← New search

2010 Ford Escape

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Escape years

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

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,764 reports with mileage · 305 unknown

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

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

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

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

29 crash reports3 fire reports19 injury reports

What owners actually said

2,069 reports
60,000 miles · Jul 4, 2013
StructureVehicle Speed ControlCrash

2010 FORD ESCAPE BOUGHT NEW AND TAKEN BACK TO DEALERSHIP AS THE VEHICLE JUMPS FORWARD. DEALERSHIP COULD NOT FIND PROBLEM. WITHIN LAST TWO WEEKS VEHICLE IS LOSING GAS PEDAL POWER WHILE DRIVING. THE VEHICLE DOES NOT STALL. IF YOU APPLY THE GAS THE VEHICLE JUMPS FORWARD. THE COMPUTER CODE IS P2112. VEHICLE WAS SURGING FORWARD…

Read full complaint

2010 FORD ESCAPE BOUGHT NEW AND TAKEN BACK TO DEALERSHIP AS THE VEHICLE JUMPS FORWARD. DEALERSHIP COULD NOT FIND PROBLEM. WITHIN LAST TWO WEEKS VEHICLE IS LOSING GAS PEDAL POWER WHILE DRIVING. THE VEHICLE DOES NOT STALL. IF YOU APPLY THE GAS THE VEHICLE JUMPS FORWARD. THE COMPUTER CODE IS P2112. VEHICLE WAS SURGING FORWARD WHEN A DOG RAN ACROSS THE ROAD. COULDN'T CONTROL VEHICLE. VERY BUSY ROAD AND TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE WAY. BUMPER HAD TO BE REPAIRED AND CAR IS STILL LOSING POWER AND SURGING WHEN YOU APPLY GAS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523207

48,000 miles · Jul 4, 2013
Power Train

THE CAR STALLED IN AN INTERSECTION. NO LIGHT OR WARNING, JUST INSTANTLY STOPPED. CALLED THE DEALER, HE SAID NO LIGHT, NO CODE, NO IDEA. AFTER MULTIPLE MORE TIMES, IT FINALLY DID IT AND ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. IT INDICATED A BAD THROTTLE BODY. TOOK IT TO THE DEALER. HE CALLED A DAY LATER AND SAID PART WOULD NOT BE IN FOR OVER A MON…

Read full complaint

THE CAR STALLED IN AN INTERSECTION. NO LIGHT OR WARNING, JUST INSTANTLY STOPPED. CALLED THE DEALER, HE SAID NO LIGHT, NO CODE, NO IDEA. AFTER MULTIPLE MORE TIMES, IT FINALLY DID IT AND ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. IT INDICATED A BAD THROTTLE BODY. TOOK IT TO THE DEALER. HE CALLED A DAY LATER AND SAID PART WOULD NOT BE IN FOR OVER A MONTH. ALTHOUGH THE VEHICLE IS STILL UNDER EMISSIONS AND DRIVE TRAIN WARRANTY, APPARENTLY THE THROTTLE BODY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EITHER. I FEEL FORD SHOULD RECALL, PAY FOR REPAIR AND COMPENSATE IF PART IS UNAVAILABLE FOR OVER A MONTH. THERE IS NOT MUCH INCENTIVE TO PURCHASE NEW AS THIS IS THE NEWEST VEHICLE I OWN. CURRENTLY RELYING ON 15 YEAR OLD TRUCK TO GET TO WORK. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523184

23,000 miles · Jul 4, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

I MADE A LEFT TURN FROM A STOP LIGHT AND THE CAR SEEMED TO BE ACCELERATING AND SHIFTING BUT SUDDENLY JUST STARTED "CHUGGING" AND BECOME VERY DIFFICULT TO STEER, ALMOST AS IF THE BRAKE WERE ON. I GOT AS CLOSE TO THE EDGE OF THE ROAD AS I COULD AND TURNED THE CAR OFF. I LOOKED UP THE SYMBOL (WRENCH) IN THE MANUAL AND IT SAID "PO…

