NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
493 reportsClear category filter56,390 miles · Jul 1, 2013
EnginePower Train
2010 FORD ESCAPE V6 AWD - BUILT JUNE 14, 2010 WHILE DRIVING ON MAJOR LOCAL ROAD, VEHICLE LOST ALMOST ALL POWER. "WRENCH" (THROTTLE CONTROL/POWERTRAIN WARNING) LIGHT CAME ON. VEHICLE SLOWED TO A ROLL WITH GAS PEDAL PROVIDING NO ACCELERATION. AFTER COMING TO A STOP VEHICLE WOULD ONLY ACCELERATE TO BETWEEN 2-4 MPH. VEHICLE WAS A…
Read full complaint
2010 FORD ESCAPE V6 AWD - BUILT JUNE 14, 2010 WHILE DRIVING ON MAJOR LOCAL ROAD, VEHICLE LOST ALMOST ALL POWER. "WRENCH" (THROTTLE CONTROL/POWERTRAIN WARNING) LIGHT CAME ON. VEHICLE SLOWED TO A ROLL WITH GAS PEDAL PROVIDING NO ACCELERATION. AFTER COMING TO A STOP VEHICLE WOULD ONLY ACCELERATE TO BETWEEN 2-4 MPH. VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO BE DRIVEN TO DEALER ABOUT A MILE AWAY AFTER SITTING ON SHOULDER FOR 15-20 MINUTES. DEALERSHIP DIAGNOSED PROBLEM AS A FAILED THROTTLE BODY AND REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY WITH A DEDUCTIBLE CHARGE. THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A DANGEROUS SITUATION HAD THE VEHICLE BEEN MERGING, ETC. AT THE TIME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522750
29,500 miles · Jul 1, 2013
Engine
THIS INCIDENT WAS THE SECOND ONE WITHIN ONE MONTH. WHILE DRIVING AT 30 MPH, THE ENGINE, ALTHOUGH DID NOT CUT OFF COMPLETELY, IT SLOWED DOWN TO LOWEST POSSIBLE RPM, REDUCING THE VEHICLE SPEED FROM 30MPH TO ABOUT 3 MPH. BOTH MYSELF AND MY WIFE WERE LUCKY IN THAT THERE WERE NO VEHICLES BEHIND US FOR THEY FOR SURE WOULD HAVE RUN INT…
Read full complaint
THIS INCIDENT WAS THE SECOND ONE WITHIN ONE MONTH. WHILE DRIVING AT 30 MPH, THE ENGINE, ALTHOUGH DID NOT CUT OFF COMPLETELY, IT SLOWED DOWN TO LOWEST POSSIBLE RPM, REDUCING THE VEHICLE SPEED FROM 30MPH TO ABOUT 3 MPH. BOTH MYSELF AND MY WIFE WERE LUCKY IN THAT THERE WERE NO VEHICLES BEHIND US FOR THEY FOR SURE WOULD HAVE RUN INTO US. WE TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE WE ORIGINALLY PURCHASED IT AND THEY TOLD US WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS, STATING THAT THEY HAVE HAD MANY VEHICLES RETURNED FOR THE SAME PROBLEM AND WE WOULD HAVE TO WAIT FOR REPLACEMENTS PARTS BECAUSE THERE IS A SHORTAGE OF PARTS DUE TO DEMAND. NEEDLESS TO SAY THEY ARE CHARGING US 440 DOLLARS TO REPLACE THE VALVE BODY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522741
85,000 miles · Jun 30, 2013
EnginePower Train
ON SATURDAY, JUNE 22, 2013, I DROVE 2.5 HOURS NORTH FOR ONE OF MY BEST FRIENDS WEDDINGS. I WAS ON THE INTERSTATE WITH CRUISE CONTROL SET AT ABOUT 70 MPH WHEN SUDDENLY MY CAR LOST POWER. I WAS IN THE LEFT LANE WITH A SEMI BEHIND ME. LUCKILY THE SEMI DRIVER WAS PAYING ATTENTION AND WAS ABLE TO MOVE INTO THE RIGHT LANE BEFORE REAR-…
Read full complaint
