← New search

2011 Ford Escape

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2011 Ford Escape do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 996.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

1,061 reports with mileage · 255 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.

  • Steering. Review the 409 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 268 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Fuel/propulsion System. Review the 253 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

38 crash reports7 fire reports29 injury reports

Power Train complaints

268 reports
Clear category filter
34,000 miles · Oct 29, 2013
EnginePower Train

ABOUT 12:30 PM OCTOBER 17TH I WAS ATTEMPTING TO PULL OUT OF A PARKING LOT ONTO THE FEEDER ROAD OF A FREEWAY. AS I STEPPED ON THE GAS TO PULL OUT, I GOT A SURGE AND THEN MY CAR STALLED LEAVING ME STRANDED ON THE SIDE OF A BUSY ROAD. THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND WHILE MY CAR STILL HAD POWER, IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. MY VEHICLE …

Read full complaint

ABOUT 12:30 PM OCTOBER 17TH I WAS ATTEMPTING TO PULL OUT OF A PARKING LOT ONTO THE FEEDER ROAD OF A FREEWAY. AS I STEPPED ON THE GAS TO PULL OUT, I GOT A SURGE AND THEN MY CAR STALLED LEAVING ME STRANDED ON THE SIDE OF A BUSY ROAD. THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND WHILE MY CAR STILL HAD POWER, IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. MY VEHICLE WAS ALMOST HIT 3 TIMES BY DRIVERS WHO WERE NOT PAYING ATTENTION. AFTER ABOUT 10 MINUTES I WAS ABLE TO GET THE CAR RESTARTED AND I DROVE TO MY DESTINATION. ABOUT 7:30 AM ON OCTOBER 22 THIS HAPPENED AGAIN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AS I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE STREET GOING 20 MILES AN HOUR. WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON. OCTOBER 28TH ABOUT 11:00 AM, I WAS DOING 40 MPH DOWN A TWO LANE ROAD AND THE CAR DID NOT SURGE, BUT I DID LOSE ALL ACCELERATION AND HAD TO STOP AND TURN MY CAR OFF AND WAIT ABOUT 5-10 MINUTES TO RESTART. THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON. OCTOBER 29TH ABOUT 12:30 PM, I WAS MAKING A RIGHT HAND TURN ONTO A BUSY STREET AND THE CAR STALLED AND I HAD TO TURN OFF THE ENGINE. THE WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON. I RESTARTED THE CAR AND LESS THAN A MILE LATER IT HAPPENED AGAIN, BUT THIS TIME THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10550002

58,000 miles · Oct 25, 2013
Power Train

WHILE DRIVING ON I75 NORTH NEAR DAYTON, OH MY 2011 FORD ESCAPE ALL OF A SUDDEN LOST ALL ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. THE RPM'S DROPPED DOWN TO 0 AND THE POWER TRAIN/TRANSMISSION LIGHT CAME ON. THERE WAS NO ABILITY TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN BRAKE AND GET OFF THE HIGHWAY. I WAS TRAVELING AT 70MPH ON A BUSY HIGHWAY AT THE TIME. ON THE S…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING ON I75 NORTH NEAR DAYTON, OH MY 2011 FORD ESCAPE ALL OF A SUDDEN LOST ALL ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. THE RPM'S DROPPED DOWN TO 0 AND THE POWER TRAIN/TRANSMISSION LIGHT CAME ON. THERE WAS NO ABILITY TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN BRAKE AND GET OFF THE HIGHWAY. I WAS TRAVELING AT 70MPH ON A BUSY HIGHWAY AT THE TIME. ON THE SHOULDER I SHUT OFF THE CAR, AND RESTARTED IT. EVERYTHING SEEMED NORMAL. I NEEDED TO GET BACK TO TOLEDO, OH. ABOUT 30 MILES LATER THE CAR DID THE SAME THING AS BEFORE. ONCE AGAIN, I WAS FORTUNATELY ON A SECTION OF I75 WITH A SHOULDER. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER AND SHUT OFF THE VEHICLE AND RESTART. I WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT THE REST OF THE WAY ON THE TRIP. IF THIS INCIDENT HAD HAPPENED IN AN AREA WITH NO SHOULDER, IN CONSTRUCTION, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHWAY WITH NO WAY TO GET TO THE SHOULDER, ON A HILL.....ETC THE RESULTS COULD HAVE BEEN DISASTROUS. THE FORD DEALER DETERMINED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY HAD FAILED. ONCE AGAIN, THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A TERRIBLE ACCIDENT UNDER DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES. TO LOSE ALL POWER ON THE HIGHWAY TRAVELING 70MPH IN BUSY TRAFFIC IS A SAFETY ISSUE. THIS PART SHOULD BE RECALLED AND REMOVED FROM OTHER VEHICLES BEFORE SOMEONE SUFFERS A TERRIBLE ACCIDENT DUE TO THIS FAILURE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10549596

