← New search

2010 Ford Escape

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Escape years

Owner complaints for the 2010 Ford Escape are substantially higher than the model-year median of 996.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,764 reports with mileage · 305 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 558 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 508 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 493 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

29 crash reports3 fire reports19 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

216 reports
Clear category filter
45,000 miles · Jun 24, 2013
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train

VEHICLE STALLED SEVERAL TIMES. LOSES POWER WITH NO ACCELERATION WHEN FEEDING GAS. WRENCH INDICATOR LIGHT COMES ON, INDICATES THROTTLE BODY ISSUE. VEHICLE NEEDS TO BE RESTARTED. TOOK TO THE SHOP AFTER 3 INCIDENCES. MECHANICS TELL ME THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY HAS FAILED. PARTS ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER DUE TO HIGH FREQUENCY OF INC…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE STALLED SEVERAL TIMES. LOSES POWER WITH NO ACCELERATION WHEN FEEDING GAS. WRENCH INDICATOR LIGHT COMES ON, INDICATES THROTTLE BODY ISSUE. VEHICLE NEEDS TO BE RESTARTED. TOOK TO THE SHOP AFTER 3 INCIDENCES. MECHANICS TELL ME THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY HAS FAILED. PARTS ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER DUE TO HIGH FREQUENCY OF INCIDENCES. PLEASE ISSUE A RECALL! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10521389

42,500 miles · Jun 21, 2013
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train

DRIVING APPROX 40MPH WHEN VEHICLE STARTED STALLING. RPM DROPS TO APPROX 1000, GAS PEDAL DOES NOT RESPOND. HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE PAST, TAKEN TO DEALERSHIP BUT "NO CODES WERE FOUND TO SUGGEST A DEFECT." HAVE TO TURN THE CAR OFF AND RESTART WITH IT BEING IN PARK BEFORE STARTS TO RUN AND WRENCH LIGHT TURNS OFF. DROVE TO …

Read full complaint

DRIVING APPROX 40MPH WHEN VEHICLE STARTED STALLING. RPM DROPS TO APPROX 1000, GAS PEDAL DOES NOT RESPOND. HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE PAST, TAKEN TO DEALERSHIP BUT "NO CODES WERE FOUND TO SUGGEST A DEFECT." HAVE TO TURN THE CAR OFF AND RESTART WITH IT BEING IN PARK BEFORE STARTS TO RUN AND WRENCH LIGHT TURNS OFF. DROVE TO THE DEALER AFTER THAT LAST INCIDENT ON 6/21, CODE 2111 WAS FOUND TO BE PENDING WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST IF I TURNED THE CAR OFF, FOUND IT TO BE THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY. FOR A CAR THAT IS 3 YEARS OLD AND 40K MILES, IT IS DANGEROUS TO HAVE THIS DEFECT AS IF IT HAPPENS ON THE HIGHWAY YOU ARE STUCK WITH A CHANCE FOR A SEMI-TRUCK TO REAR END YOU. PLEASE ALLOW THIS RECALL FOR THE SAFETY OF OTHERS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10521101

90,000 miles · Jun 19, 2013
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control

DRIVING ON HIGHWAY @ 65 MPH - LOSS OF GAS PEDAL CONTROL - I COULD PRESS THE GAS PEDAL AND IT WAS AS IF IT WAS DISCONNECTED - THERE WAS NO RESPONSE AT ALL - CAR STARTS LOSING SPEED IN MIDDLE OF HWY - I HAD TO COAST TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD -- THE ENGINE KEPT RUNNING - ENGINE WAS SKIPPING AS IT COASTED TO A STOP - THE WRENCH LIGHT …

