CSR

Mercury · NHTSA safety record

2011 Mercury Mariner

Every safety complaint, recall and defect investigation the US government holds on this vehicle.

87

Complaints

2

Crashes

0

Fires

1

Injuries

0

Deaths

Owners of the 2011 Mercury Mariner have filed 87 safety complaints with NHTSA between December 2010 and May 2026. The most complained-about system is the power train, named in 24 of them (28%). The typical failure was reported at 52,440 miles, the median across the 68 complaints that gave an odometer reading.

NHTSA has issued 2 recalls covering this vehicle.

Recalls (2)

FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:DELIVERY:FUEL PUMP

16V777000 · October 26, 2016

The defect
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.
The risk
A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source increases the risk of a fire.
The 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.

Ford Motor Company · up to 329,265 vehicles across all model years covered

STEERING:ELECTRIC POWER ASSIST SYSTEM

14V284000 · May 29, 2014

The defect
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.
The risk
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.
The 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.

Ford Motor Company · up to 740,878 vehicles across all model years covered

Defect investigations (3)

An investigation means NHTSA has decided a pattern is worth examining. A preliminary evaluation is often closed with no action; an engineering analysis is the stage that usually precedes a recall.

Loss of power steering while driving

DP15001

Closed defect petition · opened April 1, 2015 · closed June 14, 2018

the steering

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

Electronic Throttle Body Malfunction

PE13003

Closed preliminary evaluation · opened February 21, 2013 · closed February 28, 2014

the 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

Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage

PE11016

Closed preliminary evaluation · opened April 27, 2011 · closed August 18, 2011

the body structure, 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.

What owners report

Complaints naming each system. One complaint can name several, so these add up to more than 87.

POWER TRAIN 24 28%
FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM 22 25%
STEERING 20 23%
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL 15 17%
ENGINE 11 13%
FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE 7 8%
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 6 7%
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING 3 3%
UNKNOWN OR OTHER 3 3%
VISIBILITY 3 3%
VISIBILITY/WIPER 3 3%
AIR BAGS 2 2%

When the complaints arrived

By the year NHTSA received them, which is not the year the failures happened. They peaked in 2013 at 30.

2010 2013 2026
2010 to 2026, the last of them a part year

In owners' own words

Quoted from NHTSA's complaint file. These are unverified accounts by the people who filed them, not findings of fault.

AIR BAGS

1 injured · crash · 39,400 miles

SHE PULLED INTO A PATIENTS DRIVEWAY AND STOPPED SHE WENT TO PUT IT IN PARK AND THE CAR JUST TOOK OFF INTO THE HOUSE. SHE (THE DRIVER) HAD TO BE TAKEN TO THE ER. SHE HAD HER FOOT ON THE BRAKE STILL WHEN THE CAR TOOK OFF. I HAVE PICTURES OF HOW THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE WAS DRAGGED THROUGH THE DIRT WHILE BRAKE WAS APPLIED. IT DAMAGED THE HOME AND DID OVER 5000.00 DAMAGE TO THE CAR. SHE INSISTS IT ACCELERATED UNEXPECTEDLY. *JB

NHTSA complaint 10544299. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

AIR BAGS

crash · 50,000 miles

IN DECEMBER OF 2013, I WAS INVOLVED IN A FENDER BENDER. AFTER THIS ACCIDENT THE AIR BAG LIGHT REMAINED ON. IN JANUARY OF 2015 I WAS BUMPED FROM BEHIND WITH NO DAMAGE. HOWEVER, I THEN DECIDED I SHOULD TAKE IN MY CAR TO SEE WHY THE LIGHT WAS STILL ON. AS IT TURNS OUT, THE AIRBAG MODULE WAS APPARENTLY DAMAGED BEYOND REPAIR. I BELIEVE THAT THIS PART WAS DEFECTIVE AS THE SPEED OF EITHER COLLISION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ENOUGH TO CAUSE THE AIRBAG SYSTEM TO COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN. ADDITIONALLY, THE HIGH COST OF THE MODULE ALSO MADE IT VERY COSTLY TO REPAIR. THIS MODEL OF MARINER HAS BEEN SUBJECT TO A RECALL BEFORE. I HAD TO TAKE IT INTO A SHOP BECAUSE IT WOULD SHUT DOWN ON THE HIGHWAY WHILE I WAS