59,800 miles · Oct 23, 2013
Power Train

JUST LEFT HIGHWAY SITTING AT RED LIGHT. LIGHT TURNED GREEN AND PROCEEDED TO GO WHEN A TOOL LIGHT THAT LOOKS LIKE A WRENCH LIT UP ON THE DASH. CAR WOULD NOT GO JUST COASTED ALONG. I WAS ABLE TO SLOWLY COAST THE CAR OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AFTER I TURNED MY HAZARD LIGHTS ON TO ALERT THE OTHER DRIVERS THAT I WAS HAVING PROBLEM…

Read full complaint

JUST LEFT HIGHWAY SITTING AT RED LIGHT. LIGHT TURNED GREEN AND PROCEEDED TO GO WHEN A TOOL LIGHT THAT LOOKS LIKE A WRENCH LIT UP ON THE DASH. CAR WOULD NOT GO JUST COASTED ALONG. I WAS ABLE TO SLOWLY COAST THE CAR OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AFTER I TURNED MY HAZARD LIGHTS ON TO ALERT THE OTHER DRIVERS THAT I WAS HAVING PROBLEMS. I PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND TURNED THE CAR OFF. I WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE CAR AND CONTINUE TO DRIVE TO MY DESTINATION. I CALLED THE FORD SERVICE DEPARTMENT THAT I TAKE MY VEHICLE TO AND WAS TOLD THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CAR NEEDS A NEW THROTTLE BODY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10549045

99,066 miles · Oct 23, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE INTERSTATE AT APROX. 65MPH MY CAR LOST ALL SPEED AND QUIT RESPONDING TO THE GAS PEDAL. I WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT TO THE SIDE OF THE INTERSTATE. MY CAR WAS STILL RUNNING (ROUGH) SO I TURNED IT OFF. AFTER SEVERAL MIN I TRIED TO RESTART THE CAR (PER MY MECHANIC KNOWLEDGE) AND IT STARTED RIGHT UP. I DROVE TO THE N…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE INTERSTATE AT APROX. 65MPH MY CAR LOST ALL SPEED AND QUIT RESPONDING TO THE GAS PEDAL. I WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT TO THE SIDE OF THE INTERSTATE. MY CAR WAS STILL RUNNING (ROUGH) SO I TURNED IT OFF. AFTER SEVERAL MIN I TRIED TO RESTART THE CAR (PER MY MECHANIC KNOWLEDGE) AND IT STARTED RIGHT UP. I DROVE TO THE NEAREST FORD DEALER AND AFTER THEY INSPECTED MY CAR WAS TOLD I NEEDED A THROTTLE BODY. SO NEEDLESS TO SAY $461 LATER MY CAR IS FIXED BUT REALLY ANNOYED THAT 9000 MILES OUT OF WARRANTY THINGS ARE ALREADY FALLING APART. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10549032

45,000 miles · Oct 22, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

WAS DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH AND ALL OF A SUDDEN MY VEHICLE WOULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE. LUCKILY I WAS ABLE TO SAFELY PULL OVER AND ONCE I CAME TO A STOP I NOTICED MY VEHICLE WAS IDLING ROUGH AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO THE THROTTLE AND NOTICED THE LIGHT WITH A WRENCH WAS ALSO ON. I TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF AND WAS ABLE TO…

Read full complaint

WAS DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH AND ALL OF A SUDDEN MY VEHICLE WOULD NO LONGER ACCELERATE. LUCKILY I WAS ABLE TO SAFELY PULL OVER AND ONCE I CAME TO A STOP I NOTICED MY VEHICLE WAS IDLING ROUGH AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO THE THROTTLE AND NOTICED THE LIGHT WITH A WRENCH WAS ALSO ON. I TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF AND WAS ABLE TO START IT BACK UP AND MAKE IT HOME AND AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH THIS SEEMS TO BE A VERY COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE FORD ESCAPE. WILL BE TAKING TO A DEALER TO SEE WHAT THEY CAN DO. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10548998

