NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
493 reportsClear category filter48,760 miles · Jul 11, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
FIRST IT STARTED WITH THE ENGINE LIGHT COMING ON. I HAD THE CODES READ AT A LOCAL AUTO PARTS STORE AND THEY SAW IT WAS AN "EVAP CENSOR" AND STATED THIS IS USUALLY ASSOCIATED WITH A GAS CAP LEAKING. WELL, THE ESCAPE WE HAVE DOESN'T HAVE A GAS CAP!!! IT'S ONE OF THOSE "QUICK FUEL, NASCAR TYPE SYSTEMS", WHERE THERE IS JUST A PLUG T…
Read full complaint
FIRST IT STARTED WITH THE ENGINE LIGHT COMING ON. I HAD THE CODES READ AT A LOCAL AUTO PARTS STORE AND THEY SAW IT WAS AN "EVAP CENSOR" AND STATED THIS IS USUALLY ASSOCIATED WITH A GAS CAP LEAKING. WELL, THE ESCAPE WE HAVE DOESN'T HAVE A GAS CAP!!! IT'S ONE OF THOSE "QUICK FUEL, NASCAR TYPE SYSTEMS", WHERE THERE IS JUST A PLUG THAT RETRACTS WHEN YOU INSERT THE GAS NOZZLE AND RETRACTS WHEN YOU'RE FINISHED? SECONDLY, THE SURGING STARTED HAPPENING WHILE STOPPED AT RED LIGHTS. I WOULD SLIDE THE GEAR INTO NEUTRAL, WHICH WOULD KEEP THE VEHICLE FROM LUNGING, BUT YOU COULD STILL SEE THE RPM'S REVVING UP AND DOWN. THIS ISSUE WENT ON FOR ABOUT TWO MONTHS. THIRDLY, IT IS NOW STALLING WHILE DRIVING 50 - 60 MPH DOWN THE HIGHWAY. THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY RHYME OR REASON AS TO WHEN IT HAPPENS, IT JUST TOTALLY SHUTS DOWN THE ENGINE!!! VERY DANGEROUS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10524362
57,300 miles · Jul 11, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
AS I ACCELERATE FROM A STOP POSITION SUCH AS A STOP SIGN, TRAFFIC LIGHT OR ACCELERATE TRYING TO GO UP AN INCLINE OR BRIDGE THE CAR LOSES ALL POWER. THE ENGINE STILL RUNS AND THE POWER STEERING STILL WORKS BUT AS YOU TRY AND PRESS DOWN ON THE PEDAL TO ACCELERATE NOTHING HAPPENS. EVENTUALLY THE CAR STOPS AND BEGINS TO SPUTTER. …
Read full complaint
AS I ACCELERATE FROM A STOP POSITION SUCH AS A STOP SIGN, TRAFFIC LIGHT OR ACCELERATE TRYING TO GO UP AN INCLINE OR BRIDGE THE CAR LOSES ALL POWER. THE ENGINE STILL RUNS AND THE POWER STEERING STILL WORKS BUT AS YOU TRY AND PRESS DOWN ON THE PEDAL TO ACCELERATE NOTHING HAPPENS. EVENTUALLY THE CAR STOPS AND BEGINS TO SPUTTER. I TURN OFF THE CAR AND THEN START IT UP. THE CAR WORKS FINE FOR A FEW MILES BUT THE SITUATION HAPPENS AGAIN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10524323
46,109 miles · Jul 9, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING ON 2 LANE HWY IN 55MPH ZONE IN PASSING LANE AND CAME UP TO RED LIGHT. WHEN LIGHT CHANGED, STEPPED ON GAS PEDAL AND HAD NO ACCELERATION. VEHICLE HAD ONLY AN IDLING, SURGING ROUGH MOTION THAT ALLOWED IT TO SLOWLY MOVE ONTO THE GRASS MEDIAN. CAUSED SEVERAL CARS TO BACK UP BEFORE VEHICLE WAS OUT OF TRAFFIC. RESTARTED VEHI…
Read full complaint
