NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
558 reportsClear category filter32,000 miles · Oct 4, 2015
EngineVehicle Speed Control
MY CAR SOMETIMES SUDDENLY JUST LOSING POWER. I COULD GET KILLED ON THE FREEWAY. FROM RESEARCHING A BIT I SEE IT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE THROTTLE BODY CONTROL. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWO TIME IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS. ONCE AS WE GET GETTING READY TO GET ON THE FREEWAY AND THE SECOND TIME AS WE WERE CROSSING A BUSY INTERSECTION, L…
Read full complaint
MY CAR SOMETIMES SUDDENLY JUST LOSING POWER. I COULD GET KILLED ON THE FREEWAY. FROM RESEARCHING A BIT I SEE IT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE THROTTLE BODY CONTROL. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWO TIME IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS. ONCE AS WE GET GETTING READY TO GET ON THE FREEWAY AND THE SECOND TIME AS WE WERE CROSSING A BUSY INTERSECTION, LUCKILY WE WERE ABLE TO GET ACROSS THE ROAD WITHOUT GETTING HIT. I AM AFRAID I HAVE BOUGHT AN UNSAFE CAR.
NHTSA ODI #10779589
101,883 miles · Sep 13, 2015
Service BrakesVehicle Speed ControlCrash
I WAS STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT, WITH THE BRAKE ENGAGED, AND MY CAR LUNGED FORWARD INTO THE CAR AHEAD OF ME, DAMAGING IT'S LIFTGATE (MINIVAN) AND BUMPER. I INITIALLY THOUGHT SOMEONE MUST HAVE REAR-ENDED MY CAR, PUSHING ME INTO THE OTHER CAR, BUT I WAS NOT HIT FROM BEHIND. MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE THE ENTIRE TIME. I AM CONCER…
Read full complaint
I WAS STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT, WITH THE BRAKE ENGAGED, AND MY CAR LUNGED FORWARD INTO THE CAR AHEAD OF ME, DAMAGING IT'S LIFTGATE (MINIVAN) AND BUMPER. I INITIALLY THOUGHT SOMEONE MUST HAVE REAR-ENDED MY CAR, PUSHING ME INTO THE OTHER CAR, BUT I WAS NOT HIT FROM BEHIND. MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE THE ENTIRE TIME. I AM CONCERNED THIS MIGHT HAPPEN AGAIN, INJURING SOMEONE POSSIBLY IN A CROSSWALK, OR LUNGING ME INTO CROSS TRAFFIC.
NHTSA ODI #10763382
85,000 miles · Sep 11, 2015
EngineService BrakesVehicle Speed Control
THE PROBLEM DEMONSTRATED AS I LEFT THE SHOPPING CENTER AND MADE THE FIRST TURN ONTO THE STREET. THE ENGINE WAS VERY ROUGH AND NOT CONSISTENT, THE SPEED VARIED FROM 20 - 40 MILES PER HR WITHOUT ANY PRESSURE TO THE ACCELERATOR. AS I CAME TO A RED TRAFFIC LIGHT I HAD ALMOST NO BRAKE PRESSURE AND PREPARED TO TURN INTO A SCHOOL PA…
Read full complaint
