← 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

Engine complaints

493 reports
Clear category filter
77,000 miles · Jul 15, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 55 MPH WHEN THE WRENCH DASHBOARD INDICATOR LIGHT COMES ON. AT THE SAME TIME MY GAS PEDAL CEASES TO WORK AND CAR SPEED DECREASES. I HAVE TO COAST ONTO THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD. THANKFULLY BRAKES WORK. CAR IS STILL RUNNING. I TURN CAR OFF AND WAIT A MINUTE. TURN BACK ON. IT STARTS. LIGHT IS GONE AND CAR FEELS S…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 55 MPH WHEN THE WRENCH DASHBOARD INDICATOR LIGHT COMES ON. AT THE SAME TIME MY GAS PEDAL CEASES TO WORK AND CAR SPEED DECREASES. I HAVE TO COAST ONTO THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD. THANKFULLY BRAKES WORK. CAR IS STILL RUNNING. I TURN CAR OFF AND WAIT A MINUTE. TURN BACK ON. IT STARTS. LIGHT IS GONE AND CAR FEELS SHUDDERY BUT CONTINUES RUNNING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10525051

30,625 miles · Jul 15, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

TRAVELING AT 65 MPH ENGINE SUDDENLY DROPS IN RPM TO ABOUT 600 - 900 RPM AND CHECK ENGINE LIGHT COMES ON. PULLED CAR TO SIDE OF ROAD, SHUT IT OFF AND RESTARTED. ENGINE RAN FINE AND WAS LATER INSPECTED. OBD INDICATES THROTTLE BODY MALFUNCTION AND REQUIRES REPLACEMENT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524892

47,000 miles · Jul 15, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineVehicle Speed Control

I WAS TRAVELING APPROXIMATELY 35-40 MPH WHEN MY CAR STALLED, BUT NOT SHUTTING OFF AND THE RPM FLUTTERING BETWEEN 1000-2000 RPM. MY ACCELERATOR PEDAL WOULD NOT ALLOW ME TO PRESS IT TO INCREASE RPM OR MPH. NEXT MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ONE AND THE WRENCH SYMBOL AS WELL. I CALL MY LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP/SERVICE AND HE EXPLAINED IT…

Read full complaint

I WAS TRAVELING APPROXIMATELY 35-40 MPH WHEN MY CAR STALLED, BUT NOT SHUTTING OFF AND THE RPM FLUTTERING BETWEEN 1000-2000 RPM. MY ACCELERATOR PEDAL WOULD NOT ALLOW ME TO PRESS IT TO INCREASE RPM OR MPH. NEXT MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ONE AND THE WRENCH SYMBOL AS WELL. I CALL MY LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP/SERVICE AND HE EXPLAINED IT TO BE THE ACCELERATOR THROTTLE BODY AND THERE IS A NATIONAL BACK ORDER FOR THIS PART. IF THIS IS THE CASE THERE SHOULD BE A NATIONAL RECALL FROM THE GOVERNMENT OR FORD ABOUT THIS PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524866

Mileage unknown · Jul 15, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion System

DRIVING ON I-95 NORTH....AT 60 MPH....WHEN THE ENGINE ALMOST COMPLETELY STALLED OUT WITHOUT WARNING. THE CAR SPEED DROPPED DOWN TO 5-7MPH...AND THE CAR STARTED SHAKING AND THE ENGINE BEGAN ROUGH SURGING. I BARELY MISSED BEING HIT BY A LARGE SEMI TRUCK AS I INCHED THE CAR OVER TO THE CURB. I WAS ABLE TO GET THE CAR OFF THE EXPRE…

Read full complaint

DRIVING ON I-95 NORTH....AT 60 MPH....WHEN THE ENGINE ALMOST COMPLETELY STALLED OUT WITHOUT WARNING. THE CAR SPEED DROPPED DOWN TO 5-7MPH...AND THE CAR STARTED SHAKING AND THE ENGINE BEGAN ROUGH SURGING. I BARELY MISSED BEING HIT BY A LARGE SEMI TRUCK AS I INCHED THE CAR OVER TO THE CURB. I WAS ABLE TO GET THE CAR OFF THE EXPRESSWAY (GOING ABOUT 5 MPH) AT THE NEXT EXIT AND THEN TURNED THE CAR OFF. THE WRENCH LIGHT ALSO APPEARED. I TURNED THE CAR OFF .I CALLED MY HUSBAND, WHO TOLD ME TO SEE IF I COULD RESTART THE CAR AFTER 15 MINUTES. IT STARTED BACK UP AND I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE HOME. THE CAR WORKED OKAY FOR 3 MORE WEEKS AND THEN THE SAME THING HAPPENED TO ME AGAIN .....AND ALMOST CAUSED AN ACCIDENT AGAIN. I WAS ABLE TO GET THE CAR HOME, I HAVE PARKED THE CAR AND WILL NO LONGER USE IT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524847

