NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
493 reportsClear category filter62,000 miles · Nov 3, 2013
Engine
IN SEPT WHILE GOING UP A HILL, JUST MADE IT TO THE TOP, HAD LOSS OF POWER, ENGINE RUNNING BUT ACCELERATOR WILL NOT WORK. ABLE TO COAST DOWN HILL INTO A PARKING LOT. AFTER TURNED CAR OFF, STARTED BACK UP. RAN FINE UNTIL TODAY. LITTLE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. SPOKE TO MECHANIC, HE STATED IT WAS A THROTTLE BODY PROBLEM, OK TO DR…
Read full complaint
IN SEPT WHILE GOING UP A HILL, JUST MADE IT TO THE TOP, HAD LOSS OF POWER, ENGINE RUNNING BUT ACCELERATOR WILL NOT WORK. ABLE TO COAST DOWN HILL INTO A PARKING LOT. AFTER TURNED CAR OFF, STARTED BACK UP. RAN FINE UNTIL TODAY. LITTLE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. SPOKE TO MECHANIC, HE STATED IT WAS A THROTTLE BODY PROBLEM, OK TO DRIVE UNLESS YOU HAVE FURTHER PROBLEMS, IT WILL NEED TO BE REPLACED IN THE FUTURE. TODAY, NOV. 3, WHILE PULLING OUT FROM A PARKING LOT, INTO HEAVY TRAFFIC, CAR ENGINE STALLED, PUT CAR INTO PARK, TURNED KEY TO OFF POSITION, THEN CAR STARTED RIGHT UP. VEHICLES BEHIND OURS WERE ABLE TO STOP, LUCKILY NONE COLLIDED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10550710
46,000 miles · Nov 3, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
STOPPED AT STOP SIGN, PRESSED ACCELERATOR AND ENGINE RPMS DID NOT INCREASE. NO ENGINE RESPONSE FROM ACCELERATOR. TURNED OFF ENGINE. RESTARTED AND THE THROTTLE/ENGINE WORKED NORMALLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10550688
37,530 miles · Nov 1, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
AFTER WAITING FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL, I BEGAN MY TURN LEFT. JUST PAST THE INTERSECTION, I LOST POWER WITH SORT OF A CHUGGING MOTION IN THE VEHICLE. I WAS ABLE TO GET OFF THE ROAD. THE INDICATOR ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL WAS OF A SMALL WRENCH, INDICATING THROTTLE CONTROL/POWERTRAIN IN THE MANUAL. I CALLED THE DEALER AND WAS ABLE TO…
Read full complaint
AFTER WAITING FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL, I BEGAN MY TURN LEFT. JUST PAST THE INTERSECTION, I LOST POWER WITH SORT OF A CHUGGING MOTION IN THE VEHICLE. I WAS ABLE TO GET OFF THE ROAD. THE INDICATOR ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL WAS OF A SMALL WRENCH, INDICATING THROTTLE CONTROL/POWERTRAIN IN THE MANUAL. I CALLED THE DEALER AND WAS ABLE TO START THE CAR AND DRIVE IN. THE CHARGE FOR INSTALLING DS7Z 9E926 D (THROTTLE BODY AND MOTOR AS) WAS $400.46 PLUS TAX. WITH LESS THAN 38000 MILES ON THIS VEHICLE, I DID NOT EXPECT TO HAVE THIS KIND OF REPAIR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10550534
124,300 miles · Nov 1, 2013
EnginePower Train
I AM A HOMEHEALTH NURSE, I WORK IN A VERY MOUNTAINOUS, RURAL AREA WHERE I DO NOT EVEN HAVE CELLPHONE SERVICE. I WAS ON A VERY NARROW, CURVY ROAD, WHEN THE CAR JUST QUIT ACCELERATING, THE SMALL WRENCH APPEARED ON THE DASH, I WAS ABLE TO COAST FAR ENOUGH TO GET TO A WIDE SPOT WHERE I COULD GET THE VEHICLE SAFELY OUT OF THE ROAD, B…
Read full complaint