THE PROBLEM DEMONSTRATED AS I LEFT THE SHOPPING CENTER AND MADE THE FIRST TURN ONTO THE STREET. THE ENGINE WAS VERY ROUGH AND NOT CONSISTENT, THE SPEED VARIED FROM 20 - 40 MILES PER HR WITHOUT ANY PRESSURE TO THE ACCELERATOR. AS I CAME TO A RED TRAFFIC LIGHT I HAD ALMOST NO BRAKE PRESSURE AND PREPARED TO TURN INTO A SCHOOL PARKING LOT. THIS OCCURRED IN THE FIRST HALF MILE OF COUNTRY ROAD; AS I REALIZED I HAD NO BRAKING POWER I TURNED INTO A PARK LOT AND CALLED FOR A TOW TRUCK. FORTUNATELY THERE WAS LITTLE TRAFFIC THAT EVENING. THIS PRODUCED UNNECESSARY ANXIETY FOR ME EVEN THOUGH I WAS CLOSE TO HOME. OUR MECHANIC CHECKED MANY THINGS, FINALLY DECIDING IT WAS DIAGNOSTIC CODES PO306, PO316, PO109, PO 300, AND PO304. FORD TELLS ME THIS IS NOT UNDER WARRANTY. ONCE AGAIN I FELT THIS PROBLEM PLACED ME IN A POTENTIALLY LIFE-THREATENING SITUATION FOR ME AS THE THROTTLE BODY HAD DONE PREVIOUSLY (BEFORE THE RECALL). I HAVE NEARLY 3 COMPUTER PAGES OF PROBLEMS WITH THIS VEHICLE, RANGING FROM SEAT BELT LATCHES, REAR SEAT LATCHES, HATCH LATCH AND DEFROSTER, QUARTER PANEL PAINT DEFECT AND RUST, FAN SPEED AND EFFECTIVENESS. THIS LATEST INCIDENT AND THE THROTTLE BODY ISSUES ARE THE MOST SERIOUS. TONIGHT FORD INFORMED ME THERE IS NO FORD COMPLAINT FORM ONLINE. I WAS ADAMANT THAT A FORD ENGINEER NEEDS TO CALL ME SO I CAN DISCUSS ALL THE ISSUES WITH THIS VEHICLE. TRADE IN VALUE ON THIS VEHICLE HAS PROBABLY PLUMMETED DUE TO ALL THE ISSUES. THIS VEHICLE WAS PAID OFF IN 3 YEARS AND I AM NOT IN A POSITION TO BUY A NEW VEHICLE BUT I HOPE IT WILL NOT BE THE DEATH OF ME. IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC SAFETY I HOPE THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE RESOLVED. AFTER ALL THE ISSUES WITH THIS ESCAPE I WONDER HOW MANY CAR "ACCIDENTS" ARE REALLY "ACCIDENTS". THANK YOU FOR REVIEWING THIS DATA. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10763259
77,000 miles · Sep 9, 2015
EngineVehicle Speed Control
ON AUGUST 31, 2015 I WAS LEAVING AN AIRPORT AND ACCELERATING TO MERGE ONTO A HIGHWAY. I BELIEVE I WAS CLOSE TO 60MPH WHEN I FELT SOMETHING IN MY CAR CHANGE. ALL OF THE ELECTRONICS WERE STILL WORKING, SO I KNEW IT WAS NOT AN ISSUE WITH MY BATTERY. THE WRENCH LIGHT APPEARED AND I REALIZED I WAS NO LONGER ABLE TO ACCELERATE. I IMM…
Read full complaint
ON AUGUST 31, 2015 I WAS LEAVING AN AIRPORT AND ACCELERATING TO MERGE ONTO A HIGHWAY. I BELIEVE I WAS CLOSE TO 60MPH WHEN I FELT SOMETHING IN MY CAR CHANGE. ALL OF THE ELECTRONICS WERE STILL WORKING, SO I KNEW IT WAS NOT AN ISSUE WITH MY BATTERY. THE WRENCH LIGHT APPEARED AND I REALIZED I WAS NO LONGER ABLE TO ACCELERATE. I IMMEDIATELY GOT OVER TO THE RIGHT LANE AND BY THIS TIME MY SPEED HAD DROPPED TO 40MPH. I WAS ABLE TO SAFELY PULL OVER AND PUT MY CAR INTO PARK. THE RPMS SPIKED AND I TURNED