NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
2,069 reports41,000 miles · Sep 10, 2013
Power Train
WHILE DRIVING MY MOTHERS 2010 FORD ESCAPE, IT SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER AND CAME TO ALMOST A COMPLETE STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS ONLY ABLE TO CREEP ALONG, BARELY ALLOWING ME TO PULL OFF THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THANKFULLY, NO ONE WAS BEHIND ME, OTHERWISE THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A SERIOUS ACCIDENT BECAUSE AS I SAID, IT CAME OUT OF NOWHERE AN…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING MY MOTHERS 2010 FORD ESCAPE, IT SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER AND CAME TO ALMOST A COMPLETE STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS ONLY ABLE TO CREEP ALONG, BARELY ALLOWING ME TO PULL OFF THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THANKFULLY, NO ONE WAS BEHIND ME, OTHERWISE THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A SERIOUS ACCIDENT BECAUSE AS I SAID, IT CAME OUT OF NOWHERE AND BROUGHT THE VEHICLE FROM 35MPH DOWN TO 2 MPH IN A MATTER OF SECONDS. THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON THE DASH, INDICATING A "THROTTLE CONTROL/POWERTRAIN" ISSUE. I SHUT THE CAR OFF, RESTARTED IT AND IT RAN FINE, HOWEVER, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. I CALLED MY MOTHER AND IT TURNS OUT THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO HER ON 3 PREVIOUS OCCASIONS, ONLY THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT NEVER CAME ON. I HAD THE CODES CHECKED, AND THAT INDICATED "THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL (TAC) SYSTEM - ACTUATOR STUCK OPEN". I DID A LITTLE RESEARCH AND IT TURNS OUT THAT THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM AND THE ONLY WAY TO RESOLVE IT IS TO REPLACE THE THROTTLE BODY. I FOUND RECALLS FROM FORD FOR THROTTLE ISSUES, BUT NOT THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE, APPARENTLY THEY DON'T CONSIDER IT A SAFETY ISSUE. WELL LET ME TELL YOU, IT ABSOLUTELY IS A SAFETY ISSUE. IF I HAD BEEN OUT ON THE MAIN ROAD DOING 55 AND THIS HAPPENED WITH SOMEONE BEHIND ME, THEY WOULD HAVE SLAMMED RIGHT INTO ME BECAUSE THERE IS NO WARNING. I'M REPLACING THE THROTTLE BODY TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE BUT FORD REALLY NEEDS TO ISSUE A RECALL, IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE SOMEONE GETS HURT, IT'S NOT JUST COINCIDENCE THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO SO MANY PEOPLE, THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A DEFECTIVE PART. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542879
61,478 miles · Sep 10, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE, WOULD MISS FIRE AND STOP RUNNING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542878
90,000 miles · Sep 10, 2013
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING AT 20 MILES AN HOUR WHEN SUDDENLY THE TOOL LIGHT CAME ON AND MY FORD NO LONGER WOULD GET GAS FROM THE GAS PEDAL. I WAS SUDDENLY COASTING WITHOUT ABILITY TO GIVE GAS TO THE CAR HOWEVER THE ENGINE WAS STILL RUNNING. IT CAME TO A STOP AFTER I WAS ABLE TO GET OUT OF HIGH TRAFFIC AREA ALMOST GETTING HIT BY OTHER CARS. T…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING AT 20 MILES AN HOUR WHEN SUDDENLY THE TOOL LIGHT CAME ON AND MY FORD NO LONGER WOULD GET GAS FROM THE GAS PEDAL. I WAS SUDDENLY COASTING WITHOUT ABILITY TO GIVE GAS TO THE CAR HOWEVER THE ENGINE WAS STILL RUNNING. IT CAME TO A STOP AFTER I WAS ABLE TO GET OUT OF HIGH TRAFFIC AREA ALMOST GETTING HIT BY OTHER CARS. THERE IS NO WARNING IT HAPPENED SUDDENLY. SHUT OFF CAR TURNED BACK ON AND WAS FINE. ON THE 9TH