NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
558 reportsClear category filter36,600 miles · Aug 21, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. WHILE DRIVING 58 MPH, THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT INCREASE SPEED DESPITE THE CONTACT DEPRESSING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE VEHICLE WAS MERGED TO THE SHOULDER AND THE ENGINE WAS RESTARTED. THE VEHICLE WAS DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALER AS HAVING THROTTLE ASSEMBLY FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. WHILE DRIVING 58 MPH, THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT INCREASE SPEED DESPITE THE CONTACT DEPRESSING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE VEHICLE WAS MERGED TO THE SHOULDER AND THE ENGINE WAS RESTARTED. THE VEHICLE WAS DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALER AS HAVING THROTTLE ASSEMBLY FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 36,600. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. UPDATED 9/19/13 *CN THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. UPDATED 09/24/13
NHTSA ODI #10536482
67,650 miles · Aug 21, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT A MAINTAINED SPEED, MY VEHICLE ILLUMINATED A MAINTENANCE LIGHT, AND WITHIN SECONDS THE GAS PEDAL WAS NOT WORKING. I WAS ON A SLIGHT HILL AT THE TIME SO I STILL HAD SOME MOMENTUM, ENOUGH TO PULL OVER OUT OF THE TRAFFIC. THE STEERING, BRAKES, AND EVERYTHING ELSE WERE WORKING FINE, BUT NOTHING HAPPENED W…
Read full complaint
DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT A MAINTAINED SPEED, MY VEHICLE ILLUMINATED A MAINTENANCE LIGHT, AND WITHIN SECONDS THE GAS PEDAL WAS NOT WORKING. I WAS ON A SLIGHT HILL AT THE TIME SO I STILL HAD SOME MOMENTUM, ENOUGH TO PULL OVER OUT OF THE TRAFFIC. THE STEERING, BRAKES, AND EVERYTHING ELSE WERE WORKING FINE, BUT NOTHING HAPPENED WHEN I PRESSED THE GAS. WHEN I PUT THE CAR IN PARK THERE WAS SOME STUTTERING, ALMOST LIKE IT WAS STALLING OUT, COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD. I TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF AND WAITED A FEW MOMENTS. WHEN I TURNED IT BACK ON, IT TOOK AN EXTRA 2-3 SECONDS TO START UP, BUT SEEMED TO BE RUNNING FINE, AND I DROVE TO WORK, THEN RIGHT TO THE DEALER AFTER WORK FOR REPAIRS. THEY TOLD ME IT WAS THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY, AND THAT IT IS NOW RUNNING FINE SINCE THEY REPLACED THE THROTTLE BODY, AND I AM GOING TO PICK IT UP AFTER WORK TODAY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536453
80,000 miles · Aug 20, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I BOUGHT VEHICLE 2010 FORD ESCAPE IN AUGUST OF 2011. IN FEBRUARY OF 2011 I WAS DRIVING DOWN A CITY ROAD GOING ABOUT 30 MPH AND MY ESCAPE STARTING STALLING OUT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. I PULLED INTO A PARKING LOT AND IT WAS IDLING ROUGH LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL OUT. I PUT MY ESCAPE INTO PARK PUSHED SLIGHTLY ON…
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT VEHICLE 2010 FORD ESCAPE IN AUGUST OF 2011. IN FEBRUARY OF 2011 I WAS DRIVING DOWN A CITY ROAD GOING ABOUT 30 MPH AND MY ESCAPE STARTING STALLING OUT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. I PULLED INTO A PARKING LOT AND IT WAS IDLING ROUGH LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL OUT. I PUT MY ESCAPE INTO PARK PUSHED SLIGHTLY ON GAS PEDAL IT MADE NO DIFFERENCE WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE I SWITCHED IT INTO GEAR MADE NO DIFFERENCE. I PUT CAR BACK INTO PARK AND TURNED IT OFF. WAITED A FEW MINUTES STARTED IT. IT STARTED RIGHT UP WITH NO PROBLEMS. I RAN FUEL CLEANER THROUGH IT. I DID NOT HAVE ANYMORE PROBLEMS UNTIL THURSDAY AUG 15TH 2013. I WAS DRIVING DOWN CITY ROAD GOING ABOUT 30 MPH IT DID THE SAME THING AGAIN. STARTED STALLING OUT WOULD NOT PICK UP ACCELERATION RUNNING ROUGH WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON PULLED INTO PARKING LOT BARLEY IDLING SPUTTERING LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL I PUT CAR INTO PARK TURNED ENGINE OFF WAITED A FEW MINUTES. TURNED BACK ON. MY CAR STARTED FINE RAN FINE LIKE NOTHING HAPPENED AGAIN. SO TODAY 8/20/13 IM GOING DOWN BUSY TRAFFIC COUNTRY TWO LANE ROAD NO WHERE TO PULL CAR OFF ON SIDE SAFELY. AND AGAIN ALL OF A SUDDEN GOING ABOUT 35 MPH I LOOSE ACCELERATION CAR STARTS SPUTTERING I CANT ACCELERATE RUNNING ROUGH WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON I COASTED UP TO STOP SIGN AS I HAD NOWHERE TO SAFELY PULL CAR OFF ROAD AND PUT CAR IN PARK TURN OFF ENGINE STARTED ENGINE RIGHT BACK UP CAR RAN FINE. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE. I THOUGHT AT FIRST MY FUEL FILTER MAY BE THE PROBLEM BUT AS IM READING THE 2010 FORD ESCAPES HAVE A GUARANTEED LIFETIME FUEL FILTER INSIDE THE FUEL TANK CANNOT REPLACE IT. SO AS I WAS READING MORE IN DEPTH I SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM AS I AM WITH THEIR 2010 ESCAPES. I NOW SEE THE PROBLEM IS A THROTTLE BODY ISSUE DEFECT AND AN INVESTIGATION IS GOING ON. FORD NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS BEFORE PEOPLE WIND UP IN CRASHES OVER THIS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536367
80,000 miles · Aug 20, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System
VEHICLE STALLED UPON ACCELERATION FROM STOP, AND LOST ALL THROTTLE FUNCTION. SURGES AT IDLE, AND INTERMITTENTLY STALLS. THROTTLE FAILED THE NEXT DAY AT HIGHWAY SPEED. SAME SYMPTOMS AS THE FAILED THROTTLE BODY SENSOR ISSUE THAT WAS FIXED BY OCTOBER 2009, BUT MY ESCAPE WAS BUILT IN DECEMBER '09 AFTER THE PROBLEM WAS SUPPOSEDLY …
Read full complaint
VEHICLE STALLED UPON ACCELERATION FROM STOP, AND LOST ALL THROTTLE FUNCTION. SURGES AT IDLE, AND INTERMITTENTLY STALLS. THROTTLE FAILED THE NEXT DAY AT HIGHWAY SPEED. SAME SYMPTOMS AS THE FAILED THROTTLE BODY SENSOR ISSUE THAT WAS FIXED BY OCTOBER 2009, BUT MY ESCAPE WAS BUILT IN DECEMBER '09 AFTER THE PROBLEM WAS SUPPOSEDLY FIXED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536347
86,000 miles · Aug 20, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
IN AUGUST RUSH-HOUR MORNING TRAFFIC AT APPROXIMATELY 60MPH THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING WENT INTO 'LIMP MODE', THE ENGINE RPM DECREASED TO UNDER 1000RPM AND I WAS ABLE TO FIGHT THRU SEVERAL LANES OF TRAFFIC WHILE COASTING THE VEHICLE TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. NO THROTTLE INPUTS AFFECTED THE ENGINE, IT REMAINED UNDER 1000…
Read full complaint
IN AUGUST RUSH-HOUR MORNING TRAFFIC AT APPROXIMATELY 60MPH THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING WENT INTO 'LIMP MODE', THE ENGINE RPM DECREASED TO UNDER 1000RPM AND I WAS ABLE TO FIGHT THRU SEVERAL LANES OF TRAFFIC WHILE COASTING THE VEHICLE TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. NO THROTTLE INPUTS AFFECTED THE ENGINE, IT REMAINED UNDER 1000RPM AND RAN VERY ROUGH AS IF IT WAS GOING TO STALL. I SHUT THE CAR COMPLETELY OFF, WAITED A MINUTE, THEN RESTARTED THE ENGINE AND WAS ABLE TO CONTINUE TO THE WORKPLACE. TWO DAYS LATER ON A SHORT TRIP TO A RESTAURANT, THE ENGINE AGAIN WENT INTO 'LIMP MODE'. I SHUTOFF THE VEHICLE AND RESTARTED AND CONTINUED ON MY WAY. ABOUT 1/4 MILE LATER THE ENGINE WENT INTO 'LIMP MODE' AGAIN. THE VEHICLE WOULD GO INTO 'LIMP MODE' AFTER EVERY 1/4 - 1/2 MILE FOR A TOTAL OF 4 TIMES ON THE SHORT TRIP. I THEN TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP, WHERE IT IS NOW. THIS 2010 FORD ESCAPE HAS 86K MILES. THE DEALERSHIP SAYS IT IS A BAD THROTTLE BODY. I CALLED FORD CUSTOMER RELATIONS AND THEY WILL NOT DO ANYTHING TO HELP BECAUSE OF THE MILEAGE AND NO RECALL HAS BEEN ISSUED DUE TO NHTSA ACTION NUMBER: PE13003 AS OF YET (STILL IN INVESTIGATION SINCE FEBRUARY). I CANNOT SAFELY DRIVE THIS VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536293
