2017 Ford Edge

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a petition on August 5, 2026, requesting a defect investigation into the 2.0 Liter EcoBoost engine on model year 2015-2018 Ford Edge vehicles. The petition alleges that engine coolant intrusion results in a significant loss of engine power, accompanied by an "Engine Coolant Over Temperature" warning message.  The petition further alleges that after the vehicle has sat and cooled down, the engine runs roughly and generates a check engine light for a cylinder misfire. This defect petition is being opened to evaluate the issue and determine whether to grant or deny the petition. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI number 11647929.

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.

On October 3, 2024, NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this Preliminary Evaluation to investigate instances of rear brake hose ruptures causing a sudden and unexpected loss of braking in model year (MY) 2015-2017 Ford Edge vehicles manufactured by Ford Motor Company. The complaints allege that, without warning, the vehicle lost its ability to brake causing an unanticipated increase in the vehicle’s stopping distance. The complaints also allege that, prior to the rear brake hose rupture event, the vehicle had been serviced under recall 20V-469. Recall 20V469 involved MY 2015-2018 Ford Edge and MY 2016-2018 Lincoln MKX vehicles which may experience front brake hose ruptures causing increased brake pedal travel and a reduction in the rate of deceleration. Ford identified the cause of this safety defect as a consistent localized failure of the internal reinforcement braid of the brake hose due to cyclic fatigue via tensile/bending and torsional inputs during suspension and steering articulations. Ford also identified that only 88% of suspension articulation was utilized on the front brake hose test rig during life cycle testing. These findings, along with ODI’s identification of an emerging trend involving rear brake hose ruptures, prompted the opening of this investigation. ODI identified 64 Vehicle Owners Questionnaires related to this investigation, 2 involving a crash. These consumers were interviewed and reported experiencing sudden loss of braking ability while traveling at low and highway speeds without any prior warning such as a “low brake fluid” warning indicator. Consumers reported that, as they tried to stop their vehicle, the brake pedal traveling to the floorboard and the vehicle required more stopping distance than anticipated or considered normal. Consumers also observed brake fluid present on the rear tires and roadway near the rear tires immediately after the incident. Some consumers provided photographs of the rear brake hose ruptures which depicted a similar rupture pattern and location (near the crimp on the dynamic section of the brake hose). 1 photograph showed an installation alignment mark pulled out near the crimp suggesting exposure to unanticipated tensile forces pulling the hose away from the crimp. During this investigation, Ford responded to Information Request Letters detailing information such as warranty claim data, brake hose specifications and engineering drawings, production part changes logs, and Ford’s assessments of potential root cause. Ford reported that the front and rear brake jounce hoses equipped on the subject vehicle population utilized the same construction and material. Therefore, Ford’s analysis consisted of a comparison between the front and rear hoses demonstrating that the rear hose bend radii in full jounce and full rebound were larger than the front hose. Ford also described that the two hoses are exposed to different loading environments as the rear brake hose is exposed to suspension inputs only, while the front hose is exposed to both suspension and steering inputs; thus, the rear hose is subjected to lower tension and fatigue loads. However, it is important to point out that larger bend radii alone do not necessarily mean a brake hose can withstand the dynamic loading requirements of a brake hose (as discussed earlier, the defect identified in the front brake hoses were attributed to the hose material). Rear brake hose failures were identified through exemplar vehicle and parts inspections conducted by NHTSA’s Vehicle Research and Testing Center. Ford stated that its investigation did not identify any specific or common root cause for this safety defect, and that brake hoses can fail for many reasons including contact with road debris, improper vehicle servicing, and fatigue, as well as vehicle age and miles in service. Based on its assessment of failure rates and warranty claims, Ford concluded that the rear brake hose ruptures did not present an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety because consumers would experience a progressive leak accompanied by a red brake warning indicator within the instrument panel and would not experience a total loss of braking due to the diagonally split brake system. Note that these assessments are contrary to the consumer experiences described above. As previously described, consumers described a sudden, unexpected loss of braking ability with no prior warning in their instrument cluster (not a progressive leak) and an increase in anticipated vehicle stopping distance (presenting an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety). ODI conveyed these perspectives and investigative findings to Ford during a technical discussion on July 23, 2025. On August 22, 2025, Ford submittedrecall 25V-544 which included MY 2015-2018 Ford Edge and MY 2016-2018 Lincoln MKX vehicles, for a total recall population of 499,129 vehicles. As described in the Part 573, in September 2024, Ford concluded that this concern did not present an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and closed its investigation into allegations involving rear brake jounce hose ruptures within this vehicle population. Ford reopened this investigation in July 2025 following the technical discussion with ODI referenced above. Ford identified the safety defect as a rupture of the rear brake jounce hose resulting in an increase in pedal travel and increase in vehicle stopping distance elevating the risk of a crash. To date, Ford has not fully determined the root cause of this safety defect and is currently working to develop a remedy program. In view of the recall action taken by Ford, ODI is closing this Preliminary Evaluation. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

