NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Power Train complaints
508 reportsClear category filter79,500 miles · Jul 26, 2013
Power Train
WAS DRIVING TO WORK ON LOCAL INTERSTATE @ 60MPH, APPROX 5AM (LUCKILY VERY FEW CARS ON ROAD AT THIS HOUR). LOST ALL POWER, NO ACCELERATION POSSIBLE, BUT ENGINE DIAL STILL SHOWING <1000RPM. WAS ABLE TO COAST TO SHOULDER, YELLOW WRENCH SYMBOL WAS LIT UP, TURNED OFF ENGINE, RE-STARTED, CONTINUED TO WORK. HAPPENED AGAIN @ ABOUT 30 MP…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING TO WORK ON LOCAL INTERSTATE @ 60MPH, APPROX 5AM (LUCKILY VERY FEW CARS ON ROAD AT THIS HOUR). LOST ALL POWER, NO ACCELERATION POSSIBLE, BUT ENGINE DIAL STILL SHOWING <1000RPM. WAS ABLE TO COAST TO SHOULDER, YELLOW WRENCH SYMBOL WAS LIT UP, TURNED OFF ENGINE, RE-STARTED, CONTINUED TO WORK. HAPPENED AGAIN @ ABOUT 30 MPH, 15 MINUTES LATER, ON CITY STREET. CALLED FORD SERVICE LATER THAT MORNING AND SCHEDULED TO DROP VEHICLE OFF NEXT BUSINESS DAY (HAD TO DRIVE IT FOR TWO MORE DAYS). HAPPENED SEVERAL MORE TIMES DURING ALL TYPES OF DRIVING: HIGHWAY, RURAL, CITY; AT SPEEDS BETWEEN 25-70 MPH, BOTH WITH AND WITHOUT CRUISE CONTROL BEING USED. GOT VEHICLE TO DEALER IN AFTERNOON. SERVICE TECH CALLED AROUND DINNER TIME TO SAY THE THROTTLE BODY WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. REPAIRS MADE AT A COST OF ABOUT $450. PICKED VEHICLE UP LATER IN EVENING. NO PROBLEMS SO FAR. THIS APPEARS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM AS SEEN/READ IN SEVERAL FORUMS AND NEWS REPORTS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10532020
56,000 miles · Jul 25, 2013
Power Train
CAR IS STALLING WHILE DRIVING. SITTING AT DEALER, WAITING TO HAVE THROTTLE BODY REPLACED. PART IS ON BACK ORDER NOT COVERED UNDER POWER TRAIN WARRANTY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10531915
47,570 miles · Jul 25, 2013
EnginePower Train
DRIVING AND GAS PEDAL LOST ALL POWER. PULLED TO SIDE OF ROAD, ENGINE CONTINUED TO RUN ABOUT 700/800 RPM. I NOTICED THE WRENCH SYMBOL WAS LIT IN DASHBOARD SO I TURNED OFF A/C OPENED ALL WINDOWS & SHUT OFF ENGINE. AFTER ABOUT 30 SECONDS OR SO, I RE-STARTED THE CAR & DROVE BACK HOME (APPROX. 35 MILES) . THE FOLLOWING DAY I TOOK TH…
Read full complaint
DRIVING AND GAS PEDAL LOST ALL POWER. PULLED TO SIDE OF ROAD, ENGINE CONTINUED TO RUN ABOUT 700/800 RPM. I NOTICED THE WRENCH SYMBOL WAS LIT IN DASHBOARD SO I TURNED OFF A/C OPENED ALL WINDOWS & SHUT OFF ENGINE. AFTER ABOUT 30 SECONDS OR SO, I RE-STARTED THE CAR & DROVE BACK HOME (APPROX. 35 MILES) . THE FOLLOWING DAY I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A FORD DEALER & EXPLAINED MY PROBLEM. DEALER SAID THIS WAS PROBABLY A THROTTLE CONTROL / POWERTRAIN PROBLEM. THEY OFFERED ME SOME SUGGESTIONS TO HELP WITH THIS TROUBLE, WHICH I HAVE DONE. AS OF TODAY 7/25/2013 VEHICLE SEEMS TO BE RUNNING FINE. I HOPE THIS GETS RESOLVED BECAUSE I REALLY LIKE THIS VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10531906
33,726 miles · Jul 25, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
I WAS TRAVELING AT APX 45 MPH WHEN THE YELLOW WRENCH ERROR MESSAGE APPEARED ON THE DASH. AT THE SAME TIME THE VEHICLE CEASED TO RESPOND TO THE GAS PEDAL. THE ENGINE AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEM REMAINED ON HOWEVER THERE WAS NO POWER COMING FROM THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE COASTED AS IT LOST MOMENTUM. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OFF THE MAJOR RO…
Read full complaint