ON SATURDAY, JUNE 22, 2013, I DROVE 2.5 HOURS NORTH FOR ONE OF MY BEST FRIENDS WEDDINGS. I WAS ON THE INTERSTATE WITH CRUISE CONTROL SET AT ABOUT 70 MPH WHEN SUDDENLY MY CAR LOST POWER. I WAS IN THE LEFT LANE WITH A SEMI BEHIND ME. LUCKILY THE SEMI DRIVER WAS PAYING ATTENTION AND WAS ABLE TO MOVE INTO THE RIGHT LANE BEFORE REAR-ENDING ME. I WAS ABLE TO MOVE ON THE SHOULDER OF THE INTERSTATE AND COME TO A STOP. AS I DID, MY ESCAPE ACTED AS THOUGH IT WAS GOING TO DIE BUT DID NOT COMPLETELY. I NOTICED AN OPEN-ENDED WRENCH IN THE BOTTOM LEFT OF MY INSTRUMENT PANEL AND MY CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON. I TURNED THE CAR OFF AND LOOKED THROUGH THE MANUAL TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE WRENCH LIGHT MEANT. IT SAID THROTTLE CONTROL/POWERTRAIN. I WAS RUNNING LATE TO BEGIN WITH SO I STARTED FREAKING OUT. I TURNED MY ESCAPE BACK ON AND EVERYTHING SEEMED TO BE FINE. BOTH LIGHTS WENT OFF SO I PUT IT IN DRIVE AND GOT BACK ON THE INTERSTATE WITHOUT ANY MORE PROBLEMS. AT FIRST I THOUGHT MAYBE IT WAS CRUISE CONTROL GOING OUT SO I DIDN'T USE IT THE REST OF THE WAY. ONCE I GOT OFF THE INTERSTATE, I STOPPED AT A LIGHT AND WHEN THE LIGHT CHANGED I PROCEEDED THROUGH IT WITH MY ESCAPE STALLING AS SOON AS I TURNED, ALONG WITH BOTH LIGHTS BACK ON. I KNEW IT WAS SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE CRUISE. ONCE I GOT TO THE NEAREST TOWN, I STOPPED AT AUTOZONE AND HAD THEM TEST IT. THEIR COMPUTER SHOWED TPS/THROTTLE BODY FAILURE. I IMMEDIATELY STARTED DOING SOME RESEARCH TO FIND THIS PART SINCE AUTOZONE DOESN'T CARRY IT. I WAS SURPRISED TO FIND OUT THAT NO ONE CAN GET THIS PART AND FORD HAS BEEN ON BACK ORDER FOR QUITE A FEW MONTHS. AFTER THE WEDDING, I DROVE BACK HOME WITH MY CAR STALLING MANY MORE TIMES. SINCE THEN, IT HAPPENS AT LEAST ONCE A DAY, IF NOT MORE. TWICE, MY CAR HAS STALLED IN THE MIDDLE OF A VERY BUSY HIGHWAY INTERSECTION ON MY WAY TO WORK, FREAKING ME OUT I WAS GOING TO GET HIT. HELP NEEDED SOON! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522507
46,283 miles · Jun 29, 2013
Engine
ON SEVERAL INTERMITTENT OCCASIONS BEGINNING ON JUNE 15, 2013 MY FORD ESCAPE WOULD JERK FORWARD AND LOSE POWER (EVEN ON THE FREEWAY). SOMETIMES I AM ABLE TO MOVE OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND OTHERS IT DIES BEFORE I CAN MOVE IT OUT OF THE INTERSECTION OR STREET. THIS HAS HAPPENED WHEN ME AND MY TWO CHILDREN WERE IN THE CAR WHI…
Read full complaint
ON SEVERAL INTERMITTENT OCCASIONS BEGINNING ON JUNE 15, 2013 MY FORD ESCAPE WOULD JERK FORWARD AND LOSE POWER (EVEN ON THE FREEWAY). SOMETIMES I AM ABLE TO MOVE OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND OTHERS IT DIES BEFORE I CAN MOVE IT OUT OF THE INTERSECTION OR STREET. THIS HAS HAPPENED WHEN ME AND MY TWO CHILDREN WERE IN THE CAR WHICH IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND WRENCH ILLUMINATES. THIS PROBLEM IS SPONTANEOUS AND CAN DRIVE FOR SEVERAL MILES WITHOUT AN INCIDENT AND THEN OCCURS OUT OF NOWHERE AGAIN. WHEN I TOOK THE CAR TO THE MECHANIC HE INFORMED ME THAT THE CODE P2112 SHOWED THAT MY THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AS IT WAS GETTING STUCK CLOSED. I HAVE HEARD THAT SEVERAL OTHER FORD VEHICLES ARE HAVING SIMILAR ISSUES AND THIS NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED ASAP. AFTER SPENDING $370 TO FIX THE PROBLEM I FEEL THAT THIS ISSUE COULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED BEFOREHAND. PLEASE PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING TO OTHER FAMILIES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522408
