New Lawsuit Targets Ford EcoBoost Four-Cylinder Coolant Leaks

[jimmy fitzwell]

2nd Gen 2.0 EcoBoost

Ford gave the 2.0 a major revamp in 2015 in favor of more performance and better fuel efficiency. However, the real reason for the new engine is that the Ford/Mazda partnership lapsed and Ford had to design it’s own 2.0 EB engine instead of piggy-backing off of the Mazda L engine.


The 2nd Gen variation received a new aluminum block, new cylinder head with an integrated exhaust manifold, and changed to a twin-scroll turbocharger. Additionally, the twin-scroll turbo by BorgWarner has an active wastegate.


In addition to a higher compression ratio, the fuel system and oil cooling system received upgrades. The overall result was better gas mileage and more low-end torque, making it more capable as a tow vehicle.

What year did the Ford/Mazda partnership lapse?

Sponsored

 

[spacemancraig]

I have a 2017 escape titanium 2.0 that just died at 69k miles due to this issue. I had an extended warranty through AutoNation (the vehicle was new when I bought it tho, 500ish miles) and they told me to pound sand because I don't have documentation of an oil change I did around 30k.

Prepping docs this week to make a case to ford to hopefully get some assistance on the repair. I've done a lot of research. The new 2.0 won't have the coolant intrusion issue...who knows if it has anything else, but this one was fixed. Anyone who replaced their block with the new design hasn't seen it again.

That said, Ford, like all automakers is a business. They'll die pretty quick if they release trash on the regular. I have an order in for an area 51 first edition hybrid because...shit happens. Ford vehicles have overall been good to me so I see no reason to switch.

 

[starquestbd22]

People keep throwing out the 2015 redesign as having something to do with this issue when it actually doesn’t. The coolant issue was around before and after 2015. Somewhere around 2019-2020 is when Ford redesigned the specific problem area to correct this issue.

There are only a handful of half legit third party warranty companies out of hundreds out there. I will buy some form of extended warranty directly from Ford. Not so much because I’m worried about the Mav or the 2.0 but more because between being able to buy the warranty at near dealer cost and considering the price of the Mav, I’m able to do so. Plus, who doesn’t like peace of mind?

 

[FirstOnRaceDay]

There was some overlap between the first and second generation ecoboost. They didn’t change over every vehicle in 2015.
But there are some isolated issues.

it sounds like lawyers are making it a bigger deal than what it actually is.

 

[Hot Runr Guy]

it sounds like lawyers are making it a bigger deal than what it actually is.

I can see both sides of the discussion. In my case, I was under warranty, and the repairing dealer could not have possibly treated me any better, I have no interest in joining a class action suit and enriching the lawyers.

However, if like spacemancraig relates, he was out of the initial Ford warranty period, and his aftermarket policy did not cover. I think any of us expect our engines to live past 69K, warranty or not, so I can see the interest in joining the suit.

HRG

 

[Old Ranchero]

Are there any members that experienced this issue? Has it been resolved by Ford? I saw this posted on Ford Authority, dated for late 2020.

Did you even read the class action lawsuit filing? Here's the lead plaintiff complaint: " Arkansas plaintiff Patricia Lund says she owned a used 2016 Ford Escape equipped with a 2-liter EcoBoost engine. The lawsuit doesn't allege the plaintiff's vehicle suffered any engine problems, but she says Ford should have told her the Escape was defective. "

Complete B$$$. She never even experienced any of the alleged problems! Do you really need to know more after that?

There was a recall to address the tiny number (26) of alleged (not proven) complaints:
" In March 2017, Ford recalled “certain 2014 Escape, 2014-2015 Fiesta ST, 2013-2014 Fusion and 2013-2015 Transit Connect vehicles equipped with 1.6L GTDI engines.” The Ford EcoBoost engine recall notice said due to low coolant levels, the “engine cylinder head may overheat, crack, and leak oil.” "

Ford recommended corrective action: " The plaintiff claims Ford EcoBoost engine problems have caused owners to seek warranty repairs but dealerships allegedly only install coolant sensors or replacement parts that allegedly do nothing to fix the issues. "

And yes, Ford completely redesigned the 2.0 motor including new Block, head and integrated exhaust manifold in 2015, and as mentioned elsewhere here, later made a small change to coolant channel to further address alleged problems.

