NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
248 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Feb 7, 2026
Electrical SystemEngineSteering
I purchased this vehicle on 10/16/25 through Affordable Auto Sales 692 Pleasant St Fall River Ma as it is a buy here pay here. It had 97,626 miles on it day of purchase. I noticed trouble with power steering as it is electric and kept locking up and asked several times to fix it. It didn't get repaired until the week before Chr…
Read full complaint
I purchased this vehicle on 10/16/25 through Affordable Auto Sales 692 Pleasant St Fall River Ma as it is a buy here pay here. It had 97,626 miles on it day of purchase. I noticed trouble with power steering as it is electric and kept locking up and asked several times to fix it. It didn't get repaired until the week before Christmas. On 1-10-26, took it for first oil change and it had 100,837 miles in total I put 3,211 miles on it. The mechanic called me into the garage and showed me 3 things that were critically wrong with the vehicle. It had severe rot in front and rear, mostly rear, the transmission had a significant leak, and the power steering was still not properly fixed. The mechanic informed me that the dealership had not done their safety inspection and this was deemed an unsafe vehicle and I should not be driving it. I brought it to the attention of Affordable Auto sales and they are accusing me of the damage. The owner Lucy Sousa also changed the mileage on the paperwork saying I put 20,000 on itinerary 2 months time. She changed it to 82,294 which is false. I have my inspection report to show accurate mileage. I no longer have this vehicle. I returned it to them. I bought another vehicle from a different dealer.
NHTSA ODI #11716452
134,499 miles · Jul 1, 2024
Electrical SystemEngine
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle shuddered and jerked, with the check engine warning light illuminated. The contact also stated that while attempting to accelerate, the vehicle lost motive power. The vehicle was diagnosed by Roadside Assistance as a failur…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle shuddered and jerked, with the check engine warning light illuminated. The contact also stated that while attempting to accelerate, the vehicle lost motive power. The vehicle was diagnosed by Roadside Assistance as a failure with the alternator. The vehicle was towed to an independent mechanic to be diagnosed as it was confirmed that the alternator had failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired but the failure persisted. The dealer was not contacted; however, the vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 134,499.
NHTSA ODI #11598015
14,000 miles · May 10, 2024
EngineEngine And Engine CoolingSteering
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated that while his daughter was driving at an undisclosed speed, the power steering failed to work as needed. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer. The vehicle was diagnosed with EGR valve failure. The contact was informed that the steering co…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated that while his daughter was driving at an undisclosed speed, the power steering failed to work as needed. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer. The vehicle was diagnosed with EGR valve failure. The contact was informed that the steering column needed to be replaced. The contacted stated that the check engine warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact related the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 14V284000 (Steering). The dealer confirmed that the vehicle was not included the recall. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and confirmed that the vehicle was not included in the recall, and a case was opened. The failure mileage was approximately 140,000.
NHTSA ODI #11588106
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
Mileage unknown · Aug 25, 2022
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
Back in June, I took my vehicle to have it checked out. When I accelerate, the SUV would feel like it was dragging something under the tires and riding very rough and bumpy, actually the vehicle was shaking while driving, then it would stop when I slow down. Even when I turn off the engine for a few hours and then drive it, its…
Read full complaint
Back in June, I took my vehicle to have it checked out. When I accelerate, the SUV would feel like it was dragging something under the tires and riding very rough and bumpy, actually the vehicle was shaking while driving, then it would stop when I slow down. Even when I turn off the engine for a few hours and then drive it, its fine. No warning lights on dashboard. Fred Beans replaced spark plugs, changed filters, cleaned throttle body, oil change. Now it 's doing the same thing. If I am idle in park with AC on for a few minutes, it does it. Sometimes after I fill it with fuel, it does it. As far as I am know, they never checked the fuel pump. SUV shakes for about 2 minutes then stops. It feels as though I am getting a flat in all tires.