Read full complaint

DRIVING ON HIGHWAY @ 65 MPH - LOSS OF GAS PEDAL CONTROL - I COULD PRESS THE GAS PEDAL AND IT WAS AS IF IT WAS DISCONNECTED - THERE WAS NO RESPONSE AT ALL - CAR STARTS LOSING SPEED IN MIDDLE OF HWY - I HAD TO COAST TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD -- THE ENGINE KEPT RUNNING - ENGINE WAS SKIPPING AS IT COASTED TO A STOP - THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON ALONG WITH SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT - AFTER SITTING STILL FOR 10 MINUTES VEHICLE WILL START UP AND RUN AS USUAL - I TOOK TO DEALERSHIP FOUND OUT THAT THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE FORD ESCAPE 2010 - THEY HAD 10 ON ORDER WITHIN 2 WEEKS - THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY IS ON NATIONAL BACKORDER AND I CAN'T GET AN ANSWER ON WHEN THE PARTS WILL BE AVAILABLE - CALLED FORD CUSTOMER RELATIONS GOT NO WHERE - THE THROTTLE INCIDENT STARTED WEEKLY AND NOW IT HAPPENS 1 - 2 TIMES A DAY - IT IS NOW UNSAFE TO DRIVE- CAR LOOSES POWER WITHOUT ANY NOTICE - HAS HAPPENED AT STOP LIGHT / INTERSECTION / RR CROSSING / ROADS WITH NO SHOULDER / INTERSTATE - I NEED A VEHICLE THAT I CAN DEPEND ON DAILY TO GET ME HOME SAFETY - IF THE DEALERSHIP TELLS ME THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH FORD ESCAPE WHY CAN'T THE PART BE RECALLED AND FIX THE THROTTLE BEFORE IT FAILS - PAYING FOR THE PART ISN'T AN ISSUE - GETTING THE PART TO FIX THE PROBLEM IS THE ISSUE - FORD KNOWS ABOUT THE THROTTLE AND DOESN'T HAVE PARTS AVAILABLE AND CAN'T TELL ME WHEN THEY WILL BE AVAILABLE. WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD IS THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO GET ME A PART OR DATE WHEN IT WILL BE AVAILABLE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10520699

200,000 miles · Jun 17, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineUnknown Or Other

PURCHASED MAY 30, 2012....LESS THAN ONE MONTH LATER, I WAS DRIVING ONTO A RAMP AND COULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE CAR JUST STOPPED BUT I COULD STEER SO I WAS ABLE TO PULL IT OVER. A STATE POLICEMAN CAME BY AND I SAID I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH MY MECHANIC. APPARENTLY, THE COMPUTER HAD SHUT DOWN AND THE ISSUE MAY HAVE BEEN THAT THE KEY I…

Read full complaint

PURCHASED MAY 30, 2012....LESS THAN ONE MONTH LATER, I WAS DRIVING ONTO A RAMP AND COULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE CAR JUST STOPPED BUT I COULD STEER SO I WAS ABLE TO PULL IT OVER. A STATE POLICEMAN CAME BY AND I SAID I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH MY MECHANIC. APPARENTLY, THE COMPUTER HAD SHUT DOWN AND THE ISSUE MAY HAVE BEEN THAT THE KEY I WAS USING WAS NOT PROGRAMMED?. I FOLLOWED STEPS TO PROGRAM KEYS AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE FOR MONTHS UNTIL THIS PAST APRIL, 2013. DRIVING ALONG ON A MAIN ROAD, THE CAR DID IT AGAIN. COULD STEER IT BUT COULD NOT REPAIR SAME WAY AS BEFORE. I KNOW COMPUTERS AND SAY THAT WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, DISCONNECT IT. SO WE DISCONNECTED BATTERY AND WERE ABLE TO START CAR AND GET HOME BUT THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN WHEN ARRIVING AT MY HOUSE. OF COURSE THE WARRANTY RAN OUT BACK IN FEBRUARY. MY MECHANIC COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND THEREFORE DID NOT KNOW WHY IT HAPPENED. I DO REGULAR MAINTENANCE THAT IS REQUIRED AND TAKE CARE OF THE CAR. I ALSO KEEP A LOG. IT HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES SINCE, YESTERDAY AND TODAY, JUNE 17, 2013. I HAVE SEEN SEVERAL COMPLAINTS ONLINE ABOUT A SIMILAR PROBLEM WITH THE SAME MAKE, MODEL AND YEAR. THERE SHOULD BE A RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED USED AND WAS TWO YEARS OLD. THE PREVIOUS DRIVER DID NOT HAVE IT FOR VERY LONG BEFORE TURNING IT IN. I ASKED FOR THE CAR FACTS FROM THE DEALERSHIP AND THE CAR WAS BROUGHT IN SEVERAL TIMES WITH NO REPAIRS DONE. NOT EVEN SURE IF THEY WERE THE ACTUAL CAR FACTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10520163