I AM A HOMEHEALTH NURSE, I WORK IN A VERY MOUNTAINOUS, RURAL AREA WHERE I DO NOT EVEN HAVE CELLPHONE SERVICE. I WAS ON A VERY NARROW, CURVY ROAD, WHEN THE CAR JUST QUIT ACCELERATING, THE SMALL WRENCH APPEARED ON THE DASH, I WAS ABLE TO COAST FAR ENOUGH TO GET TO A WIDE SPOT WHERE I COULD GET THE VEHICLE SAFELY OUT OF THE ROAD, BARELY MISSING AN 18 WHEEL COAL TRUCK FROM HITTING ME. THERE WAS NO WARNING, THE VEHICLE DROVE FINE ALL DAY AND THEN IT JUST QUIT. I WAS ABLE TO TURN THE CAR OFF AND RESTART AND ATTEMPTED TO DRIVE IT AND AGAIN THIS HAPPENED 3 TIMES BEFORE THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT FINALLY CAME ON. THE NICEST PERSON IN THE WORLD HELP ME AND HE WAS ABLE TO DETECT THE PROBLEM WITH HIS COMPUTER AND HE WAS ABLE TO ADJUST THE THROTTLE INTO THE CLOSED POSITION AND THEN I WAS ABLE TO GET THE VEHICLE HOME WITHOUT ANYMORE PROBLEMS. I THEN TOOK IT TO A FORD DEALERSHIP AND HAD THE THROTTLE BODY REPLACED BEFORE I DID GET KILLED IF THIS WAS TO HAPPEN AGAIN. I DO WISH FORD WOULD JUST GET THIS PART RECALLED BEFORE SOMEONE DOES GET KILLED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10550533
43,000 miles · Nov 1, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING FREEWAY SPEEDS, I LOST POWER. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, ENGINE REMAINED RUNNING AND I LIMPED TO THE SIDE OF THE FREEWAY. WHEN RE-STARTING CAR, PROBLEM DISAPPEARED. TOOK CAR TO PRIVATE MECHANIC ([XXX]) AND HE COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM IN THE COMPUTER HISTORY. HE SUSPECTED THROTTLE LINKAGE. CAR DROVE FINE UNTIL OCT…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING FREEWAY SPEEDS, I LOST POWER. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, ENGINE REMAINED RUNNING AND I LIMPED TO THE SIDE OF THE FREEWAY. WHEN RE-STARTING CAR, PROBLEM DISAPPEARED. TOOK CAR TO PRIVATE MECHANIC ([XXX]) AND HE COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM IN THE COMPUTER HISTORY. HE SUSPECTED THROTTLE LINKAGE. CAR DROVE FINE UNTIL OCT 25, 2013 WHEN IT RECURRED ON THE FREEWAY. WHILE COASTING IN THE HOV LANE, WE PUT VEHICLE IN "NEUTRAL" AND TRIED TO RESTART, PROBLEM DID NOT RESOLVE. ONLY AFTER COASTING TO A STOP AND PUTTING THE VEHICLE IN "PARK" AND RESTARTING WOULD THE PROBLEM RE-SET. VERY HAZARDOUS LOSING POWER AT FREEWAY SPEEDS AND TRYING TO LIMP TO THE SIDE. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10550522
50,000 miles · Oct 31, 2013
EnginePower Train
I WAS DRIVING IN CONGESTED MORNING TRAFFIC AND THE ENGINE STALLED. THE WRENCH INDICATOR LIGHT POPPED ON AS I LOST ACCELERATION. I WAS ABLE TO COAST ON TO THE MEDIAN. HOWEVER, I WAS ALMOST STRUCK FROM BEHIND BY ANOTHER CAR. AFTER ABOUT 30 SECONDS, THE CAR STARTED BACK UP AND I IMMEDIATELY WENT TO WORK AND MADE IT HOME WITHOU…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING IN CONGESTED MORNING TRAFFIC AND THE ENGINE STALLED. THE WRENCH INDICATOR LIGHT POPPED ON AS I LOST ACCELERATION. I WAS ABLE TO COAST ON TO THE MEDIAN. HOWEVER, I WAS ALMOST STRUCK FROM BEHIND BY ANOTHER CAR. AFTER ABOUT 30 SECONDS, THE CAR STARTED BACK UP AND I IMMEDIATELY WENT TO WORK AND MADE IT HOME WITHOUT PROBLEMS THIS EVENING. AFTER RESEARCHING ON THE INTERNET, IT APPEARS THIS IS A RECURRING PROBLEM AND JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE SOMEONE GETS SERIOUSLY INJURED OR HURT. I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE NOW AS OTHER COMPLAINTS INDICATE THIS HAS NOT ONLY BEEN OCCURRING FOR QUITE SOME TIME, BUT IT MAY ALSO CONTINUE TO HAPPEN MORE FREQUENTLY AND EVENTUALLY STOP RUNNING ALTOGETHER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10550434
57,000 miles · Oct 28, 2013
Electrical SystemEngine
