2017 Ford Edge · keep 3 yr

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“We were driving down Hwy 84 in Georgia coming from the airport a truck was making a left hand turn and turned in front of us.. We hit the car going about 30 miles an hour.. The air bags did not deploy and we suffered greatly because of this.. This happened 2/14/21..”

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“WAS IN ACCIDENT HIT FROM BACK AND THAN FRONT. CAR WAS TOTALED. AIR BAGS NEVER WENT OFF. CAR WAS STOPPED FOR TRAFFIC JAM. ACCIDENT WAS ON A HIGHWAY.”

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“THIS VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT WHEN ANOTHER VEHICLE CROSSED ITS PATH GOING THE WRONG WAY ON A ONE WAY STREET. THIS FORD EDGE STRUCK THE FORD F150 BROADSIDE AT APPROXIMATELY 30+ MPH AT ABOUT A 20 DEGREE ANGLE DRIVERS SIDE HOOD AND FENDER AND WINDSHIELD BROKEN. THE STEERING WHEEL AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY, AND THE KNEE BOLSTER DID NOT DEPLOY FULLY. THIS CAUSED SERIOUS INJURIES TO THE DRIVER.”

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“The contact owns a 2017 Ford Edge. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Numbers: 25V544000 (Service Brakes, Hydraulics) and 25V572000 (Back Over Prevention); however, the part to do the recall repair was unavailable. The contact stated that the manufacturer exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The contact stated that after pulling into a parking lot at 5 MPH, the vehicle suddenly accelerated without applying more pressure to the accelerator pedal. The vehicle crashed into the cement foundation of a handicap sign, bringing the vehicle to a complete stop. No air bags deployed. The contact received emotional distress. The contact's husband, brother, and friend also experienced emotional distress. The vehicle's fender was slightly detached due to the incident. Someone assisted them with tying the fender to the vehicle with a rope before driving the vehicle home at approximately 10 MPH. A police report was not filed. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed. The dealer replaced the front bumper, grille, front lamps, radiator support, mount tie bar, fender, and electrical components, as well as other unknown parts. The dealer confirmed that there were no remedies available for the recalls. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure. The failure mileage was approximately 50,000.”

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“The contact owns a 2017 Ford Edge. The contact stated that while his wife was driving at 70 MPH and approaching an exit, the brake pedal was depressed but the brakes failed to engage. As a result, the driver crashed into a vehicle in front that was stopped at a red light. The air bag deployed. No warning light was illuminated. A police report was filed. There was a six-year-old daughter occupant seated at the rear driver's at the time of the failure. Both received minor abrasions. The driver had a seat belt abrasion on her collarbone. The daughter had a seatbelt abrasion in the lower abdomen. Medical treatment was needed and both received blood tests to make sure there was no damage to the liver. The vehicle was towed to a lot. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 110,000.”

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“NHTSA SHOULD INVESTIGATE THE POTENTIAL FOR SUDDEN FAILURE OF THE BRAKE PEDAL BRACKET MOUNTED ON THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT BULKHEAD ON FORD VEHICLES THAT UTILIZE THE CJ5Z-7825557-AB MOULDING. THIS BRACKET FAILED ON MY 2017 FORD EDGE THAT WAS TWO WEEKS OLD AND HAD 500 MILES ON THE ODOMETER. COPIES OF THE EXPERT MECHANICS' REPORT AND THE REPORT FROM THE METALLURGIST, WHO WAS HIRED TO CONDUCT AN ANALYSIS AND THE FAILURE MODE OF THE BRAKE BRACKET REMOVED FROM MY VEHICLE AFTER THE ACCIDENT, ARE ATTACHED TO THIS COMPLAINT. DURING THE METALLURGICAL STUDY A BRAND NEW BRAKE BRACKET WAS ANALYZED AND WAS FOUND TO HAVE SIMILAR CRACKS. WHEN THE BRAKE BRACKET FRACTURED AND FAILED, THE BRAKE PEDAL WENT DOWN TO THE FLOOR AND I LOST THE ABILITY TO DECELERATE THE VEHICLE. NONE OF THE BRAKE SYSTEM WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON. THE KEY-LESS IGNITION WOULD HAVE BEEN DANGEROUS TO USE BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE SWITCHED OFF THE ELECTRICAL CIRCUITS TO THE AIR BAGS. MY FULL ATTENTION WAS FOCUSED ON STEERING THE VEHICLE WHILE ATTEMPTING TO CROSS MULTIPLE LANES OF TRAFFIC AND GET ONTO THE ENTRANCE RAMP TO REDUCE SPEED. SEE THE ATTACHED POLICE REPORT FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ACCIDENT. A FORD ENGINEERING REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ACTIVE IN THE INVESTIGATION SINCE APRIL AND FAILED TO INCLUDE OTHER FORD AND SUPPLIER PERSONNEL IN THE JOINT REVIEW OF THE DEFECTIVE PART OR SUGGESTED ANY ADDITIONAL TESTING. WHEN I STARTED CONTACTING FORD IN OCTOBER, SUDDENLY THEY INSISTED THAT I HAD TO GIVE THEM THE DEFECTIVE PART, SO THEY COULD CONDUCT THEIR OWN TESTING AND REVIEW. I REFUSED TO HAND OVER THE PART AND OFFERED JOINT REVIEWS AND TESTING. FORD REFUSED MY OFFER AND BASICALLY SAID TO TAKE THEM TO COURT. CONTRARY TO WHAT FORD MAY CLAIM, THE DAMAGED VEHICLE AND DEFECTIVE PART ARE STILL OWNED BY ME, BUT BEING HELD BY MY INSURANCE COMPANY SINCE TESTING. *BF *TR”

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“The contact owns a 2017 Ford Edge. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 25V544000 (Service Brakes, Hydraulic); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The dealer was made aware of the issue and confirmed that parts were not yet available. The manufacturer was not made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure.”

