NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Power Train complaints
508 reportsClear category filter45,000 miles · Jun 24, 2013
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train
VEHICLE STALLED SEVERAL TIMES. LOSES POWER WITH NO ACCELERATION WHEN FEEDING GAS. WRENCH INDICATOR LIGHT COMES ON, INDICATES THROTTLE BODY ISSUE. VEHICLE NEEDS TO BE RESTARTED. TOOK TO THE SHOP AFTER 3 INCIDENCES. MECHANICS TELL ME THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY HAS FAILED. PARTS ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER DUE TO HIGH FREQUENCY OF INC…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE STALLED SEVERAL TIMES. LOSES POWER WITH NO ACCELERATION WHEN FEEDING GAS. WRENCH INDICATOR LIGHT COMES ON, INDICATES THROTTLE BODY ISSUE. VEHICLE NEEDS TO BE RESTARTED. TOOK TO THE SHOP AFTER 3 INCIDENCES. MECHANICS TELL ME THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY HAS FAILED. PARTS ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER DUE TO HIGH FREQUENCY OF INCIDENCES. PLEASE ISSUE A RECALL! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10521389
51,500 miles · Jun 22, 2013
Power Train
ON 6/20/13, I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE WHEN SUDDENLY, TRUCK STARTED TO DECREASE SPEED AND YELLOW WRENCH SYMBOL APPEARED ON DASHBOARD. I PULLED OVER AND CUT OFF VEHICLE. WHEN I STARTED THE VEHICLE UP AGAIN, IT MADE A SOUND AS IF IT WAS GOING TO KILL, HOWEVER, IT CRANKED UP AND I PROCEEDED TO DRIVE HOME, AND WRENCH SYMBOL…
Read full complaint
ON 6/20/13, I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE WHEN SUDDENLY, TRUCK STARTED TO DECREASE SPEED AND YELLOW WRENCH SYMBOL APPEARED ON DASHBOARD. I PULLED OVER AND CUT OFF VEHICLE. WHEN I STARTED THE VEHICLE UP AGAIN, IT MADE A SOUND AS IF IT WAS GOING TO KILL, HOWEVER, IT CRANKED UP AND I PROCEEDED TO DRIVE HOME, AND WRENCH SYMBOL DIDN'T COME ON AGAIN. THE NEXT DAY, I WENT TO WORK AND VEHICLE OPERATED FINE THAT MORNING , UNTIL I LEFT FOR LUNCH. THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN WHILE MAKING A TURN AND BATTERY LIGHT CAME ON. LUCKILY THE DEALERSHIP WASN'T FAR, EACH TIME I STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT IT KILLED. FINALLY MADE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP, AND WAS TOLD THE THROTTLE BODY WIRE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. ENDED UP PAYING $533.. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10521234
56,000 miles · Jun 22, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING NORMAL HWY SPEEDS, THROTTLE SHUTS DOWN. WRENCH INDICATOR LIGHTS. HAVE TO TRY TO GET OFF OF HWY ON TO SHOULDER. WHEN STOPPED, ENGINE STILL RUNS BUT VERY ROUGH AND THE THROTTLE DOES NOTHING. AFTER TURNING THE ENGINE OFF THE PROBLEM RESETS AND RUNS FINE FOR APPROX 20 MILES OR MORE. THEN THE SAME THING HAPPENS AGAIN. THE P…
Read full complaint
DRIVING NORMAL HWY SPEEDS, THROTTLE SHUTS DOWN. WRENCH INDICATOR LIGHTS. HAVE TO TRY TO GET OFF OF HWY ON TO SHOULDER. WHEN STOPPED, ENGINE STILL RUNS BUT VERY ROUGH AND THE THROTTLE DOES NOTHING. AFTER TURNING THE ENGINE OFF THE PROBLEM RESETS AND RUNS FINE FOR APPROX 20 MILES OR MORE. THEN THE SAME THING HAPPENS AGAIN. THE PROBLEM THEN PROGRESSIVELY GETS WORSE. HAVE READ THAT THIS IS A HUGE ISSUE AND NEEDS T BE ADDRESSED BEFORE SOMEONE GETS INJURED OR KILLED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10521228
36,000 miles · Jun 22, 2013
Power Train
