IllustrationVehicle unexpectedly and without driver command steered/pulled to the right, departed the roadway and struck a guardrail. Dashcam footage documents the vehicle’s movement immediately before impact. BlueCruise was not equipped/being used. Driver did not intentionally steer the vehicle from the roadway.
2023 Ford Mustang Mach E
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2023 Ford Mustang Mach E do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 82.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Mustang Mach E years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
Limited mileage data: 11 of 122 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.
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.
- Electrical System. Review the 50 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Forward Collision Avoidance. Review the 24 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 22 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
10 crash reports1 fire reports4 injury reports
Steering complaints
7 reportsVehicle unexpectedly and without driver command steered/pulled to the right, departed the roadway and struck a guardrail. Dashcam footage documents the vehicle’s movement immediately before impact. BlueCruise was not equipped/being used. Driver did not intentionally steer the vehicle from the roadway.
Vehicle: 2023 Ford Mustang Mach-E (leased) The issue involves the cruise control system and steering wheel control layout (human-machine interface). Cruise control is unintentionally activated when attempting to use the turn signal due to the placement of the cruise control buttons. The vehicle is available for inspection upon …
Read full complaint
Vehicle: 2023 Ford Mustang Mach-E (leased) The issue involves the cruise control system and steering wheel control layout (human-machine interface). Cruise control is unintentionally activated when attempting to use the turn signal due to the placement of the cruise control buttons. The vehicle is available for inspection upon request. On two separate occasions while using one-pedal driving, unintended cruise control activation caused sudden acceleration during low-speed turning maneuvers. The first incident occurred while signaling to turn into a parking spot. The second occurred while entering a left-turn pocket. In both cases, the unexpected acceleration created an immediate risk of collision with surrounding vehicles and required sudden panic braking to avoid an accident. The issue has occurred multiple times during normal driving but has not yet been formally reproduced or confirmed by a dealer or independent service center, and the vehicle has not yet been inspected by the manufacturer or other parties regarding this issue. No warning lamps, alerts, or messages appeared prior to the unintended acceleration. Cruise control engaged without driver intent and without advance warning.
Dear NHTSA Team, I am writing to urgently raise concern and seek answers regarding what appears to be a systemic safety issue affecting vehicles equipped with Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and self-driving technologies. I have personally experienced repeated and dangerous incidents of phantom braking, overcorrect…
Read full complaint
Dear NHTSA Team, I am writing to urgently raise concern and seek answers regarding what appears to be a systemic safety issue affecting vehicles equipped with Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and self-driving technologies. I have personally experienced repeated and dangerous incidents of phantom braking, overcorrection, and loss of control while driving a 2019 Toyota Prius. The car suddenly brakes, swerves, or pulls sharply when it detects shadows, road inclinations, or mild curves — making it unsafe to drive, especially at highway speeds. These events occur without any driver error. To make things worse, this issue is not limited to one brand or vehicle. Over the past year, I have driven and rented multiple cars from different brands and models through rental companies, and many of them presented the exact same unsafe behavior — unpredictable braking, steering correction, and traction instability. This clearly indicates that the issue is industry-wide, not isolated to a single manufacturer. I have been a professional rideshare driver for over five years, completing more than 500,000 miles without a single accident or ticket. Since October 2023, these vehicle behaviors have made it nearly impossible for me to continue working safely. This situation has destroyed my livelihood — I am now three months behind on rent, my mental health has been severely impacted, and I am facing homelessness for the second time in two years. All of this has happened because of unsafe technology that drivers cannot fully disable, even when it is clearly malfunctioning. I respectfully ask NHTSA: Why are automakers allowed to release and maintain these unsafe systems on public roads? Why do drivers not have the right to safely disable malfunctioning ADAS or self-driving features, like any other electronic system that can be shut down in an emergency? When will NHTSA take meaningful action to stop these dangerous practices before more lives are affected?
