← New search

2010 Ford Escape

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Escape years

Owner complaints for the 2010 Ford Escape are substantially higher than the model-year median of 996.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,764 reports with mileage · 305 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 558 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 508 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 493 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

29 crash reports3 fire reports19 injury reports

Power Train complaints

508 reports
Clear category filter
32,300 miles · Jun 13, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE AT 60 MPH, VEHICLE WITHOUT WARNING IS UNABLE TO ACCELERATE WHILE ATTEMPTING TO CHANGE LANES. AGAIN ON 6/12, ACCELERATED FROM A STOP LIGHT, WITHOUT WARNING THE CAR IS UNABLE TO CONTINUE TO ACCELERATE AND STOPS IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. TURNED CAR OFF, TURNED IT BACK ON AG…

Read full complaint

DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE AT 60 MPH, VEHICLE WITHOUT WARNING IS UNABLE TO ACCELERATE WHILE ATTEMPTING TO CHANGE LANES. AGAIN ON 6/12, ACCELERATED FROM A STOP LIGHT, WITHOUT WARNING THE CAR IS UNABLE TO CONTINUE TO ACCELERATE AND STOPS IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. TURNED CAR OFF, TURNED IT BACK ON AGAIN, WAS ABLE TO GET OUT OF THE INTERSECTION AND PULL OVER TO THE RIGHT HAND LANE BEFORE IT STOPPED ACCELERATING AGAIN. VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO FORD DEALERSHIP THEY FOUND THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519643

51,000 miles · Jun 12, 2013
Fuel System, GasolinePower Train

THIS FIRST STARTED SEVERAL WEEKS ONE DAY AFTER FILLING UP MY CAR ALL OF SUDDEN IT WOULD NOT GO. I PULLED OVER BARELY MISSING BEING HIT. I TURNED THE CAR OFF FOR A FEW MINUTES AND IT WOULD START UP AND I COULD GO. THIS DIDN'T HAPPEN AGAIN FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS. THE NEXT TIME I WAS LOW ON GAS. IT HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES. I K…

Read full complaint

THIS FIRST STARTED SEVERAL WEEKS ONE DAY AFTER FILLING UP MY CAR ALL OF SUDDEN IT WOULD NOT GO. I PULLED OVER BARELY MISSING BEING HIT. I TURNED THE CAR OFF FOR A FEW MINUTES AND IT WOULD START UP AND I COULD GO. THIS DIDN'T HAPPEN AGAIN FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS. THE NEXT TIME I WAS LOW ON GAS. IT HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES. I KEPT THINKING I HAD BAD GAS. THEN LAST SATURDAY I WAS OUT SHOPPING AND IT HAPPENED NUMEROUS TIMES. I WAS SO SCARED BY THE TIME I WENT HOME I WAS A NERVOUS WRECK. I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY TIMES I WAS ALMOST HIT. EVEN THE MORNING I TOOK IT INTO THE CAR DEALER IT DIED FOUR TIMES ON THE WAY. MY CAR ACTED JUST LIKE THE SITUATIONS IN YOUR ARTICLE. NOW THE DEALERSHIP AT FORD IS MAKING ME RENT A CAR. I CAN'T DRIVE MINE. FORD IS SAYING THEY DON'T KNOW IF IT IS A WEEK OR A MONTH BEFORE THEY GET THESE PARTS IN. THEY CAN'T FIX MY CAR BECAUSE THERE IS SUCH A BIG BACK ORDER FOR THIS PART. SOMEBODY NEEDS TO GET THESE MOTELS RECALLED AND GET THEM FIXED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519556

47,100 miles · Jun 12, 2013
EnginePower Train

CAR CUT OFF WHILE DRIVING. FORD DEALER SAID IT IS THE THROTTLE BODY. WILL TAKE 4 TO 5 WEEKS TO RECEIVE THE REPLACEMENT PART. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519531

49,150 miles · Jun 12, 2013
Power Train

1ST TIME: AT TRAFFIC LIGHT MAKING A LEFT. LIGHT CHANGED, HIT THE GAS, CAR WENT FORWARDS THEN LOST POWER, BRAKES AND STEERING WORKED HAD TO COAST THROUGH THE LIGHT TO THE SHOULDER, IDLING ROUGH. WRENCH SYMBOL ON DASH WAS LIT. TURNED CAR OFF, CHECKED MANUAL, WRENCH SYMBOL NOT IN MANUAL. TURNED CAR BACK ON AND RAN FINE. 2N…