Mileage unknown · Aug 19, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD WHEN MY GAS PEDAL STOPPED WORKING AND MY CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. AFTER TURNING THE CAR OFF AND BACK ON, THE PROBLEM RECURRED FOUR TIMES BEFORE I FINALLY CALLED A TOW TRUCK. THE REPAIR SHOP DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM AS THE THROTTLE BODY STUCK IN AN OPEN POSITION. THE PART IS NOW ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER. …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD WHEN MY GAS PEDAL STOPPED WORKING AND MY CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. AFTER TURNING THE CAR OFF AND BACK ON, THE PROBLEM RECURRED FOUR TIMES BEFORE I FINALLY CALLED A TOW TRUCK. THE REPAIR SHOP DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM AS THE THROTTLE BODY STUCK IN AN OPEN POSITION. THE PART IS NOW ON NATIONAL BACK ORDER. IT IS AN EXPENSIVE AND, DUE TO THE BACK ORDER, LONG REPAIR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536220
Mileage unknown · Aug 19, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, OUR NEWLY BOUGHT USED VEHICLE (A 2010 FORD ESCAPE WITH LESS THAN 60,000 MILES,) HAD STALLED ON MY PARTY WHILE DRIVING. WHEN THE VEHICLE IS IN DRIVE THE CAR LOSES THE ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. SOME OF THE TIMES ALL WE HAD TO DO WAS RESTART THE VEHICLE AND IT WOULD GET US BACK HOME. THE OCCURRENCES OF THE PROBL…
Read full complaint
ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, OUR NEWLY BOUGHT USED VEHICLE (A 2010 FORD ESCAPE WITH LESS THAN 60,000 MILES,) HAD STALLED ON MY PARTY WHILE DRIVING. WHEN THE VEHICLE IS IN DRIVE THE CAR LOSES THE ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. SOME OF THE TIMES ALL WE HAD TO DO WAS RESTART THE VEHICLE AND IT WOULD GET US BACK HOME. THE OCCURRENCES OF THE PROBLEM HAPPENED MORE FREQUENTLY WHEN DRIVING ON A FREEWAY OR HIGHWAY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536213
63,000 miles · Aug 19, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AND EVERYTHING SEEMED FINE. SUDDENLY, THE ENGINE SHUDDERED, HESITATED, AND LOST POWER. LUCKILY, TRAFFIC WAS LIGHT AND I WAS ABLE TO GET OFF THE ROAD. ALL FLUIDS OK, BATTERY OK, FUEL OK, ETC. AFTER CHECKING OPTIONS, I TRIED RESTARTING THE CAR. IT STARTED FINE -LIKE THERE WAS NO PROBLEM. SINCE THEN IT…
Read full complaint
DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AND EVERYTHING SEEMED FINE. SUDDENLY, THE ENGINE SHUDDERED, HESITATED, AND LOST POWER. LUCKILY, TRAFFIC WAS LIGHT AND I WAS ABLE TO GET OFF THE ROAD. ALL FLUIDS OK, BATTERY OK, FUEL OK, ETC. AFTER CHECKING OPTIONS, I TRIED RESTARTING THE CAR. IT STARTED FINE -LIKE THERE WAS NO PROBLEM. SINCE THEN IT HAS BEEN HAPPENING MORE OFTEN, BUT NOT ON AT ANY PREDICTABLE TIME OR EVENT. ENGINE COOL OR HOT, SLOW OR HIGH SPEED, SMOOTH OR BUMPY ROAD -JUST WHENEVER IT SEEMS TO FEEL LIKE IT. I'VE BEEN READING ONLINE THAT THIS SEEMS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE THROTTLE BODY ON THESE VEHICLES. I'M NOW LOOKING FOR A REPLACEMENT AND AM WONDERING HOW MUCH THIS IS GOING TO COST. SINCE IT IS A WIDESPREAD ISSUE, WILL FORD REIMBURSE FOR THE EXPENSE? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536090
15,000 miles · Aug 18, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
THE FIRST INCIDENT, THE ENGINE STALLED AS I SLOWED DOWN TO MAKE A TURN. THE SECOND INCIDENT, WHILE DRIVING THE ENGINE NEARLY KILLED AND WAS IN A LOW SPEED LIKE IT WAS IN NEUTRAL, JUST STAYED IN ONE SPOT LIKE IT WAS STALLED. HAD VEHICLE TOWED TO DEALERSHIP WHERE THEY REPLACED THE THROTTLE BODY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10535947
60,985 miles · Aug 18, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
VEHICLE WAS MOVING. THE GAS PEDAL LOST CONTROL FOR ACCELERATION AND THE CAR CAME DOWN TO AN IDLE AND IT'S THRUSTING ITSELF FORWARD TO MOVE. THE GAS PEDAL WOULD NOT REACT. THE YELLOW WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10535941
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.