DRIVING ON 2 LANE HWY IN 55MPH ZONE IN PASSING LANE AND CAME UP TO RED LIGHT. WHEN LIGHT CHANGED, STEPPED ON GAS PEDAL AND HAD NO ACCELERATION. VEHICLE HAD ONLY AN IDLING, SURGING ROUGH MOTION THAT ALLOWED IT TO SLOWLY MOVE ONTO THE GRASS MEDIAN. CAUSED SEVERAL CARS TO BACK UP BEFORE VEHICLE WAS OUT OF TRAFFIC. RESTARTED VEHICLE AND ENGINE RAN A ROUGH IDLE W/ THE WRENCH AND ENGINE LIGHTS ON. IRONIC, THAT ANOTHER FORD ESCAPE OWNER STOPPED TO HELP AND TOLD ME HIS 2009 HAD JUST HAD SAME SYMPTOMS THE WEEK BEFORE AND HE TOLD ME HIS WAS THROTTLE BODY AND IT WAS OVER $500 TO REPAIR. DIAGNOSIS AT FORD WAS CODE P2112 (THROTTLE STUCK CLOSED). SOLUTION WAS TO REPLACE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY. SEEMS TO BE A FAMILIAR ISSUE W/ FORD DEALER AS THEY HAD JUST GOTTEN PARTS THIS WEEK AFTER BEING BACK ORDERED LAST WEEK. QUESTIONED CUSTOMER SERVICE REP TO SEE IF NEW PART WAS SAME MANUFACTURER AS OLD PART. HE INFORMED ME THAT NEW PART WAS FROM A NEW MANUFACTURER. SEEMS LIKE ANOTHER SITUATION OF LOWEST COST VENDOR SYNDROME AND FORD SHOULD HAVE TO STAND BEHIND THEIR PROCUREMENT/ENGINEERING DECISIONS. JUST THANKFUL THAT I DID NOT GET REAR-ENDED WHILE STUCK IN THE PASSING LANE IN A 55MPH ZONE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10524012
1,000 miles · Jul 9, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE ENGINE STALLED WITH THE ILLUMINATION OF THE WRENCH WARNING ICON. UPON RESTARTING, THE VEHICLE RESUMED NORMALLY. THE FAILURE RECURRED NUMEROUS TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE THROTTLE BODY MOTOR …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE ENGINE STALLED WITH THE ILLUMINATION OF THE WRENCH WARNING ICON. UPON RESTARTING, THE VEHICLE RESUMED NORMALLY. THE FAILURE RECURRED NUMEROUS TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE THROTTLE BODY MOTOR ASSEMBLY WAS REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 1,000. UPDATED 08/15/13*LJ
NHTSA ODI #10523930
50,300 miles · Jul 9, 2013
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train
THE ESCAPE ENGINE STOPPED PROVIDING POWER AND THE ACCELERATOR STOPPED RESPONDING. THE CAR ENGINE WENT TO IDLE. AFTER PULLING OVER SHUTTING CAR OFF THEN ON AGAIN THE ENGINE BEGAN RESPONDING. THIS HAPPENED ABOUT 10 TIMES BEFORE GETTING THE CAR TO A SERVICE DEALER. THE PROBLEM WAS IDENTIFIED AS A FAILED THROTTLE BODY. THE DEAL…
Read full complaint
THE ESCAPE ENGINE STOPPED PROVIDING POWER AND THE ACCELERATOR STOPPED RESPONDING. THE CAR ENGINE WENT TO IDLE. AFTER PULLING OVER SHUTTING CAR OFF THEN ON AGAIN THE ENGINE BEGAN RESPONDING. THIS HAPPENED ABOUT 10 TIMES BEFORE GETTING THE CAR TO A SERVICE DEALER. THE PROBLEM WAS IDENTIFIED AS A FAILED THROTTLE BODY. THE DEALER INDICATED THAT THESE PARTS ARE ON A 10 DAY BACK-ORDER DUE TO SO MANY VEHICLES HAVING THE SAME FAILURE AND PARTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE DUE TO SURGE IN DEMAND. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523869
38,490 miles · Jul 8, 2013
EngineService BrakesWheels
AFTER SITTING WITH MY CAR RUNNING IN A PARKED POSITION FOR APPROXIMATELY ONE MINUTE, I PUT THE CAR IN DRIVE. I DROVE FOR AN ESTIMATED 30 SECONDS. THEN I STOPPED TO CHECK FOR ONCOMING TRAFFIC BEFORE PULLING OUT INTO AN INTERSECTION. WHEN I PRESSED THE GAS TO MAKE A RIGHT TURN ONTO THAT MAJOR ROAD, THE YELLOW/ORANGE "WRENCH" SI…