Read full complaint

1ST TIME: AT TRAFFIC LIGHT MAKING A LEFT. LIGHT CHANGED, HIT THE GAS, CAR WENT FORWARDS THEN LOST POWER, BRAKES AND STEERING WORKED HAD TO COAST THROUGH THE LIGHT TO THE SHOULDER, IDLING ROUGH. WRENCH SYMBOL ON DASH WAS LIT. TURNED CAR OFF, CHECKED MANUAL, WRENCH SYMBOL NOT IN MANUAL. TURNED CAR BACK ON AND RAN FINE. 2ND TIME, 300 MILES LATER. DRIVING WHEN THE CAR LOST POWER, DROPPED TO IDLE WHILE DRIVING, BRAKES AND STEERING WORKED. COASTED TO SIDE OF THE ROAD, WRENCH SYMBOL WAS LIT ON THE DASH. IDLING ROUGH. RAN A VEHICLE HEALTH REPORT AND IT SHOWED: URGENT POWERTRAIN MALFUNCTION / REDUCED POWER TURNED OFF CAR, LET SIT FOR A MINUTE, RESTARTED AND DROVE FINE. TOOK CAR TO DEALERS, STATES ITS THE THROTTLE BODY, ON NATIONAL BACKORDER WITH NO IDEA ON AVAILABILITY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519458

29,800 miles · Jun 12, 2013
Power Train

WHILE DRIVING ON THE EXPRESSWAY I SUDDENLY LOST ACCELERATION, BEGAN TO LOSE SPEED AND NOTICED THE WRENCH LIGHT ON THE DASHBOARD CAME ON. I HAD TO PULL OVER ONTO THE SHOULDER WHILE SEMI TRUCKS AND CARS BLEW PAST ME. AS I WAS TRYING TO CONTACT ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE, I RESTARTED THE CAR AND NOTICED THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS GONE. I WAS TH…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING ON THE EXPRESSWAY I SUDDENLY LOST ACCELERATION, BEGAN TO LOSE SPEED AND NOTICED THE WRENCH LIGHT ON THE DASHBOARD CAME ON. I HAD TO PULL OVER ONTO THE SHOULDER WHILE SEMI TRUCKS AND CARS BLEW PAST ME. AS I WAS TRYING TO CONTACT ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE, I RESTARTED THE CAR AND NOTICED THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS GONE. I WAS THEN ABLE TO GET BACK ON THE ROAD AND CONTINUED TO MY DESTINATION WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. I TOOK MY CAR INTO A CERTIFIED FORD DEALERSHIP FOR SERVICE AND THEY ADVISED THEY FOUND NOTHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE AND LOCATED NO STORED CODES IN THE COMPUTER. YESTERDAY ON 06/11/2013 THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN WHILE I WAS ON THE EXPRESSWAY. I HAD TO GET ON THE SHOULDER WAIT A FEW MINUTES AND RESTART THE CAR. BOTH TIMES I WAS SO GRATEFUL MY 19 MONTH WAS NOT IN THE CAR WITH ME WHICH IS UNUSUAL. I PLAN ON TAKING IT AGAIN TO HAVE IT CHECKED OUT BUT I'M ANTICIPATING THE SAME RESPONSE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519452

36,800 miles · Jun 12, 2013
Power Train

AS WE WERE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD WE LOST POWER, HAD TO PULL OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE VEHICLE THEN STARTED LURCHING FORWARD AND WE HAD TO TURN THE CAR OFF TO MAKE IT STOP. WHEN WE RESTARTED THE CAR IT WOULD DRIVE FINE FOR A FEW MILES THEN LOSE POWER AGAIN AND AGAIN BEGIN TO LURCH FORWARD. THIS HAPPENED 4 SEPARATE TIMES B…

Read full complaint

AS WE WERE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD WE LOST POWER, HAD TO PULL OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE VEHICLE THEN STARTED LURCHING FORWARD AND WE HAD TO TURN THE CAR OFF TO MAKE IT STOP. WHEN WE RESTARTED THE CAR IT WOULD DRIVE FINE FOR A FEW MILES THEN LOSE POWER AGAIN AND AGAIN BEGIN TO LURCH FORWARD. THIS HAPPENED 4 SEPARATE TIMES BEFORE WE HAD THE CAR TOWED TO THE NEAREST DEALERSHIP. THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM IN THIS MODEL FORD AND IT NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519420