I WAS TRAVELING AT APX 45 MPH WHEN THE YELLOW WRENCH ERROR MESSAGE APPEARED ON THE DASH. AT THE SAME TIME THE VEHICLE CEASED TO RESPOND TO THE GAS PEDAL. THE ENGINE AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEM REMAINED ON HOWEVER THERE WAS NO POWER COMING FROM THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE COASTED AS IT LOST MOMENTUM. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OFF THE MAJOR ROAD THAT I WAS ON. THE VEHICLE SHUDDERED AS I CAME TO A STOP AND TURNED IT OFF. WHEN I RESTARTED THE VEHICLE, THE YELLOW WRENCH ERROR LIGHT WENT OUT AND THE VEHICLE STARTED WITH NO PROBLEMS. THE FORD DEALERSHIP LATER DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM AS THE THROTTLE BODY COMPONENT. THERE HAD BEEN NO PREVIOUS INDICATORS OF ANY PROBLEMS. VEHICLE HAD BEEN SERVICED FOLLOWING THE MANUFACTURERS SERVICE REQUIREMENTS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10531865
64,652 miles · Jul 25, 2013
Electrical SystemPower Train
WHILE DRIVING MY VEHICLE LOST ACCELERATION AND THEN BEGAN TO SHAKE THE WRENCH AND ENGINE LIGHTS CAME ON. RECENTLY WENT TO A SHOP AND THE ISSUE IS BECAUSE OF A PART CALLED THROTTLE BODY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10531737
29,406 miles · Jul 23, 2013
Power Train
ON JULY 20, 2013 I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE ON THE HIGHWAY WITH MY PARENTS (63 & 67 RESPECTIVELY) WHEN SUDDENLY (OUT OF THE BLUE) I PUSHED THE GAS PEDAL BUT VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE WRENCH LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE DASHBOARD AND THE VEHICLE WAS JERKING. I HAD A CAR BEHIND ME THAT ALMOST CRASH ON ME. I MANAGED TO PULL OVER …
Read full complaint
ON JULY 20, 2013 I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE ON THE HIGHWAY WITH MY PARENTS (63 & 67 RESPECTIVELY) WHEN SUDDENLY (OUT OF THE BLUE) I PUSHED THE GAS PEDAL BUT VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. THE WRENCH LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE DASHBOARD AND THE VEHICLE WAS JERKING. I HAD A CAR BEHIND ME THAT ALMOST CRASH ON ME. I MANAGED TO PULL OVER TO THE SHOULDER. I TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE AND TURNED IT ON WITHIN 2-3 MINUTES AND IT WORKED PERFECTLY (AS IF NOTHING HAS HAPPENED). I WENT HOME THAT NIGHT (10:30PM MORE OR LESS). I WENT TO A LOCAL PEP BOYS STORE NEXT DAY SINCE THE DEALERS WERE CLOSED (SUNDAY). THEY CHECKED IT AND SAID EVERYTHING WAS OK. ON MONDAY, JULY 21, SAME ISSUE HAPPENED TWICE WITHIN 30 MINUTE RANGE. I CALLED MY LOCAL DEALER AND MADE AN APPOINTMENT FOR TUESDAY. I'VE LEFT IT THERE FOR A CHECK UP. HOWEVER, I WAS TOLD THAT THE WARRANTY EXPIRED 5 MONTHS AGO AND THE POWER TRAIN WARRANTY IS LIMITED... LOSING POWER OF GAS AND VEHICLE DYING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHWAY/ROAD CERTAINLY SEEM TO BE A SAFETY HAZARD! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10531513
85,728 miles · Jul 23, 2013
Power Train
I WAS DRIVING MY CAR, THERE WAS A NOISE AND THEN A LITTLE WRENCH APPEARED ON MY CONTROL PANEL. THE CAR STARTED TO DECELERATE AND THEN I SHUT IT DOWN. I TURNED IT BACK ON, IT SEEMED TO BE OKAY, AS I DROVE DOWN THE ROAD I HEARD THE NOISE AGAIN AND THE CAR STAYED AT 40 MPH. I COULD NOT ACCELERATE. ONCE AGAIN I STOPPED, TURNED I…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY CAR, THERE WAS A NOISE AND THEN A LITTLE WRENCH APPEARED ON MY CONTROL PANEL. THE CAR STARTED TO DECELERATE AND THEN I SHUT IT DOWN. I TURNED IT BACK ON, IT SEEMED TO BE OKAY, AS I DROVE DOWN THE ROAD I HEARD THE NOISE AGAIN AND THE CAR STAYED AT 40 MPH. I COULD NOT ACCELERATE. ONCE AGAIN I STOPPED, TURNED IT OFF. I STARTED IT BACK UP. I CALLED THE FORD DEALER, THEY SAID TO BRING IT IN, THEY PUT IT ON THE COMPUTER AND SAID THAT THE THROTTLE BODY WAS BAD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10531496
47,000 miles · Jul 22, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
