NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Power Train complaints
508 reportsClear category filter51,000 miles · Oct 7, 2013
EnginePower Train
I WAS ON THE RIGHT HAND LANE ON HIGHWAY WHEN VEHICLE ALL OF SUDDEN LOST POWER AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. ALMOST REAR ENDED DUE TO SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER. ONCE I PULLED OVER AND WAITED A FEW SECONDS IT STARTED BACK UP. AFTER EXITING AND WAITING AT A RED LIGHT AND THEN PROCEEDING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION ON GREEN TO MAKE A LEFT HAND…
Read full complaint
I WAS ON THE RIGHT HAND LANE ON HIGHWAY WHEN VEHICLE ALL OF SUDDEN LOST POWER AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. ALMOST REAR ENDED DUE TO SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER. ONCE I PULLED OVER AND WAITED A FEW SECONDS IT STARTED BACK UP. AFTER EXITING AND WAITING AT A RED LIGHT AND THEN PROCEEDING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION ON GREEN TO MAKE A LEFT HAND TURN THE VEHICLE AGAIN LOST POWER. THIS HAS HAPPENED ON AT LEAST THREE OTHER OCCASIONS. WHEN I FIRST TOOK VEHICLE TO MECHANIC THEY TELL ME THAT THEY COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG AND AFTER THE THIRD OCCURRENCE THE WRENCH LIGHT FINALLY CAME ON AND NOW I'M TOLD ITS THE THROTTLE THAT SHOWS TO BE STUCK IN OPEN. I HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE PRICE FROM $750-$1000 FOR PARTS AND LABOR. NO RECALL AS OF TODAYS DATE. THE AUTO MECHANIC AT THE FORD DEALERSHIP TELLS ME THAT THERE HAS BEEN COMPLAINTS BUT NO RECALL SO I WOULD HAVE TO PAY TO HAVE THIS FIX. I OWN ANOTHER FORD VEHICLE A 2004. NEVER HAD A PROBLEM AND VERY RELIABLE, THIS IS EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING AND BAD BUSINESS FOR CUSTOMER RELATIONS WHEN THERE ARE SO MANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE SAME ISSUE THAT IT IS OBVIOUS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PART THE IS A DEFECT. THERE SHOULD BE RECALL. THIS MAY BE MY LAST FORD VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10547096
42,000 miles · Oct 3, 2013
Power Train
WAS DRIVING VEHICLE THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN HAD NO PEDAL THEN THE WRENCH CAME ON THE DASHBOARD HAD TO GET OVER 2 LANES TO SIDE OF ROAD TURNED CAR MOTOR OFF THEN TURNED BACK ON WAS OK FOR A WHILE THEN HAPPENED AGAIN MY WIFE AND I COULD VERY EASILY OF BEEN KILLED SEE WHERE PEOPLE HAVING THIS PROBLEM CANT BELIEVE FORD HASN'T RE-CALLE…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING VEHICLE THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN HAD NO PEDAL THEN THE WRENCH CAME ON THE DASHBOARD HAD TO GET OVER 2 LANES TO SIDE OF ROAD TURNED CAR MOTOR OFF THEN TURNED BACK ON WAS OK FOR A WHILE THEN HAPPENED AGAIN MY WIFE AND I COULD VERY EASILY OF BEEN KILLED SEE WHERE PEOPLE HAVING THIS PROBLEM CANT BELIEVE FORD HASN'T RE-CALLED THIS WAS THE THROTTLE BODY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10546685
67,000 miles · Oct 3, 2013
Power Train
WHILE DRIVING, VEHICLE JUST LOSES ALL POWER TO AN IDLE OF 1000 RPM WITH NO GAS PEDAL RESPONSE. ONCE YOU PULL OVER TURN VEHICLE OFF THEN START IT BACK UP IT SEEMS TO RESET ITSELF FOR AWHILE. IT HAS HAPPENED A FEW MORE TIMES AND IS CURRENTLY AT A FORD DEALERSHIP WHERE THEY HAVE DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM AS A FAULTY THROTTLE BODY AND S…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING, VEHICLE JUST LOSES ALL POWER TO AN IDLE OF 1000 RPM WITH NO GAS PEDAL RESPONSE. ONCE YOU PULL OVER TURN VEHICLE OFF THEN START IT BACK UP IT SEEMS TO RESET ITSELF FOR AWHILE. IT HAS HAPPENED A FEW MORE TIMES AND IS CURRENTLY AT A FORD DEALERSHIP WHERE THEY HAVE DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM AS A FAULTY THROTTLE BODY AND SAYS IT IS NOT COVERED BY WARRANTY OR RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10546664
64,823 miles · Oct 1, 2013
Power Train
2010 FORD ESCAPE STALLED OUT WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH. I WAS NEARLY REAR ENDED BY UPS TRUCK. TOOK TO DEALER FOR SERVICE THEY REPLACED THE THROTTLE BODY AND CHARGED ME $500.77. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10546451
54,000 miles · Oct 1, 2013
