NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Power Train complaints
268 reportsClear category filter45,186 miles · Aug 29, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
WEDNESDAY AUGUST 28, 2013-I WAS GOING DOWN MY STREET HEADED TO WORK-I HAD JUST PULLED OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY. MAYBE GOING 15-20 MILES PER HOUR. THEN THE ESCAPE JOLTED FORWARD LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL AND SHUT OFF. IT DID NOT START BACK UP RIGHT AWAY LIKE IT IS SUPPOSED TO. THURSDAY AUGUST 29, 2013-JOLTED, STALLED, AND SHUT OFF 3 …
Read full complaint
WEDNESDAY AUGUST 28, 2013-I WAS GOING DOWN MY STREET HEADED TO WORK-I HAD JUST PULLED OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY. MAYBE GOING 15-20 MILES PER HOUR. THEN THE ESCAPE JOLTED FORWARD LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL AND SHUT OFF. IT DID NOT START BACK UP RIGHT AWAY LIKE IT IS SUPPOSED TO. THURSDAY AUGUST 29, 2013-JOLTED, STALLED, AND SHUT OFF 3 DIFFERENT TIMES TODAY. ONE OF THOSE TIMES, THE VEHICLE WAS ON THE HIGHWAY AND A SEMI TRUCK WAS COMING UP BEHIND ME AND ALMOST HIT ME! VERY SCARY!!! UNSAFE!! AS I HAVE BEEN RESEARCHING THIS PROBLEM, I HAVE NOTICED THAT THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THIS MAKE, MODEL, AND YEAR. IS IT GOING TO TAKE SOMEONE LOSING THEIR LIFE FOR SOMEONE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS PROBLEM?! FORD NEEDS TO STEP UP AND RIGHT THEIR WRONG AND QUIT IGNORING IT.
NHTSA ODI #10537979
65,000 miles · Aug 29, 2013
Power Train
STALLING AND SURGING WITHOUT WARNING WHILE I WAS IN HEAVY TRAFFIC. WARNING LIGHT CAME ON LOOKED LIKE A WRENCH. THIS HAPPENED THREE TIMES WAS ABLE TO GET INTO PARKING LOT AND HAD CAR TOWED TO FORD DEALER FOR REPAIR. DEALER INDICATED WAS THROTTLE AUTO BODY PROBLEM AND PARTS WILL NOT BE IN FOR 10 DAYS DUE TO A NATIONAL BACK ORDE…
Read full complaint
STALLING AND SURGING WITHOUT WARNING WHILE I WAS IN HEAVY TRAFFIC. WARNING LIGHT CAME ON LOOKED LIKE A WRENCH. THIS HAPPENED THREE TIMES WAS ABLE TO GET INTO PARKING LOT AND HAD CAR TOWED TO FORD DEALER FOR REPAIR. DEALER INDICATED WAS THROTTLE AUTO BODY PROBLEM AND PARTS WILL NOT BE IN FOR 10 DAYS DUE TO A NATIONAL BACK ORDER ON THE SAME PART (S). I HAVE TAKEN GREAT CARE OF THIS CAR AND WAS LIVID IT COULD HAVE SUCH A SERIOUS PROBLEM AT AGE 2 AND 65,000 MILES, OBVIOUS WIDE SPREAD PROBLEM WITH SAME MAKE/MODEL THROUGHOUT THE NATION DUE TO NATIONAL BACK ORDER. MY COMPLAINT IS THE DANGEROUS POSITION THE STALLING PUT ME IN DURING HEAVY TRAFFIC, DUE TO NATIONAL BACK ORDER I MUST RENT CAR TO GET TO WORK AT A COST OF $300 AND THE RESISTANCE OF FORD TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND DO A RECALL. I AM SURE SOMEONE HAS BEEN HARMED BY THIS FAULT AND FORD MUST RECTIFY THE PROBLEM, I WAS LUCKY.