OF SEPT JUST A COUPLE DAYS LATER THIS CONTINUED TO HAPPEN A TOTAL OF THREE TIMES ALMOST CAUSING A SEVERE ACCIDENT--SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS AS IT HAS BEEN REPORTED TOO MANY TIMES AS BEING A ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY FAILURE AND IT IS A DEFECT. I AM HAVING TO PAY FOR THE REPAIRS AT THE FORD DEALER TOMORROW AS I HAD IT TESTED TODAY AND HOOKED UP TO DIAGNOSTICS AND THERE WAS NOTHING THAT GAVE WARNINGS. I WAS TOLD TO TAKE TO THE DEALER IT MUST BE ELECTRICAL PROBLEM. ALSO THE RPM'S WERE GOING CRAZY WHEN THIS HAPPENED EACH TIME. THE AGENCY NEEDS TO HAVE IT SO IT IS RECALLED ITEM SO THIS WOULDN'T BE COMING DIRECTLY OUT OF THE CONSUMERS POCKET--IT IS OBVIOUSLY A DEFECT IN THE FORD 2010 ESCAPE--I WANT A REFUND!!! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542791
Mileage unknown · Sep 9, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH AND WENT TO ACCELERATE, BUT WHEN I HIT THE GAS THE CAR STALLED AND I HAD TO PULL TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND RESTART THE CAR. THE VEHICLE DID THIS 4 TIMES IN THE NEXT THREE DAYS. SOMETIMES IT WOULD HAPPEN AT HIGHER SPEED AND SOMETIMES IT WOULD HAPPEN WHEN I WAS JUST GETTING GOING. IT TURNS OUT …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH AND WENT TO ACCELERATE, BUT WHEN I HIT THE GAS THE CAR STALLED AND I HAD TO PULL TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND RESTART THE CAR. THE VEHICLE DID THIS 4 TIMES IN THE NEXT THREE DAYS. SOMETIMES IT WOULD HAPPEN AT HIGHER SPEED AND SOMETIMES IT WOULD HAPPEN WHEN I WAS JUST GETTING GOING. IT TURNS OUT THAT I HAD A DEFECTIVE THROTTLE BODY WHICH IS APPARENTLY A COMMON PROBLEM IN FORD ESCAPES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542768
73,210 miles · Sep 9, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
DRIVING ABOUT 30MPH AND CAR SUDDENLY STOPS ACCELERATING AND WON'T GO, DOESN'T DIE BUT THE"THROTTLE CONTROL/POWERTRAIN" SYMBOL COMES ON. I SHUT CAR OFF AND RESTART AND PROCEED TO DRIVE AGAIN AND IT HAPPENS A 2ND TIME. I HAVE LEARNED THAT THIS IS HAPPENING IN THESE MODELS AND I THINK SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT IT! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542765
41,000 miles · Sep 9, 2013
Engine
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED AND LUNGED FORWARD ABNORMALLY. THE CONTACT DID NOT TAKE THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER OR A MECHANIC FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST. THE CONTACT CALLED THE DEALER AND THE DEALER STATED THE THROTTLE COULD BE AN ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2010 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED AND LUNGED FORWARD ABNORMALLY. THE CONTACT DID NOT TAKE THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER OR A MECHANIC FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST. THE CONTACT CALLED THE DEALER AND THE DEALER STATED THE THROTTLE COULD BE AN ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 41,000. UPDATED 11/15/13*CN
NHTSA ODI #10542729
48,277 miles · Sep 9, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
FOR THE 2ND TIME IN 2 1/2 WEEKS, MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE HAS STALLED ON ME. TODAY IT HAPPENED WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AND NEARLY CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. THANK GOD I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER TO THE SHOULDER, ALTHOUGH WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO ACCELERATE AT ALL NO MATTER HOW MUCH I PRESSED ON THE PEDAL. ONCE I GOT ON THE SHOULDER OF THE HI…
Read full complaint
