← 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

Fuel/propulsion System complaints

440 reports
Clear category filter
19,000 miles · Aug 5, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

CAR STALLED WHILE DRIVING AT 40 MILES PER HOUR.THIS SITUATION HAPPENED AFTER I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR A FUEL SERVICE. THE CAR STALLING WAS AWFUL. IT WAS THE THIRD TIME IT HAPPENED DURING THAT WEEK. THE ENGINE SERVICE SOON SIGN WENT ON AFTER THE INCIDENT. I WAS DRIVING MY CAR WITH MY 2 YEARS OLD DAUGHTER IN THE BACKSE…

Read full complaint

CAR STALLED WHILE DRIVING AT 40 MILES PER HOUR.THIS SITUATION HAPPENED AFTER I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR A FUEL SERVICE. THE CAR STALLING WAS AWFUL. IT WAS THE THIRD TIME IT HAPPENED DURING THAT WEEK. THE ENGINE SERVICE SOON SIGN WENT ON AFTER THE INCIDENT. I WAS DRIVING MY CAR WITH MY 2 YEARS OLD DAUGHTER IN THE BACKSEAT. IT WAS A DANGEROUS SITUATION. I WAS LUCKY NOT TO BE HIT BY OTHER CARS. I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE SERVICE AGAIN AND THEY SAID IT WAS A FAILURE OF THE THROTTLE BODY. THEY CHARGED ME 600 DOLLARS FOR A REPLACEMENT. I AM NOT HAPPY WITH THIS SITUATION BECAUSE IT LOOKED LIKE A MALFUNCTION. THE CAR IS UNDER 20000 MILES AND I KEEP IT IN TIP TOP CONDITION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533698

54,367 miles · Aug 5, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

AFTER THE APRIL 30, 2013 (54,367MILES) INCIDENT, THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED BY THE FORD DEALER AND ON AUG 4TH (58,700+/- MILES), THE SAME SYMPTOMS APPEARED WHILE DRIVING ON OPEN FREEWAY 65 MPH WITH ROLLING HILLS. THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED A POWER DROP AND SURGE WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION GEAR SHIFTING. A WARNING LIGHT--MECHANIC W…

Read full complaint

AFTER THE APRIL 30, 2013 (54,367MILES) INCIDENT, THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED BY THE FORD DEALER AND ON AUG 4TH (58,700+/- MILES), THE SAME SYMPTOMS APPEARED WHILE DRIVING ON OPEN FREEWAY 65 MPH WITH ROLLING HILLS. THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED A POWER DROP AND SURGE WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION GEAR SHIFTING. A WARNING LIGHT--MECHANIC WRENCH TURNED ON AND THEN THERE WAS A DIFFERENT ENGINE/TRANSMISSION SOUND AND IT WOULD NOT SHIFT OUT OF GEAR BY ITSELF SO WE PUT IT INTO NEUTRAL AND ROLLED TO A STOP. THE CAR WAS TOWED APPROX 70MILES TO THE SAME FORD DEALER NEAR OUR HOME. WE ARE WAITING FOR THE SERVICE DEPT TO RETURN OUR CALLS AND PROVIDE THE DETAIL TECHNICAL INFORMATION OF FAULT CODES ETC AND HOW THEY PLAN TO REPAIR IT AGAIN. SAME CONDITION, APPEARS TO BE AN ENGINEERING DESIGN OR MANUFACTURING DEFECT OF SPECIFIC COMPONENTS, (THROTTLE BODY, TRANSMISSION). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533696

38,541 miles · Aug 5, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

DRIVING DOWN INTERSTATE 45 IN HOUSTON, CAR WAS RUNNING, BUT NO POWER FROM THE GAS PEDAL. NEEDED TO COAST TO AN EXIT WHERE I STOPPED COMPLETELY. I NEEDED TO POWER DOWN THE CAR COMPLETELY THEN RESTART THE CAR BEFORE THE GAS PEDAL WORKED AGAIN. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWICE. THE OTHER TIME WAS ABOUT A MONTH EARLIER. FORD SERVICE D…

Read full complaint

DRIVING DOWN INTERSTATE 45 IN HOUSTON, CAR WAS RUNNING, BUT NO POWER FROM THE GAS PEDAL. NEEDED TO COAST TO AN EXIT WHERE I STOPPED COMPLETELY. I NEEDED TO POWER DOWN THE CAR COMPLETELY THEN RESTART THE CAR BEFORE THE GAS PEDAL WORKED AGAIN. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWICE. THE OTHER TIME WAS ABOUT A MONTH EARLIER. FORD SERVICE DEPARTMENT SAID IT WAS A DEFECTIVE "THROTTLE BODY". SOMETHING LIKE THAT SHOULDN'T FAIL SO EARLY. I WAS JUST OUT OF MY WARRANTY AS WELL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533681