I’m writing this message out of frustration, exhaustion, and genuine concern for public safety. Over the past months, I’ve been renting and driving multiple cars from different brands and models — Toyota, Subaru, Nissan, and now a 2023 Ford Mustang Mach-E and all of them show the same dangerous behavior: sudden phantom braking …
Read full complaint
I’m writing this message out of frustration, exhaustion, and genuine concern for public safety. Over the past months, I’ve been renting and driving multiple cars from different brands and models — Toyota, Subaru, Nissan, and now a 2023 Ford Mustang Mach-E and all of them show the same dangerous behavior: sudden phantom braking for no reason, traction control malfunctioning, throwing the car from side to side, unstable handling, especially on highways or during light rain. This is not an isolated case it’s happening across several brands and systems, which makes me question what is really going on. Why are drivers being forced to deal with unreliable technology that clearly isn’t ready for real-world conditions? Are these systems being tested using real drivers as data sources to “teach” self-driving cars how to handle special situations? Because that’s what it feels like we are being used without consent, forced to correct constant software mistakes that could cost lives. This situation has destroyed my professional and financial stability. I work as a rideshare driver (Uber and Lyft), and passengers have reported me as “unsafe” because the car suddenly brakes or moves erratically something completely out of my control. I’ve lost access to stable work, fell behind on my car payments, and ended up returning my own vehicle because of all the expenses and stress trying to fix something that was never broken in the first place. And I have to ask: Why did NHTSA approve a regulation that prevents drivers from fully turning off these driver assistance systems? In what world does it make sense for a safety-critical technology to have no emergency off switch? In any other context like electricity we have breakers to stop the system when it becomes unsafe. Cars should be no different. I’ve lost almost everything I worked for because of this. Please, take this seriously. People’s lives, jobs, and mental health are being destroyed by technology that we can’t control.
Ford Motor Company Dear Ford Customer Service Team, I am writing as a highly disappointed owner of a Ford (specify model, e.g., Mustang Mach‑E), having observed a dramatic unexplained jump of over 10,000 miles on my vehicle’s odometer in just three months. I firmly reject the insinuation that I drove that distance—I maintain a…
Read full complaint
Ford Motor Company Dear Ford Customer Service Team, I am writing as a highly disappointed owner of a Ford (specify model, e.g., Mustang Mach‑E), having observed a dramatic unexplained jump of over 10,000 miles on my vehicle’s odometer in just three months. I firmly reject the insinuation that I drove that distance—I maintain an accurate charging and usage log proving otherwise—and I demand a refund of my warranty payment plus a prompt and transparent investigation. Key Facts & Concerns 1. Sudden mileage spike (~10,000 miles in 3 months) • I did not charge or drive anywhere near that distance. My charging logs and event logs—comprehensively detailed—show a maximum of [X] miles total for that period. • The odometer reading is simply inconsistent with verifiable usage data. 2. Likelihood of system error or tampering • Similar issues have been documented in EVs: • Tesla vehicles are currently under multiple lawsuits alleging artificially inflated odometer mileage, sometimes by as much as 15–117%—accusations that have triggered a proposed class-action in California and garnered widespread reports and press coverage    . • Ford EV owners have also flagged odometer anomalies—both underreporting and overreporting, including a Ford Lightning report revealing odometer mismatch in a vehicle health report (). 3. Legal precedent and consumer protection • Odometer manipulation—even unintentional—is taken seriously under federal law (Federal Odometer Act), with strict penalties for tampering  . • Odometer discrepancies significantly affect warranty eligibility and residual vehicle value. What I Want Ford to Do 1. Full refund of the prorated warranty cost, as it has been voided unfairly by incorrect mileage totals. 2. Comprehensive odometer and software audit of my vehicle. I request a certified statement of findings. 3. Corrected mileage records and warranty reinstatement based on actual usage. 4. Clear, documented communication detailing how this issue
The vehicle regularly, and at random times, will drop out of the chosen drive setting and go to the default "Engage" mid-level setting. This changes the driving dynamics, such as pedal pressure required to move the car, and the sensitivity of the steering. If the driver was in "Unbridle", for example, the car will immediately lo…
Read full complaint
The vehicle regularly, and at random times, will drop out of the chosen drive setting and go to the default "Engage" mid-level setting. This changes the driving dynamics, such as pedal pressure required to move the car, and the sensitivity of the steering. If the driver was in "Unbridle", for example, the car will immediately lose speed and steering sensitivity, while if the driver was in "Whisper", the car will lurch forward. This has happened at city speeds, highway speeds, and even while at a stop in a line of cars. The stop is especially dangerous, as 1-pedal drivers would expect the car to be fully stopped, but it still lurches forward towards people or other cars. Temperature of the engine and battery does not seem to be a factor, as this happens in all conditions. It appears to be a dangerous software error.
Official recalls
626V582000 · Electrical System:propulsion System:traction Battery:management System/energy Control Module (bms/becm):software
Sep 9, 2026
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2023-2025 Mustang Mache E vehicles that received a new Battery Energy Control Module (BECM) during a prior repair. The battery energy control module software may cause an incorrect state of charge to display in the vehicle, or lead to an increased risk of a high voltage battery fire after repeated DC Fast Charging cycles.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: An inaccurate state-of-charge reading can lead to an unexpected loss of drive power, increasing the risk of crash. Additionally, a high voltage battery fire increases the risk of injury.
