NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Electrical System complaints
116 reportsClear category filter253,877 miles · Oct 19, 2023
Electrical SystemSteering
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated while driving 50 MPH, the vehicle power steering and the A/C intermittently became inoperable. The battery warning light was illuminated. The vehicle had not been diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated while driving 50 MPH, the vehicle power steering and the A/C intermittently became inoperable. The battery warning light was illuminated. The vehicle had not been diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and determined that the VIN was not included in a recall. The failure mileage was approximately 253,877.
NHTSA ODI #11550883
131,000 miles · Oct 13, 2023
Electrical SystemPower Train
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated when the vehicle was parked the key was inserted into the ignition approximately five times before the vehicle started. Additionally, the contact stated on three occasions while driving at various speeds the steering wheel became stiff. The vehicle was steered to the side o…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated when the vehicle was parked the key was inserted into the ignition approximately five times before the vehicle started. Additionally, the contact stated on three occasions while driving at various speeds the steering wheel became stiff. The vehicle was steered to the side of the road and restarted. The vehicle was taken to a independent dealer where it was diagnosed that the ignition cylinder switch and torque sensor needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 131,000. .
NHTSA ODI #11549751
Mileage unknown · Jun 4, 2023
Electrical System
The power steering keeps going out and the car becomes almost impossible to control. I have to turn the car off and on several times for it to work again. I am scared to drive it because I do not want to wreck. No warnings it just goes out. This has happened on numerous occasions. I noticed recalls on this for the same reason on…
Read full complaint
The power steering keeps going out and the car becomes almost impossible to control. I have to turn the car off and on several times for it to work again. I am scared to drive it because I do not want to wreck. No warnings it just goes out. This has happened on numerous occasions. I noticed recalls on this for the same reason on the same vehicle. Why does my car not have the same recall?
NHTSA ODI #11525308
Mileage unknown · Apr 15, 2023
Electrical SystemEngineUnknown Or Other
Discovered my car has electric power steering not seeing a reservoir did some research and seen that there were a lot of 2011 Ford Escapes with safety recalls three being the main problems I've had with my car since I began financing it almost 4 years ago my last payment is in 2 weeks. Went to leave a driveway and within a few s…
Read full complaint
Discovered my car has electric power steering not seeing a reservoir did some research and seen that there were a lot of 2011 Ford Escapes with safety recalls three being the main problems I've had with my car since I began financing it almost 4 years ago my last payment is in 2 weeks. Went to leave a driveway and within a few seconds my steering wheel locked up and I thought it was strange that's when I found out I have electric power steering and that there has been recalls turned the car off turn to back on and it was just fine. Found out that is a common thing although it may not be considered a safety recall just yet but I would believe it is a major problem because anytime in my life if I was to believe my power steering was failing me I would still have control over the wheel but this thing locks up as if I ain't going nowhere. I seen that there has been recalls for fuel systems front wheel bearings and electric power steering. My engine light has been on for a very long time and people say it's because of the O2 sensor causing a misfire to appear random. My front wheels kind of knock making me think it could be between the rack axle and bearing. Other than that my radio face button stopped working one day as if they were possessed until they completely shut off and I have no access to it besides the steering wheel components. Rear wiper stuck in the up position one day was causing a tick I could hear with no power and no key in the ignition that caused my battery to die several times 2 years in a row. Realized unplugging my rear wiper made it quit but I can't use my front washer fluid without it being unplugged. And my AC Open Air Max AC and heating cooling climate control buttons work but the blower only works on high making me think yet another electrical issue being the blower speed regulator is bad. I would say these are safety issues package together. This website says I have 0unrepaired recalls. Might try fix it with a torque sensor/calling dealership.
NHTSA ODI #11517205
143,000 miles · Apr 4, 2023
Electrical SystemSteering
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated that while driving at low speeds, the power steering functionality failed to remain operational. The steering wheel failed to turn with the wheels. The steering wheel was shaking. The steering wheel failed to turn. There was an unknown sound detected outside the vehicle. Th…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated that while driving at low speeds, the power steering functionality failed to remain operational. The steering wheel failed to turn with the wheels. The steering wheel was shaking. The steering wheel failed to turn. There was an unknown sound detected outside the vehicle. The tire warning light was illuminated. The navigation system was dimmed and not responding. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic who informed the contact about a recall. The contact called the local dealer, but the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not contacted. The failure mileage was approximately 143,000.