70,500 miles · Jun 14, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System

MY VEHICLE IS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE 6 CYC WITH 4 WD. THIS WAS A NEW VEHICLE PURCHASED IN EARLY 2010 AS IT HAD 4.7 MILES ON IT WHEN PURCHASED AND I PUT MOST OF THOSE MILES ON IT DURING THE TEST DRIVE. WHEN TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEED RECENTLY IN HEAVY TRAFFIC THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST ALL ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. IT WAS AS IF THERE…

Read full complaint

MY VEHICLE IS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE 6 CYC WITH 4 WD. THIS WAS A NEW VEHICLE PURCHASED IN EARLY 2010 AS IT HAD 4.7 MILES ON IT WHEN PURCHASED AND I PUT MOST OF THOSE MILES ON IT DURING THE TEST DRIVE. WHEN TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEED RECENTLY IN HEAVY TRAFFIC THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST ALL ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. IT WAS AS IF THERE WAS NO GAS PEDAL IN THE VEHICLE AT ALL. NO SHUDDERING, OR CHUGGING AFTER THIS OCCURRED AND ABSOLUTELY NO WARNING AT ALL BEFORE IT OCCURRED. IT WAS EXTREMELY LUCKY THAT NO ONE WAS INJURED AS I ATTEMPTED TO MAKE MY WAY ACROSS 4 LANES OF TRAFFIC TO THE SHOULDER. THE VEHICLE NEVER SHUT OFF WHEN THIS OCCURRED. I THEN TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF, WAITED, AND THEN RESTARTED AND IT SEEMED TO RUN FINE. I TOOK IT TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP WHERE IT WAS PURCHASED TO ASSESS THE SITUATION. I WAS TOLD THE BATTERY WAS BAD WHICH THEY REPLACED. I QUESTIONED AS TO HOW A BATTERY COULD CAUSE THIS TYPE OF PROBLEM AS I UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE VEHICLE MECHANICS AND MY RESEARCH SHOWED THAT IT WAS MORE THAN LIKELY A THROTTLE BODY ISSUE AND I WAS ASSURED THAT BATTERY WAS MOST CERTAINLY THE ISSUE DUE TO THE COMPLEX NATURE OF VEHICLES TODAY AND THEIR ON BOARD COMPUTERS. WHEN THE BATTERY WAS REPLACED MY WIFE PICKED UP THE VEHICLE AND HAD JUST ENTERED THE INTERSTATE WHEN AT HIGHWAY SPEED THE SAME EXACT PROBLEM OCCURRED WHERE AN ACCIDENT WAS ALMOST CAUSED BY HER EFFORTS TO EXIT THE ROAD. AGAIN NO WARNING. WHEN IT WAS RESTARTED IT WAS DRIVEN BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP. TODAY, IT WAS CONFIRMED BY THE FORD DEALERSHIP THAT IN FACT IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY ISSUE THAT MY RESEARCH HAD SHOW IT TO BE, AND MORE SO, THE PART, WHICH IS SOMEHOW NOT A SAFETY RECALLED ITEM BY THE NHTSA, IS ON BACK-ORDER BY FORD BECAUSE OF THE SHEAR NUMBER OF THESE PARTS GOING BAD AND NEEDING TO BE REPLACED IN SO MANY VEHICLES. I NOW OWN A VEHICLE THAT CANNOT BE OPERATED SAFELY WITHOUT A SAFETY RECALL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519853