Read full complaint

I MADE A LEFT TURN FROM A STOP LIGHT AND THE CAR SEEMED TO BE ACCELERATING AND SHIFTING BUT SUDDENLY JUST STARTED "CHUGGING" AND BECOME VERY DIFFICULT TO STEER, ALMOST AS IF THE BRAKE WERE ON. I GOT AS CLOSE TO THE EDGE OF THE ROAD AS I COULD AND TURNED THE CAR OFF. I LOOKED UP THE SYMBOL (WRENCH) IN THE MANUAL AND IT SAID "POWERTRAIN FAULT" CALL YOUR AUTHORIZED DEALER. IT WAS TERRIFYING BEING STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET IN THE DARK! I HAD MY HAZARD FLASHERS ON AND WHEN I CALLED MY SON HE ASKED IF I COULD START THE CAR AND GET OFF THE STREET. IT DID START UP AND I WAS ABLE TO MOVE IT ABOUT A 100 FEET BEFORE IT STARTED "CHOKING UP" AGAIN. I WAITED A FEW MINUTES AND DID THAT AGAIN AND WAS ABLE TO GET IT INTO A PARKING LOT AND OFF THE STREET. MY CAR WAS TOWED TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP AND WHEN I CALLED THEM THE NEXT DAY THEY INFORMED ME THAT IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY AND THAT PART IS ON BACK ORDER AND IT MAY BE A COUPLE OF WEEKS. MY WARRANTY EXPIRED IN MAY AT THE THREE YEAR POINT. FORD SAID IT IS NOT UNDER WARRANTY AND WILL BE ABOUT $400 TO REPAIR; THEY WILL NOT PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION AND MY INSURANCE WON'T COVER A RENTAL UNLESS I AM IN A COLLISION. IRONICALLY, HAD I TURNED LEFT WHEN I LEFT THE DRUGSTORE I WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE MAIN STREET IN TOWN AND BETWEEN A STRIP SHOPPING CENTER AND THE MALL AND PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN IN A WRECK! FROM WHAT THE SERVICE MAN TOLD ME THIS IS A PROBLEM THEY ARE AWARE OF, BUT THROUGH NO FAULT OF MY OWN, I HAVE TO FIX THE PROBLEM AND COVER THE COST OF A RENTAL FOR POSSIBLY SEVERAL WEEKS BECAUSE THEY CANNOT KEEP THE PART IN STOCK. INSULT AND INJURY! I AM SINGLE AND DO NOT HAVE ANYONE TO CHAUFFEUR ME. MY SON PICKS ME UP AT WORK, I DROP HIM OFF AND KEEP HIS TRUCK SO I CAN SHOP OR GO TO EAT AND I PICK HIM UP IN THE MORNING. PLEASE INVESTIGATE THIS BEFORE SOMEONE IS SERIOUSLY INJURED, AS I COULD HAVE BEEN!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523181