NHTSA ODI #11515443
Mileage unknown · Oct 10, 2022
Electrical SystemSteering
My steering got heavy and hard to turn. Loss of power steering. I had a diagnostic done and my Torque sensor in my steering is bad. I know there is already a recall on the 2011 Ford Escape, but my Vin number wasn't on the list. Thank you
NHTSA ODI #11488602
Mileage unknown · Oct 8, 2022
Electrical SystemStructure
I AM A 79 YEAR OLD DISABLED MAN WHEN I STOPPED AT TH SPOKANE VA HOSPITAL THE DRIVER'S DOOR WOULD NOT UNLOCK. I TRIED EVERYTHING I COULD AND COULD NOT UNLOCK THE DOOR.TO GET OUT.EVEN THE KEY IS ONLY AN ELECTRIC SWITCH THERE IS NO MECHANICAL WAY TO OPEN THE DOOR. IF I HAD BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT AND THE CAR WAS ON FIRE I WOULD HAVE DI…
Read full complaint
I AM A 79 YEAR OLD DISABLED MAN WHEN I STOPPED AT TH SPOKANE VA HOSPITAL THE DRIVER'S DOOR WOULD NOT UNLOCK. I TRIED EVERYTHING I COULD AND COULD NOT UNLOCK THE DOOR.TO GET OUT.EVEN THE KEY IS ONLY AN ELECTRIC SWITCH THERE IS NO MECHANICAL WAY TO OPEN THE DOOR. IF I HAD BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT AND THE CAR WAS ON FIRE I WOULD HAVE DIED. AS IS I HAD AN EXTREMELY DIFICULT TIME CLIMBING OUT OF THE CAR. I DROVE TO A FORD DEALER TO SEE IF THEY COULD FIX IT BUT THEY TOLD ME IT WOULD BE TWO OR MORE WEEKS BEFORE THEY COULD HELP ME. I ASKED THEM IF I HAD TO STAY IN THAT CAR FOR ALL THAT TIME.
NHTSA ODI #11488445
Mileage unknown · Aug 23, 2022
Electrical SystemSteering
The electric power steering failed several times while driving. Have to turn off and on the get it working again. It fails without warning while driving. Informed dealer and they stated don’t worry about it that it is not on recall. It is very dangerous to drive and happens without warning. This vehicle needs a recall to be able…
Read full complaint
The electric power steering failed several times while driving. Have to turn off and on the get it working again. It fails without warning while driving. Informed dealer and they stated don’t worry about it that it is not on recall. It is very dangerous to drive and happens without warning. This vehicle needs a recall to be able to fix this serious dangerous situation. I have to drive with kids in the car. This is a serious hazard to me and others. Other cars of this type and year has had recalls to fix the very same problem. Thank you
NHTSA ODI #11480872
Mileage unknown · Feb 23, 2022
Electrical SystemSteering
When driving, the power steering goes out and you are not able to steer the car. It is very noticeable when I am making a right or left hand turn. You have to turn the steer wheel manually (a lot different from manual steering in older cars). When this happens, I put the car in neutral, turn the car off, restart the car, and …
Read full complaint
When driving, the power steering goes out and you are not able to steer the car. It is very noticeable when I am making a right or left hand turn. You have to turn the steer wheel manually (a lot different from manual steering in older cars). When this happens, I put the car in neutral, turn the car off, restart the car, and put it back in drive. This temporarily fixes the problem. Very difficult to turn the wheel. It is extremely stressful and difficult to control the car at that point. I have not been in an accident yet and no bodily harm has been caused; however, I am hoping it doesn't ever happen. I was told by Ford that this is the Electric Power Steering Gear. There was a recall for Ford Escape 2011 and my VIN is not included. It should be as I am experiencing the same problems. There is no warning before this happens. It just happens and you cannot prepare for it. I would truly appreciate to be included in the recall as I do have a 2011 Ford Escape and I am experiencing the same problems/issues the other cars did that were included in the recall. As this was purchased as a used car, I was not aware of the possible recall and this problem. The date below only indicates the most current incident.
NHTSA ODI #11453624
147,000 miles · Dec 1, 2020
Electrical SystemService BrakesVehicle Speed ControlInjury
THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER STARTED BY FLASHING ALL LIGHTS TO STAYING ON. THEN THE SPEED CONTROLS, SPEEDOMETER, RPM GAUGE, AND HEAT SENSOR WOULD NOT WORK. ON TOP OF ALL THIS. THE BRAKES BEGAN TO MAKE A CLICKING NOISE WHEN THIS ISSUE WOULD HAPPEN AND THE BRAKES WOULD ACT ROUGH. NO MECHANIC COULD FIGURE OUT THE PROBLEM UNTIL IT WAS TO …
Read full complaint
THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER STARTED BY FLASHING ALL LIGHTS TO STAYING ON. THEN THE SPEED CONTROLS, SPEEDOMETER, RPM GAUGE, AND HEAT SENSOR WOULD NOT WORK. ON TOP OF ALL THIS. THE BRAKES BEGAN TO MAKE A CLICKING NOISE WHEN THIS ISSUE WOULD HAPPEN AND THE BRAKES WOULD ACT ROUGH. NO MECHANIC COULD FIGURE OUT THE PROBLEM UNTIL IT WAS TO LATE. THIS NEEDS TO BE BETTER KNOWN AND BETTER MANAGED.
NHTSA ODI #11377241
Official recalls
2Oct 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.
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.
Illustration