MY FORD ESCAPE VEHICLE HAS SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER MULTIPLE TIMES IN HEAVY TRAFFIC ON 6 AND 8 LANE HIGHWAYS AT VARIOUS SPEEDS. IT LOSES ALL RPM'S WHICH HAS CAUSED ME TO NEARLY GET REAR-ENDED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES I PUSH ON THE GAS PEDAL, IT DOES NOTHING BUT COAST & SPUTTER & JERK. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO …
Read full complaint
MY FORD ESCAPE VEHICLE HAS SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER MULTIPLE TIMES IN HEAVY TRAFFIC ON 6 AND 8 LANE HIGHWAYS AT VARIOUS SPEEDS. IT LOSES ALL RPM'S WHICH HAS CAUSED ME TO NEARLY GET REAR-ENDED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES I PUSH ON THE GAS PEDAL, IT DOES NOTHING BUT COAST & SPUTTER & JERK. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO MY MECHANIC SEVERAL TIMES, HE HAS PLUGGED IT INTO THE COMPUTER, AND NOTHING SHOWS UP AS BEING WRONG. IT IS VERY DANGEROUS, I HAVE ALMOST BEEN REAR-ENDED BECAUSE OF THE SUDDEN SLOWDOWN, PEOPLE TRYING TO SPEED AROUND ME, AND TRYING TO PULL OFF THE ROAD TO STOP THE CAR. AAA HAS TOWED ME MULTIPLE TIMES. I READ UP ON THE ISSUE ON THE INTERNET, AND THERE IS A MASSIVE NUMBER OF FORD ESCAPE OWNERS WHO HAVE HAD THE EXACT PROBLEM AND FORD REFUSES TO RECALL THE VEHICLE. SOMEONE WILL DIE IF THEY DON'T NOTIFY ALL 2010 FORD ESCAPE OWNERS OF THIS HUGE SAFETY MALFUNCTION AND FIX IT. SOME SAID IT IS A FAULTY THROTTLE BOTTLE ASSEMBLY, BUT THAT FORD SIMPLY REPLACES IT WITH THE SAME FAULTY ASSEMBLY AND TELLS THEM THERE'S NO GUARANTEE AS TO HOW LONG THE NEWER FAULTY ONE WILL LAST. OWNERS HAVE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY GETTING MULTIPLE THINGS FIXED BEFORE SOMEONE FINALLY DIAGNOSED AND REPLACED THE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER TO GET IT REPLACED AND RISK LOSING POWER AT NIGHT ON A DANGEROUS ROAD AGAIN, OR TO SIMPLY SELL IT AND TAKE MY LOSSES. I AM DISAPPOINTED THAT FORD REFUSES TO RECALL THIS VEHICLE. MY GRANDCHILDREN RIDE IN THE REAR SEAT IN BABY SEATS, AND IF I GET HIT FROM THE REAR BECAUSE THIS CAR LOSES POWER, I WILL SUE FORD. THAT WON'T BRING BACK MY BABIES, SO I HOPE YOU CAN GET FORD TO NOTIFY OWNERS AND RECALL THIS HUGE SAFETY ISSUE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR HELP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10521209
32,000 miles · Jun 21, 2013
Power Train
CAR SHOWED NO PREVIOUS SIGN OF DAMAGE. THE VEHICLE HAS HAD REGULAR OIL CHANGES AND A REPLACED BATTERY IN NOVEMBER 2012. AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT, I HAD 3/4 TANK OF QUALITY EXXONMOBIL GASOLINE. DROVE 10 MINUTES TO RAMP WITHOUT ISSUE/LIGHT. ACCELERATING ON RAMP, THE WRENCH AND BATTERY LIGHTS CAME ON. THIS WAS RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC …
Read full complaint
CAR SHOWED NO PREVIOUS SIGN OF DAMAGE. THE VEHICLE HAS HAD REGULAR OIL CHANGES AND A REPLACED BATTERY IN NOVEMBER 2012. AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT, I HAD 3/4 TANK OF QUALITY EXXONMOBIL GASOLINE. DROVE 10 MINUTES TO RAMP WITHOUT ISSUE/LIGHT. ACCELERATING ON RAMP, THE WRENCH AND BATTERY LIGHTS CAME ON. THIS WAS RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC IN DOWNTOWN HOUSTON. IT WAS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. TRIED TO RESTART CAR AND MANAGED TO DRIVE TO SHOULDER. VEHICLE WAS TOWED. SHOP SAID THAT THE THROTTLE HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS STILL UNDER WARRANTY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10521102
42,500 miles · Jun 21, 2013
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train