Power Train
WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, VEHICLE JERKED (AS THOUGH THE TRANSMISSION SLIPPED REAL HARD) AND THEN LOST POWER. I MANAGED TO COAST FOR ABOUT 25 YARDS TO GET OFF THE MAIN ROAD. A "YELLOW WRENCH" AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED ON THE CONSOLE. SHUT ENGINE OFF, WAITED A MINUTE AND RESTARTED. PROCEEDED ON ROAD FOR APPR…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, VEHICLE JERKED (AS THOUGH THE TRANSMISSION SLIPPED REAL HARD) AND THEN LOST POWER. I MANAGED TO COAST FOR ABOUT 25 YARDS TO GET OFF THE MAIN ROAD. A "YELLOW WRENCH" AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED ON THE CONSOLE. SHUT ENGINE OFF, WAITED A MINUTE AND RESTARTED. PROCEEDED ON ROAD FOR APPROXIMATELY 1 1/2 MILES REACHING SPEED OF APPROXIMATELY 55 MPH. VEHICLE JERKED AGAIN AND NO POWER. ONCE AGAIN, I MANAGED TO COAST ABOUT 50 FEET TO GET OFF OF THE MAIN ROAD. SAME LIGHTS APPEARED ON THE CONSOLE. SHUT OFF ENGINE. RESTARTED. DROVE 2 MILES BACK TO HOUSE, THE VEHICLE HAD MINIMAL POWER AND WAS SPUTTERING THE WHOLE WAY. THE NEXT MORNING, TRIED TO TAKE VEHICLE TO DEALERSHIP. STARTED VEHICLE, DROVE ACROSS THE STREET, AGAIN NO POWER. CALLED DEALERSHIP, THEY ARRANGED TO HAVE IT TOWED TO A NEIGHBORING DEALERSHIP BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET TO EVEN LOOK AT IT FOR ABOUT TWO WEEKS. ERROR MESSAGE ON VEHICLE ACCORDING TO DEALERSHIP WAS P2112. UNABLE TO REPAIR AT THIS TIME DUE BACK ORDER OF PART. HAD THERE BEEN ANYONE BEHIND ME ON THE FIRST TWO OCCASIONS OR SOMEONE COMING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION WHILE TRYING TO CROSS ROAD, SURELY I WOULD HAVE BEEN HIT. FORTUNATELY, I WAS NOT ON THE INTERSTATE WHEN THIS OCCURRED OR THE POTENTIAL FOR HARM WOULD HAVE BEEN HIGH! THIS IS POSES AN UNSAFE SITUATION!!! I PURCHASED THIS CERTIFIED VEHICLE ONLY FOUR MONTHS AGO, WITH 50,271 MILES ON IT. I AM NOT CERTAIN IF I WILL FEEL CONFIDENT DRIVING THIS VEHICLE AGAIN. THE DEALERSHIP WANTS TO REASSURE THAT THE REPLACEMENT PART WILL FIX THE SITUATION, BUT I HAVE MY DOUBTS FOR A LONG TERM RESOLUTION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10546414
44,130 miles · Sep 30, 2013
EngineFuel System, GasolinePower Train
WAS TRAVELING THROUGH AN INTERSECTION AND THE ESCAPE POWER QUIT EVEN THOUGH THE ENGINE WAS RUNNING. GOT IT PULLED INTO A PARKING LOT WHERE THEN I LOOKED UP TO SEE WHAT THE WRENCH LIGHT MEANT WHICH WAS POWERTRAIN ISSUE, TOOK IT HOME ADDED TRANSMISSION FLUID THINKING THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE PROBLEM SINCE IT WAS A LITTLE LOW. HAD…
Read full complaint
WAS TRAVELING THROUGH AN INTERSECTION AND THE ESCAPE POWER QUIT EVEN THOUGH THE ENGINE WAS RUNNING. GOT IT PULLED INTO A PARKING LOT WHERE THEN I LOOKED UP TO SEE WHAT THE WRENCH LIGHT MEANT WHICH WAS POWERTRAIN ISSUE, TOOK IT HOME ADDED TRANSMISSION FLUID THINKING THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE PROBLEM SINCE IT WAS A LITTLE LOW. HAD NO ISSUES UNTIL 9/19/2013 WHEN TRAVELING ABOUT 40MPH AND THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN. MY ESCAPE OF COURSE IS OUT OF WARRANTY AND HAS BEEN SITTING AT THE BUTLER COUNTY FOR NOW FOR 10 DAYS WAITING FOR THIS THROTTLE BODY TO COME IN SINCE IT IS ON BACK ORDER (AND FORD WONT DO A RECALL WHEN THIS IS HAPPENING TO SO MANY VEHICLES THEY CANT GET THE PART) I HAVE BEEN WITHOUT A VEHICLE SINCE (BORROWING THE PARENTS TO GET TO AND FROM WORK) AND THE PART IS STILL NOT IN AND I KEEP HEARING THAT IT IS ON ITS WAY. NEVER HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE LAST 6 FORD PRODUCTS I HAVE OWNED BUT THIS IS PATHETIC THAT NOTHING IS BEING DONE BEFORE SOMEONE GETS HURT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10546175
42,000 miles · Sep 27, 2013
Power Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE BEING TOWED BY A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE, SMOKE EMITTED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS FOUND THAT THE TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE BEING TOWED BY A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE, SMOKE EMITTED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS FOUND THAT THE TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 42,000.