41,000 miles · Jun 11, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

DRIVING ON HIGHWAY, AT 65 MPH. CAR LOSES POWER AND HAVE TO COST TO A STOP. VERY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS TRYING TO CROSS 4 LANES OF TRAFFIC TO GET TO SHOULDER OF HIGHWAY AND STOP SAFELY. THIS HAPPENED ONCE ON 4/26/13, TOOK TO DEALERSHIP, THEY SAID NOTHING WRONG. CONTINUED TO DRIVE UNTIL HAPPENED AGAIN. HAPPENED ON 5/30 AND 5/31 …

Read full complaint

DRIVING ON HIGHWAY, AT 65 MPH. CAR LOSES POWER AND HAVE TO COST TO A STOP. VERY DANGEROUS SITUATIONS TRYING TO CROSS 4 LANES OF TRAFFIC TO GET TO SHOULDER OF HIGHWAY AND STOP SAFELY. THIS HAPPENED ONCE ON 4/26/13, TOOK TO DEALERSHIP, THEY SAID NOTHING WRONG. CONTINUED TO DRIVE UNTIL HAPPENED AGAIN. HAPPENED ON 5/30 AND 5/31 REPEATEDLY UNTIL GOT THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR SHOP. REPAIR SHOP HAS HAD THE VEHICLE FOR 10 DAYS DUE TO PART NOT AVAILABLE. PART IS NOT AVAILABLE BECAUSE THIS IS A RECURRING PROBLEM FOR FORD AND THESE VEHICLES. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE AND NEEDS TO BE RECALLED! PLEASE DO SOMETHING! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519355

57,000 miles · Jun 11, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control

IN A 35 MPH ZONE, WHEN ACCELERATING AFTER SLOWING TO ALLOW VEHICLE IN FRONT TO TURN, THROTTLE STUCK OPEN & CAR LOST POWER. WAS ABLE TO GET TO SIDE OF ROAD AND RESTART CAR AND PROCEED. SAME THING HAPPENED 4 ADDITIONAL TIMES THAT DAY AT VARIOUS SPEEDS ACCELERATING TO SPEED FOLLOWING A STOP OR USING AN ON-RAMP TO HIGHWAY SPEED. …

Read full complaint

IN A 35 MPH ZONE, WHEN ACCELERATING AFTER SLOWING TO ALLOW VEHICLE IN FRONT TO TURN, THROTTLE STUCK OPEN & CAR LOST POWER. WAS ABLE TO GET TO SIDE OF ROAD AND RESTART CAR AND PROCEED. SAME THING HAPPENED 4 ADDITIONAL TIMES THAT DAY AT VARIOUS SPEEDS ACCELERATING TO SPEED FOLLOWING A STOP OR USING AN ON-RAMP TO HIGHWAY SPEED. HAVE EXPERIENCED "SURGING" PREVIOUSLY BUT DEALER IGNORED REPORTS AS "INTERMITTENT". CAR WAS TOWED TO DEALER ON 22 MAY AND IS STILL THERE AWAITING A NEW THROTTLE CONTROL BODY. SHIPMENT OF NEW PART IS ESTIMATED AS 17 JUNE. DEALER IS NOT PROVIDING LOANER OR RENTAL CAR AS THE PART IS NOT CONSIDERED PART OF THE POWERTRAIN & IS THEREFORE APPROX. 6 MONTHS OUT OF WARRANTY. SINCE THE CAR CANNOT "GO" WITHOUT THE THROTTLE CONTROL BODY - WHY IS IT CONSIDERED PART OF THE EMISSION SYSTEM VICE THE POWERTRAIN? WITH SO MANY CARS DOWN FOR THIS PART, IT SHOULD BE A RECALL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519294

30,350 miles · Jun 11, 2013
Electrical SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed Control

I WAS STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT PREPARING TO TURN RIGHT. WHILE AT A COMPLETE STOP, THE VEHICLE JOLTED FORWARD MOMENTARILY AND AGAIN CAME TO A STOP. I TURNED RIGHT AND IMMEDIATELY MY ACCELERATOR FAILED AND THE CAR WOULD ONLY MOVE FORWARD AT A SPEED LESS THAN 5 MILES PER HOUR. I COASTED INTO A PARKING LOT WHERE I TURNED OFF THE VEHIC…