I FILED A COMPLAINT YESTERDAY AND WILL CONTINUE TO AS LONG AS THIS IS HAPPENING, WHEN I STARTED MY CAR THIS MORNING I DROVE 3 MILES AND IT STOPPED MOVING, WHEN I PRESS THE GAS NOTHING HAPPENED AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, STOPPED THE CAR TURNED IT OFF STARTED IT DROVE THE CAR ABOUT 20 FEET AND IT DID THE SAME. STARTED THE CAR A…
Read full complaint
I FILED A COMPLAINT YESTERDAY AND WILL CONTINUE TO AS LONG AS THIS IS HAPPENING, WHEN I STARTED MY CAR THIS MORNING I DROVE 3 MILES AND IT STOPPED MOVING, WHEN I PRESS THE GAS NOTHING HAPPENED AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, STOPPED THE CAR TURNED IT OFF STARTED IT DROVE THE CAR ABOUT 20 FEET AND IT DID THE SAME. STARTED THE CAR AGAIN MADE IT ALMOST TO WORK 3 MILES AWAY AND IT HAPPENED AGAIN. STOPPED THE CAR TURNED IT OFF AND STARTED IT AGAIN IT CONTINUED ALL DAY LONG APPROXIMATELY 15 TIMES ALL DAY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10549890
60,950 miles · Oct 28, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
AS I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE INTERSTATE WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL SET AT 70MPH, THE VEHICLE TURNED THE CRUISE CONTROL OFF AND DECELERATED ALMOST IMMEDIATELY TO 60MPH WHICH CAUSED AN UNCOMFORTABLE THRASHING FORWARD OF MYSELF AND MY 2 CHILDREN. WE HAD OUR SEAT BELTS ON, SO WE WERE NOT INJURED. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO LOSE POWER, SO …
Read full complaint
AS I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE INTERSTATE WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL SET AT 70MPH, THE VEHICLE TURNED THE CRUISE CONTROL OFF AND DECELERATED ALMOST IMMEDIATELY TO 60MPH WHICH CAUSED AN UNCOMFORTABLE THRASHING FORWARD OF MYSELF AND MY 2 CHILDREN. WE HAD OUR SEAT BELTS ON, SO WE WERE NOT INJURED. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO LOSE POWER, SO I PULLED OFF THE HIGHWAY AND PLACED THE VEHICLE IN PARK AND TURNED OFF THE ENGINE. I NOTICED A LITTLE WRENCH HAD APPEARED IN THE LEFT CORNER OF MY DASH DISPLAY. I LOOKED UP THIS SYMBOL IN MY OWNERS MANUAL. I THEN DECIDED TO GO AHEAD AND TRY TO CONTINUE DRIVING AS I WAS A GOOD 75+ MILES FROM HOME AND I WAS IN A VERY REMOTE AREA. WHEN I STARTED THE ENGINE, I NOTICED THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON AND DID NOT GO BACK OUT. I PROCEEDED DOWN THE INTERSTATE APPROXIMATELY 2 MILES BEFORE THE VEHICLE DID THE SAME THING. THIS TIME I ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE AND WITH THE GAS PEDAL TO THE FLOOR, HAD NO SUCCESS. THE CAR JUST CONTINUED TO LOSE SPEED, SO AGAIN , I PULLED OFF THE HIGHWAY AND THIS TIME I LET THE VEHICLE PROCEED AS FAR AS IT COULD WITHOUT APPLYING THE BRAKE. AS THE CAR WAS NEARLY STOPPED, IT STARTED TO SHAKE AS IF IT WERE ABOUT TO SHUT OFF. I TURNED OFF THE ENGINE AND AGAIN, RESTARTED AFTER A SHORT BREAK AND WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT THE REST OF THE WAY HOME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10549834