Remedy: Dealers will update the BECM software, free of charge. Interim letters, notifying owners of the safety risk, are expected to be mailed October 26, 2026. Additional letters will be sent once the remedy is available, anticipated in December 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 26S68. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall became searchable on NHTSA.gov on September 9, 2026.
26V487000 · Structure:exterior Trim
Jul 28, 2026
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2023-2025 Mustang Mach E vehicles. The rear side quarter window glass trim may be improperly secured, which can allow it to detach.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Detached trim pieces can create a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the quarter window glass assemblies, as necessary, free of charge. Interim letters, notifying owners of the safety risk, were mailed September 14, 2026. Additional letters will be sent once the remedy is available. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 26S56. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall will be searchable on NHTSA.gov beginning September 7, 2026.
26V417000 · Power Train:driveline:differential Unit
Jun 30, 2026
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2023 Mustang Mach E vehicles. The rear differential pinion shaft may fracture.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Differential pinion shaft fracture may result in a loss of drive power, or unintended vehicle movement if the vehicle is in park without the parking brake applied, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will repair or replace the rear differential assembly as necessary, free of charge. Interim letters, notifying owners of the safety risk, were mailed July 13, 2026. Additional letters will be sent once the remedy is available, anticipated in late December 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 26S50.
25V404000 · Electrical System:body Control Module:software; Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Jun 13, 2025
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2025 Mustang Mach E vehicles. In the event of a low battery charge, the electronic door latches may remain locked once the driver or front passenger exits and shuts the door, possibly trapping someone who is unable to use the inside door release handles, such as a child in the back seat.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The inability to enter or exit the vehicle in an emergency increases the risk of injury.
Remedy: Dealers will update the Powertrain Control Module (PCM) and the Secondary On-Board Diagnostic Control Module C (SOBDMC) software, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed to 2021-2025 Mustang Mach-E owners September 12, 2025. Additionally, Owner notification letters were mailed to 2024-2025 Mustang Mach-E owners July 10, 2025. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S65.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Electrical System:body Control Module:software
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2025 Mustang Mach E vehicles. In the event of a low battery charge, the electronic door latches may remain locked once the driver or front passenger exits and shuts the door, possibly trapping someone who is unable to use the inside door release handles, such as a child in the back seat.
Consequence: The inability to enter or exit the vehicle in an emergency increases the risk of injury.
Remedy: Dealers will update the Powertrain Control Module (PCM) and the Secondary On-Board Diagnostic Control Module C (SOBDMC) software, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed to 2021-2025 Mustang Mach-E owners September 12, 2025. Additionally, Owner notification letters were mailed to 2024-2025 Mustang Mach-E owners July 10, 2025. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S65.
Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2025 Mustang Mach E vehicles. In the event of a low battery charge, the electronic door latches may remain locked once the driver or front passenger exits and shuts the door, possibly trapping someone who is unable to use the inside door release handles, such as a child in the back seat.
Consequence: The inability to enter or exit the vehicle in an emergency increases the risk of injury.
Remedy: Dealers will update the Powertrain Control Module (PCM) and the Secondary On-Board Diagnostic Control Module C (SOBDMC) software, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed to 2021-2025 Mustang Mach-E owners September 12, 2025. Additionally, Owner notification letters were mailed to 2024-2025 Mustang Mach-E owners July 10, 2025. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S65.
25V315000 · Back Over Prevention:software
May 9, 2025
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2024 Bronco, F-150, 2021-2024 Edge, 2022-2025 Escape, F-250, F-350, F-450, F-550, F-600, 2022-2024 Expedition, 2022-2025 Transit, 2021-2023 Mach-E, 2024 Ranger, Mustang, 2021-2023 Lincoln Nautilus, 2022-2024 Navigator, and 2023-2024 Corsair vehicles. A software error may cause the rearview camera image to delay, freeze, or not display when the vehicle is in reverse.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A frozen or missing rearview camera image can reduce the driver's view behind the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: The accessory protocol interface module (APIM) software will be updated by a dealer or through an over-the-air update, free of charge. This will be a phased campaign, with the remedy becoming available in different phases based on model and model years. Interim letters notifying owners of the safety risk were mailed on June 26, 2025. Additional letters will be mailed once the final remedy is available on each phase. Owner notification letters were sent on October 8, 2025. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S49.
24V594000 · Visibility:windshield Wiper/washer:motor
Aug 9, 2024
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2023-2024 Maverick, Ford Bronco Sport, and Mustang Mach-E vehicles. The front windshield wiper motor may become inoperative, causing the wipers to fail.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Inoperative windshield wipers can reduce visibility in certain conditions, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the windshield wiper motor as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed on December 6, 2024. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 24S51.