Read full complaint

I WAS STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT PREPARING TO TURN RIGHT. WHILE AT A COMPLETE STOP, THE VEHICLE JOLTED FORWARD MOMENTARILY AND AGAIN CAME TO A STOP. I TURNED RIGHT AND IMMEDIATELY MY ACCELERATOR FAILED AND THE CAR WOULD ONLY MOVE FORWARD AT A SPEED LESS THAN 5 MILES PER HOUR. I COASTED INTO A PARKING LOT WHERE I TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE AND RESTARTED IT. IT ACCELERATED NORMALLY FOR A MOMENT BEFORE FAILING AGAIN. THE WARNING LIGHT THAT APPEARED WAS CORRELATED WITH THE POWER TRAIN, PER THE VEHICLE'S INSTRUCTION MANUAL. WHEN INSPECTED BY A FORD DEALERSHIP, THE MECHANIC SAID THE THROTTLE SYSTEM HAD FAILED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. ALL INSPECTIONS AND SERVICES RELATED TO THE VEHICLE WERE UP-TO-DATE AND THERE WERE NO OTHER PROBLEMS DETECTED. NO ONE WAS INJURED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10516254

Mileage unknown · Jun 11, 2013
EquipmentPower Train

THROTTLE BODY FAILURE, MAKING MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE INOPERABLE. IT SHUTS DOWN COMPLETELY ON THE HIGHWAY. I LOST POWER ON THE INTERSTATE WHILE IN TRAFFIC. THIS HAPPENED 3 TIMES AND I'VE HAD TO RENT A CAR WHILE I WAIT FOR THE THROTTLE BODY PART WHICH IS ON BACK ORDER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10516183

Official recalls

3

16V777000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump

Oct 26, 2016

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2010-2012 Ford Escape vehicles manufactured February 26, 2009, to April 29, 2012, and 2010-2011 Mercury Mariner vehicles manufactured February 25, 2009, to December 12, 2010. On vehicles with a 3.0L engine, the Fuel Delivery Module (FDM) may crack, causing a fuel leak.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source increases the risk of a fire.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the FDM flange with one that has a redesigned fuel supply port, free of charge. Remedy parts are currently unavailable. Interim notices were mailed to owners on December 13, 2016. Owners will receive a second notice when remedy parts become available. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 16S41.

14V284000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System

May 29, 2014

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2008-2011 Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner vehicles manufactured August 18, 2006, through September 11, 2010. The affected vehicles have a steering torque sensor that may not be able to properly detect driver steering input. As a result, the system could remove the Electric Power Steering (EPS) assist.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If power steering assist is lost, greater driver effort would be required to steer the vehicle at low speeds, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will update the software for the power steering control module (PSCM) and the instrument cluster module, free of charge. If a vehicle shows a history of a loss of the torque sensor signal or fault codes relating to the PSCM when the vehicle is brought in for the recall remedy, the affected components will be replaced, free of charge. The recall began on July 18, 2014. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-800-392-3673. Ford's number for this recall is 14S05.

10V222000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission

May 24, 2010

FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2010 FUSION, MILAN, AND ESCAPE VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM FEBRUARY 27, THROUGH MARCH 26, 2010. THE PARK ROD GUIDE RETENTION PIN MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PROPERLY INSTALLED WHICH FAILS TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENT OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 114, "THEFT PROTECTION AND ROLLAWAY PREVENTION".

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A VEHICLE PARKED WITHOUT AN ENGAGED PARK PAWL AND WITHOUT AN APPLIED PARKING BRAKE MAY HAVE UNINTENDED MOVEMENT WHICH MAY CAUSE A CRASH.

Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND DEALERS WILL REPAIR THE VEHICLES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 28, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332 AND FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED CALL 1-800-232-5952 (TDD). REPRESENTATIVES ARE AVAILABLE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY: 8:00AM - 5:00PM.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

4

DP15001 · Loss Of Power Steering While Driving

Opened Apr 1, 2015 · Closed Jun 14, 2018

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering:electric Power Assist System