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“The contact owns a 2017 Ford Edge. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 25V544000 (Service Brakes, Hydraulic); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The local dealer was contacted and confirmed that the part was not yet available. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was not made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure.”

The records describe a problem worth checking before purchase.

“The contact owns a 2017 Ford Edge. The contact received notification of NTHSA Campaign Number: 25V544000 (Service Brakes, Hydraulic); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The local dealer was contacted. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed and depressing the brake pedal, the vehicle lost braking power. The vehicle was towed to the dealer, where it was repaired with in-house parts at the owner's expense. The contact was currently awaiting the release of the recall remedy to apply for reimbursement. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 130,159.”

The records describe a possible fatal outcome.

“Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture 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.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Loss of braking caused by rear brake hose failure 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.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2016-2017 Ford Edge and Lincoln MKX vehicles and 2017 Lincoln Continental vehicles. In the event of a crash, the driver's frontal air bag may not fully inflate or the air bag cushion may detach from the air bag module. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 208, "Occupant Crash Protection." During deployment, if the air bag does not fully inflate or the cushion detaches, there is an increased risk of injury in the event of a crash. Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the driver frontal air bag module, free of charge. The recall began June 16, 2017. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 17C02.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2017 Edge vehicles equipped with the optional Panoramic Vista Roof. These vehicles may have an improperly welded windshield header, reducing the vehicle's lateral structural integrity. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 214, "Side Impact Protection." If the vehicle has reduced lateral structural integrity, the occupants are at an increased risk of injury in the event of a side-impact crash. Ford will notify owners, and dealers will repair the windshield header, free of charge. The recall began May 18, 2017. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for the recall is 17C05.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2017 Lincoln MKZ and Ford Edge and Fusion vehicles. On vehicles with 2.0L gas engines and six-speed automatic transmissions, the torque converter weld studs may have been inadequately welded. If the torque converter weld studs fail, the torque converter will not be connected to the engine flexplate and the vehicle will lose the ability to move, increasing the risk of a crash. Ford or Lincoln will notify owners, and dealers will replace the torque converters, free of charge. The recall began August 25, 2017. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 17S16.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2017-2018 Ford Edge and 2017 Lincoln MKZ vehicles. On vehicles with 2.0L gas engines and six-speed automatic transmissions, the torque converter weld studs may have been inadequately welded. If the torque converter weld studs fail, the torque converter will not be connected to the engine flexplate and the vehicle will lose the ability to move, increasing the risk of a crash. Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the torque converters, free of charge. The recall began on July 5, 2018. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 17S16 (S2). Note: This recall is an expansion of recall 17V-427.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2018 Ford Edge and 2016-2018 Lincoln MKX vehicles. The front brake hoses may rupture prematurely. A ruptured front brake hose will cause a brake fluid leak, lengthening the distance needed to stop the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash. Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the front brake hoses with the new hoses that have a revised braid material, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed on May 13, 2021. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 20S42.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2013-2019 Escape, 2013-2018 C-Max, 2013-2016 Fusion, 2013-2021 Transit Connect, and 2015-2018 Edge vehicles. The bushing that attaches the shifter cable to the transmission may degrade or detach. A damaged or missing bushing may prevent the vehicle from shifting into the intended gear, and cause the vehicle to move in an unexpected direction. Additionally, the vehicle may roll after the driver selects the 'Park' position. Either scenario increases the risk of a crash or injury. Dealers will replace the under hood shift bushing and add a protective cap over the shift cable bushing, free of charge. Interim owner notification letters, informing owners of the safety risk, were mailed July 1, 2022. Remedy parts are expected to be available in 4th Quarter 2022. Owner notification letters were mailed October 27, 2022. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 22S43.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2016-2018 Lincoln MKX and 2015-2018 Edge vehicles. The rear brake jounce hose may rupture and leak brake fluid. A brake fluid leak can extend the distance required to stop the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash. Dealers will inspect and replace the brake jounce hoses and adjust brake jounce hoses with no damage present, free of charge. Interim owner letters notifying owners of the safety risk were mailed September 8, 2025. Additional letters will be sent once the remedy is available, anticipated August 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S87.”

The records describe a possible crash, fire, injury, or loss of control.

“Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2019 Lincoln MKC, Mustang, F-350 SD, F-250 SD, F-450 SD, 2015-2017 Lincoln Navigator, Expedition, 2015-2018 Edge, Transit Connect, 2016-2019 F-550 SD, Transit, 2017-2019 Econoline, and 2019 Ranger vehicles. The rearview camera may display a distorted, inverted, or blank image when the vehicle is in reverse. A rearview camera that displays an inverted, distorted, or blank image can reduce the driver’s view behind the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash. Dealers will inspect and replace the rearview camera as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed January 13, 2026. Ford owners will receive letters in phases, beginning January 2026 and June 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S89. This recall expands previous NHTSA recall number 25V270. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall will be searchable on NHTSA.gov beginning September 8, 2025.”