Read full complaint
AFTER SITTING WITH MY CAR RUNNING IN A PARKED POSITION FOR APPROXIMATELY ONE MINUTE, I PUT THE CAR IN DRIVE. I DROVE FOR AN ESTIMATED 30 SECONDS. THEN I STOPPED TO CHECK FOR ONCOMING TRAFFIC BEFORE PULLING OUT INTO AN INTERSECTION. WHEN I PRESSED THE GAS TO MAKE A RIGHT TURN ONTO THAT MAJOR ROAD, THE YELLOW/ORANGE "WRENCH" SIGN IMMEDIATELY POPPED UP. SIMULTANEOUSLY, MY CAR BEGAN TO RUMBLE AND SHAKE. IN ADDITION, DESPITE PRESSING THE GAS PEDAL, MY CAR WAS NOT ACCELERATING. I IMMEDIATELY PULLED ONTO THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD, WHICH WAS DIFFICULT TO DO SINCE MY CAR WAS STRUGGLING TO MOVE. I TURNED THE CAR OFF AND RESTARTED IT. IT WAS DIFFICULT TO GET THE CAR TO RESTART. IT STRUGGLED AND SOUNDED LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL OUT, BUT AFTER APPROXIMATELY TEN SECONDS, IT STARTED UP. NOW, IN ADDITION TO THE "WRENCH" LIGHT, MY ESCAPE ALSO HAD THE CHECK ENGINE SYMBOL LIT UP. EVEN THOUGH I WAS SITTING ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WITH MY CAR RUNNING IN THE PARKED POSITION, MY CAR WAS STILL RUMBLING AND SHAKING. INTERESTING TO NOTE, I WAS ACTUALLY ON THE WAY HOME FROM THE FORD SERVICE DEPARTMENT WHERE I HAD JUST HAD MY CAR SERVICED FOR A SEEMINGLY UNRELATED PROBLEM. THE DAY BEFORE THE THROTTLE WENT, MY BACK PASSENGER TIRE BECAME STUCK IN A LOCKED POSITION, AND I WAS UNABLE TO DRIVE. I HAD TO PUMP MY BRAKES, AND PUT MY EMERGENCY BRAKE (WHICH HAD NOT BEEN ENGAGED) ON AND OFF SEVERAL TIMES TO UNLOCK THE BACK PASSENGER TIRE. FORD DETERMINED THIS INCIDENT WAS DUE TO WATER GETTING ON THE BRAKE SHOE WHICH MADE IT STICK TO THE BRAKE DRUM. THEY CLEANED, READJUSTED AND LUBRICATED MY REAR BRAKES (DRUMS, SHOES, ETC) AND SENT ME ON MY WAY. MY THROTTLE WENT WHILE I WAS ON MY WAY HOME FROM THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT AT FORD WHERE THEY HAD JUST FIXED MY BRAKE ISSUE. I HAD TO BE TOWED BACK TO FORD SINCE MY CAR WAS NOT ABLE TO RUN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523735
49,000 miles · Jul 8, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE AT ABOUT 65 MILES PER HOUR ON THE NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND I LOST POWER IN THE ENGINE. I WAS IN THE MIDDLE LANE OF A 4 LANE HIGHWAY AND HAD TO GET OVER TO THE SHOULDER. THE ENGINE NEVER SHUT OFF BUT WOULD NOT GO OVER 5 MPH. I SHUT THE ENGINE DOWN AND …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE AT ABOUT 65 MILES PER HOUR ON THE NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND I LOST POWER IN THE ENGINE. I WAS IN THE MIDDLE LANE OF A 4 LANE HIGHWAY AND HAD TO GET OVER TO THE SHOULDER. THE ENGINE NEVER SHUT OFF BUT WOULD NOT GO OVER 5 MPH. I SHUT THE ENGINE DOWN AND RESTARTED THE CAR AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE. I HAD 70 MILES TO GO SO I DECIDED TO TRY TO DRIVE ON AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE FOR 40 MILES WHEN IT DID IT AGAIN. I GOT OVER TO THE SHOULDER, SHUT THE ENGINE OFF AND RESTARTED AND WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT TO MY DESTINATION. I HAVE AN APPOINTMENT TO TAKE THE CAR TO A FORD DEALERSHIP TO GET IT FIXED ON THURSDAY. THE DEALERSHIP TOLD ME THAT THEY WERE FAMILIAR WITH THIS ISSUE AND THAT THE THROTTLE CONTROL NEED TO BE REPLACED. I HAVE LOOKED ONLINE AND HAVE SEEN HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF POSTS FROM OWNERS THAT ARE HAVING THE SAME ISSUE. WHAT GIVES. IF FORD KNOW ABOUT THIS, SHOULDN'T THEY TAKE CARE OF IT! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523695
25,100 miles · Jul 7, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System
VEHICLE STALLS WHILE DRIVING , STALLS WHILE IDLE , RPM'S SPIKE WHILE DRIVING !!! SCARY !! CODES READ P2112 . (THROTTLE STUCK OPEN ) THINKING BAD THROTTLE BODY ? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523521
47,358 miles · Jul 6, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
I CURRENTLY HAVE A 2010 FORD ESCAPE WITH 47,000 MILES ON IT . ON WEDNESDAY JULY 3 2013 I WAS RETURNING HOME FROM DOING ERRANDS, AND MY FORD ESCAPE CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT MOVE. THERE WERE NO WARNING LIGHTS ON THE DASH INFORMING ME THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM. FORTUNATELY, I HAD JUST TURNED INTO…
Read full complaint
I CURRENTLY HAVE A 2010 FORD ESCAPE WITH 47,000 MILES ON IT . ON WEDNESDAY JULY 3 2013 I WAS RETURNING HOME FROM DOING ERRANDS, AND MY FORD ESCAPE CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT MOVE. THERE WERE NO WARNING LIGHTS ON THE DASH INFORMING ME THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM. FORTUNATELY, I HAD JUST TURNED INTO THE LANE TO MY HOUSE AND WAS NOT ON A MAJOR HIGHWAY. WE HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO A LOCAL DEALER WHO INFORMED US THAT IT IS THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY. WE CONTACTED FORD CORPORATION AND REPORTED THE ISSUE, THEY SAID THAT THIS IS NOT UNDER WARRANTY AND THERE HAS BEEN NO ISSUES WITH THIS PART IN THE PAST. FORD GAVE US A CASE NUMBER AND SAID THAT IT WOULD TAKE UP TO FOUR DAYS TO DETERMINE IF THEY WILL COVER THE REPAIR. I HAD MY SEVEN YEAR OLD GRANDSON WITH ME THAT DAY, AND ALL I KEEP THINKING ABOUT IS WHAT IF THAT WOULD HAVE HAPPEN ON A BUSY HIGHWAY WITH CARS GOING THE SPEED OF 55MPH AND HIGHER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523464
63,750 miles · Jul 5, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE IS GOING INTO LIMP MODE WHILE DRIVING. IT JUST STOPS RESPONDING TO THE ACCELERATOR AND LIMPS ALONG UNTIL I CAN PULL OFF THE ROAD AND TURN THE CAR OFF. IN THE BEGINNING, I COULD START THE CAR BACK UP AND DRIVE HOME. BUT IT IS BEGINNING TO HAPPEN MORE OFTEN AND NOW I CANNOT DRIVE IT AT ALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10523369
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.