FOR THE 2ND TIME IN 2 1/2 WEEKS, MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE HAS STALLED ON ME. TODAY IT HAPPENED WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AND NEARLY CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. THANK GOD I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER TO THE SHOULDER, ALTHOUGH WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO ACCELERATE AT ALL NO MATTER HOW MUCH I PRESSED ON THE PEDAL. ONCE I GOT ON THE SHOULDER OF THE HIGHWAY AND HIT THE BRAKE, MY CAR JERKED A LITTLE AND THEN SHUT OFF. THE FIRST OCCURRENCE HAPPENED 2 1/2 WEEKS AGO WHILE I WAS PULLING OUT OF A FAST FOOD DRIVE-THRU. AS I STARTED TO ACCELERATE, IT WOULD NOT GO ANYWHERE. I PUSHED THE PEDAL ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE FLOOR AND MY CAR WOULDN'T MOVE AT ALL. THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT STARTED JERKING AND FINALLY STALLED ON ME JUST AS IT DID TODAY. WHEN I RESTARTED MY CAR, IT TOOK A FEW SECONDS LONGER THAN USUAL. LAST WEEK I TOOK IT IN FOR AN OIL CHANGE TO MY MECHANIC AND EXPLAINED THE FIRST OCCURRENCE TO HIM. AFTER HE CHECKED IT OUT HE STATED THAT IT'S A THROTTLE BODY ISSUE WHICH WILL BE EXPENSIVE. SINCE THEN, I HAVE BEEN SEARCHING ONLINE TO SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS HAD THE SAME ISSUE WITH THEIR FORD ESCAPE AND AS EXPECTED, I FOUND TONS OF COMPLAINTS FROM OTHER FORD ESCAPE OWNERS THAT HAVE HAD THE SAME ISSUE. I CONTACTED THE DEALERSHIP TODAY WHERE I PURCHASED MY CAR AND THEY TOLD ME THAT IT WOULD COST $105 JUST TO RUN A DIAGNOSTIC. THEY ALSO STATED THAT THE EXTENDED WARRANTY THAT I PURCHASED WHEN I BOUGHT THE CAR DOES NOT COVER ANY EXPENSES TO GET THIS PROBLEM FIXED. ALTHOUGH THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY RECALLS ON ANY 2010 FORD ESCAPES THAT I COULD FIND ONLINE, I BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE A RECALL PLACED AS THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE. WITH SO MANY OTHER COMPLAINTS I'VE FOUND ONLINE, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW FORD HASN'T DONE A RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542643
34,000 miles · Sep 9, 2013
Power Train
THE INCIDENT FIRST HAPPENED ON SEP. 2 2013, WHEN I WAS ACCELERATING ON HIGHWAY RAMP. THE CAR SUDDENLY LOST PUSHING POWER AND THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON WHILE ENGINE WAS STILL RUNNING. I PULLED OVER AND TURNED OFF THE ENGINE THEN RESTARTED IT AND EVERYTHING BACK TO NORMAL. THE SAME ISSUE HAPPENED AGAIN WHEN I WAS ON MY WAY TO WO…
Read full complaint
THE INCIDENT FIRST HAPPENED ON SEP. 2 2013, WHEN I WAS ACCELERATING ON HIGHWAY RAMP. THE CAR SUDDENLY LOST PUSHING POWER AND THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON WHILE ENGINE WAS STILL RUNNING. I PULLED OVER AND TURNED OFF THE ENGINE THEN RESTARTED IT AND EVERYTHING BACK TO NORMAL. THE SAME ISSUE HAPPENED AGAIN WHEN I WAS ON MY WAY TO WORK ON SEP 6, WHILE I WAS ON THE LEFT LANE OF HIGHWAY 401 AND ACCELERATING TO ABOUT 60 MILES. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND BOOKED APPOINTMENT. TODAY (SEP 9) IT WAS ALMOST ACCIDENT ON MY WAY TO THE DEALERSHIP. I WAS MAKING A LEFT TURN IN AN LOCAL INTERSECTION, THE VEHICLE LOST THE POWER DURING ACCELERATING. THANK GOD I I WAS ABLE TO FINISH THE LEFT TURN WITH INERTIA. AFTER INVESTIGATION THE DEALER TOLD ME I HAVE TO PAY FROM MY POCKET TO REPLACE THE THROTTLE BODY. I ALSO COMPLIANT TO FORD CANADA. I THINK FORD SHOULD RECALL THIS ISSUE FOR SAFETY REASON. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542631
