In August, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) closed an investigation into select Ford Bronco Sport and Ford Maverick models after the Blue Oval issued a recall to address the 12V battery issue that the agency had been at the center of the inquiry. Owners alleged that their vehicles suffered from a “loss of motive power,” essentially shutting down without warning. Unfortunately, new information suggests some of the vehicles may still be experiencing the issue, prompting the agency to open an investigation into the effectiveness of the recall remedy.
According to the Recall Query, the automaker’s recall of select 2021-2024 Ford Bronco Sport and 2022-2023 Ford Maverick vehicles involves a software update designed to address situations where where the 12V battery can rapidly degrade during operation, which can result in a sudden loss of motive power and what is essentially a complete shutdown, meaning the vehicles lose power and the ability to restart, along with accessories associated with the 12V system, including the hazard lights. The recall remedy involves software updates to the body control module and powertrain control module, in order to improve detection of the 12V battery state of charge during operation and to give drivers a warning in case the it degrades.
Since Ford issued the recall, NHTSA says the Office of Defects Investigation has received 15 Vehicle Owner Questionnaires that describe loss of motive power incidents with 2021 Ford Bronco Sport models that received the recall remedy. Consumers stated that before loss of power, the vehicle did not issue any warnings related to the 12V battery or the electrical system and that Ford dealers fixed the issue by replacing the 12V battery after the vehicles in question were towed to the dealership. Due to these reports, NHTSA decided to open a query into the effectiveness of the recall remedy for all vehicles covered by the recall itself, namely the 2021-2024 Ford Bronco Sport and the 2022-2023 Ford Maverick. The agency estimates that 465,565 vehicles are covered by the new query.
The opening of the query follows almost immediately after the agency obtained a consent order against Ford over its handling of several rearview camera recalls. The $165 million order is the second largest in the agency’s history.
Comments
Uh, oh. NHTSA has it in for Ford and here comes another big fine. If NHTSA really wanted to, they could bankrupt Ford by week’s end.
What is it with Fords poor engineering over the last number of years?
Putting a passageway for coolant between cylinders that turned into a complete failure and cost them many long block replacement’s of the 1.5 L
A wet belt that caused complete engine destruction of there 1L engines. A failure that they denied having for years that cost many owners thousands of dollars. Engines drinking coolant because of cracks forming in there EcoBoost blocks that went on for years and may still be happening.
Ford has single handily set a record for the most recalls a company has ever been involved in.
I just purchased a 24 Bronco Sport and it ran out of gas with the gauge showing more than 1/4 tank. It has the right side rear wheel tipped in at the top and a serious tow in issue. Now a recall for a battery degradation issue that makes no sense at all? Has anyone herd of an issue where you start your car and the battery goes bad while driving down the road?
Ford fix your engineering junk…….
Toyota replacing 100k+ entire engines not long blocks in 22-24 Tacoma & Tundra trucks due to engineering defect. Fords 1.5L engine block was redesigned for ’19 model yr. Proven to be stout small GTDI. Honda redesigned its 1.5L GTDI after just 2-3 yrs in production . Facts.
The saw kerf used instead of a drilled passage in the siamese area of the cylinders left a very narrow section of cylinder wall for the head gasket to keep its seal. In observing other makers engine designs, the kerf design was used in some BMW and Mercedes models, to name a couple, apparently without negative effect. They produced these models years prior to the Ford 1.0. I think Ford copied the manufacturing shortcut, cheaper to cut a slice than drill a passage, figuring if BMW & Mercedes used that method, it should be good enough for their own engine. The 2.0 ecoboost also used the same procedure to allow coolant passage, to its detriment.
From a distance, it seems the engineers didn’t test sufficiently to verify copying what other makers did was reliable. Oops. Oops to the tune of $millions.
Being old, a wet belt is something that was always avoided. To have the oil pump(no one needs that to work reliably…) driven by a wet belt is IMHO asking for trouble. GM uses one for their 4 cylinder diesel, which in turn drives chains to operate the fuel pump. Guess if it fails, and dumps the oil pressure, at least the engine won’t run as the injectors will have nothing to inject. Videos of belt inspections can be found on YT, and the apparent evidence is the belts deteriorate as expected(by me, anyway), and leave the owner with the expensive option of replacing the belt before the recommended interval. The 2.7EBV6 and 5.0 also have a wet belt, to their detriment. No thanks.
i have a 22 F150 with the 2.7 wet belt in it… my next two auto purchases were a Tahoe and a Yukon. That in spite of several ford bonus points for purchases. i am not happy at all with the the 2.7 nor the four recalls on my ’22. Ford killed me these real big short cuts – recalls..
on my 4th battery in 6months!! No warning just come out and its dead and when the Maverick Hybrid 12v battery is dead it is Bricked, cant be put in Neutral to be loaded up on flatbed tow truck easily. Me and the Ford Roadside service driver are on a first name basis. He just brought it back to me again today and i said see ya in 2 weeks!!! Come on Ford Do BETTER!!!!