Vehicle Safety Complaint – 2017 Ford Edge 2.0L EcoBoost VIN: [XXX] NHTSA Service Request: XXX I am submitting a formal vehicle safety complaint regarding a 2017 Ford Edge equipped with the 2.0L EcoBoost engine. The vehicle has experienced recurring overheating problems, including at highway speeds. Multiple diagnostic and repair efforts have been undertaken, including replacement of cooling-system components and evaluation by an authorized Ford dealership. The case involves suspected coolant intrusion into the engine, a condition addressed in Ford Technical Service Bulletin 22-2229. I have sought assistance from Ford Motor Company and requested a technical review and goodwill consideration. I am concerned that this condition could cause unexpected engine overheating, loss of engine power, or engine failure while driving, creating a potential safety hazard. I respectfully request that NHTSA review this complaint, consider the available Ford diagnostic documentation, and evaluate its relevance to investigation DP26-008. Please assign an ODI Complaint Number and advise whether additional documentation is required. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11775957

Incident

Jan 7, 2026

Engine failed due to EcoBoost coolant intrusion / loss of motive power. Repaired via extended warranty.

NHTSA ID

11775759

Incident

Sep 15, 2026

Vehicle was using coolant, engine overheating warning, whole vehicle violently shaking, could not accelerate/loss of power, got diagnosed with coolant intrusion on cylinder 1

NHTSA ID

11775618

Incident

Apr 15, 2026

My car abruptly displayed the message “engine coolant over temperature” and refused to drive. I had it towed and the cost to fix is significant. However when looking up recalls for this particular vehicle, I found that an investigation has been opened to potentially reach a recall decision regarding this exact issue. The mechanic further evaluated that the coolant was getting inside the engine. I will attach pictures of the estimate

NHTSA ID

11775612

Incident

Oct 31, 2026

While operating the vehicle, it experienced a sudden, unexpected loss of engine power, rough idling, and white smoke emitting from the exhaust due to internal engine failure. The vehicle’s check engine light illuminated, throwing codes P0301 for cylinder misfires, and P0316. A formal diagnostic inspection confirmed that this vehicle is suffering from the known manufacturing defect outlined in Ford Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 19-2346, which involves internal coolant intrusion into the engine cylinders. The open-deck engine block design allows engine coolant to breach the cylinder head gasket and flood the combustion chambers. This creates an immediate safety hazard on public roadways. The sudden loss of acceleration and severe engine shuddering occurred without warning while driving, exposing the vehicle and its passengers to a high risk of a rear-end collision in active traffic. Ford Motor Company has denied out-of-warranty or goodwill assistance to resolve this defect. This issue directly aligns with the ongoing NHTSA investigation into Ford EcoBoost coolant leaks and structural engine failures. I am filing this to request that the agency upgrade its current inquiry into a mandatory safety recall to protect consumers from catastrophic highway engine failure. Current Vehicle Mileage: 85,000 miles

NHTSA ID

11775388

Incident

Oct 8, 2026

Upon doing a drive with 60,000 miles my check engine light came on. Upon taking it in to a dealer in Chicago, I was told that it had a coolant intrusion defect and that I would need to replace the entire engine ~11,000 quote. I then took it to two seperate dealerships, and got a video of it. They both confirmed this. I contacted ford and they have refused to help in an form. The component is the engine block. I am completely scared to take it on the road. I don't know what will happen as it shakes on startup now. The problem was reproduced by both. I have not had it inspected by insurance. Warning lamp was an engine light.

