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.
Front Brake Jounce Hose Failures
RQ22004
Closed recall query · opened August 8, 2022 · closed March 24, 2023 · led to recall 23V162000
the hydraulic brakes
On August 8, 2022, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation based on 50 Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQs) alleging front brake jounce hose ruptures on model year (MY) 2013-2018 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ vehicles. A ruptured front brake hose results in a brake fluid leak. As a result, the driver may experience an increase in pedal travel and a reduction in the rate of deceleration, increasing the risk of a crash. It should be noted that the subject vehicles identified fell outside the scope of NHTSA Safety Recall 20V-469, which addressed front brake hoses rupturing on certain MY 2015-2018 Ford Edge and 2016-2018 Lincoln MKX vehicles. The result causes a brake fluid leak, lengthening the distance needing to stop the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.On March 10, 2023, Ford Motor Company (Ford) submitted to NHTSA Safety Recall 23V-162 (Ford Recall 23S12) to address front brake jounce hoses that may rupture. Ford found the rupture occurs from a localized failure of the internal reinforcement braid due to cyclic fatigue through tensile/bending and torsional inputs during suspension and steering articulations. The supplier for the front brake jounce hoses is Hitachi. This recall affects the subject vehicles equipped with non-hybrid engines and the suspect front brake jounce hoses (a total of 1,280,726 vehicles). The recall covers subject vehicles built from February 3, 2012 to July 19, 2017 when the suspect hoses were used in vehicle production. The remedy is for dealerships to replace both front brake jounce hoses with new hoses that have a revised braid material at no cost. The vehicles equipped with hybrid engines are excluded from the recall because the internal hose pressure is much lower due to the regenerative braking provided by the hybrid brake system. No failures of brake hoses on hybrid vehicles have been reported to ODI or Ford.Ford's actions address ODIs concerns at this time. Hybrid vehicles will be monitored for related failures. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by new circumstances.The 103 ODI numbers cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following ID numbers:11511014, 11510867, 11510318, 11509030, 11505993, 11504989, 11504400, 11502147, 11502082, 11501820, 11501283, 11498439, 11498296, 11496842, 11496335, 11494931, 11494851, 11494252, 11493001, 11492084, 11492070, 11491444, 11491274, 11488858, 11488027, 11487627, 11487416, 11487233, 11486150, 11484924, 11484526, 11484080, 11483948, 11483926, 11483739, 11483723, 11482773, 11482690, 11481077, 11480788, 11480294, 11480052, 11479338, 11479334, 11479252, 11479247, 11479187, 11479094, 11479048, 11478985, 11478953, 11478729, 11478216, 11476892, 11476282, 11470558, 11468994, 11467109, 11466294, 11462746, 11461217, 11456065, 11455367, 11444848, 11436419, 11436376, 11430685, 11428329, 11425083, 11421026, 11420738, 11420735, 11420298, 11418197, 11403926, 11397549, 11366991, 11366757, 11361016, 11359968, 11354569, 11352165, 11350344, 11348799, 11343929, 11343205, 11331947, 11329020, 11319596, 11310529, 11292271, 11288455, 11254787, 11253479, 11253244, 11234622, 11230669, 11230050, 11228240, 11221111, 11143630, 11129392 and 11120228.
Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
EA21002
Still open engineering analysis · opened September 17, 2021
the air bags
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Door Latch Failures
RQ19005
Closed recall query · opened December 19, 2019 · closed February 7, 2022 · led to recall 20V177000
the latches, locks and linkages, the body structure
In December 2019, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation based on 235 Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQs) alleging doors failed to latch when closed, and/or inadvertently opened while driving, on model year (MY) 2012-2014 Ford Fiesta, and 2013-2014 Fusion and Lincoln MKZ. Some VOQs reported the failure occurred after the latch had been remedied under a prior recall which involved fracture of the latch pawl spring tab due to thermally induced cyclic fatigue. Other VOQs alleged a similar failure in vehicles not previously recalled. A latch with a fractured pawl spring tab typically results in a ?door will not close? condition, however in certain somewhat rare circumstances, may result in the door coming open while driving. In response to ODI?s investigation, Ford has announced three field actions, as discussed below.On March 23, 2020, Ford submitted Safety Recall 20V-177 (Ford 20S15), a regional recall campaign to address door latch failures in vehicles not previously recalled under Safety Recalls 15V-246, 16V-643 and 17V-210. The recall affects vehicles currently or ever registered in certain high ambient temperature states (see 20V-177 for affected states). As a remedy, Ford will replace all four door latches free of charge.On August 24, 2020, Ford issued a non-safety regional field action (Ford 20R01) to address door latch failures on the same model/MY vehicles not covered under 20V-177 (i.e., not currently/ever registered in affected states). According to Ford, spring tab failure rates for vehicles covered by this action are about half that of the 20V-177 vehicles. Under this action, dealers will replace all door latches, free of charge, if either; a) the vehicle exhibits a related latch concern, or b) if the vehicle owner expresses a concern about the latches in their vehicles. Details can be found under NHTSA TSB No. 10190990, a copy of which is available in this investigative file available at NHTSA.gov.On June 8, 2020, Ford submitted Safety Recall 20V-331 (Ford 20S30) addressing vehicles previously remedied under NHTSA Recalls 15V-246, 16V-643 and 17V-210, where the repair may not have been properly completed, specifically not all of the door latches were replaced, or replaced correctly. This recall involves an inspection of the latches, with the option for a consumer self-inspection; owners could view the date codes on their latches (and confirm child safety locks are present on the rear doors) and then submit the information to Ford?s mobile app or website. A dealership inspection option was also available. Any vehicle found to have unreplaced defective latches requires the replacement of all door latches as directed by Ford.Regarding the 4,494 reports cited above, 1,485 involve scope-related failures (with 13% alleging door opening), and the remaining 3,009 reports involving remedy concerns (with 18% alleging door opening - note ODI was unable to verify the allegations of door opening). The three ODI injuries were all relatively minor. Ford?s reported injury incidences include one (unconfirmed) report of an ejection, three minor injuries with the others involving undisclosed injuries. Ford?s crashes involved two (unconfirmed) crashes alleging the incident door contacted another vehicle and three involving doors striking other property.The recalled vehicles include MY 2011-2015 Ford Fiesta, 2013-2016 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ, 2015 Ford Mustang and Lincoln MKC, 2013-2015 Ford Escape and Ford C-MAX, 2012-2015 Ford Focus and 2014-2016 Ford Transit Connect.Ford's actions address ODI's concerns at this time. ODI will take further action if warranted by new information. The reference (OD
Door Latch Failure
EA15002
Closed engineering analysis · opened February 27, 2015 · closed November 13, 2015 · led to recall 15V246000
the latches, locks and linkages, the body structure
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened an investigation based on consumer allegations of doors failing to latch and/or inadvertently opening on model year (MY) 2011-2013 Ford Fiesta, MY 2013 Ford Fusion and MY 2013 Lincoln MKZ vehicles. All of the affected vehicles share the same door latch design.ODI has received 281 unique reports related to the alleged problem, with over 100 claiming that the door(s) opened inadvertently while the vehicle was in motion. There were no crashes reported however three separate injuries were indicated, all caused by a rebounding door striking a consumer after they attempted to close it. In response to ODI's Information Request (IR) letter, Ford Motor Company (Ford) responded with 1,102 unique reports related to the alleged problem. There were no injury claims but there were two claims of low speed accidents occurring involving the door opening while driving and damaging property. Ford also submitted 10,883 warranty claims related to door latch failures.Many customers indicated that the door would not latch at all and accordingly they decided to restrain the door by other means (looping the seatbelt through the door, or using rope or tape) in order to drive the vehicle.Some customers also reported multiple door latch failures occurring on the same vehicle on different doors occurring months apart.On April 23rd, 2015 Ford notified ODI that it would conduct a safety recall (15V-246) to remedy door latches failures on certain MY 2011-2014 Ford Fiesta and MY 2013-2014 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ vehicles.According to Ford, the pawl spring tab located within the door latch can break off, or separate and result in a ?door will not close condition.The recalled vehicles include Fiesta vehiclesmanufactured from the start of the MY 2011 to May 2013 and Fusion and MKZ vehicles manufactured from the start of the MY 2013 year until May 2013.In May 2013 Ford reports that it made a manufacturing quality control change, specific to the spring tab, to improve the performance of the existing part.The door latch spring tab was redesigned and the new latch was phased into production in December 2014 with a new part number.Ford will replace all four door latches on the affected vehicles with the new latch design currently in production.The recall action initiated by the manufacturer appears to address the safety risks of concern to ODI.Accordingly, the investigation is closed.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the identification (ODI) numbers found in the attached list.
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