42,000 miles · Aug 5, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

WHILE DRIVING ON 3 LANE HIGHWAY (IN TRAFFIC) CAR BUCKED AND LOST GAS PEDAL (DID NOTHING WHEN PUSHED) I WAS IN CENTER LANE ENGINE WENT TO IDOL WITH NO ENGINE CONTROL LOOKED IN MIRROR SEEN TRUCK LIGHTS ( VERY SCARY ) WHEN U CAN'T DO NOTHING LUCKILY ABLE TO GET OFF ROAD . TURNED OFF ENGINE AN RE STARTED IT WHEN A SHORT DISTANCE…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING ON 3 LANE HIGHWAY (IN TRAFFIC) CAR BUCKED AND LOST GAS PEDAL (DID NOTHING WHEN PUSHED) I WAS IN CENTER LANE ENGINE WENT TO IDOL WITH NO ENGINE CONTROL LOOKED IN MIRROR SEEN TRUCK LIGHTS ( VERY SCARY ) WHEN U CAN'T DO NOTHING LUCKILY ABLE TO GET OFF ROAD . TURNED OFF ENGINE AN RE STARTED IT WHEN A SHORT DISTANCE THEN SAME THING HAPPENED. DID THIS 7 TIMES IN LESS THAN 7 MILES LUCK I MADE IT TO MY DRIVE WAY (HAD TOWED TO DEALER NEXT DAY) WAITING FOR IT TO BE FIXED. THIS IS A DEATH WAITING TO HAPPEN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533589

44,800 miles · Aug 3, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

WHILE TRAVELING ON A STATE HIGHWAY THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST POWER ALTHOUGH IT WAS STILL RUNNING. THE POWERTRAIN LIGHT CAME ON. WE LIMPED OFF THE HIGHWAY. AFTER TURNING THE VEHICLE OFF AND TURNING IT BACK ON, THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO RUN AGAIN. THE LIGHT GOES OFF AND STAYS OFF UNTIL THE NEXT INCIDENT. THE INCIDENTS HAPPEN VERY FR…

Read full complaint

WHILE TRAVELING ON A STATE HIGHWAY THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST POWER ALTHOUGH IT WAS STILL RUNNING. THE POWERTRAIN LIGHT CAME ON. WE LIMPED OFF THE HIGHWAY. AFTER TURNING THE VEHICLE OFF AND TURNING IT BACK ON, THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO RUN AGAIN. THE LIGHT GOES OFF AND STAYS OFF UNTIL THE NEXT INCIDENT. THE INCIDENTS HAPPEN VERY FREQUENTLY NOW, AND BECAUSE OF THIS, WE ARE UNABLE TO USE OUR VEHICLE AT ALL. THIS HAS HAPPENED WITH ME RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION. WE HAD A CODE RUN AND HAVE BEEN TOLD IT IS THE THROTTLE BODY, WHICH IS APPARENTLY A COMMON PROBLEM. WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO OBTAIN THE PART TO REPAIR IT SO FAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533376

36,000 miles · Aug 3, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

I HAD A PROBLEM WITH ACCELERATION WHERE THE ESCAPE WOULD COUGH AND BUCK WHEN TRYING TO ACCELERATE. AT THAT TIME ( A COUPLE OF WEEKS AFTER PURCHASE), I TOOK IT BACK TO THE DEALER AND THEY SENT IT FOR A "SOFTWARE UPDATE". IT DIDN'T BUCK CONTINUALLY AFTER THAT, BUT WAS STILL GUTLESS AND SLOW. YESTERDAY 8/2/2013, I WAS AT A STOP …