MY CAR OFF. AFTER WAITING A MINUTE OR SO I WAS ABLE TO RESTART MY CAR WITH NO PROBLEM. I GOT BACK ONTO THE HIGHWAY AND TOOK MY EXIT. MAYBE 5-7 MILES FROM THE LOCATION OF THE FIRST INCIDENT, I WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40MPH DOWN A 2-LANE STREET WHEN THE SAME THING HAPPENED. THIS TIME BOTH THE WRENCH LIGHT AND THE ENGINE LIGHT WERE ON. ONCE AGAIN I PULLED OVER, PUT MY CAR INTO PARK, THE RPM'S SPIKED HIGHER THIS TIME. I SHUT MY CAR OFF. I WAS AGAIN ABLE TO RESTART MY CAR RIGHT AWAY WITH NO PROBLEM. IN THE 9 DAYS SINCE THIS HAPPENED I HAVEN'T EXPERIENCED THIS PROBLEM AGAIN. I AM EXTREMELY NERVOUS MY ENGINE WILL SHUT OFF ON A HIGHWAY AGAIN, IN A LOCATION WHERE I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PULL OVER SAFELY. WHEN I CALLED FORD THEY SAID MY WARRANTY COVERS THE THROTTLE BODY, SO THEY HAVE SCHEDULED THE THROTTLE BODY REPAIR FOR SEPTEMBER 11, 2015. THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM, AND I THINK FORD NEEDS TO ADDRESS THIS FOR THE SAFETY OF ALL DRIVERS.
NHTSA ODI #10762684
68,000 miles · Sep 9, 2015
EngineVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING MY TOOL LIGHT CAME ON AND CAR LOST POWER. PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED OFF CAR. RESTARTED CAR AND LIGHT WAS OFF THEN CAR DROVE FINE. TOOK MY CAR INTO BICKFORD FFORD AND WAS TOLD THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING BECAUSE THE LIGHT WASN'T ON SO THEY CAN'T GET A CODE. HOW AM I SUPPOSE TO GET GET THE EXTENDED WARRAN…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING MY TOOL LIGHT CAME ON AND CAR LOST POWER. PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED OFF CAR. RESTARTED CAR AND LIGHT WAS OFF THEN CAR DROVE FINE. TOOK MY CAR INTO BICKFORD FFORD AND WAS TOLD THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING BECAUSE THE LIGHT WASN'T ON SO THEY CAN'T GET A CODE. HOW AM I SUPPOSE TO GET GET THE EXTENDED WARRANTY ON THROTTLE BODY ISSUES IF THE LIGHT GOES AWAY WHEN THE CAR IS TURNED OFF? I CAN'T DRIVE THE CAR WHEN THIS HAPPENS SO HOW AM I SUPPOSE TO GET THIS COVERED BY FORD? I'M SUPPOSE TO DRIVE MY CAR WITH UNSAFE CONDITIONS UNTIL IT PERMANENTLY BREAKS DOWN? SEEMS LIKE A SCAM.
NHTSA ODI #10762529
60,000 miles · Sep 9, 2015
Power TrainUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed Control
I PULLED OUT OF MY STREET ON TO A MAIN ROAD AND WITH NO WARNING MY ESCAPE SHUT OFF COMPLETELY WHILE DRIVING AND MULTIPLE CARS ALMOST HIT ME BECAUSE IT WAS SO UNEXPECTED. NOW MY CAR RANDOMLY SHUTS OFF AND GOES INTO LIMP MODE, CAUSING IT TO BE QUITE DANGEROUS TO DRIVE MY VEHICLE BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU NO WARNING.