Bottom line, there is no massive inherent defect causing significant numbers of proven failures on the current 2.0 and the basic powertrain warranty covers you 5 yrs/60k miles. This Nuisance lawsuit case should get tossed on merits, or at worst Ford will have to settle just to make it go away since it's not worth fighting over. Lots of complainers in this world and too many sleazy lawyers only too happy to accommodate them.

https://www.carcomplaints.com/news/2021/ford-ecoboost-engine-problems-class-action-lawsuit.shtml

 

[FirstOnRaceDay]

Did you even read the class action lawsuit filing? Here's the lead plaintiff complaint: " Arkansas plaintiff Patricia Lund says she owned a used 2016 Ford Escape equipped with a 2-liter EcoBoost engine. The lawsuit doesn't allege the plaintiff's vehicle suffered any engine problems, but she says Ford should have told her the Escape was defective. "

Complete B$$$. She never even experienced any of the alleged problems! Do you really need to know more after that?

There was a recall to address the tiny number (26) of alleged (not proven) complaints:
" In March 2017, Ford recalled “certain 2014 Escape, 2014-2015 Fiesta ST, 2013-2014 Fusion and 2013-2015 Transit Connect vehicles equipped with 1.6L GTDI engines.” The Ford EcoBoost engine recall notice said due to low coolant levels, the “engine cylinder head may overheat, crack, and leak oil.” "

Ford recommended corrective action: " The plaintiff claims Ford EcoBoost engine problems have caused owners to seek warranty repairs but dealerships allegedly only install coolant sensors or replacement parts that allegedly do nothing to fix the issues. "

And yes, Ford completely redesigned the 2.0 motor including new Block, head and integrated exhaust manifold in 2015, and as mentioned elsewhere here, later made a small change to coolant channel to further address alleged problems.

Bottom line, there is no massive inherent defect causing significant numbers of proven failures on the current 2.0 and the basic powertrain warranty covers you 5 yrs/60k miles. This Nuisance lawsuit case should get tossed on merits, or at worst Ford will have to settle just to make it go away since it's not worth fighting over. Lots of complainers in this world and too many sleazy lawyers only too happy to accommodate them.

https://www.carcomplaints.com/news/2021/ford-ecoboost-engine-problems-class-action-lawsuit.shtml

Sounds like sleazy lawyers going after sleazy dealers.

more of a bad dealer issue vs Ford issue.

 

[starquestbd22]

Did you even read the class action lawsuit filing? Here's the lead plaintiff complaint: " Arkansas plaintiff Patricia Lund says she owned a used 2016 Ford Escape equipped with a 2-liter EcoBoost engine. The lawsuit doesn't allege the plaintiff's vehicle suffered any engine problems, but she says Ford should have told her the Escape was defective. "

Complete B$$$. She never even experienced any of the alleged problems! Do you really need to know more after that?

There was a recall to address the tiny number (26) of alleged (not proven) complaints:
" In March 2017, Ford recalled “certain 2014 Escape, 2014-2015 Fiesta ST, 2013-2014 Fusion and 2013-2015 Transit Connect vehicles equipped with 1.6L GTDI engines.” The Ford EcoBoost engine recall notice said due to low coolant levels, the “engine cylinder head may overheat, crack, and leak oil.” "

Ford recommended corrective action: " The plaintiff claims Ford EcoBoost engine problems have caused owners to seek warranty repairs but dealerships allegedly only install coolant sensors or replacement parts that allegedly do nothing to fix the issues. "

And yes, Ford completely redesigned the 2.0 motor including new Block, head and integrated exhaust manifold in 2015, and as mentioned elsewhere here, later made a small change to coolant channel to further address alleged problems.

Bottom line, there is no massive inherent defect causing significant numbers of proven failures on the current 2.0 and the basic powertrain warranty covers you 5 yrs/60k miles. This Nuisance lawsuit case should get tossed on merits, or at worst Ford will have to settle just to make it go away since it's not worth fighting over. Lots of complainers in this world and too many sleazy lawyers only too happy to accommodate them.

https://www.carcomplaints.com/news/2021/ford-ecoboost-engine-problems-class-action-lawsuit.shtml

No offense meant at all but you sound like a lawyer for Ford!