NHTSA ODI #11481211
Mileage unknown · Aug 6, 2022
EnginePower TrainSteering
When I turn at slows down and stalls. Nearly cuts off
NHTSA ODI #11477892
150,000 miles · Jul 26, 2022
EngineFire
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated while driving at 50 MPH, he heard abnormal knocking sounds coming from the engine. The oil pressure warning light was illuminated. The contact pulled to the nearby gas station where an independent mechanic inspected the vehicle and informed the contact that the engine had t…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2011 Ford Escape. The contact stated while driving at 50 MPH, he heard abnormal knocking sounds coming from the engine. The oil pressure warning light was illuminated. The contact pulled to the nearby gas station where an independent mechanic inspected the vehicle and informed the contact that the engine had thrown a rod and there were metal shavings in the engine oil. The contact stated the failure increased significantly while driving at 50 MPH. The contact veered to the side of the road and unlocked the doors. Another driver informed the contact that there there was a fire underneath the vehicle. The contact was able to extinguish the fire with a fire extinguisher. There were no injuries sustained. The contact stated upon towing the vehicle there was a significant amount of oil leaked from the oil pan onto the tow truck vehicle. The vehicle was towed to the dealer who diagnosed that the engine blew up and had shattered. The dealer diagnosed that the engine needed to be replaced and additional repairs needed to be completed. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and a case was opened. The failure mileage was approximately 151,000.
NHTSA ODI #11475998
Mileage unknown · Jun 24, 2022
EngineSteeringWheelsCrash
got rear ended/t-boned in january 2022 at low rate of speed, started having issues for the first time since 2011, check engine light comes on periodically since the accident, power steering has gone in and out periodically since the accident, engine seems to stumble periodically since March 2022, AC has never worked since 2011, …
Read full complaint
got rear ended/t-boned in january 2022 at low rate of speed, started having issues for the first time since 2011, check engine light comes on periodically since the accident, power steering has gone in and out periodically since the accident, engine seems to stumble periodically since March 2022, AC has never worked since 2011, recently (june 3rd 2022) the tire pressure sensor light has come on despite air pressure being adequate in all 4 tires, took car to a collision specialist and they repaired cosmetic damages but cleared 3 codes and did not repair/resolve any of the actual issues affecting drivability and safety because they could not attribute it to the mechanism of accident, took the print out of codes in to my normal mechanic when I got the tires and oil changed June 3rd 2022 and he said if there were no active codes I would have to take it to the dealership, yesterday June 24th 2022 while waiting for a light to change the car pedals suddenly stopped working, car stayed idling at a stop while still in drive, would not work even when shifted into park, drive, or reverse, air still blowed, music still playing, a horrid smell started to fill the car, turned everything completely off and turned hazards on and waited for 2 minutes then turned the car back, car resumed working with tire pressure light still on and smell still coming out of engine. Car now smells constantly of putrid burning plastic/carpet and stumbles frequently, had the car stumbled while at a high rate of speed during rush hour, both mine, my infant son, and the other drivers lives' could've been devastated or lost. These are the codes they reset at time of incident/repair 1) ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM: C1963-20 - STABILITY CONTROL INHIBIT WARNING 2) ACCESORY PROTOCOL INTERFACE MODULE: U3000-04 -CONTROL MODULE - SYSTEM INTERNAL FAILURES 3) POWER STEERING CONTROL MODULE: B2278-2F - STEERING SHAFT TORQUE SENSOR MALFUNCTION
NHTSA ODI #11470865
128,000 miles · Oct 13, 2020
EnginePower Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2011 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING UP HILL AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE SHUT-OFF WITH THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE CONTACT HAD TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER, THE CAMSHAFT SENSOR, AND OIL DELIVER…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2011 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING UP HILL AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE SHUT-OFF WITH THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE CONTACT HAD TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER, THE CAMSHAFT SENSOR, AND OIL DELIVERY SENSOR WERE REPLACED ON SEPARATE OCCASIONS. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO REACH THE MANUFACTURER BUT WAS UNABLE TO REACH A REPRESENTATIVE. THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 128,000.
NHTSA ODI #11364127
115,000 miles · Feb 14, 2020
Engine
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2011 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHECK FUEL FILL INLET MESSAGE WAS DISPLAYED. THE OIL WARNING LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED. CAPITOL CITY FORD 8623 E WASHINGTON ST, INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46219 317) 898-0700, WAS CONTACTED AND INFORMED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTU…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2011 FORD ESCAPE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHECK FUEL FILL INLET MESSAGE WAS DISPLAYED. THE OIL WARNING LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED. CAPITOL CITY FORD 8623 E WASHINGTON ST, INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46219 317) 898-0700, WAS CONTACTED AND INFORMED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND INFORMED OF THE FAILURE HOWEVER, NO ASSISTANCE WAS PROVIDED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 115,000.
NHTSA ODI #11309147
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