2013 Ford Escape "do not drive it" type safety recall

[allisolm]

http://corporate.ford.com/news-cent...ford-acts-quickly-to-ensure-36814?searchid=||

2013 model year Ford Escape vehicles equipped with the 1.6-liter engine, which were built through July 11, 2012.

•The recall is being taken to replace an engine compartment fuel line, which could split and leak fuel, potentially resulting in an underhood fire; no injuries have been reported.

•Ford is advising affected owners not to drive their vehicles and to contact their dealers immediately for the needed repair. Dealers will deliver a loaner vehicle to customers and will then transport their 2013 Escape to the dealership until the repair has been completed

 

[rh71]

what it comes down to is don't buy first year redesigned models if you can help it.

 

[theevilsharpie]

2013 model year Ford Escape vehicles equipped with the 1.6-liter engine...

I admit that I've been out of the automotive loop for a while, but an SUV with a 1.6 liter engine actually exists? WTF is the point of such a vehicle?

Edit: Oh, it's turbocharged. Nevermind

 

[Engineer]

The fuel lines came from my former employer (of 17 years). This is what you get when you shut down your tooling plant of 35 people with over 1,000 years of experience and then hire out the machinery to be built by inexperienced tooling shops in hopes to save money. Crappy equipment that builds defective parts (confirmed via former co-workers who are on contract with the former employer and see this stuff every day).

Hope nobody gets hurt and that the supplier survives the money hit of this as I would really like to get my pension someday! :biggrin:

 

[jagec]

I admit that I've been out of the automotive loop for a while, but an SUV with a 1.6 liter engine actually exists? WTF is the point of such a vehicle?

Edit: Oh, it's turbocharged. Nevermind

It's not really an SUV, it's a crossover. Which is to say, a big and tall hatchback.

 

[fatpat268]

I admit that I've been out of the automotive loop for a while, but an SUV with a 1.6 liter engine actually exists? WTF is the point of such a vehicle?

Edit: Oh, it's turbocharged. Nevermind

Yep, I had to laugh when I first heard about that... it's essentially the same engine that my lowly ford fiesta has (afaik), just turbocharged.

In a small car a 1.6L is fine, but I'm not sure I'd want that in an SUV, turbocharged or not.

 

[rcpratt]

Would be a big deal if they hadn't caught it so early.

 

[Zap]

This could result in, of course, fiery death!

 

[Spungo]

This could result in, of course, fiery death!

Kill it with fire!

In a small car a 1.6L is fine, but I'm not sure I'd want that in an SUV, turbocharged or not.

So you'd rather drive a vehicle that has the same power but uses significantly more fuel?

 

[Meghan54]

Dang....Ford is getting hammered on recalls for this Escape. Came into this thread thinking it was about the recall for sticking throttles causing unintended acceleration, but it's not. The fuel line recall was last week....the sticking throttle is this week's Escape recall.

http://www.nydailynews.com/autos/recall-trouble-ford-escape-time-faulty-gas-pedals-article-1.1123245

Wonder what next week will produce?

 

[Arkaign]

Kill it with fire!


So you'd rather drive a vehicle that has the same power but uses significantly more fuel?

I'll take the larger non-turbo motor every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

2013 FWD 1.6T 173HP/184TQ - 23 City 33 Highway $25,070

2013 FWD 2.5 170HP/168TQ - 22 City 32 Highway $22,470

It's a pretty fair gap in price between the two, the 1.6T has a little bit more torque and a speck better fuel economy, but my preference would go to the 2.5 Duratec, it's just a simpler design and I prefer not to have to deal with turbos. It's 103 today here in Texas, and turbos just sort of suck with this kind of extreme heat wave. Now would I rather have a 2.5 or a 2.5T? Haha well if it's a for-fun car then a 2.5T for sure. But for an economy proposition I'd always rather have fewer moving parts and potential problems. Not to mention in the example above $2,500 will buy quite a lot of gas to cover the 1mpg gap. It's worth noting that the 1.6T models come with a few more options, though less than the 2.0T top of the line setups.

 

[Arkaign]

On the subject though, I think the Mazda CX-5 wins this segment.

 

[Subyman]

what it comes down to is don't buy first year redesigned models if you can help it.

Yup. We bought a first year Chevy Cruze for business and its had some trouble. We've got around 45k miles on it already. They've had to totally replace the AC. Even with the new parts it still doesn't cool properly in 90F+. The transmission is rough when cold and when putting it into drive.

 

[Arkaign]

Yup. We bought a first year Chevy Cruze for business and its had some trouble. We've got around 45k miles on it already. They've had to totally replace the AC. Even with the new parts it still doesn't cool properly in 90F+. The transmission is rough when cold and when putting it into drive.