50,000 miles · Oct 27, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVIN ABOUT FIFTY THE CAR JUST STOPPED GOING, THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, I TRIED TO PUSH THE FAS PEDAL BUT NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN IT JUST SLOWED TO A STOP. SO I PUT IT IN PARK AND TURNED IT OFF WAITED A FEW SECONDS AND IT STARTED UP AND I DROVE OFF. A COUPLE OF DAYS LATER IT HAPPENED AGAIN AT ABOUT 35 MPH, SO I DID THE SAME.…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVIN ABOUT FIFTY THE CAR JUST STOPPED GOING, THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, I TRIED TO PUSH THE FAS PEDAL BUT NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN IT JUST SLOWED TO A STOP. SO I PUT IT IN PARK AND TURNED IT OFF WAITED A FEW SECONDS AND IT STARTED UP AND I DROVE OFF. A COUPLE OF DAYS LATER IT HAPPENED AGAIN AT ABOUT 35 MPH, SO I DID THE SAME. THOUGHT IT WAS A FLUKE AND/OR THE WEATHER BEING THE PROBLEM SO I CALLED FORD DEALER AND THEY SAID IT SOUNDS LIKE THE THROTTLE BODY. WELL FOR THE PAST MONTH IT HAPPENS EVERYDAY WHILE IM DRIVING 65 OR 15 JUST ALL OF THE SUDDEN IT STOPS GOING AND I HAVE TO PULL OFF THE SIDE OF THE ROAD PUT IT IN PARK AND RESTART IT SOMETIMES IT GOES A FEW FEET AND I HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN SOMETIMES IT JUST STARTS AND GOES AND NOW THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT COMES ON EVERY THIRD TIME IN A ROW THAT IT HAPPENS STAYS ON FOR A COUPLE DAYS AND THEN GOES OUT FOR A COUPLE DAYS AND SO ON, JUST DO THE RECALL WE HAVE ALL BEEN READING ABOUT IT DOESN'T TAKE A GENIUS LIKE YOU PEOPLE TO FIGURE THIS OUT ........HEAR LET ME HELP YOU DOOOOO THE RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10549732
113,133 miles · Oct 23, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
THE VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING ON THE EXPRESSWAY WHEN SUDDENLY THE CAR SEEMED TO "STALL" ALTHOUGH IT NEVER ACTUALLY STALLED OUT, BUT RPMS DROPPED TO 800-1000 AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO ANY THROTTLE ACTION . AFTER TURNING THE CAR OFF, WAITING AND STARTING AGAIN, THE PROBLEM THEN RESURFACED ABOUT A HALF MILE LATER. I WAS AGAIN ABLE TO …
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING ON THE EXPRESSWAY WHEN SUDDENLY THE CAR SEEMED TO "STALL" ALTHOUGH IT NEVER ACTUALLY STALLED OUT, BUT RPMS DROPPED TO 800-1000 AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO ANY THROTTLE ACTION . AFTER TURNING THE CAR OFF, WAITING AND STARTING AGAIN, THE PROBLEM THEN RESURFACED ABOUT A HALF MILE LATER. I WAS AGAIN ABLE TO PULL OFF, RESTART THE CAR AND CONTINUE NORMALLY. ONCE IN A SAFE LOCATION (WORK), I WAS ABLE TO CONNECT A OBD-II READER TO THE CAR AND FOUND THE FOLLOWING: P2112: TAC SYSTEM STUCK CLOSED RUNNING A GOOGLE SEARCH OF THE ABOVE ERROR GAVE MANY MANY ARTICLES POINTING TO A THROTTLE BODY ISSUE. THIS ISSUE WAS PRECEDED BY THE CAR RANDOMLY STALLING OUT (THIS TIME ACTUAL STALLS). THESE HAPPENED AT VERY RANDOM INTERVALS FOR APPROX. 2-3 WEEKS BEFORE THE EXPRESSWAY ISSUE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10549248
Official recalls
3Oct 26, 2016
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2010-2012 Ford Escape vehicles manufactured February 26, 2009, to April 29, 2012, and 2010-2011 Mercury Mariner vehicles manufactured February 25, 2009, to December 12, 2010. On vehicles with a 3.0L engine, the Fuel Delivery Module (FDM) may crack, causing a fuel leak.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source increases the risk of a fire.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the FDM flange with one that has a redesigned fuel supply port, free of charge. Remedy parts are currently unavailable. Interim notices were mailed to owners on December 13, 2016. Owners will receive a second notice when remedy parts become available. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 16S41.