75,000 miles · Jul 4, 2013
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

WHILE DRIVING OUR ESCAPE, YOU TRY TO ACCELERATE AND THERE IS NOTHING THERE. YOU CAN PUSH THE GAS PEDAL TO THE FLOOR AND THE ENGINE DOES NOT RESPOND. THIS HAS HAPPENED 4 TIMES IN ABOUT 6 DAY PERIOD. WE HAVE HAD TO PULL OUR VEHICLE TO SIDE OF THE ROAD/HIGHWAY AND SHUT IT OFF AND THEN RESTART IT. IT DOES STARTS WORKING AGAIN BUT WE…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING OUR ESCAPE, YOU TRY TO ACCELERATE AND THERE IS NOTHING THERE. YOU CAN PUSH THE GAS PEDAL TO THE FLOOR AND THE ENGINE DOES NOT RESPOND. THIS HAS HAPPENED 4 TIMES IN ABOUT 6 DAY PERIOD. WE HAVE HAD TO PULL OUR VEHICLE TO SIDE OF THE ROAD/HIGHWAY AND SHUT IT OFF AND THEN RESTART IT. IT DOES STARTS WORKING AGAIN BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. WE TOOK IT TO HARROLD ZEIGLERS IN KALAMAZOO MICHIGAN, AND THEY TOLD US IT WAS A ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY AND THERE WAS 8013 OF THEM ON BACK ORDER AND NO ETA ON WHEN THEY WILL BE IN. I CALLED FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY TOLD ME THE SAME STORY.[XXX], AND [XXX] WERE THE FIRST TO AGENTS I SPOKE WITH. I TOLD THEM THAT THEIR ANSWERS WERE NOT GOOD ENOUGH AND I WANTED TO SPEAK TO THEIR MANAGER. HE CALLED ME BACK 2 HOURS LATER(TERRY BADGE#62889) AND HE TOLD ME THEY WERE ALREADY AWARE OF THIS ISSUE AND THEY COULD NOT HELP ME BECAUSE I HAD TOO MANY MILES ON MY ESCAPE(75000) WHICH I TOLD HIM I WANTED TO SPEAK TO HIS SUPERVISOR. HE TOLD ME HIS BOSS WOULD GIVE ME THE SAME ANSWER. I ASKED HIM IF THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY SAFETY COMMISSION WAS AWARE OF THIS ISSUE AND HE SAID THEY WERE AND THAT MY ISSUE AND CONVERSATION WOULD ALSO BE REPORTED. I AM NOT SURE WHY THERE IS NOT A RECALL FOR THIS ISSUE AS THERE ARE CURRENTLY 8013 ON BACK ORDER. I WONDER HOW MANY HAVE ALREADY BEEN REPLACED. THIS ISSUE COULD CAUSE A SERIOUS ACCIDENT FOR SOMEONE ELSE OR MY WIFE AS SHE IS THE DRIVER OF OUR ESCAPE. WE ARE CURRENTLY WITHOUT A VEHICLE TO DRIVE BECAUSE OF THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523163

36,400 miles · Jul 4, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING ALONG AND ALL OF A SUDDEN MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE WENT FROM AROUND 35 MPH ON A BUSY ROAD TO A ROUGH IDLE. THE ENGINE WAS STILL RUNNING BUT WOULD NOT RESPOND TO PRESSING ON THE GAS PEDAL, IT JUST STAYED RUNNING ON A ROUGH IDLE. I CONTINUED ON AT 3 MILES AN HOUR WAVING CARS TO PASS ME UNTIL I FOUND A SAFE PLACE TO PULL O…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ALONG AND ALL OF A SUDDEN MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE WENT FROM AROUND 35 MPH ON A BUSY ROAD TO A ROUGH IDLE. THE ENGINE WAS STILL RUNNING BUT WOULD NOT RESPOND TO PRESSING ON THE GAS PEDAL, IT JUST STAYED RUNNING ON A ROUGH IDLE. I CONTINUED ON AT 3 MILES AN HOUR WAVING CARS TO PASS ME UNTIL I FOUND A SAFE PLACE TO PULL OVER. I WAITED 20 MINUTES BEFORE STARTING THE VEHICLE AND IT THEN RAN NORMALLY. SO I WENT ON AND ABOUT 5 MILES FURTHER IT DID IT AGAIN. I HAD TO PULL OVER AND I RESTATED THE ENGINE IN JUST A FEW MINUTES AGAIN. IT DID IT AGAIN AND AGAIN SOMETIMES I WOULD ONLY NEED TO SHUT IT OFF FOR A SECOND. I TOOK IT INTO THE FORD DEALER AND THEY CHARGED ME $125.00 FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST TO TELL ME IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY (FORD WOULD NOT COVER THE TEST). THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE PART IN STOCK AND TOLD ME IT WAS ON BACK ORDER AS THE FORD CHICAGO WAREHOUSE WAS OUT OF THEM. THE FORD SERVICE WRITER ALSO TOLD ME THEY HAVE REPLACED A NUMBER OF THEM SINCE HIS HIRING JUST THREE MONTHS PRIOR. HE FIRST TOLD ME A DIRTY AIR FILTER CAUSED THE PART TO FAIL, WHEN I EXPLAINED TO HIM I KNOW WHAT A DIRT AIR FILTER IS AND I DON'T HAVE ONE. THEN HE SAID IT WAS BECAUSE I DIDN'T DRIVE MY CAR ENOUGH AND THERE WAS CARBON BUILDUP CAUSING IT. SO I ASKED HIM IF FORD WAS SAYING THEY DON'T BUILD A GOOD ENOUGH ENGINE. HE ADMITTED HE WAS JUST READING THE PRINT OUT. THEY WOULDN'T HONOR MY POWER-TRAIN WARRANTY OF 5 YEARS OR 50,000 MILES. I WROTE A LETTER AND PERSONALLY DELIVERED IT TO THE FORD DEALER AND NO ONE HAS BOTHERED TO CONTACT ME AND IT'S BEEN EIGHT DAYS NOW. THE MECHANIC ACTUALLY TRIED TO SELL ME TIRES AND GAVE ME BOGUS REASONS WHY THE BACK TWO NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AND THE BACK TO HAVE 7/32 LEFT ACCORDING TO A REAL TIRE STORE'S SALESMAN AND ARE ALMOST LIKE NEW. I HAVE BEEN A LOYAL FORD MAN ALL MY LIFE. I MAY NEVER BUY ANOTHER FORD AND IT WILL NOT BE FROM THIS DEALERSHIP IF I DO! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523156