Very disappointing, the Fiesta has had some similar troubles as well.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Ford: 109 years of cars on fire

 

[foghorn67]

On the subject though, I think the Mazda CX-5 wins this segment.

It does everything perfectly...unless you have more than one person in the car.

 

[LTC8K6]

I'll take the larger non-turbo motor every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

2013 FWD 1.6T 173HP/184TQ - 23 City 33 Highway $25,070

2013 FWD 2.5 170HP/168TQ - 22 City 32 Highway $22,470

It's a pretty fair gap in price between the two, the 1.6T has a little bit more torque and a speck better fuel economy, but my preference would go to the 2.5 Duratec, it's just a simpler design and I prefer not to have to deal with turbos. It's 103 today here in Texas, and turbos just sort of suck with this kind of extreme heat wave. Now would I rather have a 2.5 or a 2.5T? Haha well if it's a for-fun car then a 2.5T for sure. But for an economy proposition I'd always rather have fewer moving parts and potential problems. Not to mention in the example above $2,500 will buy quite a lot of gas to cover the 1mpg gap. It's worth noting that the 1.6T models come with a few more options, though less than the 2.0T top of the line setups.

I'll take the 2.0T. It's been around long enough now to have the kinks ironed out.

2.5 is front wheel drive only.

 

[Arkaign]

I'll take the 2.0T. It's been around long enough now to have the kinks ironed out.

2.5 is front wheel drive only.

The 2.0T certainly is really damn nice, but it's reserved for the most expensive models :\

 

[Arkaign]

I'd probably consider AWD if I lived somewhere I actually needed it. I've driven through iced/wintered over upstate NY state, Montana, Canada, etc, and AWD/4WD is super nice to have. Here in north texas, even through snowpocaylpse, puttering down the road in a FWD is easily done. I always smh at people driving around in BMW 328xi, etc, as AWD is utterly pointless here, just more weight, lower fuel economy, more moving parts, higher sticker price. One could argue that you could take an AWD SUV offroad more capably, though I don't think I ever would. Personally I prefer a beater Cherokee or something of that nature to take camping, mudding, etc. My brother used to take his Land Rover HSE on hardcore offroad trails (three diamond in the wet). It did really really well, but it made me shudder to see scratches and dings that you really can't avoid during intense offroad sessions in the brush.

 

[LTC8K6]

The 2.0T certainly is really damn nice, but it's reserved for the most expensive models :\

It's available on all but the S.

I just would not want a front wheel drive, so I'd go with AWD.

 

[LTC8K6]

Looks like the 2.5 is S model only and front drive only.

I have the same problem with the Explorer. I don't want a front wheel drive SUV, so it would have to be AWD.

 

[PhoKingGuy]

These things are super popular with the retirees in FL. I see them ALL OVER the place now.

 

[rcpratt]

Dang....Ford is getting hammered on recalls for this Escape. Came into this thread thinking it was about the recall for sticking throttles causing unintended acceleration, but it's not. The fuel line recall was last week....the sticking throttle is this week's Escape recall.

http://www.nydailynews.com/autos/recall-trouble-ford-escape-time-faulty-gas-pedals-article-1.1123245

Wonder what next week will produce?

That was announced last week as well, and it's not the same Escape. The apparent throttle thing is 2001-2004 models.

 

[mmntech]

Yep, I had to laugh when I first heard about that... it's essentially the same engine that my lowly ford fiesta has (afaik), just turbocharged.

In a small car a 1.6L is fine, but I'm not sure I'd want that in an SUV, turbocharged or not.

180hp so 0.051hp/lb. Fiesta gets 0.049hp/lb for comparison with the non turbo engine.

 

[fatpat268]

Very disappointing, the Fiesta has had some similar troubles as well.

Well the issues with the fiesta aren't necessarily with the transmission itself, but the software controlling it. The auto transmission in the fiesta is actually a manual (or so I'm told) controlled by the car's computer. Most of the issues occur when the car is trying to "learn" your driving style.

I hate it myself though. There's times where I need quick acceleration, and the transmission thinks I'm in the middle of a parking lot or something, so it's sluggish. Seriously wish there were paddle shifters on that car.

I'm curious, is the new Ford Escape's automatic controlled similarly?

180hp so 0.051hp/lb. Fiesta gets 0.049hp/lb for comparison with the non turbo engine.

Yuck. That's my point. If you're buying an SUV, theoretically you're buying it to haul passengers/cargo. Like I said, that performance is fine for a small car designed to get good fuel mileage. It's not good for an SUV (or whatever they're calling it nowadays).

But like Arkaign pointed out, the 1.6L turbo on the escape is really a losing value proposition. You only get marginally better fuel economy for $2.5k more with similar performance.