DRIVING APPROX 40MPH WHEN VEHICLE STARTED STALLING. RPM DROPS TO APPROX 1000, GAS PEDAL DOES NOT RESPOND. HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE PAST, TAKEN TO DEALERSHIP BUT "NO CODES WERE FOUND TO SUGGEST A DEFECT." HAVE TO TURN THE CAR OFF AND RESTART WITH IT BEING IN PARK BEFORE STARTS TO RUN AND WRENCH LIGHT TURNS OFF. DROVE TO …
Read full complaint
DRIVING APPROX 40MPH WHEN VEHICLE STARTED STALLING. RPM DROPS TO APPROX 1000, GAS PEDAL DOES NOT RESPOND. HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE PAST, TAKEN TO DEALERSHIP BUT "NO CODES WERE FOUND TO SUGGEST A DEFECT." HAVE TO TURN THE CAR OFF AND RESTART WITH IT BEING IN PARK BEFORE STARTS TO RUN AND WRENCH LIGHT TURNS OFF. DROVE TO THE DEALER AFTER THAT LAST INCIDENT ON 6/21, CODE 2111 WAS FOUND TO BE PENDING WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST IF I TURNED THE CAR OFF, FOUND IT TO BE THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY. FOR A CAR THAT IS 3 YEARS OLD AND 40K MILES, IT IS DANGEROUS TO HAVE THIS DEFECT AS IF IT HAPPENS ON THE HIGHWAY YOU ARE STUCK WITH A CHANCE FOR A SEMI-TRUCK TO REAR END YOU. PLEASE ALLOW THIS RECALL FOR THE SAFETY OF OTHERS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10521101
59,800 miles · Jun 20, 2013
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN CAR LURCHED FORWARD AND THEN PROCEEDED TO COAST. I PRESSED GAS PEDAL BUT NOTHING HAPPENED. I HAD TO STEER THROUGH TRAFFIC TO GET TO THE SHOULDER WHERE THE CAR STARTED TO STUMBLE LIKE IT WAS GOING TO DIE. I SHUT OFF ENGINE AND RESTARTED, IT STARTED NORMAL SO I PROCEEDED HOME. I HAD LESS THAN A MILE…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN CAR LURCHED FORWARD AND THEN PROCEEDED TO COAST. I PRESSED GAS PEDAL BUT NOTHING HAPPENED. I HAD TO STEER THROUGH TRAFFIC TO GET TO THE SHOULDER WHERE THE CAR STARTED TO STUMBLE LIKE IT WAS GOING TO DIE. I SHUT OFF ENGINE AND RESTARTED, IT STARTED NORMAL SO I PROCEEDED HOME. I HAD LESS THAN A MILE TO HOME YET IT DIED 2 MORE TIMES. THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY PROBLEM SEEING HOW YOU'RE DEAD IN THE WATER WHEN THE CAR MALFUNCTIONS! IT TAKES A LOT TO SCARE ME BUT SEEING HOW I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY OF MY WIFE AND 4 YR OLD SON, IT SCARED ME HALF TO DEATH! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520851
33,000 miles · Jun 19, 2013
Power Train
I CAME TO A STOP AT THE TOP OF MY STREET AND ACCELERATED OUT TO MAKE A TURN ONTO THE MAIN ROAD WHEN THE CAR JUST LOST POWER AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. I HAD TO PULL OFF THE ROAD AND WAS LUCKY THE CAR BEHIND DID NOT HIT ME. THIS HAS HAPPENED 2 MORE TIMES INCLUDING ON AN EXPRESSWAY WHERE I HAD TO PULL OFF AND GET IT TOWED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520773
47,500 miles · Jun 19, 2013
Power Train
THE CAR STARTED TO SLOW DOWN, I PUSHED THE GAS AND THE CAR STARTED TO STALL OUT. I WAS ABLE TO PULL THE CAR OFF THE ROAD AND WHEN I PUT THE CAR IN PARK IT COMPLETELY STOPPED. THE WRENCH ALERT SIGNAL WAS ON AND THE CAR WAS TOWED TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP. THE THROTTLE BODY WAS STUCK CLOSED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520771
66,424 miles · Jun 18, 2013
EnginePower Train
EXPERIENCED REPEATED STALLING OF ENGINE WHILE GOING 40+ MILES PER HOUR. ENGINE WOULD RUN FOR APPROX. ONE BLOCK THEN STALL. VEHICLE WENT TO LIMP MODE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10520541
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.