On May 27, 2014, amended June 2, 2014, Ford Motor Company (Ford) submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) to NHTSA describing a safety defect that may result in a sudden loss of power steering assist while driving in approximately 746,067 model year (MY) 2008 through 2011 Ford Escape vehicles equipped with electric power assisted steering (NHTSA 14V-284, Ford 14S05). Ford's DIR described the defect condition as a poor signal to noise ratio [SNR] in the torque sensor within the Electric Power Assisted Steering (EPAS) system [which] does not allow the PSCM to determine the driver's steering input. When the system detects this fault condition, it transitions the EPAS system to the fail-safe/manual steering mode.Ford's DIR indicates that loss of power steering assist while driving would require higher steering effort at lower vehicle speeds, which may result in an increased risk of a crash.Ford's remedy instructs dealers to check the Power Steering Control Module (PSCM) for Diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTCs) to determine the proper repair procedure. If no DTCs are present, dealers are to update the PSCM and instrument cluster module software. The updated PSCM software changes the torque sensor fault strategy so that the SNR condition does not result in a loss of power steering assist while driving.In addition, audible and visual warnings are provided for torque sensor faults.If DTCs indicating faults in the torque sensor, PSCM or Power Steering Motor (motor) are present in the initial recall inspection, the dealer performs the following repairs: 1) replaces the torque sensor for torque sensor faults (DTC B2278); or 2) replaces the steering column for faults related to the PSCM (DTC B1342) or motor (DTC B2277).Continued in attachment pages

PE13003 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction

Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Feb 28, 2014

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine

On February 21, 2013, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 to investigate allegations of electronic throttle body (ETB) failures resulting in sudden reduction of engine power in model year (MY) 2009-2013 Ford Escape, Fusion, Mariner and Milan vehicles. During this investigation, Ford identified a condition in subject vehicles equipped with 2.5L and 3.0L engines that may result in a sudden reduction of engine power.According to Ford, the ETB internal motor contacts may develop a high resistance material buildup condition on the commutator, resulting in intermittent electrical connectivity and reduced engine power. When this condition occurs, the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) or Wrench light will illuminate and the vehicle may enter a limited limp home mode.Ford?s trade name for the feature is Failure Mode Effects Management (FMEM) mode.In this mode, engine power and vehicle speed are reduced, while full function of the power steering, power braking, lighting, and climate control systems are maintained.ODI?s complaint analysis indicate that the predominant failure mode involved reduced motive power associated with the limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Analysis of warranty claims provided by Ford identified 59,807 claims related to ETB replacements and approximately 50 percent of claims are associated with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed.Ford described several factors where the ETB motor may fail resulting in DTCs P2111 or P2112 but the failure is not an existing stuck open or closed ETB valve position.According to Ford, the ETB control strategy provides the driver with three FMEM modes that allow varying degrees of vehicle mobility depending on the severity of the fault detected.DTCs associated with stuck open or closed throttle valves are designated the highest failure severity resulting in engine speeds limited to high idle corresponding to the limited limp home mode.Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability.Other FMEM limp modes may result in reduced engine performance but will maintain vehicle speed above 20mph. During this investigation, Ford and its suppliers, Delphi and Igarashi, updated the powertrain control module (PCM) software to include a throttle body motor cleaning cycle during key-on and modified the ETB internal motor components design, surface finish and material composition to improve durability. Additionally, Ford developed a remedy procedure and issued a special Customer Satisfaction Program (CSP) 13N03 extending the ETB warranty coverage and instructing dealers to update the powertrain calibration to improve vehicle performance in the event that intermittent electrical connectivity of the throttle body motor contacts occurs. The program extends the coverage for up to 10 years of service or 150,000 miles from the warranty start date of the vehicle, all vehicles are eligible for the program through January 31, 2015 regardless of mileage.Owners of the affected vehicles will be contacted by mail to take their vehicle to a Ford dealer who will reprogram the PCM to the latest calibration. The bulletin was sent to dealers on January 17, 2014 and the owner letter mailing began on January 27, 2014. See the investigative file for copies of Ford's bulletin and owner letter. This preliminary evaluation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding that