60,000 miles · Jul 3, 2013
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train

I WAS DRIVING ON I35 E IN LEWISVILLE, TX WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY STOPPED ACCELERATING, I HAD BEEN TRAVELING AT APPROX 40 MPH IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. THE VEHICLE/ENGINE WAS STILL ON BUT I COULD NOT CONTINUE FORWARD. I EXITED THE HIGHWAY AND GLIDED INTO A PARKING LOT ( AFTER NEARLING BEING KILLED BY A LARGE TRUCK ON THE SERVICE RO…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ON I35 E IN LEWISVILLE, TX WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY STOPPED ACCELERATING, I HAD BEEN TRAVELING AT APPROX 40 MPH IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. THE VEHICLE/ENGINE WAS STILL ON BUT I COULD NOT CONTINUE FORWARD. I EXITED THE HIGHWAY AND GLIDED INTO A PARKING LOT ( AFTER NEARLING BEING KILLED BY A LARGE TRUCK ON THE SERVICE ROAD) THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AS WELL AS THE ENGINE LIGHT. I PULLED INTO A PARKING SPACE AND THE VEHICLE STARTED TO VIOLENTLY SHAKE. I PUT IN PARK AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF. I WAITED A FEW MINUTES AND STARTED THE VEHICLE WITH NO ISSUES. THE VEHICLE IDLED FINE AND I COULD REV UP THE ENGINE. I DROVE AROUND THE PARKING LOT WITH NO ISSUES HOWEVER THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS STILL ON. I TRIED GOING ONTO A RESIDENTIAL STREET AND WHEN I ACCELERATED ABOVE 20MPH THE VEHICLE WOULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE AND HAD TO PULL OVER AND HAD THE SAME BEFORE MENTIONED RESULTS. I CALLED A TOW TRUCK AND HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED. I CALLED A LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP AND I WAS ADVISED IT WAS MOST LIKELY AN ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY ISSUE AND THEY HAVE THEM COME IN ALL THE TIME. THIS NEEDS TO BE RECALLED IMMEDIATELY AS THIS VERY WELL COULD HAVE CAUSE A MAJOR ACCIDENT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523128