Seriously though, I don’t know much of anything about the lawsuit. I didn’t read it and I have no desire to. But I would point out a few things. The engine may have been completely redesigned in 2015 but apparently the new design carried the same problematic coolant passages over because the issue continued by Ford’s own admission up until 2019. Also, I wouldn’t call it massive either but the coolant issue on the 1.5, 1.6, and 2.0 engines is a very real and well-known issue. Ask any Ford tech how many short blocks they’ve replaced on these engines due to this issue. It’s difficult to say just how prevalent the issue really is. I would say it occurs to a relatively small number of engines. There are a LOT of these engines out there that have given no serious issue. But that doesn’t change the fact that as someone else said, owners don’t expect their engine to need replacement at 69k miles. If that happens due to a known (yes, relatively small in number but still known…not alleged) design issue, regardless of warranty, Ford should make it right.

I agree that the lawsuit is unnecessary. What should happen is that Ford should extend warranty coverage for this specific issue to 150k miles. Then there would be no need for the lawsuit.

 

[Old Ranchero]

No offense meant at all but you sound like a lawyer for Ford!

Seriously though, I don’t know much of anything about the lawsuit. I didn’t read it and I have no desire to. But I would point out a few things. The engine may have been completely redesigned in 2015 but apparently the new design carried the same problematic coolant passages over because the issue continued by Ford’s own admission up until 2019. Also, I wouldn’t call it massive either but the coolant issue on the 1.5, 1.6, and 2.0 engines is a very real and well-known issue. Ask any Ford tech how many short blocks they’ve replaced on these engines due to this issue. It’s difficult to say just how prevalent the issue really is. I would say it occurs to a relatively small number of engines. There are a LOT of these engines out there that have given no serious issue. But that doesn’t change the fact that as someone else said, owners don’t expect their engine to need replacement at 69k miles. If that happens due to a known (yes, relatively small in number but still known…not alleged) design issue, regardless of warranty, Ford should make it right.

I agree that the lawsuit is unnecessary. What should happen is that Ford should extend warranty coverage for this specific issue to 150k miles. Then there would be no need for the lawsuit.

No offense intended here either- but you seem to just want to believe a few anecdotal individual complaints and blow it out of proportion to a "known design defect" and blame Ford for not doing anything. Where's the proof there is a design defect? It makes absolutely no sense at all if this was the case- Ford would not have addressed it in the redesign and open themselves up to mass liability and ...ahem... Class action lawsuits. Spending millions of $ on a major redesign and carrying over "known" defects? Pfffttt. doesn't pass the common sense test!

I have another explanation for you: it is simply NOT a design defect. I have owned and worked on cars since 1973 and can tell you the most common reason for coolant leaking into the motor is #1 a cracked head gasket, #2 a warped/cracked head (usually as a result of #1) and #3 a cracked block (also many times related to #1 and/or #2 happening 1st ). MANY times this is due to owner negligence like not keeping enough coolant in their car, continuing to drive after overheating or abusing it in extreme towing or other operating conditions beyond manufacturers recommended uses.

Exactly 1 poster on here described an incident of failed motor at 69k- and his 3rd party extended warranty company screwed him. NOT Ford's fault- and maybe with further investigation it was not directly traceable ONLY to a coolant leak failure from a design flaw? It is unfortunate the guy had to experience it (I have stories too!)- but doesn't support a trend or cover up by Ford. The lawsuit points out 26 complaints, 26! out of how many 100s of thousands of those motors out there? No supporting info on exactly what caused any ALLEGED until proven otherwise failure. It was mostly on the 1.6L motor too. That's buried in the noise floor on "failures". Confucius say "the bitch is in the details"!