DP12006 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction

Opened Oct 2, 2012 · Closed Feb 21, 2013

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine

In a letter dated August 30, 2012, The North Carolina Consumers Council (NCCC) petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to initiate a defect investigation of alleged electronic throttle body failures resulting in engine stall or surge while driving in model year (MY) 2005 through 2012 Ford Escape vehicles. On October 2, 2012 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Defect Petition DP12-006 to evaluate whether to grant or deny the petition. The petition is hereby granted on certain model years. The NCCC letter cites two complaints of stall while driving in MY 2009 Ford Escape vehicles that were diagnosed as failed throttle bodies with diagnostic trouble codes (DTC) P2111, Throttle Body Stuck Open, and P2112, Throttle Body Stuck Closed. The petitioner indicates that the owners of both vehicles reported experiencing repeated incidents of stalling and engine surging. According to Ford, Escape non-hybrid vehicles are equipped with Electronic Throttle Body (ETB) assemblies beginning with MY 2009. Vehicles manufactured between June 22, 2009 and October 15, 2009 may contain contaminated printed circuit boards (PCB) with plating variations. Plating variations could lead to a lack of continuity in the throttle position sensor circuit where P2111 and/or other DTCs would be generated and stored. Ford and its electronic throttle body supplier, Delphi, modified the PCB manufacturing process and issued a technical service bulletin (TSB) 09-23-5. Vehicles produced after October 15, 2009 incorporated ETBs manufactured with a PCB process that resolved this condition. ODI's analysis identified a total of 123 unique reports indicating allegations of reduced motive power or vehicle stall. Depending on the condition of throttle control system malfunction, a driver may experience varying levels of reduced engine performance associated with three limp home modes. In two limp modes, reduced engine performance may maintain vehicle speeds above 20mph while the third is a limited limp home mode with engine speeds limited to approximately 900 RPM. Allegations of stall appear to be related to the limited limp home mode. Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has motive capability. Allegations of vehicle surge appear to be related to limp home mode operation. Complaints alleging surge are most likely related to engine RPM fluctuations at low vehicle speeds or idle as the control system engages to prevent engine stall. In limited limp mode, rough-idle conditions may exist while the control system attempts to modulate engine RPMs once the vehicle reaches a reduced speed to maintain approximately 900 RPM. Separately, ODI received 59 complaints alleging incidents of engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2010-2011 Ford Fusion vehicles. Approximately 60 percent (36) of the incidents occurred at speeds of 40 miles per hour or more. Eighty percent of complaints (47) were received beginning March 2012 and 14 complaints reported that the throttle body was replaced or DTCs associated with limp home modes. Additionally, Ford issued TSB 10-21-6 addressing DTCs associated with idle speed drops and limited limp home mode. The petition is granted on certain model years.Preliminary Evaluation PE13-003 has been opened to assess the scope, frequency and potential safety consequences associated with the alleged defect.See full copy of the closing resume for this defect petition for list of the VOQs associated with the defect petition analysis.

PE11016 · Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage

Opened Apr 27, 2011 · Closed Aug 18, 2011

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments; Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut; Visibility; Visibility:glass, Side/rear

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Additional source detail variants (5)

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Visibility

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Visibility:glass, Side/rear

In its response to the agency, Ford acknowledged a higher than normal level of glass breakage incidents in the model year (MY) 2010 to early-build MY 2011 subject vehicles.The incidentsoccurred when the liftgate glass was being opened, or more typically while being closed, but in both cases while the vehicle was stationery, i.e., not moving on the roadway.Additionally failures often occurred during early morning hours when ambient and/or liftgate glass temperatures may have been lower.Ford advised that it investigated the failures but failed to identify an anomaly in the glass manufacturing process (which is often a factor in glass breakage trends ODI investigates) that could explain the reports.It did however identify a potential thermal expansion/compression condition in the mounting of the rear wiper motor to the liftgate glass.Starting at MY 2008 vehicle production the motor was attached to the glass using an adhesive.Ford revised that design to a nut and bolt type attachment in October 2010, during MY 2011 vehicle production.ODI's review of Ford data indicates that vehicles built after this change exhibit lower glass breakage rates.Among the 296 consumer complaints on the subject vehicles, ODI identified 15 injury incidents resulting in a total of 18 alleged injuries.All the injuries were minor in nature and consisted mainly of superficial skin cuts or minor lacerations, with two of the injury incidents occurring when vehicle owners were cleaning up broken glass.Additionally both the injury rate and report rate (including warranty claims) are low in comparison to similar investigations resulting in safety recalls (see PE04-045, MY 2002 Ford explorer liftgate glass failure, which resulted in NHTSA safety recall 04V442). In November 2010 Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 10-22-10 to address reports of liftgate glass breakage on all MY 2010 vehicles, and MY 2011 vehicles built through 10/15/2010, the date the above design revision was implemented.The TSB enables owners of affected vehicles to have a broken liftgate glass replaced under normal vehicle warranty, which would not otherwise be a warrantable failure, with the revised design liftgate glass.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Go deeper into Ford Escape problems