63,833 miles · Jul 15, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

THE FIRST INCIDENT HAPPENED AS I WAS LEAVING WORK. I'D JUST PULLED OUT OF OUR PARKING LOT ONTO THE HIGHWAY WHEN MY CAR FAILED TO ACCELERATE. A WRENCH SYMBOL LIGHT CAME ON AND I COASTED TO THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY, TURNED IT OFF, LET IT SIT FOR A MOMENT AND THEN RESTARTED MY CAR. I MADE IT ABOUT 7 MILES WHEN THE SAME THING HAPPEN…

Read full complaint

THE FIRST INCIDENT HAPPENED AS I WAS LEAVING WORK. I'D JUST PULLED OUT OF OUR PARKING LOT ONTO THE HIGHWAY WHEN MY CAR FAILED TO ACCELERATE. A WRENCH SYMBOL LIGHT CAME ON AND I COASTED TO THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY, TURNED IT OFF, LET IT SIT FOR A MOMENT AND THEN RESTARTED MY CAR. I MADE IT ABOUT 7 MILES WHEN THE SAME THING HAPPENED. I PULLED INTO A PARKING LOT AND USED MY PHONE TO GOOGLE THE SYMPTOMS ON A FORD FORUM. IT STATED THAT THERE WERE IN FACT SEVERAL INCIDENTS STATING THE EXACT SAME PROBLEMS. AND THAT AFTER RESTARTING THEIR VEHICLES, IT RESETS ITSELF. SO I CONTINUED HOME. IT HAPPENED 2 MORE TIMES BEFORE I MADE IT HOME ONLY NOW THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON AS WELL. I CALLED FORD AND THEY STATED THERE WAS IN FACT AN ISSUE WITH THE THROTTLE BODY AFFECTING SEVERAL FORD VEHICLES. I HAD MY CAR TOWED TO FORD WHERE THEY DIAGNOSED THAT IT WAS IN FACT THE THROTTLE BODY. HOWEVER, THIS PART IS NOW ON A NATIONAL BACKORDER. I AM THE 13TH PERSON AT MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP NEEDING THIS PART IN ORDER TO DRIVE MY VEHICLE. I HAVE CHILDREN AND I REFUSE TO PUT THEIR LIVES AT RISK IN THIS VEHICLE. THEY CLEANED THE THROTTLE BODY AND SAID THIS WAS A BAND AID FIX UNTIL THE PART CAME IN WHICH BY THE WAY HAS NO ETA.THIS BAND AID REPAIR LASTED LESS THAN 24 HOURS. I HAVE THE EXTENDED WARRANTY AND IT WILL COVER THIS REPAIR BUT I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PAY $100 DEDUCTIBLE FOR IT TO BE FIXED. WHY AM I HAVING TO PAY OUT OF POCKET FOR A PROBLEM THAT IS NOT SPECIFIC TO MY VEHICLE? THEY HAVE POSTED BULLETINS BUT STILL NO RECALL. IS IT GOING TO TAKE SOMEONE BEING KILLED BEFORE THEY DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. I'M HAVING TO DEPEND ON RIDES FROM FRIENDS TO GET TO AND FROM WORK, TO GET TO THE GROCERY STORE, TO PICK UP MY CHILDREN. MY EXTENDED WARRANTY WILL COVER 2 DAYS OF A RENTAL. FORD SAYS THEY CAN'T OFFER ME A LOANER VEHICLE. PLEASE MAKE THEM DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS... *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524822

69,122 miles · Jul 14, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING 55MPH AND THE ESCAPE SUDDENLY LOST POWER, DECELERATING AND COMING TO A STOP. THE POWERTRAIN LIGHT CAME ON AND THE VEHICLE HAD A DIFFICULT TIME TURNING OVER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALERSHIP WHERE NOTHING WAS FOUND. THE INCIDENT THEN OCCURRED AGAIN A WEEK LATER AT THE SAME SPEED. THIS TIME THE CHECK ENGINE LIGH…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING 55MPH AND THE ESCAPE SUDDENLY LOST POWER, DECELERATING AND COMING TO A STOP. THE POWERTRAIN LIGHT CAME ON AND THE VEHICLE HAD A DIFFICULT TIME TURNING OVER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALERSHIP WHERE NOTHING WAS FOUND. THE INCIDENT THEN OCCURRED AGAIN A WEEK LATER AT THE SAME SPEED. THIS TIME THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND OIL PRESSURE LIGHT CAME ON AS WELL. THE VEHICLE WOULD ONLY START IN NEUTRAL AND THEN IT WAS TAKEN TO THE STOP. THIS TIME IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY SENSOR NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524742