54,000 miles · Oct 21, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

I WAS DRIVING DOWN I-80 AT 65 MPH AND ALL OF A SUDDEN I HAD NO POWER WITH MY GAS PEDAL AND MY ENGINE LIGHT (WRENCH) CAME ON. MY CAR WAS STILL RUNNING, BUT WHEN I PRESSED THE GAS PEDAL IT DID NOTHING. I PULLED OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND CALLED FOR ROAD ASSISTANCE. SITTING THERE MY RPM'S WAS AROUND 1,000 AND MY CAR WOULD S…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING DOWN I-80 AT 65 MPH AND ALL OF A SUDDEN I HAD NO POWER WITH MY GAS PEDAL AND MY ENGINE LIGHT (WRENCH) CAME ON. MY CAR WAS STILL RUNNING, BUT WHEN I PRESSED THE GAS PEDAL IT DID NOTHING. I PULLED OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND CALLED FOR ROAD ASSISTANCE. SITTING THERE MY RPM'S WAS AROUND 1,000 AND MY CAR WOULD SHAKE. WHILE WAITING FOR A TOW TRUCK, I SHUT MY CAR OFF AND THEN STARTED IT AGAIN. WHEN I PRESSED ON THE GAS IT STARTED TO GO AGAIN. HOWEVER, WHEN I TRIED TO GET BACK ON THE INTERSTATE I HAD NO POWER AGAIN AND MY ENGINE LIGHT CAME BACK ON. I HAD MY CAR TOWED TO A FORD DEALERSHIP AND THEY CHECKED IT AND THEY SAID THAT THE THROTTLE BODY WAS THE PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10548758

45,000 miles · Oct 18, 2013
Power Train

TRAVELING AT A SPEED OF AROUND 50MPH AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR JUMPED AND LOST POWER. WHEN I PUSHED THE GAS PEDAL, THERE WAS NOTHING AND EVEN THE TACHOMETER WOULD NOT MOVE. WAS ABLE TO COAST INTO A PARKING LOT AND TURN CAR OFF. AFTER A FEW MINUTES, THE CAR CRANKED AND ALL DASHBOARD LIGHTS WENT CRAZY. WAS ABLE TO CONTINUE HOME,…

Read full complaint

TRAVELING AT A SPEED OF AROUND 50MPH AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR JUMPED AND LOST POWER. WHEN I PUSHED THE GAS PEDAL, THERE WAS NOTHING AND EVEN THE TACHOMETER WOULD NOT MOVE. WAS ABLE TO COAST INTO A PARKING LOT AND TURN CAR OFF. AFTER A FEW MINUTES, THE CAR CRANKED AND ALL DASHBOARD LIGHTS WENT CRAZY. WAS ABLE TO CONTINUE HOME, BUT CAR WAS RUNNING VERY SLUGGISH. THANK GOODNESS I WAS ON A QUIET COUNTRY ROAD. HAD THIS OCCURRED ON A MORE HEAVILY TRAVELED ROAD, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY DANGEROUS CONSIDERING I HAD 6 AND 7 YEAR OLD GRANDCHILDREN IN MY CAR.DEALERSHIP DIAGNOSED AS THROTTLE BODY PROBLEM. EVEN THOUGH THE THROTTLE BODY IS PART OF THE POWER TRAIN, IT IS NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY??A $800 REPAIR AT 45K MILES IS NOT SOMETHING YOU LOOK FORWARD TO. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10548417

40,000 miles · Oct 18, 2013
EnginePower Train

TODAY ON NEARBY INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, SUDDENLY MY THROTTLE PEDAL ACTED USELESS WITH NO POWER, ENGINE IDLED DOWN. THROTTLE PEDAL USELESS IN ANY POSITION. ENGINE OUTLINE LIGHT CAME ON AS WELL A OPEN END WRENCH. WRENCH WARNING LIGHT IN LISTED IN OWNERS MANUAL AS "THROTTLE CONTROL / POWERTRAIN FAULT, PLEASE CONTACT DEALER." I …

Read full complaint

TODAY ON NEARBY INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, SUDDENLY MY THROTTLE PEDAL ACTED USELESS WITH NO POWER, ENGINE IDLED DOWN. THROTTLE PEDAL USELESS IN ANY POSITION. ENGINE OUTLINE LIGHT CAME ON AS WELL A OPEN END WRENCH. WRENCH WARNING LIGHT IN LISTED IN OWNERS MANUAL AS "THROTTLE CONTROL / POWERTRAIN FAULT, PLEASE CONTACT DEALER." I CALLED THE FORD DEALER SERVICE DEPARTMENT, HE KNEW PRETTY QUICKLY THE DEFECT I WAS DESCRIBING. HE INFORMED ME THAT MY 2011 FORD ESCAPE IS A COUPLE THOUSAND MILES OVER THE 3YR 36,000 MILE WARRANTY. BUT HE ALSO SAID I MAY BE COVERED UNDER AN EXTENDED EMISSIONS WARRANTY. MY CAR IS JUST OVER 2 YEARS OLD. THIS IS A DANGEROUS DEFECT IN THE CAR WHICH IS DOCUMENTED AS BEING UNDER INVESTIGATION IN THESE NHTSA.GOV WEBSITES. PLEASE RAISE THE STATUS OF THIS DEFECT TO BE AN OFFICIAL RECALL BEFORE SOMEONE DIES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10548373