Read full complaint

I HAD A PROBLEM WITH ACCELERATION WHERE THE ESCAPE WOULD COUGH AND BUCK WHEN TRYING TO ACCELERATE. AT THAT TIME ( A COUPLE OF WEEKS AFTER PURCHASE), I TOOK IT BACK TO THE DEALER AND THEY SENT IT FOR A "SOFTWARE UPDATE". IT DIDN'T BUCK CONTINUALLY AFTER THAT, BUT WAS STILL GUTLESS AND SLOW. YESTERDAY 8/2/2013, I WAS AT A STOP LIGHT AND TRIED TO ACCELERATE AND THE CAR JUST WOULDN'T GO. ENGINE STILL RUNNING, BUT NO POWER TO PROPEL FORWARD. "WRENCH" LIGHT CAME ON DASH AND I COASTED TO REPAIR GARAGE AT CORNER. I RESTARTED ENGINE AND LIGHT WENT AWAY. GARAGE EMPLOYEES RECOMMENDED I KEEP DRIVING TO SEE IF LIGHT COMES BACK ON. I CONTINUED ON MY WAY AND WAS TURNING RIGHT AND AS I MADE THE TURN, THE ESCAPE COMPLETELY LOST POWER. THANKFULLY I HAD A SHOULDER TO COAST ON TO OR I WOULD HAVE BEEN HIT BY ONCOMING TRAFFIC. THIS TIME, "WRENCH" LIGHT AND "ENGINE" LIGHT CAME ON. I HAD TO BE TOWED TO A FORD DEALERSHIP AND THE REPAIR WAS MADE THERE. THE DIAGNOSIS AND CORRECTION WAS FOR A THROTTLE BODY. FROM MY REPAIR SLIP IT SAYS "10FOZ RETRIEVED CODES P2111/P2112 - FAULTY AFTER RESEARCHING THE PROBLEM ONLINE, I SEE IT HAS BEEN AN ISSUE WITH OTHERS. MINE WAS FIXED UNDER THE WARRANTY. I AM REPORTING THE PROBLEM JUST IN CASE YOU ARE KEEPING RECORDS OF HOW MANY FORD ESCAPES HAVE HAD THIS PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533358

42,500 miles · Aug 2, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

WHILE ON A TWO LANE ROAD DRIVING 40 MPH, THE ENGINE IN MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE STARTED TO SPUTTER AS IF IT WAS GOING TO DIE. IT DID NOT, BUT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE INCIDENT I WAS NO LONGER ABLE TO ACCELERATE MY VEHICLE. THE ENGINE DID NOT REV, THE CAR REMAINED ON BUT JUST COASTED. I PULLED OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, TURNED OFF MY …

Read full complaint

WHILE ON A TWO LANE ROAD DRIVING 40 MPH, THE ENGINE IN MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE STARTED TO SPUTTER AS IF IT WAS GOING TO DIE. IT DID NOT, BUT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE INCIDENT I WAS NO LONGER ABLE TO ACCELERATE MY VEHICLE. THE ENGINE DID NOT REV, THE CAR REMAINED ON BUT JUST COASTED. I PULLED OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, TURNED OFF MY CAR AND TURNED IT ON AGAIN. I WAS THEN ABLE TO DRIVE FOR APPROXIMATELY 7 MINUTES UNTIL THE SAME PROBLEM OCCURRED AGAIN. THE NEXT DAY I EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM ON A 4 LANE ROAD GOING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH. THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM AND COULD HAVE HAD A FATAL OUTCOME. FORD NEEDS TO RECALL THE THROTTLE BODY FOR ALL AFFECTED VEHICLES IMMEDIATELY!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533299

43,000 miles · Aug 1, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion System

VEHICLE APPEARS TO BE STALLING OUT AT RANDOM TIMES. WHEN THIS HAPPENS, THERE IS NO POWER FROM THE GAS PEDAL AND NO RPM MOVEMENT. AN ORANGE WRENCH LIGHT COMES ON WHEN THE FAILURE OCCURS. MUST PULL OVER AND TURN ENGINE COMPLETELY OFF AND RESTART TO CORRECT. THE ENGINE SPUTTERS FOR SEVERAL SECONDS UPON RESTART BEFORE TURNING BACK O…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE APPEARS TO BE STALLING OUT AT RANDOM TIMES. WHEN THIS HAPPENS, THERE IS NO POWER FROM THE GAS PEDAL AND NO RPM MOVEMENT. AN ORANGE WRENCH LIGHT COMES ON WHEN THE FAILURE OCCURS. MUST PULL OVER AND TURN ENGINE COMPLETELY OFF AND RESTART TO CORRECT. THE ENGINE SPUTTERS FOR SEVERAL SECONDS UPON RESTART BEFORE TURNING BACK ON. THIS PROCESS OFTEN HAS TO REPEATED MULTIPLE TIMES THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF A SINGLE TRIP. VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL AUTO CARE SHOP ON 8/1/13 AND IT WAS DETERMINED THE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY IS MALFUNCTIONING. WAS TOLD BY THE SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE THAT THERE IS A NATIONAL BACK ORDER ON THE PART FROM FORD AND IT COULD TAKE UP TO A MONTH TO GET THE PART IN. THE QUOTE FOR THE REPAIR WAS $420 (INCLUDING THE COST OF LABOR). UPON FURTHER RESEARCH OF THE ISSUE OVER THE INTERNET IT WAS DETERMINED THAT OVER 725,000 COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN FILED OVER THE SAME ISSUE ON THE FORD ESCAPES, YET NO RECALL HAS TAKEN EFFECT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533130