I'm not in the least bit worried about this issue for when I go to purchase my Maverick 2.0. You admitted you didn't bother to read the lawsuit, but did a lot of research on the issue before coming across information the leaking coolant was a known problem and related "design defect"? If you're bored sometime, try Googling Ford Triton V-8 V-10 defective head spark plug problems. We own a 2005 Ford E450 based Class C RV and were never told about the problem of stripped spark plug holes shooting plugs out of the head Ford apparently knew about. We had a Platinum 7yrs/70,000 warranty on it too. Drove the crap out of the RV and never let us down until around 89k and shot a spark plug. We had it repaired but don't trust it for long trips anymore after reading all the verified failures and recall/repair stories- but we got our $ out of it and it did exactly what we needed it for so can't really complain. BTW: it's for sale if anyone is interested!

 

[starquestbd22]

No offense intended here either- but you seem to just want to believe a few anecdotal individual complaints and blow it out of proportion to a "known design defect" and blame Ford for not doing anything. Where's the proof there is a design defect? It makes absolutely no sense at all if this was the case- Ford would not have addressed it in the redesign and open themselves up to mass liability and ...ahem... Class action lawsuits. Spending millions of $ on a major redesign and carrying over "known" defects? Pfffttt. doesn't pass the common sense test!

I have another explanation for you: it is simply NOT a design defect. I have owned and worked on cars since 1973 and can tell you the most common reason for coolant leaking into the motor is #1 a cracked head gasket, #2 a warped/cracked head (usually as a result of #1) and #3 a cracked block (also many times related to #1 and/or #2 happening 1st ). MANY times this is due to owner negligence like not keeping enough coolant in their car, continuing to drive after overheating or abusing it in extreme towing or other operating conditions beyond manufacturers recommended uses.

Exactly 1 poster on here described an incident of failed motor at 69k- and his 3rd party extended warranty company screwed him. NOT Ford's fault- and maybe with further investigation it was not directly traceable ONLY to a coolant leak failure from a design flaw? It is unfortunate the guy had to experience it (I have stories too!)- but doesn't support a trend or cover up by Ford. The lawsuit points out 26 complaints, 26! out of how many 100s of thousands of those motors out there? No supporting info on exactly what caused any ALLEGED until proven otherwise failure. It was mostly on the 1.6L motor too. That's buried in the noise floor on "failures". Confucius say "the bitch is in the details"!

I'm not in the least bit worried about this issue for when I go to purchase my Maverick 2.0. You admitted you didn't bother to read the lawsuit, but did a lot of research on the issue before coming across information the leaking coolant was a known problem and related "design defect"? If you're bored sometime, try Googling Ford Triton V-8 V-10 defective head spark plug problems. We own a 2005 Ford E450 based Class C RV and were never told about the problem of stripped spark plug holes shooting plugs out of the head Ford apparently knew about. We had a Platinum 7yrs/70,000 warranty on it too. Drove the crap out of the RV and never let us down until around 89k and shot a spark plug. We had it repaired but don't trust it for long trips anymore after reading all the verified failures and recall/repair stories- but we got our $ out of it and it did exactly what we needed it for so can't really complain. BTW: it's for sale if anyone is interested!

I believe it’s more than just a few complaints. Just because there are only 26 complainants named in the class action doesn’t mean those are the only owners that have experienced the issue. Forums for these respective vehicles are riddled with accounts of unexpected coolant loss leading to engine failure. Again, we typically don’t hear much from the ones who aren’t having problems. So I do still believe it’s a small percentage of owners. But to say this isn’t a known issue is simply sticking your head in the sand. Which is what Ford MAY have done for a few years. Or maybe it just took that long to diagnose and develop a solution. Who truly knows?

Perhaps me labeling it as a design defect is improper. I’ve also seen it portrayed as a production flaw. Truth is, I don’t know exactly what caused it. But there is enough evidence out there to make it very clear that some of these engines experienced failure due to unexpected coolant loss or coolant intrusion into the cylinder resulting from either a design defect or a casting flaw. Which it is doesn’t really matter. Either one is on Ford and they should step up and take care of it.

I’m not sure which redesign you’re referring to. The redesign of 2015 had nothing to do with this defect. One could wonder why Ford didn’t address it then instead of waiting 4-5 more years. I don’t know the answer to that. I can only speculate that since the issue really only arose around 2013 or later, Ford hadn’t had time to become fully aware of the problem, diagnose it, and develop a repair. The design change that occurred around 2019-2020 was limited in scope to this specific issue. That in itself is proof that whatever the issue was (design flaw or production error), there was an issue. If you dig enough, there are photos of the redesigned area on forums and the Ford technician friend that I have also confirmed that Ford released a revised part around 2019-2020 to be used in repairs.

