2009 Mercury Milan

On April 18, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Engineering Analysis (EA) 18-002 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year (MY) 2006-12 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ, and MY 2006-11 Mercury Milan vehicles manufactured with Continental Automotive System?s ABS hydraulic control units (HCUs). Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (initiated by slippery or uneven surfaces) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the vehicle stopping distance increased beyond driver expectations.Inside the HCU are four hydraulic normally closed (NC) valves with zinc-coated moving armatures that control the flow of brake fluid. Unstable brake fluid can degrade over time, allow the brake fluid to gel, and corrosion to form on the armatures. The high-viscosity gelation and corrosion can cause the armatures to become stuck (open). In some cases, braking returns to normal when the armature(s) subsequently become unstuck. The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose with complainants reporting having (non-HCU) repairs conducted only to have the condition return.During the investigation, 14 HCUs from complaint vehicles were recovered, including seven from reported crashes. NHTSA?s Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) disassembled the HCUs, removed the four NC valves in each, and confirmed 22 of the 56 NC valves contained stuck armatures. On seven of the 14 HCUs, both front wheel armatures were stuck, on nine of the 14 HCUs two or three armatures were stuck. And 52 of the 56 NC armatures exhibited corrosion of the zinc coating. Forces required to extract stuck armatures from the valve sleeve were measured to range from 1.1 to 18.0 lbs. VRTC also conducted ABS braking tests on a variety of test surfaces that showed HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel and braking distances. Testing also showed that if the driver was able to apply four times the brake pedal force and two times the brake pedal travel, then high-vehicle decelerations could be achieved, however, single or multiple wheel lockups were also occurring.Based on Ford?s response to ODI?s July 20, 2018 information request letter, and complainants' reports to NHTSA, ODI identified a population of vehicles with an elevated level of field failure compared to vehicles produced both before and after.Further evaluation of Ford?s response identified that the brake fluid used to produce these vehicles, a specific formulation of a DOT3 fluid provided by CCI Corporation between February 2006 and July 2009, differed from the brake fluid used in other vehicle populations. ODI used the correlation of fluid specification and elevated field failures to identify a vehicle population exhibiting a defect trend. The complaints, crashes and injuries cited above, and the 14 recovered HCUs involve vehicles from this population.On December 18, 2019, Ford submitted safety recall (19V-904) to remedy HCU failures on the MY 2006-2010 Ford Fusion, Lincoln MKZ, and Mercury Milan vehicles manufactured with the suspect CCI brake fluid formulation. Ford will function test the HCU and replace the DOT 3 brake fluid with an improved DOT 4 brake fluid. If the HCU fails the function test, Ford will install an HCU with a different armature coating (black oxide). HCUs with black oxide coating were fully phased into Ford?s new vehicle production by MY 2016; these HCUs do not appear to be experiencing armature corrosion. ODI notes that the non-recalled EA18-002 subject vehicles, which were manufactured with a different specification brake fluid, did not display an elevated level of field failures like the recalled vehicles.Based on available information, Ford?s rec

On December 20, 2016, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 16-017 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year 2007 through 2009 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles.Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (caused by braking on a slippery or uneven surface) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the distance in which the vehicle stopped increased beyond what was expected by the driver.The cause of the problem appears to be the Antilock Braking System (ABS) Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU), a component manufactured for Ford by Continental Automotive Systems.Hydraulic control valves within the HCU can experience corrosion and become stuck.In some cases, braking returns to normal when the valve(s) subsequently become unstuck.The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose and complainants report having several brake system components replaced only to have the condition return.ODI has identified 544 reports submitted to the agency that relate to this issue in model year 2006-2012 Ford Fusion/MKZ and MY 2006-2011 Mercury Milan, the subject vehicles.Complainants report an increase in pedal travel which in some cases resulted in going past expected stopping points or having to steer to avoid contacting another vehicle; twenty six report a crash with 3 injuries alleged.The Ford reports shown above, which are from PE16-017 and involved the scope discussed above, were similar in content and identified 7 crashes without injury.During PE16-017, ODI was able to recover HCUs from some complaint vehicles, including some from the reported crashes.The recovered HCUs were sent to NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) in East Liberty, Ohio for evaluation.VRTC was able to confirm stuck valves and corrosion of the zinc coated control valves, and it's testing indicates that HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel that may affect braking distance.According to Ford, newer version HCUs have a different coating on the affected valves that do not currently appear to be experiencing corrosion.In it's response to ODI's information request letter, Ford described analysis of two failed HCUs removed from complainant vehicles.In both cases, a gelatinous material found inside the HCU prevented control valves from properly returning to the closed position after actuation.Ford found that an interaction between the valve coating and brake fluid was the likely source of the gelatinous material.It acknowledged that stuck valves can result in increased pedal travel but maintains the affected brake circuit will develop pressure and respond if the brake pedal is pressed sufficiently.While it has not identified an unreasonable risk to safety due to this issue, Ford states that it continues to investigate the possible causal and contributory factors including additional engineering evaluations and testing.An Engineering Analysis has been opened to assess the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequence of the alleged defect.Based on information received during PE16-017, the scope of the investigation has been increased to include another model, the Lincoln MKZ, and to expand the model years of the subject vehicles.