NHTSA ODI #10762499
114,494 miles · Aug 29, 2015
Power TrainUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed Control
TELL US WHAT HAPPENED: WAS COMPLETELY STOPPED AND TOOK OFF SLIGHTLY PRESSING THE GAS PEDAL AND IT FELT LIKE IT TRIED TO STALL OUT AND THEN LUNGED FORWARD. THE SERVICE WRENCH CAME ON AND WE STOPPED AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF THEN STARTED IT AGAIN AND THAT TIME BOTH SERVICE WRENCH AND SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. WENT IN TO GET …
Read full complaint
TELL US WHAT HAPPENED: WAS COMPLETELY STOPPED AND TOOK OFF SLIGHTLY PRESSING THE GAS PEDAL AND IT FELT LIKE IT TRIED TO STALL OUT AND THEN LUNGED FORWARD. THE SERVICE WRENCH CAME ON AND WE STOPPED AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF THEN STARTED IT AGAIN AND THAT TIME BOTH SERVICE WRENCH AND SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. WENT IN TO GET THE ENGINE LIGHT TESTED AND THE RESULT WAS THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL AND THROTTLE BODY RANGE, CODE P2119
NHTSA ODI #10760189
114,494 miles · Aug 29, 2015
Power TrainUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed Control
WAS COMPLETELY STOPPED AND TOOK OFF SLIGHTLY PRESSING THE GAS PEDDLE AND IT FELT LIKE IT TRIED TO STALL OUT AND THEN LUNGED FORWARD. THE SERVICE WRENCH CAME ON AND WE STOPPED AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF THEN STARTED IT AGAIN AND THAT TIME BOTH SERVICE WRENCH AND SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. WENT IN TO GET THE ENGINE LIGHT TESTE…
Read full complaint
WAS COMPLETELY STOPPED AND TOOK OFF SLIGHTLY PRESSING THE GAS PEDDLE AND IT FELT LIKE IT TRIED TO STALL OUT AND THEN LUNGED FORWARD. THE SERVICE WRENCH CAME ON AND WE STOPPED AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF THEN STARTED IT AGAIN AND THAT TIME BOTH SERVICE WRENCH AND SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. WENT IN TO GET THE ENGINE LIGHT TESTED AND THE RESULT WAS THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL AND THROTTLE BODY RANGE, CODE P2119
NHTSA ODI #10760188
61,000 miles · Aug 15, 2015
Vehicle Speed Control
I HAD MY ESCAPE IN FOR THE RECALL TO HAVE THE THROTTLE BODY UPDATED IN 8/6/2014. AT THE TIME OF THE RECALL I HAD NOT HAD ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE THROTTLE. 1 YEAR LATER WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY I LOST ACCELERATION, MY CRUISE WENT OFF AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, PULLED OVER AND STARTED IT UP AGAIN,NO WRENCH LIGHT. HAPPENS A…
Read full complaint
I HAD MY ESCAPE IN FOR THE RECALL TO HAVE THE THROTTLE BODY UPDATED IN 8/6/2014. AT THE TIME OF THE RECALL I HAD NOT HAD ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE THROTTLE. 1 YEAR LATER WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY I LOST ACCELERATION, MY CRUISE WENT OFF AND THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON, PULLED OVER AND STARTED IT UP AGAIN,NO WRENCH LIGHT. HAPPENS AGAIN. ALSO WHEN I SLOW DOWN AND STOP FOR LIGHTS, STOP SIGN THE RPMS GO UP AND DOWN LIKE IT'S GOING TO KILL. MADE APPOINTMENT TO HAVE IT CHECKED, OF COURSE I WILL GET STUCK PAYING FOR IT BUT WILL FIGHT TILL MY DYING DAY. FORD GET YOUR [XXX] TOGETHER AND FIX THIS ISSUE. AS SOON AS I CAN I WILL SELL AND NOT BUY ANOTHER FORD PRODUCT FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE. SOCIAL NETWORK HERE I COME. I WILL HOLLER AT THE TOPS OF MY LUNGS SO EVERY ONE HEARS HOW FORD SUCKS. I WILL UPDATE AFTER THE APPOINTMENT WITH THE FORD DEALERSHIP!!! INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10748885
150,000 miles · Jul 28, 2015
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
WE LOST POWER FROM OUR GAS PEDAL. THEN IT GOT HOT. THEN IT WOULD NOT MOVE.
NHTSA ODI #10744468
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.