50,100 miles · Jul 12, 2013
EnginePower Train

THE FORD DIED ON THE INTERSTATE THE SECOND DAY(2/11/13) I OWNED IT. IT TOTALLY LOST POWER AND I HAD TO COAST ONTO THE SHOULDER AND WAIT. I RETURNED IT TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY KEPT IT FOR A DAY AND FOUND NOTHING. IT OCCURRED THREE TIMES THE NEXT WEEK AND I RETURNED TO THE DEALER. THEY CLEANED SOMETHING AND THE CAR WORKED WITHO…

Read full complaint

THE FORD DIED ON THE INTERSTATE THE SECOND DAY(2/11/13) I OWNED IT. IT TOTALLY LOST POWER AND I HAD TO COAST ONTO THE SHOULDER AND WAIT. I RETURNED IT TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY KEPT IT FOR A DAY AND FOUND NOTHING. IT OCCURRED THREE TIMES THE NEXT WEEK AND I RETURNED TO THE DEALER. THEY CLEANED SOMETHING AND THE CAR WORKED WITHOUT INCIDENT FOR A COUPLE WEEKS. THE CAR HAS INTERMITTENTLY QUIT OVER THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS. IT GOT REAL BAD THIS WEEK (7/10/13) AND WHEN I TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP THE COMPUTER FINALLY REGISTERED A THROTTLE PROBLEM. THE PART IS ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER AND SHOULD TAKE A MONTH TO GET. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524604

22,361 miles · Jul 12, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control

WHILE ENGINE IS UNDERLOAD REPRODUCED BY PRESSING BOTH GAS AND BRAKES SIMULTANEOUSLY; AT ACCELERATION AND BETWEEN 30-40 MPH THE ENGINE MAKES AN AUDIBLE THUMPING NOISE. FORD HAS BEEN UNABLE TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM AND CALLS IT NORMAL. THEY INDICATED I SHOULD DRIVE MORE AGGRESSIVELY (FASTER AND FORCING THE ENGINE TO SHIFT GEARS) IN…

Read full complaint

WHILE ENGINE IS UNDERLOAD REPRODUCED BY PRESSING BOTH GAS AND BRAKES SIMULTANEOUSLY; AT ACCELERATION AND BETWEEN 30-40 MPH THE ENGINE MAKES AN AUDIBLE THUMPING NOISE. FORD HAS BEEN UNABLE TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM AND CALLS IT NORMAL. THEY INDICATED I SHOULD DRIVE MORE AGGRESSIVELY (FASTER AND FORCING THE ENGINE TO SHIFT GEARS) IN ORDER TO AVOID THIS CONDITION. THIS IS DANGEROUS AND IRRESPONSIBLE ADVICE THAT MAY LEAD TO AN ACCIDENT. THE CONDITION MAY LEAD TO ENGINE FAILURE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524527

93,140 miles · Jul 11, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

MY 17 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER HAS HAD TWO OCCURRENCES OF THE VEHICLE LOSING ALL POWER WITHIN THE LAST TWO DAYS (7/10/2013 AND 7/11/2013). ONCE SHE WAS STARTING FROM A RED LIGHT AND THE OTHER SHE WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. BOTH TIMES SHE WAS ABLE TO PULL OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND START THE CAR AND CONTINUE TRAVEL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524440

59,000 miles · Jul 11, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System

THROTTLE BODY FAILURE. FROM NOV 2012 UNTIL JULY 2013 MY FORD ESCAPE HAS BEEN BUCKING AND SURGING AT LOW SPEEDS WITH NO THROTTLE RESPONSE. OCCASIONALLY, THE VEHICLE WOULD DIE COMPLETELY UNRESPONSIVE IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION. ON JULY 11, 2013, MY WIFE TOOK OUR 2010 FORD ESCAPE TO ERNEST MCCARTY FORD IN ALABASTER, AL. THEY …

Read full complaint

THROTTLE BODY FAILURE. FROM NOV 2012 UNTIL JULY 2013 MY FORD ESCAPE HAS BEEN BUCKING AND SURGING AT LOW SPEEDS WITH NO THROTTLE RESPONSE. OCCASIONALLY, THE VEHICLE WOULD DIE COMPLETELY UNRESPONSIVE IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION. ON JULY 11, 2013, MY WIFE TOOK OUR 2010 FORD ESCAPE TO ERNEST MCCARTY FORD IN ALABASTER, AL. THEY TOLD US THAT THE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THIS ISSUE IS VERY DANGEROUS AND SHOULD FORD SHOULD ISSUE A RECALL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10524383

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