NHTSA ODI #10537968
43,568 miles · Aug 27, 2013
EnginePower Train
ON AUGUST 21, 2013 DRIVER OF A 2011 FORD ESCAPE WAS ATTEMPTING TO TURN AND ACCELERATE THE VEHICLE FROM A STOPLIGHT WHEN THE CAR JERKED FORWARD AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE WITH ONCOMING TRAFFIC, AND WITH TRAFFIC MOVING BEHIND THE VEHICLE. THE DASHBOARD SHOWED A WRENCH LIGHT, AND DRIVE FOUND IT HARD TO STOP CAR AS IT WAS SPUTTERING A…
Read full complaint
ON AUGUST 21, 2013 DRIVER OF A 2011 FORD ESCAPE WAS ATTEMPTING TO TURN AND ACCELERATE THE VEHICLE FROM A STOPLIGHT WHEN THE CAR JERKED FORWARD AND WOULD NOT ACCELERATE WITH ONCOMING TRAFFIC, AND WITH TRAFFIC MOVING BEHIND THE VEHICLE. THE DASHBOARD SHOWED A WRENCH LIGHT, AND DRIVE FOUND IT HARD TO STOP CAR AS IT WAS SPUTTERING AND JERKING FORWARD. THE CAR WAS FINALLY MOVED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, SHUT OFF, AND RESTARTED, AND DRIVE THE 10 MILES HOME. OWNER TOOK CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THROTTLE BODY CODE WAS DISCOVERED. THIS PART IS NOT COVERED UNDER POWERTRAIN WARRANTY, THUS OWNER FIX COST IS $600.00. THIS IS A SAFETY CONCERN ON THE VEHICLE, WHEN IT GOES INTO SAFE MODE THERE IS NO WARNING AND CAN CAUSE AN ACCIDENT WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY DECELERATES TO UNDER 1000 RPM. I BELIEVE FORD SHOULD RECALL THE FAULTY THROTTLE BODY IN THE 2009-2011 MODELS AS THEY ARE SAFETY ISSUES FOR DRIVERS IN THE CAR AND OTHER DRIVERS ON THE ROAD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10537533
40,000 miles · Aug 27, 2013
Power Train
SINCE MY FIRST INCIDENT ON 7/24/13 THIS HAS NOW HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES. THE VEHICLE LOSES POWER AND THE GAS PEDAL DOES NOTHING. THE SMALL WRENCH ICON COMES ON. I IMMEDIATELY THOUGHT POWER TRAIN AND AFTER SOME BASIC RESEARCH SEE ALL OF THE DOCUMENTED ISSUES CONCERNING THE THROTTLE BODY. THESE ISSUES EXACTLY MATCH MINE. TODA…
Read full complaint
SINCE MY FIRST INCIDENT ON 7/24/13 THIS HAS NOW HAPPENED MULTIPLE TIMES. THE VEHICLE LOSES POWER AND THE GAS PEDAL DOES NOTHING. THE SMALL WRENCH ICON COMES ON. I IMMEDIATELY THOUGHT POWER TRAIN AND AFTER SOME BASIC RESEARCH SEE ALL OF THE DOCUMENTED ISSUES CONCERNING THE THROTTLE BODY. THESE ISSUES EXACTLY MATCH MINE. TODAY, THE VEHICLE STALLED AND DIED IN THE MIDDLE OF A VERY BUSY INTERSECTION WHILE MY WIFE WAS DRIVING WITH OUR 9 MONTH OLD BABY. IF THERE ARE THIS MANY ISSUES THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE! AFTER CALLING THE FORD DEALERSHIP THERE IS NO RECALL ON THIS ITEM. I CAN'T BELIEVE I AM HAVING A PROBLEM ON A 40,000 MILE VEHICLE AND THAT THOUSANDS OF OTHERS HAVE THE SAME ISSUE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10537469
58,000 miles · Aug 27, 2013
Power Train
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE INTERSTATE AT 65 MPH AND MY ESCAPE JUST STARTED DECREASING IN SPEED, AND I TRIED TO ACCELERATE AND IT WOULD NOT GAIN ANY SPEED AT ALL. I TRIED TO MAKE IT TO THE NEXT EXIT, BUT THAT DID NOT HAPPEN BECAUSE THE POWER WAS CONTINUING TO DECREASE. I WAS GLAD I WAS ALREADY IN THE FAR RIGHT LANE AND COULD PULL OV…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE INTERSTATE AT 65 MPH AND MY ESCAPE JUST STARTED DECREASING IN SPEED, AND I TRIED TO ACCELERATE AND IT WOULD NOT GAIN ANY SPEED AT ALL. I TRIED TO MAKE IT TO THE NEXT EXIT, BUT THAT DID NOT HAPPEN BECAUSE THE POWER WAS CONTINUING TO DECREASE. I WAS GLAD I WAS ALREADY IN THE FAR RIGHT LANE AND COULD PULL OVER TO AVOID AN ACCIDENT! ONCE I PULLED OVER THE WRENCH LIGHT CAME ON AND THE TRUCK STARTED TO SHAKE, I TURNED IT OFF AND LET IT SIT FOR 15 MIN, IT RESTARTED AND I HAD TO HAVE SOMEONE FOLLOW ME TO GET HOME BECAUSE IT KEPT SHUTTING OFF. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP ONLY TO FIND OUT IT'S NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY! HOPEFULLY FORD WILL FIND A SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM AND GET IT CORRECTED ASAP! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10537445