44,500 miles · Jun 28, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
LEAVING HOME CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND THROTTLE LIGHTS CAME ON AND THE VEHICLE WAS JERKING AND WOULD ALLOW ME TO GIVE IT ANY GAS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522268
54,000 miles · Jun 28, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineVehicle Speed Control
I WILL BE DRIVING ALONG AND THE ENGINE ACTS AS IF IT DIDN'T GET ENOUGH GAS AND AIR MIXTURE SO IT KICKS OUT OF SHIFTING AND JUST SLOWS DOWN THEN IT STARTS HOPPING. IT GIVES ME A SYMBOL ON THE DASHBOARD OF A WRENCH. I LOOKED IT UP AND IT SAYS IT THE THROTTLE BODY. I HAD A MECHANIC COME WITH HIS HANDHELD COMPUTER AND READ THE CODE …
Read full complaint
I WILL BE DRIVING ALONG AND THE ENGINE ACTS AS IF IT DIDN'T GET ENOUGH GAS AND AIR MIXTURE SO IT KICKS OUT OF SHIFTING AND JUST SLOWS DOWN THEN IT STARTS HOPPING. IT GIVES ME A SYMBOL ON THE DASHBOARD OF A WRENCH. I LOOKED IT UP AND IT SAYS IT THE THROTTLE BODY. I HAD A MECHANIC COME WITH HIS HANDHELD COMPUTER AND READ THE CODE AND IT SAYS THROTTLE AVIATOR STUCK OPEN, THEN HE ERASES THE COMPUTER CODE ND I AM ABLE TO DRIVE UNTIL THE NEXT TOME IT HAPPENS. WHICH IT HAS HAPPEN EVERYDAY NOW SINCE JUNE 12TH. FORD HAS SAID THAT THE PART IS BEING REVAMPED AND NOT SURE WHEN IT WILL BE AVAILABLE. MY MECHANIC SAID THAT HE HAS REPLACED MANY OF THESE. WHY HAS IT NOT BEEN RECALLED? I HAVE LOSES INCOME BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT TO BE OUT ON THE ROAD AND HAVE THIS HAPPEN WHEN I'M ON THE HIGHWAY WITH A SEMI BEHIND ME, THEN THEY WILL HAVE A LAW SUIT TO DEAL WITH. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522234
68,391 miles · Jun 28, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System
DRIVING AROUND 65MPH AND THE CAR SUDDENLY SHUTS OFF AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON, LOSS OF ALL POWER ALL I COULD DO WAS TRY TO MAKE MY WAY FROM THE FAST LANE OVER TO THE SHOULDER, DRIFTED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED THE CAR OFF AND IT RESTARTED AFTER A FEW MINUTES AND DROVE FINE ALL THE WAY HOME, A FEW DAYS LATER IT …
Read full complaint
DRIVING AROUND 65MPH AND THE CAR SUDDENLY SHUTS OFF AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON, LOSS OF ALL POWER ALL I COULD DO WAS TRY TO MAKE MY WAY FROM THE FAST LANE OVER TO THE SHOULDER, DRIFTED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED THE CAR OFF AND IT RESTARTED AFTER A FEW MINUTES AND DROVE FINE ALL THE WAY HOME, A FEW DAYS LATER IT DID THE SAME THING, CUT OFF WHILE DOING AROUND 60MPH AGAIN IN THE FAST LANE I HAD TO TRY AND GET OVER THROUGH 4 LANES OF TRAFFIC WITH CARS BLOWING BY ME AT OVER 80MPH TO GET TO THE SHOULDER, THIS IS GOING TO GET SOMEONE KILLED. I CALLED FORD AND THEY KNOW OF THE ISSUE, SEEMS THE ISSUE IS SO BAD THE PART THATS THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM (THE THROTTLE BODY) IS ON BACK ORDER, YOU HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATING SINCE FEB. WHY HAS THIS NOT BEEN RECALLED YET? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522199