NHTSA complaint 10679887, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

STEERING

towed · 129,000 miles

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2011 MERCURY MARINER. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A TURN, THE STEERING ABILITY SEIZED. THE VEHICLE STRUCK A CURB AND WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE STEERING COLUMN NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS BEING REPAIRED AT THE OWNER'S EXPENSE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED LAST YEAR PER AN UNKNOWN RECALL FOR THE STEERING MODULE. THE VIN WAS UNKNOWN. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 129,000.

NHTSA complaint 10904314. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

STEERING

96,000 miles

The contact owns a 2011 Mercury Mariner. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the power steering became inoperable with no warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed that the steering shaft port sensor had failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 96,000.

NHTSA complaint 11738857. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

SUSPENSION
My dealer says my subframe needs to be replaced, and controll arm at a cost of 3600 dollars, I don't understand why my subframe needs to be replaced, I've owned cars for as long as 20 yrs and never had that problem. This sounds like a manufacturers problem.

NHTSA complaint 11727405. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE
The contact owns a 2011 Mercury Mariner. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, there was a strong fuel odor inside the vehicle. In addition, the contact stated that the fuel odor was noticeable all the way to the rear seat. The vehicle was taken to the dealer; however, the contact was informed that the tools needed to perform the repair were not available. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or the dealer. The contact was informed by the Insurance Provider of an unrepaired recall, under NHTSA Campaign Number: 16V777000 (Fuel System, Gasoline). The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was unknown.

NHTSA complaint 11717360. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

STEERING

141,968 miles

The contact owns a 2011 Mercury Mariner. The contact stated that while attempting to make a turn from a complete stop, the steering wheel became significantly difficult to turn. The contact was able to turn the vehicle by using physical force. The contact stated that the failure persisted. The vehicle was taken to an unknown dealer, where it was diagnosed with electric power steering system torque sensor failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 141,968.

NHTSA complaint 11638337. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE

116,000 miles

The contact owns a 2011 Mercury Mariner. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle lost motive power and failed to accelerate above 10 MPH. The contact was able to pull to the shoulder of the roadway, after which the vehicle stalled. After restarting the vehicle, the vehicle briefly returned to normal functionality, but the failure reoccurred. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, who diagnosed a failure with the throttle body. The vehicle was not repaired. After investigating the failure, the contact related it to Customer Satisfaction Program 13N03, but the VIN was not included. The manufacturer was notified of the failure but referred the

NHTSA complaint 11546074, quoted in part. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

STEERING

125,000 miles

The contact owns a 2011 Mercury Mariner. The contact stated while entering a fast-food drive-thru, the power steering warning light illuminated, and the steering wheel became difficult to turn. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. A dealer was not contacted. Upon investigation, the contact associated the failure with NHTSA Campaign Number: 14V284000 (Steering) however, the VIN was not included. The manufacturer had not been informed of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 125,000.

NHTSA complaint 11530378. Filed by an owner and not verified by NHTSA or by us.

Compare

Other years of the Mercury Mariner

Model year Complaints Recalls Deaths
2010 270 2

Other 2011 Mercury models

Every Mercury on this site — 9 vehicles, 119 recall campaigns and 0 open investigation s.

If this is your car and a dealer keeps failing to fix it, your state's lemon law may require the manufacturer to replace it or buy it back. What each state asks for , read from the statutes.

Where these numbers come from

A complaint is one owner's account and has not been verified by NHTSA or by us. A vehicle with more complaints is not necessarily worse: models that sold in larger numbers collect more of them. How this is counted.

Compiled and maintained by
Independent developer and analyst