RoadVitals

NHTSA safety investigation

NHTSA Investigation PE11016

Preliminary Evaluation · Ford Motor Company · STRUCTURE:BODY:HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE

ClosedPreliminary Evaluation

An investigation is not a finding that a defect exists.

NHTSA opens an investigation to examine whether a safety defect may exist. An open investigation is not a determination that a defect exists, and many investigations close without a recall. Investigations can, however, lead to one.

Model years namedModel years in our database that NHTSA associated with this inquiry. Being named in an investigation says nothing about whether an individual vehicle has any problem.
4
2 models
Opened
Apr 27, 2011
Preliminary Evaluation
Closed
Aug 18, 2011
No associated recall recorded

What NHTSA is examining

The agency's own description of the inquiry, quoted as published

Rear Liftgate Window Glass Breakage

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.

An investigation is a separate record from a recall and from a manufacturer communication. A manufacturer campaign to repair a safety defect or a failure to meet a federal safety standard.

Investigation details

Identifiers, dates and outcome as recorded by NHTSA

Action number
PE11016
Investigation type
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)
Status
Closed
Manufacturer
Ford Motor Company
Component
STRUCTURE:BODY:HATCHBACK/LIFTGATE
Opened
Apr 27, 2011
Closed
Aug 18, 2011
Associated recall campaign
None recorded

Vehicles named in this investigation

4 model years across 2 models

Being named here means NHTSA included the vehicle in the scope of its inquiry. It is not a statement that these vehicles have a defect.