70,000 miles · Jul 3, 2013
Power Train

GETTING ONTO THE EXPRESSWAY AT ABOUT 55MPH WHEN THE CARS ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. SHORTLY AFTER THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON THE CAR THUDDED FORWARD AND LOST POWER. VERY SCARY, EASILY COULD HAVE CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. WE WERE ABLE TO START THE CAR IMMEDIATELY AFTER AND START GOING BUT THE CAR WOULDN'T MAKE IT A MILE BEFORE LOSING POWER AG…

Read full complaint

GETTING ONTO THE EXPRESSWAY AT ABOUT 55MPH WHEN THE CARS ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. SHORTLY AFTER THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON THE CAR THUDDED FORWARD AND LOST POWER. VERY SCARY, EASILY COULD HAVE CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. WE WERE ABLE TO START THE CAR IMMEDIATELY AFTER AND START GOING BUT THE CAR WOULDN'T MAKE IT A MILE BEFORE LOSING POWER AGAIN. NEXT DAY TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP TO FIND THE PART WAS ON BACK ORDER AND IT MAY BE WEEKS BEFORE THE DEALER CAN GET IT IN. A COUPLE WEEKS AND $525 LATER WE ARE NOT HAPPY CAMPERS. THIS SHOULD BE A SAFETY RECALL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523084

40,000 miles · Jul 3, 2013
Power Train

FORD ESCAPE APPROX 40,000 MILES. TRAVELING 50 MPH WHEN CAR LOST ALL ACCELERATION POWER. ENGINE STILL RUNNING, HAD TO COAST OFF OF THE HIGHWAY. DASH BOARD EMBLEM WAS THE WRENCH - REFERRED TO OWNERS MANUAL WHICH INDICATED A PROBLEM WITH THE POWER TRAIN OR THROTTLE. TURNED ENGINE OFF, RESTARTED THE CAR AND SUCCESFULLY TRAVELED …

Read full complaint

FORD ESCAPE APPROX 40,000 MILES. TRAVELING 50 MPH WHEN CAR LOST ALL ACCELERATION POWER. ENGINE STILL RUNNING, HAD TO COAST OFF OF THE HIGHWAY. DASH BOARD EMBLEM WAS THE WRENCH - REFERRED TO OWNERS MANUAL WHICH INDICATED A PROBLEM WITH THE POWER TRAIN OR THROTTLE. TURNED ENGINE OFF, RESTARTED THE CAR AND SUCCESFULLY TRAVELED THE 6 MILES TO MY HOUSE. SAME EVENING ATTEMPTED TO DRIVE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP - 10 MILES AWAY....GOT 1 MILE DOWN THE HIGHWAY, CAR LURCHED, ACCELERATION LOST, ENGINE STILL RUNNING, COASTED TO SIDE OF ROAD, TURNED OF IGNITION, RESTARTED AND SUCCESSFULLY DROVE THE MILE BACK TO MY HOUSE. HAD CAR TOWED ON THE FOLLOWING DAY. ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY REPLACED....UNDER EXTENDED WARRANTY WITH $200 DEDUCTIBLE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523083

83,000 miles · Jul 3, 2013
Engine

MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE STALLED ON ME AROUND MAY 5TH, 2013. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER AND RESTART IT AFTER A COUPLE MINUTES. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON WHEN THIS HAPPENED, BUT WENT AWAY WHEN I RESTARTED ENGINE. I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 20 MPH AT THE TIME. ON MAY 13TH, 2013 IT HAPPENED AGAIN TWICE. AFTER THE SECOND TIME I TOOK IT STRAIG…