73,000 miles · Jun 27, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON WHILE DRIVING CAR AND BARELY HAD ENOUGH RPMS TO GET OFF ROAD. HAD TO PULL BATTERY CABLE OFF TO GET CAR TO MOVE. THIS HAPPENED THREE TIMES TO GET THE CAR 20 MILES TO HOME THEN TRAILERED TO FORD DEALER. SAID IT WAS A BAD TB. THE CAR HAS ALSO STALLED AT 0MPH AND SOMETIMES SURGES. ONE TIME THIS WINTER THE CAR SU…
Read full complaint
WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON WHILE DRIVING CAR AND BARELY HAD ENOUGH RPMS TO GET OFF ROAD. HAD TO PULL BATTERY CABLE OFF TO GET CAR TO MOVE. THIS HAPPENED THREE TIMES TO GET THE CAR 20 MILES TO HOME THEN TRAILERED TO FORD DEALER. SAID IT WAS A BAD TB. THE CAR HAS ALSO STALLED AT 0MPH AND SOMETIMES SURGES. ONE TIME THIS WINTER THE CAR SURGED CAUSING IT TO HIT MY TRACTOR AND BUSTED BUMPER COVER AND FOG LAMP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522163
43,000 miles · Jun 27, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED AND COULD NOT BE RESTATED. THE CHECK ENGINE AND THE POWER TRAIN WARNING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE FAILURE WAS REPORTED TO THE MANUF…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED AND COULD NOT BE RESTATED. THE CHECK ENGINE AND THE POWER TRAIN WARNING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE FAILURE WAS REPORTED TO THE MANUFACTURER AND THEY STATED THAT THE PART WAS ON BACK ORDER. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 43,000. THE CONSUMER STATED WHILE DRIVING, SHE SUDDENLY FELT THE VEHICLE LOOSE POWER EVEN THOUGH SHE WAS PRESSING ON THE ACCELERATOR. THE WRENCH AND ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE DASH.
NHTSA ODI #10522092
39,000 miles · Jun 25, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System
WHILE DRIVING IN NEIGHBORHOOD AT APPROX. 15MPH, ENGINE STALLED AND ORANGE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF STREET, SHUT DOWN ENGINE AND THEN RESTARTED. ENGINE RAN FINE FOR ANOTHER 2 WEEKS AND THEN SAME EVENT OCCURRED WITH WIFE DRIVING. ONE WEEK LATER, DID SAME THING WHILE I WAS DRIVING. FORD DEALER HAS CAR NOW AN…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING IN NEIGHBORHOOD AT APPROX. 15MPH, ENGINE STALLED AND ORANGE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF STREET, SHUT DOWN ENGINE AND THEN RESTARTED. ENGINE RAN FINE FOR ANOTHER 2 WEEKS AND THEN SAME EVENT OCCURRED WITH WIFE DRIVING. ONE WEEK LATER, DID SAME THING WHILE I WAS DRIVING. FORD DEALER HAS CAR NOW AND SAYS THEY ARE WAITING FOR A THROTTLE BODY. CAR HAS BEEN IN SHOP FOR OVER 1 WEEK SO FAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10521791
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.