. ALSO HAPPENED ABOUT A MONTH AGO ON THE FREEWAY GOING ABOUT 70 MPH....VERY SCARED..THIS CAR IS GOING TO GET ME KILLED! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10531911

52,000 miles · Jul 25, 2013
EnginePower Train

MY 2010 MERCURY MARINER WENT INTO LIMP MODE AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO THROTTLE INPUTS. I RESEARCHED THIS ISSUE AND LEARNED THAT THIS PROBLEM APPEARS TO BE RELATED TO A FAULTY THROTTLE BODY OR ELECTRONIC CONTROL PANEL FOR THE THROTTLE BODY. THIS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS CONDITION AS IT APPEARS AT RANDOM WITHOUT WARNING. I BELIEVE …

Read full complaint

MY 2010 MERCURY MARINER WENT INTO LIMP MODE AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO THROTTLE INPUTS. I RESEARCHED THIS ISSUE AND LEARNED THAT THIS PROBLEM APPEARS TO BE RELATED TO A FAULTY THROTTLE BODY OR ELECTRONIC CONTROL PANEL FOR THE THROTTLE BODY. THIS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS CONDITION AS IT APPEARS AT RANDOM WITHOUT WARNING. I BELIEVE THIS MUST BE A DEFECT THAT HAS BEEN KNOWN TO FORD FOR SOME TIME AND NEEDS TO BE THE SUBJECT OF A RECALL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10531765

41,000 miles · Jul 19, 2013
Power Train

DRIVING AT 45 MPH AND CAR WENT INTO LIMP MODE. CALLED FOR A TOW TRUCK TO MY DEALER WHERE I BOUGHT THE CAR ONLY 6 MONTHS AGO. THEY SAID IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY. DID LOTS OF RESEARCH TO FIND THIS IS A HUGE ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. FORD NEEDS TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY BEFORE MORE GET INJURED! MY DEALER REFUSES TO COVER T…

Read full complaint

DRIVING AT 45 MPH AND CAR WENT INTO LIMP MODE. CALLED FOR A TOW TRUCK TO MY DEALER WHERE I BOUGHT THE CAR ONLY 6 MONTHS AGO. THEY SAID IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY. DID LOTS OF RESEARCH TO FIND THIS IS A HUGE ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. FORD NEEDS TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY BEFORE MORE GET INJURED! MY DEALER REFUSES TO COVER THIS REPAIR NOR CAN GIVE ME AN ETA BECAUSE THIS IS ON NATIONAL BACKORDER. BECAUSE THIS HAPPENS SO MUCH. TOO, ONCE THE NEW THROTTLE BODY COMES, I'M SURE I'D HAVE THE SAME ISSUE AS THE PART IS A DEFECT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10525738

Official recalls

2

16V777000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump

Oct 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.

14V284000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System

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

3

DP15001 · 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

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.