May 29, 2014
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2008-2011 Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner vehicles manufactured August 18, 2006, through September 11, 2010. The affected vehicles have a steering torque sensor that may not be able to properly detect driver steering input. As a result, the system could remove the Electric Power Steering (EPS) assist.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If power steering assist is lost, greater driver effort would be required to steer the vehicle at low speeds, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will update the software for the power steering control module (PSCM) and the instrument cluster module, free of charge. If a vehicle shows a history of a loss of the torque sensor signal or fault codes relating to the PSCM when the vehicle is brought in for the recall remedy, the affected components will be replaced, free of charge. The recall began on July 18, 2014. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-800-392-3673. Ford's number for this recall is 14S05.
May 24, 2010
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2010 FUSION, MILAN, AND ESCAPE VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM FEBRUARY 27, THROUGH MARCH 26, 2010. THE PARK ROD GUIDE RETENTION PIN MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PROPERLY INSTALLED WHICH FAILS TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENT OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 114, "THEFT PROTECTION AND ROLLAWAY PREVENTION".
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A VEHICLE PARKED WITHOUT AN ENGAGED PARK PAWL AND WITHOUT AN APPLIED PARKING BRAKE MAY HAVE UNINTENDED MOVEMENT WHICH MAY CAUSE A CRASH.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND DEALERS WILL REPAIR THE VEHICLES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 28, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332 AND FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED CALL 1-800-232-5952 (TDD). REPRESENTATIVES ARE AVAILABLE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY: 8:00AM - 5:00PM.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
4DP15001 · Loss Of Power Steering While Driving
Opened Apr 1, 2015 · Closed Jun 14, 2018
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering:electric Power Assist System
On May 27, 2014, amended June 2, 2014, Ford Motor Company (Ford) submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) to NHTSA describing a safety defect that may result in a sudden loss of power steering assist while driving in approximately 746,067 model year (MY) 2008 through 2011 Ford Escape vehicles equipped with electric power assisted steering (NHTSA 14V-284, Ford 14S05). Ford's DIR described the defect condition as a poor signal to noise ratio [SNR] in the torque sensor within the Electric Power Assisted Steering (EPAS) system [which] does not allow the PSCM to determine the driver's steering input. When the system detects this fault condition, it transitions the EPAS system to the fail-safe/manual steering mode.Ford's DIR indicates that loss of power steering assist while driving would require higher steering effort at lower vehicle speeds, which may result in an increased risk of a crash.Ford's remedy instructs dealers to check the Power Steering Control Module (PSCM) for Diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTCs) to determine the proper repair procedure. If no DTCs are present, dealers are to update the PSCM and instrument cluster module software. The updated PSCM software changes the torque sensor fault strategy so that the SNR condition does not result in a loss of power steering assist while driving.In addition, audible and visual warnings are provided for torque sensor faults.If DTCs indicating faults in the torque sensor, PSCM or Power Steering Motor (motor) are present in the initial recall inspection, the dealer performs the following repairs: 1) replaces the torque sensor for torque sensor faults (DTC B2278); or 2) replaces the steering column for faults related to the PSCM (DTC B1342) or motor (DTC B2277).Continued in attachment pages
PE13003 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Feb 28, 2014
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine
On February 21, 2013, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 to investigate allegations of electronic throttle body (ETB) failures resulting in sudden reduction of engine power in model year (MY) 2009-2013 Ford Escape, Fusion, Mariner and Milan vehicles. During this investigation, Ford identified a condition in subject vehicles equipped with 2.5L and 3.0L engines that may result in a sudden reduction of engine power.According to Ford, the ETB internal motor contacts may develop a high resistance material buildup condition on the commutator, resulting in intermittent electrical connectivity and reduced engine power. When this condition occurs, the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) or Wrench light will illuminate and the vehicle may enter a limited limp home mode.Ford?s trade name for the feature is Failure Mode Effects Management (FMEM) mode.In this mode, engine power and vehicle speed are reduced, while full function of the power steering, power braking, lighting, and climate control systems are maintained.ODI?s complaint analysis indicate that the predominant failure mode involved reduced motive power associated with the limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Analysis of warranty claims provided by Ford identified 59,807 claims related to ETB replacements and approximately 50 percent of claims are associated with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed.Ford described several factors where the ETB motor may fail resulting in DTCs P2111 or P2112 but the failure is not an existing stuck open or closed ETB valve position.According to Ford, the ETB control strategy provides the driver with three FMEM modes that allow varying degrees of vehicle mobility depending on the severity of the fault detected.DTCs associated with stuck open or closed throttle valves are designated the highest failure severity resulting in engine speeds limited to high idle corresponding to the limited limp home mode.Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability.Other FMEM limp modes may result in reduced engine performance but will maintain vehicle speed above 20mph. During this investigation, Ford and its suppliers, Delphi and Igarashi, updated the powertrain control module (PCM) software to include a throttle body motor cleaning cycle during key-on and modified the ETB internal motor components design, surface finish and material composition to improve durability. Additionally, Ford developed a remedy procedure and issued a special Customer Satisfaction Program (CSP) 13N03 extending the ETB warranty coverage and instructing dealers to update the powertrain calibration to improve vehicle performance in the event that intermittent electrical connectivity of the throttle body motor contacts occurs. The program extends the coverage for up to 10 years of service or 150,000 miles from the warranty start date of the vehicle, all vehicles are eligible for the program through January 31, 2015 regardless of mileage.Owners of the affected vehicles will be contacted by mail to take their vehicle to a Ford dealer who will reprogram the PCM to the latest calibration. The bulletin was sent to dealers on January 17, 2014 and the owner letter mailing began on January 27, 2014. See the investigative file for copies of Ford's bulletin and owner letter. This preliminary evaluation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding that
DP12006 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction
Opened Oct 2, 2012 · Closed Feb 21, 2013
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine
In a letter dated August 30, 2012, The North Carolina Consumers Council (NCCC) petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to initiate a defect investigation of alleged electronic throttle body failures resulting in engine stall or surge while driving in model year (MY) 2005 through 2012 Ford Escape vehicles. On October 2, 2012 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Defect Petition DP12-006 to evaluate whether to grant or deny the petition. The petition is hereby granted on certain model years. The NCCC letter cites two complaints of stall while driving in MY 2009 Ford Escape vehicles that were diagnosed as failed throttle bodies with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed. The petitioner indicates that the owners of both vehicles reported experiencing repeated incidents of stalling and engine surging. According to Ford, Escape non-hybrid vehicles are equipped with Electronic Throttle Body (ETB) assemblies beginning with MY 2009. Vehicles manufactured between June 22, 2009 and October 15, 2009 may contain contaminated printed circuit boards (PCB) with plating variations. Plating variations could lead to a lack of continuity in the throttle position sensor circuit where P2111 and/or other DTCs would be generated and stored. Ford and its electronic throttle body supplier, Delphi, modified the PCB manufacturing process and issued a technical service bulletin (TSB) 09-23-5. Vehicles produced after October 15, 2009 incorporated ETBs manufactured with a PCB process that resolved this condition. ODI's analysis identified a total of 123 unique reports indicating allegations of reduced motive power or vehicle stall. Depending on the condition of throttle control system malfunction, a driver may experience varying levels of reduced engine performance associated with three limp home modes. In two limp modes, reduced engine performance may maintain vehicle speeds above 20mph while the third is a limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Allegations of stall appear to be related to the limited limp home mode. Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability. Allegations of vehicle surge appear to be related to limp home mode operation. Complaints alleging surge are most likely related to engine RPM fluctuations at low vehicle speeds or idle as the control system engages to prevent engine stall. In limited limp mode, rough-idle conditions may exist while the control system attempts to modulate engine RPMs once the vehicle reaches a reduced speed to maintain approximately 900 RPM. Separately, ODI received 59 complaints alleging incidents of engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2010-2011 Ford Fusion vehicles. Approximately 60 percent (36) of the incidents occurred at speeds of 40 miles per hour or more. Eighty percent of complaints (47) were received beginning March 2012 and 14 complaints reported that the throttle body was replaced or DTCs associated with limp home modes. Additionally, Ford issued TSB 10-21-6 addressing DTCs associated with idle speed drops and limited limp home mode. The petition is granted on certain model years.Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 has been opened to assess the scope, frequency and potential safety consequences associated with the alleged defect.See full copy of the closing resume for this defect petition for list of the VOQs associated with the defect petition analysis.
PE11016 · Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage
Opened Apr 27, 2011 · Closed Aug 18, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut; Visibility; Visibility:glass, Side/rear
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Additional source detail variants (5)
Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Visibility
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Visibility:glass, Side/rear
In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.