WHILE DRIVING ON HIGHWAY AROUND 70MPH WHEN CAR WENT INTO A "LIMP" MODE AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. AFTER RESTARTING THE CAR, IT PERFORMED AS NORMAL AND NO WRENCH LIGHT WAS LIT. THIS HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES IN ONE WEEK AT VARYING SPEEDS. MY FORD STORE DID NOT FIND A PROBLEM. I'VE ALSO FELT A SURGE …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING ON HIGHWAY AROUND 70MPH WHEN CAR WENT INTO A "LIMP" MODE AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. AFTER RESTARTING THE CAR, IT PERFORMED AS NORMAL AND NO WRENCH LIGHT WAS LIT. THIS HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES IN ONE WEEK AT VARYING SPEEDS. MY FORD STORE DID NOT FIND A PROBLEM. I'VE ALSO FELT A SURGE WHEN THE ACCELERATING THE VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10526204
46,130 miles · Jul 22, 2013
EnginePower Train
ON JULY 14 2013, MY VEHICLE 2010 FORD ESCAPE XLT STALLED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHWAY. THE VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING AT 60 MPH WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED. AFTER THE STALL, THE VEHICLE DID NOT RESPOND TO GAS PEDAL. IT SLOWED DOWN. I WAS ABLE TO PULL THE VEHICLE TO SAFETY LANE. DURING THE INCIDENT, THE WRENCH SIGN APPEARED ON THE DASH…
Read full complaint
ON JULY 14 2013, MY VEHICLE 2010 FORD ESCAPE XLT STALLED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHWAY. THE VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING AT 60 MPH WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED. AFTER THE STALL, THE VEHICLE DID NOT RESPOND TO GAS PEDAL. IT SLOWED DOWN. I WAS ABLE TO PULL THE VEHICLE TO SAFETY LANE. DURING THE INCIDENT, THE WRENCH SIGN APPEARED ON THE DASHBOARD INDICATOR. AFTER THE VEHICLE CAME TO COMPLETE STOP, I WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE. I DROVE THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP SERVICE CENTER AT REDUCED SPEED OF 25 MPH. THEY DIAGNOSED THAT THE ISSUE IS WITH THE THROTTLE BODY AND MENTIONED THAT THE WHOLE THROTTLE BODY NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10526187
79,710 miles · Jul 22, 2013
EnginePower Train
WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE HIGH WAY AT APPROX. 65MPG THE "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT AND THE ORANGE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON INDICATING AN ISSUE WITH THE POWER TRAIN. AT THE SAME TIME THE GAS PEDAL BECAME UNRESPONSIVE WHILE THE ENGINE RPMS DROPPED TO A ROUGH IDLE THE FLUCTUATED BETWEEN 800-1200 RPMS. AFTER TURNING THE CAR OFF AND THEN BACK ON …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE HIGH WAY AT APPROX. 65MPG THE "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT AND THE ORANGE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON INDICATING AN ISSUE WITH THE POWER TRAIN. AT THE SAME TIME THE GAS PEDAL BECAME UNRESPONSIVE WHILE THE ENGINE RPMS DROPPED TO A ROUGH IDLE THE FLUCTUATED BETWEEN 800-1200 RPMS. AFTER TURNING THE CAR OFF AND THEN BACK ON THE "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT WAS ON BUT THE ORANGE WRENCH SYMBOL WAS NO LONGER LIT. I CONTINUED TO DRIVE HOME, MULTIPLE TIMES AFTER THAT THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, THROTTLE BECAME UNRESPONSIVE AND THE ENGINE DROPPED TO A ROUGH IDLE. EACH TIME THIS HAPPENED I TURNED THE ENGINE OFF AND THEN TURNED IT BACK ON AND THE ENGINE OPERATED AS NORMAL FOR A TIME TILL THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND THE THROTTLE BECAME UNRESPONSIVE. UPON PLUGGING THE CAR TO A DIAGNOSTIC I HAD 3 ERROR CODES THAT INDICATED THAT THE THROTTLE ACTUATOR WAS STUCK OPEN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10526077
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.