39,345 miles · Jun 14, 2013
Electrical SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 40MPH AND MY ESCAPE ALL OF SUDDEN LOST POWER. THE VEHICLE STAYED RUNNING BUT IT WOULD NOT DRIVE FORWARD. THE TRAFFIC WAS LIGHT, SO I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER WITH MY FLASHERS ON AND STOP. HAD THE TRAFFIC BEEN IN RUSH HOUR THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A MAJOR ACCIDENT. I TRIED TO PUT THE VEHICLE IN REVERSE AND DRIVE AND…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 40MPH AND MY ESCAPE ALL OF SUDDEN LOST POWER. THE VEHICLE STAYED RUNNING BUT IT WOULD NOT DRIVE FORWARD. THE TRAFFIC WAS LIGHT, SO I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER WITH MY FLASHERS ON AND STOP. HAD THE TRAFFIC BEEN IN RUSH HOUR THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A MAJOR ACCIDENT. I TRIED TO PUT THE VEHICLE IN REVERSE AND DRIVE AND IT WOULDN'T DO ANYTHING, BUT THE ENGINE STAYED RUNNING AND THE "WRENCH WARNING LIGHT" APPEARED ON THE DASH. I THEN TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF AND WAITED A FEW MINUTES AND STARTED IN UP AGAIN. EVERYTHING THEN RAN FINE. I TOOK THE ESCAPE TO THE FORD DEALER WHERE THEY FOUND OUT THAT THE POWER FAILURE DID OCCUR IN THE THROTTLE BODY AIR INTAKE AND IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THEY ALSO INFORMED ME THAT THEY HAD ANOTHER ESCAPE THAT WAS NEEDING TO BE WORKED ON WITH THE SAME PROBLEM AND PARTS WERE ON BACKORDER AND IT WOULD BE A FEW WEEKS BEFORE MINE WOULD BE FIXED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519784

30,350 miles · Jun 11, 2013
Electrical SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control

I WAS STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT PREPARING TO TURN RIGHT. WHILE AT A COMPLETE STOP, THE VEHICLE JOLTED FORWARD MOMENTARILY AND AGAIN CAME TO A STOP. I TURNED RIGHT AND IMMEDIATELY MY ACCELERATOR FAILED AND THE CAR WOULD ONLY MOVE FORWARD AT A SPEED LESS THAN 5 MILES PER HOUR. I COASTED INTO A PARKING LOT WHERE I TURNED OFF THE VEHIC…

Read full complaint

I WAS STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT PREPARING TO TURN RIGHT. WHILE AT A COMPLETE STOP, THE VEHICLE JOLTED FORWARD MOMENTARILY AND AGAIN CAME TO A STOP. I TURNED RIGHT AND IMMEDIATELY MY ACCELERATOR FAILED AND THE CAR WOULD ONLY MOVE FORWARD AT A SPEED LESS THAN 5 MILES PER HOUR. I COASTED INTO A PARKING LOT WHERE I TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE AND RESTARTED IT. IT ACCELERATED NORMALLY FOR A MOMENT BEFORE FAILING AGAIN. THE WARNING LIGHT THAT APPEARED WAS CORRELATED WITH THE POWER TRAIN, PER THE VEHICLE'S INSTRUCTION MANUAL. WHEN INSPECTED BY A FORD DEALERSHIP, THE MECHANIC SAID THE THROTTLE SYSTEM HAD FAILED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. ALL INSPECTIONS AND SERVICES RELATED TO THE VEHICLE WERE UP-TO-DATE AND THERE WERE NO OTHER PROBLEMS DETECTED. NO ONE WAS INJURED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10516254

51,890 miles · Jun 7, 2013
Electrical SystemFuel System, Gasoline

VEHICLE WILL CUT OFF WHILE DRIVING, WHEN I GET OFF THE ROAD TO A STOP IT SOUNDS LIKE IT IS IDILING ROUGH BUT WILL NOT MOVE. THIS VEHICLE WILL SHUT OFF AT ANY SPEED WITHOUT WARNING. VERY DANGEROUS TO DRIVE ON INTERSTATE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10515660

29,500 miles · Jun 6, 2013
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN THE MOTOR IN THE ESCAPE JUST DIED, I WAS FORCED TO MOVE FROM THE LEFT LANE OF THE HIGHWAY TO THE RIGHT WITH ALMOST NO POWER. NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED I TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAY THAT PART IS ON NATIONAL BACKORDER FORD IS MAKING 4000 OF THE THROTTLE BODIES IN ORDER TO KEEP …

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN THE MOTOR IN THE ESCAPE JUST DIED, I WAS FORCED TO MOVE FROM THE LEFT LANE OF THE HIGHWAY TO THE RIGHT WITH ALMOST NO POWER. NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED I TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAY THAT PART IS ON NATIONAL BACKORDER FORD IS MAKING 4000 OF THE THROTTLE BODIES IN ORDER TO KEEP WITH THE DEMAND. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10515413

108,000 miles · Jun 3, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineVehicle Speed Control

WHILE DRIVING THE MOTOR SHUTS DOWN. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVEN REV THE ENGINE AND INCREASE RPMS. IT WILL JERK AND JUMP FORWARD AS IF ITS TRYING TO ACCELERATE BUT WONT GO ANY FASTER THAN IDLE SPEED. IF I TURN THE ENGINE OFF IT WILL WORK PROPERLY FOR ABOUT 50 YARDS THEN SHUT DOWN AGAIN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10514795

Official recalls

3

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.