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
2EA25001 · Collisions Involving Ford Bluecruise
Opened Jan 17, 2025 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:adas
On April 25, 2024, NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE24012) to assess BlueCruise, a partial driving automation system available on certain vehicles manufactured by Ford Motor Company (Ford). NHTSA opened the investigation after the agency received notice of two fatal collisions involving BlueCruise-equipped Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles. Based on the incidents, NHTSA scoped the investigation to 2021-2024 Mustang Mach-E vehicles equipped with BlueCruise. In June 2024, ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to Ford requiring that it provide certain information pertaining to crashes, non-crash reports, and technical specifications that relate to BlueCruise, as well as other Ford partial driving automation systems that offer lane and speed maintenance. In its response to ODI’s IR, Ford stated that there are 2,539,962 Ford and Lincoln vehicles (including subject and peer vehicles) equipped with a partial driving automation system within the scope of the request. The majority of these vehicles are equipped with a system that Ford calls Lane Centering Assist (LCA), which is a hands-on partial driving automation system that combines longitudinal control authority governed by Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) and lateral control authority governed by a steerable path. LCA is offered on a wide range of Ford and Lincoln models beginning in model year 2019. Vehicles that are equipped with BlueCruise, the focus of this investigation, have LCA capability and additionally offer hands-free partial driving automation when certain conditions are met. Hands-free BlueCruise operation is only offered on certain roadways and system availability is geofenced using vehicle GPS. BlueCruise-equipped vehicles employ a camera-based driver monitoring system to determine driver attentiveness to the roadway. BlueCruise was introduced in model year 2021 and is currently available in a select range of Ford and Lincoln vehicles. For BlueCruise- and LCA-equipped vehicles, both ACC and Pre-Collision Assist (PCA) features use a combination of camera and radar sensing technologies to detect and classify objects. ACC is specifically designed to detect vehicles (including cars, trucks, and motorcycles) and bicycles in front of the subject vehicle which are either stationary or moving in the same direction as the subject vehicle. Through this investigation, limitations in the detection of stationary vehicles in certain conditions have been identified. Specifically, due to the potential for false detection of stationary objects at long distances, Ford designed ACC to inhibit any response to reported stationary objects when the subject vehicle’s approach speed is at or above 62 mph. Additionally, system performance may be limited when there is poor visibility due to insufficient illumination. In addition to reviewing Ford’s response to ODI’s IR, the agency conducted a review of crash and non-crash reports identified collectively through Ford’s IR response, incident reporting through Standing General Order 2021-01 (SGO), and NHTSA vehicle owner questionnaires. In total, 32 crashes and 2,004 non-crash reports on subject and peer Ford vehicles were identified across manufacturer and ODI data sources. A detailed analysis of each crash was conducted including the review of any available police reports, photographs, data recovered from in-vehicle event data recorders, connected vehicle data, and/or other information. In both fatal collisions referenced in the PE24012 opening resume, the subject Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicle was traveling over 70 mph on a controlled-access highway during nighttime lighting conditions with hands-free BlueCruise engaged when it collided with a stationary vehicle. Analysis of data imaged from the vehicles’ event data recorders demonstrates that in each incident, the driver did not apply the brakes or take evasive steering action, and no deceleration was initiated by either the BlueCruise system or PCA prior to impact. Through the agency’s crash analysis, four additional frontal collisions were identified where the subject Ford impacted a stopped or slow-moving lead vehicle or another stationary object located in the travel lane. Two of these four incidents involved BlueCruise-equipped Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles (included in the failure report summary along with the fatal collisions discussed above), while the other two involved other Ford models equipped with the LCA system. Additionally, a trend was identified through analysis of the non-crash reports relating to allegations that ACC (the longitudinal component of both BlueCruise and LCA) failed to detect and/or respond to a stopped or slow-moving lead vehicle. In these reports, consumers often describe that the absence of deceleration initiated by ACC was unexpected and required harsh manual braking or intervention from the PCA to avoid a frontal collision with the lead vehicle. Based on NHTSA’s analysis, system limitations relating to the detection of stationary vehicles while traveling at highway speeds and in nighttime lighting conditions appear to be factors in collisions under investigation and several apparently similar near-miss, non-crash reports. This Engineering Analysis (EA) is being opened to further investigate these system limitations and to evaluate drivers’ ability to respond to scenarios that exceed system limitations. During the EA, the agency expects to, among other things, perform vehicle evaluations, review additional technical information, and perform additional analysis of related crashes and non-crash reports. The crashes included in the failure report summary can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 502-7268, 502-7426, 502-6852, 502-8738.