On May 27, 2014, Ford Motor Company submitted recall 14E-028 (Ford recall #14S07) to correct a safety-related problem with certain driver's side Ford optional all-weather floor mats sold for use in model year 2006 through 2011 model year Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zephyr, and Lincoln MKZ vehicles built at Hermosillo Assembly Plant (HAP) from November 9, 2007, to October 31 ,2010.NHTSA testing determined that the original accessory all-weather mat with a single retention clip (Figure 1), may interfere with accelerator pedal return to idle with the mat retained by the clip and rotated clockwise.Both the single- and double-clip (Figure 2) all-weather floor mats may interfere with the accelerator pedal return to idle when the mats are not secured by the retention clip(s).Testing showed that this can occur if the mats are moved forward from the clipped position approximately two inches into a position in which the rear edge of the mats will abut the retention clip(s) when installed singly and align with the clip(s) when stacked on another floor mat.The pedal interference incidents reviewed by the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) include 1 crash and 9 incidents with allegations of brake friction materials smoking and/or requiring repair for heat related damage.The crash incident occurred after the parking brake was applied at speed, resulting in loss-of-control vehicle yaw event caused by lock-up of the rear tires.The spin-out resulted in a side impact collision with an oncoming vehicle in an opposing lane of traffic. For the 29 incidents with sufficient information available to make an assessment; 23 (79%) were controlled by the driver either shifting to neutral, turning the engine off, or both; 4 (14%) were ended by the driver either kicking the pedal free (2) or pulling the mat away from the pedal (2); and 2 (7%) were ended by the pedal freeing itself from the mat with no apparent driver action.None of the drivers who reacted to the incident by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off reported any difficulties with either action.The subject mats were sold by Ford and Lincoln dealers directly to customers as an optional accessory equipment item or, beginning in November 2007, the mats were also available as a factory installed accessory if ordered with a new vehicle.Ford estimates that approximately 82,579 affected driver's side all weather floor mats were sold worldwide; either over the counter through Ford dealerships or as original equipment.Owners that purchased the subject all-weather floor mats as a factory installed accessory with their new vehicle will be notified to return their all weather floor mats to their Ford or Lincoln Dealership in exchange for replacement mats.Owners of all other potentially affected vehicles will be notified that, if they have an affected Ford driver's side all weather floor mat, they should return their mats to the dealership in exchange for replacement mats.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10327597, 10332233, 10334211, 10335336, 10339330, 10348772 (and duplicate 10342572), 10372674, 10379562, 10415911, 10426255, 10434107, 10521053, 10554966.This investigation is hereby closed.

Unsecured mats may interfere with accelerator pedal return to idle. A heel blocker in the floor pan provides a platform that may lift an unsecured mat into contact with the pedal. Ford introduced new pedals as a running change early in model year (MY) 2010 vehicles. Analysis of complaints received by ODI and Ford show elevated rates of pedal entrapment incidents in MY 2008 through early 2010 production vehicles. Incidents typically occur following hard pedal applications to pass slower traffic or when merging into faster traffic. Drivers allege continued high engine power after releasing the accelerator pedal and difficulty braking, including reports that the incident was controlled by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off. Drivers and service technicians reference observing evidence of mat interference or note unsecured Ford or aftermarket all weather floor mats in post-incident inspections.Based on information gathered during the Preliminary Evaluation the population being investigated has been narrowed to model years 2008 to 2010.This investigation has been upgraded to an engineering analysis on MY 2008 through early-2010 vehicles (produced through September 2009) to further assess the scope, frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect.The VOQs associated with the opening of this Engineering Analysis are: 10479693, 10415911, 10379562, 10372674, 10345830, 10342572, 10339330, 10335336, 10334211, 10332233, 10331160, 10329659, 10327597, 10320011, 10232027, 10214131

The contact owns a 2009 Mercury Milan. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the brake pedal was depressed and traveled to the floorboard. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact engaged the parking brake to stop the vehicle. The vehicle was restarted. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where it was diagnosed and determined that the ABS hydraulic control unit had failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and confirmed that the VIN was not included in NHTSA Campaign Number: 19V904000 (Service Brakes, Hydraulic). The approximate failure mileage was 100,000.