52,000 miles · Sep 9, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING ALONG & SUDDENLY LOST ALL THROTTLE. A WRENCH APPEARED ON MY INSTRUMENT PANEL & IT WAS RUNNING VERY ROUGH. I WAS ABLE TO IDLE OVER INTO A PARKING LOT, BUT HAD NO THROTTLE POWER. I SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF & JUST SAT THERE, THINKING ABOUT MY OPTIONS. I TRIED TO START IT & IT STARTED, SO I DROVE IT STRAIGHT TO A SHOP,…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ALONG & SUDDENLY LOST ALL THROTTLE. A WRENCH APPEARED ON MY INSTRUMENT PANEL & IT WAS RUNNING VERY ROUGH. I WAS ABLE TO IDLE OVER INTO A PARKING LOT, BUT HAD NO THROTTLE POWER. I SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF & JUST SAT THERE, THINKING ABOUT MY OPTIONS. I TRIED TO START IT & IT STARTED, SO I DROVE IT STRAIGHT TO A SHOP, WHERE THEY HOOKED IT UP TO THEIR DIAGNOSTIC MACHINE. THE WRENCH IN THE INSTRUMENT PANEL WAS NO LONGER THERE & THE VEHICLE DIDN'T THROW ANY CODES. THE MECHANIC TOLD ME TO DRIVE IT & CONTACT FORD THAT NEXT DAY. I CALLED THE FORD DEALER & WAS TOLD THERE ARE NO RECALLS ON THIS. SINCE JUNE, THIS HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES & IT FINALLY THREW A CODE IN WHICH THE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON, SO I HAD MY MECHANIC TAKE A LOOK AT IT. HE REMOVED THE THROTTLE BODY & CLEANED THE PLATES. IT SEEMED TO DO MUCH BETTER, UNTIL A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. IT'S STARTED IT AGAIN & IS NOW HAPPENING MUCH MORE FREQUENTLY. ON 08/27/2013, I WAS DRIVING ON A HIGHWAY IN THE PASSING LANE, GOING ABOUT 60 MPH WHEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN. I COULD HAVE BEEN REAR-ENDED! I WAS ABLE TO LIMP IT OVER TO THE SHOULDER, WHERE I SHUT IT OFF, WAITED, & THEN STARTED IT BACK UP AGAIN. IT HAPPENED THREE TIMES IN ABOUT A 15 MILE PERIOD ON 09/06/2013 & TWO TIMES ON 09/08/2013. ON 09/06/2013, I AGAIN CALLED THE LOCAL FORD DEALER & SPOKE TO SOMEONE IN PARTS. I WAS TOLD THE PART I NEEDED WAS RECALLED & WAS ALSO ON BACK ORDER (3,800 PARTS BEHIND). I CALLED BACK TO SPEAK TO SOMEONE IN THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT & WAS TOLD THE PARTS PERSON WAS WRONG, BECAUSE THE PART HAD NOT BEEN RECALLED, ALTHOUGH HE HAD THREE CARS THERE WAITING ON THE SAME PART FOR THE SAME EXACT PROBLEM. IF THIS IS A KNOWN CONSTANT PROBLEM, WHY HASN'T THERE BEEN A RECALL? SOMEONE IS GOING TO GET HURT IN A REAR-ENDER ACCIDENT & I HOPE IT'S NOT ME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10542586
60,400 miles · Sep 8, 2013
Engine
DRIVING HOME FROM A DAY TRIP W/ FRIENDS AND WHEN APPROACHING LIGHT, CAR STARTED BUCKING. WHEN THE GAS PETAL WAS PUSHED DOWN, THE VEHICLE ONLY WENT 20 MPH AND WAS QUICKLY DROPPING SPEED. THE RED WRENCH APPEARED ON THE DASH. WE PULLED OVER IN A NOT SO VERY NICE PART OF THIS PARTICULAR TOWN, SHUT OFF THE CAR. FORTUNATELY FOR US, TH…
Read full complaint
DRIVING HOME FROM A DAY TRIP W/ FRIENDS AND WHEN APPROACHING LIGHT, CAR STARTED BUCKING. WHEN THE GAS PETAL WAS PUSHED DOWN, THE VEHICLE ONLY WENT 20 MPH AND WAS QUICKLY DROPPING SPEED. THE RED WRENCH APPEARED ON THE DASH. WE PULLED OVER IN A NOT SO VERY NICE PART OF THIS PARTICULAR TOWN, SHUT OFF THE CAR. FORTUNATELY FOR US, THE VEHICLE STARTED AND WE GOT HOME. I HAVE A CALL TO THE DEALERSHIP WHO SOLD THE VEHICLE (USED) TO ME IN 2012. I AM HOPING TO HEAR FROM THEM TOMORROW. PRIOR TO THIS HAPPENING, I EXPLAINED TO THEM THAT THE VEHICLE SEEMED TO HESITATE MANY TIME WHILE DRIVING ; ONLY TO BE TOLD THEY COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING. I KNOW OF TWO FRIENDS WHO EXPERIENCED THIS PROBLEM AND THE DEALERSHIP REPAIR THIS FOR FREE. I AM HOPING THE SAME. IT SEEMS TO BE THOUGH, THAT THIS IS A RECALL ISSUE. IMAGINE IF I WOULD HAVE BEEN TRAVELING AT HIGH SPEEDS AND A BIG MAC TRUCK WAS BEHIND US. I WOULDN'T BE WRITING THIS TODAY. THANK YOU. *LN
NHTSA ODI #10542518
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.