Read full complaint

MY 2010 FORD ESCAPE STALLED ON ME AROUND MAY 5TH, 2013. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER AND RESTART IT AFTER A COUPLE MINUTES. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON WHEN THIS HAPPENED, BUT WENT AWAY WHEN I RESTARTED ENGINE. I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 20 MPH AT THE TIME. ON MAY 13TH, 2013 IT HAPPENED AGAIN TWICE. AFTER THE SECOND TIME I TOOK IT STRAIGHT TO THE FORD DEALERSHIP. THEY RAN THE COMPUTER TEST ON IT AND COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING WRONG. THEY CHARGED ME $40. THEY TOLD ME UNLESS THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON, THEY PROBABLY WOULDN'T FIND ANYTHING. IF IT DIED AND WOULDN'T RESTART, THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO FIND SOMETHING THEN ALSO. THEY SAID IT WILL COST ME $40 EACH TIME I BROUGHT IT BACK TO HAVE IT CHECKED. SINCE THEN IT HAS STALLED ON ME ABOUT FOUR MORE TIME, MOST RECENTLY 7/3/2013. EACH TIME HAS BEEN CITY DRIVING NOT ABOVE 30MPH. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT DID NOT COME ON THESE TIMES. I HAVE BEEN AVOIDING DRIVING IT MUCH BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEM. IT CONSTANTLY SURGES WHEN DRIVING AND SOMETIMES JERKS WHEN FIRST TAKING OFF FROM A START. WHEN AT A STOP LIGHT OR EVEN IN PARK WITH THE MOTOR RUNNING THE RPMS CONSTANTLY GO UP AND DOWN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523075

56,500 miles · Jul 3, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE BEGAN SPUTTERING AND THEN WOULD NOT ACCELERATE AND WOULD BARELY MOVE WHEN PUSHING THE GAS PEDAL. IT WAS DIAGNOSED INITIALLY AS THE THROTTLE ACTUATOR STUCK OPEN. IT WAS CLEANED. I DROVE IT AND LESS THAN 24 HOURS LATER IT LOST ACCELERATION ON A MAJOR HIGHWAY AT A TRAVELING SPEED OF 65 MPH. I HAD TO PULL O…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE BEGAN SPUTTERING AND THEN WOULD NOT ACCELERATE AND WOULD BARELY MOVE WHEN PUSHING THE GAS PEDAL. IT WAS DIAGNOSED INITIALLY AS THE THROTTLE ACTUATOR STUCK OPEN. IT WAS CLEANED. I DROVE IT AND LESS THAN 24 HOURS LATER IT LOST ACCELERATION ON A MAJOR HIGHWAY AT A TRAVELING SPEED OF 65 MPH. I HAD TO PULL OVER 3 TIMES AND RESTART IT TO GET IT TO A CAR REPAIR PLACE. I ENDED UP HAVING TO HAVE IT TOWED TO A FORD DEALERSHIP WHERE THEY REPLACED THE THROTTLE ACTUATOR MOTOR. THE DIAGNOSTIC CODE WAS P2111. I ASKED FOR THE OLD PART AND IT DID NOT LOOK WORN OR DAMAGED. THE REPEATED LOSS OF ACCELERATION ON A MAJOR HIGHWAY DURING MORNING RUSH HOUR CREATED A GREAT RISK TO MY SAFETY AND THOSE OF THE OTHER MOTORISTS AROUND ME. THE SERVICE MAN AT THE FORD DEALERSHIP ADVISED ME THEY WERE SEEING A NUMBER OF SIMILAR SITUATIONS INVOLVING THIS PART WITH FORD ESCAPES. THE TOTAL COST FOR BOTH SERVICE VISIT WAS $465.00. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10523023

Official recalls

3

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

Oct 26, 2016

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

Consequence & remedy

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

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

14V284000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System

May 29, 2014

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

Consequence & remedy

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

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

10V222000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission

May 24, 2010

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

Consequence & remedy

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

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

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

NHTSA investigations

4

DP15001 · Loss Of Power Steering While Driving

Opened Apr 1, 2015 · Closed Jun 14, 2018

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

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

PE13003 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction

Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Feb 28, 2014

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine

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

DP12006 · Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction

Opened Oct 2, 2012 · Closed Feb 21, 2013

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine

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

PE11016 · Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage

Opened Apr 27, 2011 · Closed Aug 18, 2011

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

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

Additional source detail variants (5)

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate

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

Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:hinge And Attachments

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

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

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

Visibility

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

Visibility:glass, Side/rear

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

Go deeper into Ford Escape problems