98,545 miles · Aug 26, 2013
EnginePower Train
WAS AT THE STOP LIGHT, LIGHT TURNS GREEN PRESS THE GAS PEDAL CAR DID NOT MOVE I WAS ALMOST REAR ENDED BY ANOTHER VEHICLE. WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON DASH BOARD CAR START TO PUTTER WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. COASTED OUT OF THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET AND THEN THE TRANSMISSION LIGHT WAS ON DASH BOARD, HAD TO GET CAR TOWED HOME. FOUND OUT IT WAS …
Read full complaint
WAS AT THE STOP LIGHT, LIGHT TURNS GREEN PRESS THE GAS PEDAL CAR DID NOT MOVE I WAS ALMOST REAR ENDED BY ANOTHER VEHICLE. WRENCH LIGHT WAS ON DASH BOARD CAR START TO PUTTER WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. COASTED OUT OF THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET AND THEN THE TRANSMISSION LIGHT WAS ON DASH BOARD, HAD TO GET CAR TOWED HOME. FOUND OUT IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY AND IT IS A DEFECT FROM THE MANUFACTURER, BUT FORD WILL NOT REPLACE THE CONSUMER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REPLACING AND IT HAS AN OUT OF POCKET FEE OF $548.00 TO GET THE PROBLEM FIXED.THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS, I WAS LUCKY I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE THE TRUCK DO NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN TO ME AGAIN. FORD SHOULD AT LEAST TRY AND COME UP WITH SOME TYPE OF SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10537220
64,500 miles · Aug 24, 2013
Exterior LightingPower TrainVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN I COULD NOT GAS MY CAR. TRAFFIC WAS HEAVY AND I NEARLY CAUSED TWO ACCIDENTS TRYING TO MANEUVER TO THE EMERGENCY LANE. I AN NOT ABLE TO DRIVE MY CAR FAR FROM HOME NOR ON A HIGHWAY AS IT CHOOSES TO REPAY THIS AT RANDOM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10537092
54,963 miles · Aug 24, 2013
Power Train
WHILE DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE @ 70 MPH, I EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN LOSS OF ACCELERATION WITH A LACK OF THROTTLE RESPONSE AND THE ILLUMINATION OF A SOLID ORANGE "WRENCH" SYMBOL ON THE DASH DISPLAY. I WAS ABLE TO MANEUVER THE VEHICLE TO THE BREAK DOWN LANE AND ACTIVATE THE EMERGENCY FLASHERS. THE VEHICLE WAS STILL RUNNING @ IDLE BUT…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE @ 70 MPH, I EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN LOSS OF ACCELERATION WITH A LACK OF THROTTLE RESPONSE AND THE ILLUMINATION OF A SOLID ORANGE "WRENCH" SYMBOL ON THE DASH DISPLAY. I WAS ABLE TO MANEUVER THE VEHICLE TO THE BREAK DOWN LANE AND ACTIVATE THE EMERGENCY FLASHERS. THE VEHICLE WAS STILL RUNNING @ IDLE BUT STILL WOULD NOT ALLOW THROTTLE RESPONSE. I DECIDED TO SHUT OFF THE ENGINE SINCE I WAS ALREADY STRANDED. UPON DOING SO, I RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND IT PERFORMED THE SELF-CHECKS AND SEEMED TO BE OPERATING NORMALLY, SO I RESUMED MY JOURNEY. THIS OCCURRED 7 MORE TIMES WITHIN THE REMAINING 40 MILES I DROVE IT (I WAS ATTEMPTING TO "NURSE" THE VEHICLE TO MY HOME, WHICH WAS ACCOMPLISHED). DURING THE LAST OCCURRENCE, I OBSERVED A SOLID YELLOW "ENGINE" SYMBOL IN ADDITION TO THE PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED "WRENCH" SYMBOL. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS ISSUE WHICH APPEARS TO BE A WIDE SPREAD PROBLEM AND FORD MOTOR CO. SHOULD STAND UP AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY IF IT WISHES TO BUILD IT'S REPEAT CUSTOMER BASE AND AVOID RESPONSIBILITY FOR INJURIES OR DEATHS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10537038