10V222000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission

May 24, 2010

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2010 FUSION, MILAN, AND ESCAPE VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM FEBRUARY 27, THROUGH MARCH 26, 2010. THE PARK ROD GUIDE RETENTION PIN MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PROPERLY INSTALLED WHICH FAILS TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENT OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 114, "THEFT PROTECTION AND ROLLAWAY PREVENTION".

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A VEHICLE PARKED WITHOUT AN ENGAGED PARK PAWL AND WITHOUT AN APPLIED PARKING BRAKE MAY HAVE UNINTENDED MOVEMENT WHICH MAY CAUSE A CRASH.

Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND DEALERS WILL REPAIR THE VEHICLES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 28, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332 AND FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED CALL 1-800-232-5952 (TDD). REPRESENTATIVES ARE AVAILABLE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY: 8:00AM - 5:00PM.

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

NHTSA investigations

4

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

DP12006 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction

Opened Oct 2, 2012 · Closed Feb 21, 2013

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine

In a letter dated August 30, 2012, The North Carolina Consumers Council (NCCC) petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to initiate a defect investigation of alleged electronic throttle body failures resulting in engine stall or surge while driving in model year (MY) 2005 through 2012 Ford Escape vehicles. On October 2, 2012 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Defect Petition DP12-006 to evaluate whether to grant or deny the petition. The petition is hereby granted on certain model years. The NCCC letter cites two complaints of stall while driving in MY 2009 Ford Escape vehicles that were diagnosed as failed throttle bodies with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed. The petitioner indicates that the owners of both vehicles reported experiencing repeated incidents of stalling and engine surging. According to Ford, Escape non-hybrid vehicles are equipped with Electronic Throttle Body (ETB) assemblies beginning with MY 2009. Vehicles manufactured between June 22, 2009 and October 15, 2009 may contain contaminated printed circuit boards (PCB) with plating variations. Plating variations could lead to a lack of continuity in the throttle position sensor circuit where P2111 and/or other DTCs would be generated and stored. Ford and its electronic throttle body supplier, Delphi, modified the PCB manufacturing process and issued a technical service bulletin (TSB) 09-23-5. Vehicles produced after October 15, 2009 incorporated ETBs manufactured with a PCB process that resolved this condition. ODI's analysis identified a total of 123 unique reports indicating allegations of reduced motive power or vehicle stall. Depending on the condition of throttle control system malfunction, a driver may experience varying levels of reduced engine performance associated with three limp home modes. In two limp modes, reduced engine performance may maintain vehicle speeds above 20mph while the third is a limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Allegations of stall appear to be related to the limited limp home mode. Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability. Allegations of vehicle surge appear to be related to limp home mode operation. Complaints alleging surge are most likely related to engine RPM fluctuations at low vehicle speeds or idle as the control system engages to prevent engine stall. In limited limp mode, rough-idle conditions may exist while the control system attempts to modulate engine RPMs once the vehicle reaches a reduced speed to maintain approximately 900 RPM. Separately, ODI received 59 complaints alleging incidents of engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2010-2011 Ford Fusion vehicles. Approximately 60 percent (36) of the incidents occurred at speeds of 40 miles per hour or more. Eighty percent of complaints (47) were received beginning March 2012 and 14 complaints reported that the throttle body was replaced or DTCs associated with limp home modes. Additionally, Ford issued TSB 10-21-6 addressing DTCs associated with idle speed drops and limited limp home mode. The petition is granted on certain model years.Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 has been opened to assess the scope, frequency and potential safety consequences associated with the alleged defect.See full copy of the closing resume for this defect petition for list of the VOQs associated with the defect petition analysis.

PE11016 · Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage

Opened Apr 27, 2011 · Closed Aug 18, 2011

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut; Visibility; Visibility:glass, Side/rear

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Additional source detail variants (5)

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Visibility

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Visibility:glass, Side/rear

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Go deeper into Ford Escape problems