39,500 miles · Oct 17, 2013
Power Train

ON 9/23/13 I WAS DRIVING FROM HOUSTON TX TO HENDERSONVILLE NC. OUTSIDE MOBILE AL JUST BEFORE DUSK, IT FELT LIKE THE TRANSMISSION FELL OUT. I LEFT EXXON AFTER FUELING. AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT, ENGINE SUDDENLY GUSHED AND PAUSED. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. I APPLIED GAS, BUT ENGINE WOULDN'T RESPOND. PUT CAR IN PARK, …

Read full complaint

ON 9/23/13 I WAS DRIVING FROM HOUSTON TX TO HENDERSONVILLE NC. OUTSIDE MOBILE AL JUST BEFORE DUSK, IT FELT LIKE THE TRANSMISSION FELL OUT. I LEFT EXXON AFTER FUELING. AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT, ENGINE SUDDENLY GUSHED AND PAUSED. WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON. ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. I APPLIED GAS, BUT ENGINE WOULDN'T RESPOND. PUT CAR IN PARK, TURNED OFF ENGINE. TURNED BACK ON, WRENCH LIGHT GONE. CHECK ENGINE LIGHT STILL ON. DROVE ACROSS INTERSECTION, PULLED INTO PARKING LOT. CAR SEEMED FINE EXCEPT FOR CHECK ENGINE LIGHT. DROVE OUT, ENTERED FREEWAY, WENT ONE MILE, CAR REPEATED PROBLEM: SUDDENLY GUSHED, PAUSED, REGARDLESS OF AMOUNT OF PRESSURE TO GAS. WRENCH LIGHT ON. PULLED OFF FREEWAY, TURNED OFF CAR, TURNED BACK ON. CHECK ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED. DROVE ONE MORE MILE ON SIDE OF FREEWAY. NOW FULL DARK, NO OTHER PLACE FOR ME BUT EDGE OF ROAD OR DITCH. PULLED INTO TRUCK WEIGH STATION, CALLED FORD. FORD REPRESENTATIVE AND I DETERMINED CAR WAS DRIVABLE, SO DROVE TO MONTGOMERY AL, PLANNING TO VISIT FORD DEALER. NEXT MORNING WHEN I STARTED CAR, NO LIGHTS ON DASH. CONTINUED TRIP. THOUGHT IT WAS ISSUED WITH GAS CAPLESS SYSTEM, PERHAPS NOT COMPLETELY SEALED WHEN FINISHED GASSING. I DISCUSSED WITH FORD REP, HE SAID THERE HAD BEEN REPORTS SIMILAR, BUT HE DID NOT GO INTO DETAIL ABOUT THROTTLE BODY. IF HE HAD, I WOULD HAVE ACCEPTED HIS OFFER OF TOW IMMEDIATELY. NEVER WOULD I HAVE CONTINUED TO DRIVE, ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT (AND AS A WOMAN BY MYSELF). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10548340

71,540 miles · Oct 16, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower Train

AT HIGHWAY SPEED, VEHICLE'S 'MAINTENANCE REQUIRED' LIGHT CAME ON AND THE THROTTLE PEDAL BECAME UNRESPONSIVE. ENGINE HELD STEADY AT APPROX. 1000RPM. PULLED OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF. RESTARTED VEHICLE AND THROTTLE WAS RESPONSIVE AGAIN. THIS INCIDENT HAS OCCURRED AN ADDITIONAL THREE TIMES SINCE THE INI…

Read full complaint

AT HIGHWAY SPEED, VEHICLE'S 'MAINTENANCE REQUIRED' LIGHT CAME ON AND THE THROTTLE PEDAL BECAME UNRESPONSIVE. ENGINE HELD STEADY AT APPROX. 1000RPM. PULLED OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF. RESTARTED VEHICLE AND THROTTLE WAS RESPONSIVE AGAIN. THIS INCIDENT HAS OCCURRED AN ADDITIONAL THREE TIMES SINCE THE INITIAL OCCURRENCE. EACH TIME, TURNING THE VEHICLE OFF AND RESTARTING HAS TEMPORARILY FIXED THE PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10548075

Official recalls

2

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.

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