NHTSA ID

11633632

Incident

Jan 2, 2025

Mileage

100,000 mi

Check engine light airbag light brake light on my car they turned them off and they turned on right after

NHTSA ID

11595626

Incident

Jun 11, 2024

I RECEIVED A LETTER IN JULY OF 2021 ABOUT THE ABS CONTROL UNIT PROBLEM MY VEHICLE HAS. AT THE MOMENT THAT CONTROL MODULE IS NON-FUNCTIONAL. TO DATE FORD HAS NOT PRODUCED OR MADE AVAILABLE ANY OF THE PARTS NEEDED FOR THIS REPAIR AND WILL NOT EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE THE VEHICLE WHEN I CALLED THEM. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW LONG I HAVE TO DRIVE A VEHICLE WITH KNOWN DEFECTIVE BRAKES BEFORE FORD IS FORCED TO COMPLETE THIS REPAIR? THERE IS ALSO A BRAKE FLUID ISSUE WITH THIS VEHICLE THAT CANNOT BE ADDRESSED UNTIL THE NON-FUNCTIONING ABS MODULE IS REPAIRED. THE DEALER REFUSED TO CHANGE THE SAID CORROSIVE FLUID BECAUSE OF THE NON-FUNCTIONING ABS MODULE.

NHTSA ID

11511028

Incident

Mar 9, 2023

Brake pedal going to floor extending stopping distance. Early in 2022 I took it in for recall S1954. HCU passed test and dealer replaced DOT3 brake fluid with DOt4. 5/24/2022 Brake pedal started going to floor again. Dealer performed self test of hcu and electronic bleed hcu and said pedal was somewhat better but needed $400 of brake work to for Brake pads, lining and turn rotors. Car functioned fine for a few days. In early June I was driving on a wet street and put on the brakes. It appeared the ABS system was trying to kick in and suddenly the pedal again went to the floor. I was barely able to miss rear-ending a city bus. I pulled into a gas station, turned the car off. When I started it again the brake pedal went to the floor. After pumping it a number of times it came back up and was again functioning. Took it to dealer on 6/1/22. Dealer again tested the hcu test which once again it passed. They could find no other problems. Dealers recommended replacing the abs modlule and master cylinder to the tune of $1,400. Seems like they can test and find out which part isn't malfunctioning (hcu which is under recall), but cant test to find out which part is malfunctioning (ABS module or master cylinder) There is obviously still serious issue with the brake system on these cars that is not being corrected by the initial hcu recall. It needs to be fixed before someone is killed. There were no warning lights or messages relating to the brakes.

NHTSA ID

11467509

Incident

Jun 1, 2022

The problem I am having is with the cars braking system. I have extended brake travel required to stop the vehicle for which I have been issued two recalls. Because of the extended brake travel, I was unable to stop in time and had a front end collision with minor damage, which was not reported. The problem first showed up when I was forced to brake hard a few years causing the ABS to engage. The brake pedal traveled to the floor until the next time the ABS was engaged. Shortly after that, I was issued a recall stating the exact problem I was having. When I took it to my local dealership to get it fixed, they performed a test, changed the brake fluid, and said the system was working properly. It was not. Took it back to the dealership when hydraulic control valve became permanently locked open. They inspected it again and said the ABS unit needed to be replaced but the parts were not available. Contacted FMC customer service, and they were unable to help me either. I asked for a loaner vehicle, and received no response. Since then, I have been issued another recall and am still driving an unsafe car in a Michigan winter. All I want is a safe car to drive.

NHTSA ID

11450381

Incident

Jul 1, 2018

2009 MERCURY MILAN. CONSUMER STATED THAT AFTER HAVING SAFETY RECALL REPAIRED THEY ARE STILL EXPERIENCING ISSUES RELATED TO THE SAFETY RECALL.