48,000 miles · Aug 1, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

I WAS DRIVING DOWN A LOCAL STREET THEN I WAS APPROACHING A TRAIN CROSSING, JUST BEFORE CROSSING THE TRACKS, MY CAR WENT LIMP AND I COULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE. I WAS ONLY TRAVELING 5-10MPH SO WHEN MY CAR STOPPED, PART OF MY CAR WAS OVER THE TRAIN TRACKS. I COULD NOT MOVE MY CAR FOR ABOUT A MINUTE WHILE I PARKED MY CAR AND TURNE…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING DOWN A LOCAL STREET THEN I WAS APPROACHING A TRAIN CROSSING, JUST BEFORE CROSSING THE TRACKS, MY CAR WENT LIMP AND I COULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE. I WAS ONLY TRAVELING 5-10MPH SO WHEN MY CAR STOPPED, PART OF MY CAR WAS OVER THE TRAIN TRACKS. I COULD NOT MOVE MY CAR FOR ABOUT A MINUTE WHILE I PARKED MY CAR AND TURNED EVERYTHING OFF, INCLUDING OPENING THE CAR DOOR TO SHUT THE COMPUTER OFF. THEN AFTER RESETTING THE CAR, IT STRUGGLED TO START UP BUT STARTED AND DROVE AS USUAL. WITHIN THE LAST TWO DAYS, MY CAR SHUT DOWN DURING DRIVING 5 TIMES AND WHEN RE-STARTING, IT DID NOT INDICATE THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM. FINALLY THE CHECK ENGINE ICON TURNED ON AND I WAS ABLE TO TAKE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP TO CHECK THE CODE. IT TURNED OUT THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED REPLACING. MY CAR IS ONLY 3 YEARS OLD WITH AVERAGE MILEAGE. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AN TERRIBLE ACCIDENT IF THERE WAS A TRAIN AND I WAS IN A STATE OF PANIC. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533121

37,955 miles · Jul 31, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion System

WIFE WAS DRIVING VEHICLE 6 MILES FROM HOME, VEHICLE BEGAN STUMBLING AND WOULD HARDLY RUN. MADE IT OUT OF 4 LANE ROAD TO SAFETY. WRENCH SYMBOL SHOWED TILL ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF. SHUT OFF VEHICLE AND RESTARTED AFTER APPROX. 5 MINUTES, CONTINUED 1 MILE TO DESTINATION. AFTER VEHICLE SET FOR 2 HOURS DROVE IT 7 MILES HOME AND VEHICLE …

Read full complaint

WIFE WAS DRIVING VEHICLE 6 MILES FROM HOME, VEHICLE BEGAN STUMBLING AND WOULD HARDLY RUN. MADE IT OUT OF 4 LANE ROAD TO SAFETY. WRENCH SYMBOL SHOWED TILL ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF. SHUT OFF VEHICLE AND RESTARTED AFTER APPROX. 5 MINUTES, CONTINUED 1 MILE TO DESTINATION. AFTER VEHICLE SET FOR 2 HOURS DROVE IT 7 MILES HOME AND VEHICLE LIMPED UP DRIVEWAY. WIFE WAS AFRAID TO DRIVE VEHICLE UNTIL 7/28/2013 WHEN WE TRIED IT AGAIN. I CAN NOT DRIVE VEHICLE SINCE HAVING A STROKE BUT WAS WITH HER. WE DROVE VEHICLE TO YMCA AND IT WENT TO LIMPING AFTER 9 MILES, SHUT OFF AND LET SET FOR 5-6 MINUTES. VEHICLE RAN OK FOR AN ADDITIONAL 5 MILES TO Y. STARTED HOME AFTER 1 HOUR AT Y. VEHICLE RAN APPROX 5 MILES IN 45 AND 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT AREA. IT STARTED LIMPING APPROX. 500 FEET FROM STOP LIGHT. IT WENT IN LIMP MODE 4 MORE TIMES IN THE LAST 9 MILES TO GET HOME. LUCKILY THE TRAFFIC WAS NOT REAL HEAVY LATE IN AFTERNOON AND WE MADE IT HOME WITHOUT ANY ACCIDENTS; ONLY A VERY STRESSFUL RIDE HOME. VEHICLE NOW SHOWED ENGINE SYMBOL. WE READ THE FAULT CODE AND IT WAS P2111 OR FAULTY THROTTLE BODY. THIS IS A VERY EXPENSIVE REPAIR WHICH DEALER SAID WAS OUT OF WARRANTY AT 36K. MILES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10532981

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