39,100 miles · Aug 23, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
AT FIRST, WHILE DRIVING, THE CAR WOULD SHUT DOWN AND NOT RESPOND TO THROTTLE MOVEMENT, A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE IN TRAFFIC. AFTER PULLING OVER AND RESTARTING THE CAR, THE PROBLEM SEEMED TO GO AWAY FOR A WHILE. THE PROBLEM SEEMED TO BE INTERMITTENT THE FIRST FEW TIMES. FINALLY THE CAR SHUT DOWN TO AN IDLE AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO …
Read full complaint
AT FIRST, WHILE DRIVING, THE CAR WOULD SHUT DOWN AND NOT RESPOND TO THROTTLE MOVEMENT, A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE IN TRAFFIC. AFTER PULLING OVER AND RESTARTING THE CAR, THE PROBLEM SEEMED TO GO AWAY FOR A WHILE. THE PROBLEM SEEMED TO BE INTERMITTENT THE FIRST FEW TIMES. FINALLY THE CAR SHUT DOWN TO AN IDLE AND WOULD NOT RESPOND TO THROTTLE MOVEMENT AND THE WRENCH AND ENGINE LIGHTS CAME ON. THE CAR WOULD ONLY RUN LIMP MODE. THE ODB CODES READ A P2111 AND P2112 (THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL STUCK OPEN, AND THROTTLE ACTUATOR STUCK CLOSED) RESPECTIVELY. WE HAD TO TOW THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER. WE WERE TOLD THAT THE ENTIRE THROTTLE BODY HAD TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $666. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE PART IS UNAVAILABLE FOR 2 WEEKS AND MAYBE UP TO A MONTH. WE HAVE 39000 MILES ON THE VEHICLE, THE WARRANTY RAN OUT AT 36000. THIS ISSUE IS ALSO NOT COVERED UNDER THE POWER TRAIN WARRANTY. THIS SEEMS TO BE A WIDESPREAD ISSUE AND I AM DISAPPOINTED THAT FORD IS UNWILLING TO MAKE THIS RIGHT AND PRODUCE A RECALL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10536953
65,000 miles · Aug 20, 2013
Power Train
WHILE TRAVELING ALONG AT 55 MPH, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER AND STARTED RUNNING ROUGH. THE "WRENCH" WARNING LIGHT IDENTIFIED IN MY OWNER'S MANUAL AS "POWERTRAIN" LIT UP AND THE VEHICLE JUST WOULD NOT RESPOND TO ACCELERATOR WHATSOEVER. I MANAGED TO COAST TO A SIDE ROAD AND EXIT TO THE RIGHT. ONCE STOPPED, I PUT IT IN P…
Read full complaint
WHILE TRAVELING ALONG AT 55 MPH, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY LOST ALL POWER AND STARTED RUNNING ROUGH. THE "WRENCH" WARNING LIGHT IDENTIFIED IN MY OWNER'S MANUAL AS "POWERTRAIN" LIT UP AND THE VEHICLE JUST WOULD NOT RESPOND TO ACCELERATOR WHATSOEVER. I MANAGED TO COAST TO A SIDE ROAD AND EXIT TO THE RIGHT. ONCE STOPPED, I PUT IT IN PARK AND RESTARTED THE ENGINE. IT IMMEDIATELY RESTARTED AND I WAS ABLE TO CONTINUE WITH NO FURTHER PROBLEMS THAT DAY. I CONTACTED THE DEALER, BUT THEY INFORMED ME SINCE IT WAS OUT OF WARRANTY, THERE WAS A $95 CHARGE TO JUST CHECK THE CODES! I TOOK IT TO MY REGULAR MECHANIC WHO SCANNED IT AND NO CODES APPEARED. IT HAS SINCE HAPPENED 5 MORE TIMES, PROGRESSIVELY GETTING MORE FREQUENT. THIS PAST FRIDAY (16 AUG) I HAD IT BACK AT MY MECHANIC WHO CLEANED THE THROTTLE BODY/SYSTEM AND CHANGED THE OIL. YESTERDAY (19 AUG) IT AGAIN LOST POWER AND THEN AGAIN TODAY - AND TODAY I NARROWLY AVOIDED A COLLISION DUE TO THE SUDDEN DROP IN SPEED WHILE DRIVING IN COMMUTING TRAFFIC! I DRIVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT DAILY TO/FROM WORK AND I AM NOW EXTREMELY NERVOUS ABOUT STARTING HOME AFTER THE INCIDENT THIS MORNING. THIS IS MOST DEFINITELY A SAFETY ISSUE AND FORD NEEDS TO ADDRESS IT IMMEDIATELY! I RESEARCHED THE PROBLEM ONLINE AND THERE'S A HUGE AMOUNT OF OTHER PEOPLE WITH THE SAME ISSUE!!!!
NHTSA ODI #10536311
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