NHTSA ID

11775369

Incident

Jun 1, 2026

Coolant Intrusion and or cracked long engine block When I’m driving my car wants to lose power for example turning in traffic my car acts like it wants to turn off mid turn sometimes do coolant leaking in my engine which I have no control over due to the way my engine was made I have cyclinder 3 misfire. If my car is doing it I’m sure I’m not the only one having this issue on FORD EDGE 2017 make of suv I took it to the shop and ofc they say I need a new engine for something they made why make the engine this way if at some point they will be cracked long block or coolant intrusion, my car losing power could cause an accident

NHTSA ID

11775040

Incident

Oct 23, 2026

Engine is leaking coolant into combustion chambers, causing misfire and check engine light to come on. This issue is a known issue by Ford, with multiple TSBs (I have found 19-2346 and 22-2229 so far) Error code on diagnostic was P-0302. This issue was found at North Brothers Ford in Westland MI. We were quoted over $8,000 to have this replaced. We were told that our family car cannot be driven safely because of this issue, as it can cause the engine to just die where it sits, which could be catastrophic.

NHTSA ID

11774725

Incident

Oct 30, 2026

Customer Satisfaction Program 25N13 Certain 2015-2018 Model Year Edge and 2016-2018 Model Year MKX Vehicles Rear Brake Flexible Hose Replacement

Customer Satisfaction Program 25N15 - Supplement #1 Certain 2015-2019 Model Year Multiple Vehicle Lines Rear View Camera Inspection For One-Time Replacement

Ford and Lincoln vehicles equipped with wired keyless entry keypad systems and accessory wireless keyless entry keypad systems may or may not come with a wallet card containing the master code. Unlike the integrated wired keypad, the accessory wireless keypad master code cannot be retrieved from the vehicle using a diagnostic scan tool or from the label printed on the body control module (BCM). The Factory Keyless Entry Code application within the diagnostic scan tool will not provide an applicable master code for the accessory wireless keypad. If the wallet card for an accessory keypad is not available, the "Wireless RF Keypad Diagnosis Guide" can be referenced and provides direction on how to retrieve the master code. This guide is located under the Workshop Manual tab > Accessories > Installation > Wireless RF Keypad Diagnosis Guide > PPT C > Step C2.<br /><br /> Note: The only available keypad for some vehicles from the assembly plant is the accessory wireless keyless entry keypad. The integrated wired keypad cannot be installed on vehicles not equipped from the factory with a wired keyless entry k

Some 2016-2017 Edge/MKX, 2017 Continental/Fusion/MKZ vehicles equipped with a 2.7L or 3.0L EcoBoost engine and built on 1-Apr-2016 and through 1-Jan-2017 may exhibit white or blue smoke from the exhaust, rough idle in neutral or park at normal operating temperature or after a hot restart. The vehicle may also exhibit an illuminated malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) with diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) P0300, P0301, P0302, P0303, P0304, P0305, P0306 and/or P0316, P0524 and/or P06DD with excessive oil consumption. Oil consumption may be 1 Liter (1 quart) in less than 4,800 km (3,000 miles). This may be due to the valve guides. To correct the condition replace the cylinder heads. During service and repair, achieving proper torque of the crankshaft pulley bolt is critical. Incorrect torque may allow the bolt to loosen resulting in timing gear failure and engine damage. Replacement of the bolt is critical to the repair. The bolt requires a 4 stage torque procedure. Hold the pulley using a universal holding tool OTC 4754 or equivalent. Refer to Workshop Manual, Section 303-01. The bolt torque procedure can be

This article supersedes TSB 24-2165 to update the TSB Service Procedure. Some vehicles listed in the Model statement above may exhibit various SYNC performance related concerns including but not limited to:  Display operation concerns  Navigation inoperative  Voice recognition concerns  Phone connection issues  Dropped phone connections  Applink related performance  Travel Link not present or showing incorrect traffic  Slow system response NOTE: Ford has found some of the APIMs replaced and returned for inspection contained an outdated software level and the APIM did not require replacement. The customer concern may have been resolved by updating the APIM with latest level of software. The SYNC 3 universal thumb drive will be able to update the APIM software without the use of a scan tool and does not require the process to be monitored. Ford will be monitoring APIM replacements to confirm TSB directed software updates have been performed.

Some 2015-2021 Ford and Lincoln vehicles may exhibit an illuminated MIL with diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) P0011, P0012, P0014, P0015, P0016, P0017, P0018, P0019, P0021, P0022, P0024 and/or P0025. Pinpoint test HK in the Powertrain Control and Emissions Diagnosis (PC/ED) or in Section 303-14 of the Workshop Manual (WSM) has been updated to address this concern.