PE24012 · Collisions Involving Ford Bluecruise
Opened Apr 25, 2024 · Closed Jan 17, 2025
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:adas
On April 25, 2024, NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE24012) to assess BlueCruise, a partial driving automation system available on certain vehicles manufactured by Ford Motor Company (Ford). NHTSA opened the investigation after the agency received notice of two fatal collisions involving BlueCruise-equipped Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles. Based on the incidents, NHTSA scoped the investigation to 2021-2024 Mustang Mach-E vehicles equipped with BlueCruise. In June 2024, ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to Ford requiring that it provide certain information pertaining to crashes, non-crash reports, and technical specifications that relate to BlueCruise, as well as other Ford partial driving automation systems that offer lane and speed maintenance. In its response to ODI’s IR, Ford stated that there are 2,539,962 Ford and Lincoln vehicles (including subject and peer vehicles) equipped with a partial driving automation system within the scope of the request. The majority of these vehicles are equipped with a system that Ford calls Lane Centering Assist (LCA), which is a hands-on partial driving automation system that combines longitudinal control authority governed by Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) and lateral control authority governed by a steerable path. LCA is offered on a wide range of Ford and Lincoln models beginning in model year 2019. Vehicles that are equipped with BlueCruise, the focus of this investigation, have LCA capability and additionally offer hands-free partial driving automation when certain conditions are met. Hands-free BlueCruise operation is only offered on certain roadways and system availability is geofenced using vehicle GPS. BlueCruise-equipped vehicles employ a camera-based driver monitoring system to determine driver attentiveness to the roadway. BlueCruise was introduced in model year 2021 and is currently available in a select range of Ford and Lincoln vehicles. For BlueCruise- and LCA-equipped vehicles, both ACC and Pre-Collision Assist (PCA) features use a combination of camera and radar sensing technologies to detect and classify objects. ACC is specifically designed to detect vehicles (including cars, trucks, and motorcycles) and bicycles in front of the subject vehicle which are either stationary or moving in the same direction as the subject vehicle. Through this investigation, limitations in the detection of stationary vehicles in certain conditions have been identified. Specifically, due to the potential for false detection of stationary objects at long distances, Ford designed ACC to inhibit any response to reported stationary objects when the subject vehicle’s approach speed is at or above 62 mph. Additionally, system performance may be limited when there is poor visibility due to insufficient illumination. In addition to reviewing Ford’s response to ODI’s IR, the agency conducted a review of crash and non-crash reports identified collectively through Ford’s IR response, incident reporting through Standing General Order 2021-01 (SGO), and NHTSA vehicle owner questionnaires. In total, 32 crashes and 2,004 non-crash reports on subject and peer Ford vehicles were identified across manufacturer and ODI data sources. A detailed analysis of each crash was conducted including the review of any available police reports, photographs, data recovered from in-vehicle event data recorders, connected vehicle data, and/or other information. In both fatal collisions referenced in the PE24012 opening resume, the subject Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicle was traveling over 70 mph on a controlled-access highway during nighttime lighting conditions with hands-free BlueCruise engaged when it collided with a stationary vehicle. Analysis of data imaged from the vehicles’ event data recorders demonstrates that in each incident, the driver did not apply the brakes or take evasive steering action, and no deceleration was initiated by either the BlueCruise system or PCA prior to impact. Through the agency’s crash analysis, four additional frontal collisions were identified where the subject Ford impacted a stopped or slow-moving lead vehicle or another stationary object located in the travel lane. Two of these four incidents involved BlueCruise-equipped Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles (included in the failure report summary along with the fatal collisions discussed above), while the other two involved other Ford models equipped with the LCA system. Additionally, a trend was identified through analysis of the non-crash reports relating to allegations that ACC (the longitudinal component of both BlueCruise and LCA) failed to detect and/or respond to a stopped or slow-moving lead vehicle. In these reports, consumers often describe that the absence of deceleration initiated by ACC was unexpected and required harsh manual braking or intervention from the PCA to avoid a frontal collision with the lead vehicle. Based on NHTSA’s analysis, system limitations relating to the detection of stationary vehicles while traveling at highway speeds and in nighttime lighting conditions appear to be factors in collisions under investigation and several apparently similar near-miss, non-crash reports. This Preliminary Evaluation is being upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA25001) to further investigate these system limitations and to evaluate drivers’ ability to respond to scenarios that exceed system limitations. During the EA, the agency expects to, among other things, perform vehicle evaluations, review additional technical information, and perform additional analysis of related crashes and non-crash reports. The crashes included in the failure report summary can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 502-7268, 502-7426, 502-6852, 502-8738.