NHTSA ID

11439474

Incident

Nov 5, 2021

Manufacturer Recall Number19S54 NHTSA Recall Number19V904 This recall has been on file since: Dec 18,2019. There is still no remedy. I believe this issue is causing my vehicle to have significant delays in braking into a complete stop. The manufacturer has failed or is unable to remedy this safety recall for my vehicle in a timely manner, so I would like to file a formal complaint.

NHTSA ID

11430134

Incident

Aug 23, 2021

After receiving the Safety Recall Notice 19S54 in the mail, I contacted my local Ford dealership and set up an appointment. On May 24, 2021, I brought my car to the dealership for this recall. At this time, I explained that the brake pedal was going to the floor intermittently. The car had 134,880 miles on it. The Hydraulic Control Unit was inspected and supposedly passed. So the dealer flushed the brake system and replaced the cap. After leaving the dealership, the car sat for several weeks. Two weeks after driving it again, I noticed that the brake pedal was going to the floor and it was difficult to stop the vehicle. I called the dealer and set up another appointment. The dealer had me wait about two weeks. On August 2nd, I brought my car back to the dealer for the same brake issue (Safety Recall 19S54). At this time the car had 135,492 miles. Again they inspected the brakes and the Hydraulic Control Unit. This time they found the HCU Assembly to be faulty and recommend that it be replaced. However, Ford Motor Company is refusing to cover this part under the Safety Recall 19S54 because they closed the recall after the May appointment. They want us to pay over $1500 to have it fixed.

NHTSA ID

11428247

Incident

Jul 13, 2021

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

All accessory stick-on keyless entry keypads come with a wallet card containing the master code. If the accessory keypad was factory installed, this card will be placed in the glove box and should be handed to the vehicles owner during initial delivery. Unlike the integrated (wired) factory keypad, the accessory keypad master code cannot be retrieved from the vehicle using a diagnostic scan tool. If the wallet card for an accessory keypad is lost, follow these steps to recover the code. Dealer Key Code access is granted through the Dealer Program Enrollment System (DPES); dealership management can authorize users. The authorized user must go to FMCDealer.com > Parts and Service > Parts Product Line Information > Keys/Entry Devices > Aftermarket Keyless Entry Keypad Code Access. Follow the instructions on the screen to obtain the master code for the accessory keypad.

When performing any transmission fluid change or topoff involving Motorcraft® Premium ATF, MERCON® V has replaced all versions of Motorcraft® Premium ATF and can be used going forward. Mixing Motorcraft® Premium ATF and MERCON® V in the same transmission is acceptable. After 31-Jan-2024, Motorcraft® Premium ATF will no longer be manufactured and will only be available until inventory depletes.

Certain 2005-2014 Mustang, 2005-2006 GT, 2004-2011 Ranger, 2006-2012 Fusion and MKZ/Zephyr, 2006-2011 Milan, and 2007-2010 Edge & MKX Vehicles Driver & Passenger Airbag Module Quality Control Inspection REASON FOR THIS SUPPLEMENT • Updated Ranger Technical Information to include images of a pass and fail airbag inflator inspection for 2007-2011 model years.

Certain 2005-2014 Mustang, 2005-2006 GT, 2004-2011 Ranger, 2006-2012 Fusion & MKZ/Zephyr, 2006-2011 Milan, and 2007-2010 Edge & MKX Vehicles Driver & Passenger Airbag Module Quality Control Inspection: Ford Motor Company has determined that some vehicles claimed by dealers as repaired under Takata Airbag Safety Recalls 15S21, 17S42, 18S02, 19S01, and 21S12 may not have received the claimed repairs. The propellant in certain Takata airbag inflators can experience an alteration over time with exposure to certain climate conditions. A combination of time, high temperature fluctuations, and humidity contribute to the degradation of the propellant in the inflators. This degradation can cause the propellant to burn too quickly, creating high pressure inside the inflator, and in extreme cases causing the inflator to rupture in the event of a crash necessitating airbag deployment. A ruptured inflator can send inflator parts toward vehicle occupants resulting in serious injury or death. Additional information regarding Takata recalls can be found at www.nhtsa.gov and www.safercar.gov.

Certain 2006-2010 Model Year Fusion/Milan/MKZ/Zephyr Vehicles Equipped with Anti-Lock Brake Systems DOT 3 Brake Fluid and Anti-Lock Brake System Function In some of the affected vehicles, customers may return to the dealer with complaints of extended brake pedal travel after either 19S54 or 20S14 was previously performed and the program is closed