NHTSA ODI #10545726
39,000 miles · Sep 27, 2013
Power Train
I WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN AND WHEN I ACCELERATED THE CAR COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN AND THE GAS WAS NOT WORKING. THE LITTLE WRENCH ON THE DASH CAME ON AND I WAS ABLE TO COAST TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. AFTER LOOKING IT UP IN THE MANUAL IT SAID THROTTLE PROBLEM. I SHUT THE CAR OFF AND RESTARTED IT AND IT WORKED FINE ALTHOUGH WE WHERE …
Read full complaint
I WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN AND WHEN I ACCELERATED THE CAR COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN AND THE GAS WAS NOT WORKING. THE LITTLE WRENCH ON THE DASH CAME ON AND I WAS ABLE TO COAST TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. AFTER LOOKING IT UP IN THE MANUAL IT SAID THROTTLE PROBLEM. I SHUT THE CAR OFF AND RESTARTED IT AND IT WORKED FINE ALTHOUGH WE WHERE JUST WAITING FOR IT TO BREAK AGAIN. 2 DAYS LATER DRIVING HOME FROM WORK UP A HILL IT HAPPENED AGAIN ONLY THIS TIME IT STARTED BUCKING A BIT AND SHOOTING FORWARD IN SMALL BURSTS UNTIL I BRAKE AND SHUT THE CAR OFF. AGAIN I STARTED THE CAR AND MADE IT HOME. I HAVE A SERVICE APPOINTMENT SCHEDULED BUT AFTER READING ABOUT THIS PROBLEM ONLINE I CANNOT BELIEVE I AM GOING TO HAVE TO PAY FOR WHAT APPEARS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM AND A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN. I AM JUST GLAD I DRIVE BACK ROADS AND 4 MILES TO WORK. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10545713
61,000 miles · Sep 27, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING TO SCHOOL AND SHE INFORMED ME THAT SHE LOST ALL ACCELERATION AND THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO JERK FORWARD. THIS HAPPENED 3 TIMES IN FOUR DAYS. THE ENGINE LIGHT AND A "WRENCH" LIGHT CAME ON. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL FORD DEALER APPROXIMATELY 20 MILES AWAY. THE VEHICLE LOST ACCELERATION 10 TIMES DURING THE TR…
Read full complaint
MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING TO SCHOOL AND SHE INFORMED ME THAT SHE LOST ALL ACCELERATION AND THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO JERK FORWARD. THIS HAPPENED 3 TIMES IN FOUR DAYS. THE ENGINE LIGHT AND A "WRENCH" LIGHT CAME ON. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL FORD DEALER APPROXIMATELY 20 MILES AWAY. THE VEHICLE LOST ACCELERATION 10 TIMES DURING THE TRIP. THE GAS PEDAL WOULD NOT WORK AND THE ENGINE WOULD LOWER TO IDLE AND BEGIN TO JERK, AS IF IT WERE GOING TO STALL. I HAD TO SHUT THE ENGINE OFF AND WAIT A FEW MINUTES BEFORE CRANKING AGAIN. I WOULD MAKE IT 100 YARDS TO 3 MILES BETWEEN EACH INCIDENT. THE FORD DEALER STATED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDS REPLACING. IT IS BEING REPLACED THIS WEEK. LUCKILY I HAD PURCHASED AN EXTENDED WARRANTY THAT COVERS THIS REPAIR OR IT WOULD BE OVER $400.00. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10545622
49,000 miles · Sep 26, 2013
Power Train
TRAVELING SOUTH ON 95 JUST SOUTH OF FREDERICKSBURG, VA IN A 70 MPH ZONE IN HEAVY TRAFFIC THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER. WAS ABLE TO PULL OFF ON THE LEFT SHOULDER. AFTER A FEW MINUTES RESTARTED THE CAR AND WAS ABLE TO COMPLETE THE TRIP. THE SAME CONDITION APPEARED AGAIN ON 9/24 IN A PARKING LOT. TOOK THE CAR TO A LOCAL FOR…
Read full complaint
TRAVELING SOUTH ON 95 JUST SOUTH OF FREDERICKSBURG, VA IN A 70 MPH ZONE IN HEAVY TRAFFIC THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER. WAS ABLE TO PULL OFF ON THE LEFT SHOULDER. AFTER A FEW MINUTES RESTARTED THE CAR AND WAS ABLE TO COMPLETE THE TRIP. THE SAME CONDITION APPEARED AGAIN ON 9/24 IN A PARKING LOT. TOOK THE CAR TO A LOCAL FORD DEALER AND WAS TOLD THE THROTTLE BODY HAD TO REPLACED AT A COST OF $450. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10545545
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.