If I’m understanding correctly, you would suggest that rather than a design flaw or production error, these failures are likely attributed to simple random mechanical failure. And then go a giant leap beyond that to suggest that they were likely caused by owner negligence. I change my mind about you working for Ford. I think maybe you work for a third party warranty company instead.

Having owned a 2003 Triton I am well aware of the spark plug missile issue. I am also aware of the redesign in 04 that made the spark plugs so difficult to remove that they often broke off, causing owners hundreds in additional costs for extraction. I’m not sure how that applies to what we’re talking about other than being another example of a vehicle manufacturer producing a product with an eventually known defect. It happens. And not just to Ford.

Bottom line? I firmly believe a small number of 1.5, 1.6, and 2.0 engines had a defect (whether design or production related) that caused coolant intrusion /loss and engine failure. I believe this defect was on Ford rather than being the fault of the vehicle owner. I believe Ford eventually realized the issue (when and whether or not they took immediate action or waited, I do not know) and developed a corrective action which was put into production and is currently being used to repair vehicles with the issue.

I guess all of this is irrelevant as I also am not worried about the issue in the 2.0 AWD Maverick that I have on order as I thoroughly believe it to have been addressed.

 

[Old Ranchero]

you believe it's a design defect/flaw with no supporting evidence. IMO, MUCH more likely it was something like a bad lot of head gaskets that was caught and corrected with no fanfare as it wasn't a big deal. You think Ford won't admit it was a big defect and stand up and make people whole by extending warranty- I don't agree. It's just not that big or widespread of a problem and no proof anything should have been done in redesign to fix a phantom engineering "defect". We both agree Ford knew about the Triton head defect and acknowledged it- and changed the head design because of it. I mentioned it as comparison as to what happens with major design defects and this case- where there is none proven. That's great they had a tech bulletin with an update to the coolant channel just to make it more robust, but the kind of design defect you are making this out to be would have resulted in massive amounts of failures instead of a relative small %. I never suggested ALL the failures were owner caused, just listed it as a possibility on some (#3 on my list) after eliminating bad head gasket, head or block damage. Ask your technician friend how many leaking head gaskets he's seen vs. your design defect theory failures.

 

[Hot Runr Guy]

you believe it's a design defect/flaw with no supporting evidence. IMO, MUCH more likely it was something like a bad lot of head gaskets that was caught and corrected with no fanfare as it wasn't a big deal. You think Ford won't admit it was a big defect and stand up and make people whole by extending warranty- I don't agree. It's just not that big or widespread of a problem and no proof anything should have been done in redesign to fix a phantom engineering "defect". We both agree Ford knew about the Triton head defect and acknowledged it- and changed the head design because of it. I mentioned it as comparison as to what happens with major design defects and this case- where there is none proven. That's great they had a tech bulletin with an update to the coolant channel just to make it more robust, but the kind of design defect you are making this out to be would have resulted in massive amounts of failures instead of a relative small %. I never suggested ALL the failures were owner caused, just listed it as a possibility on some (#3 on my list) after eliminating bad head gasket, head or block damage. Ask your technician friend how many leaking head gaskets he's seen vs. your design defect theory failures.

Old Ranchero, you are coming dangerously close to calling me a liar. You can deny that this was a design defect all you want, but then YOU explain why they re-designed the area between the bores to eliminate the saw cut (left side) and use a single drilled-hole (right side). Why would they spend all this money in block replacements if they could just change head gaskets.

Quit drinking the blue kool-aid.

HRG

 

[starquestbd22]

Old Ranchero, I’m not trying to argue with you. But you listed three typical causes of coolant leaks/intrusion and then followed them up by saying MANY times this is caused by something the owner did or didn’t do. Also, a bad batch of head gaskets….for 7 years????!! Seriously? There was either a design flaw or production error that caused failure in a small percentage of these engines. Everyone else has acknowledged this. Even Ford. The photos posted above clearly document the problem area and the change made to address it.

That being said, the conversation has taken a turn away from the Maverick or anything related to it and is on the verge of becoming uncivil. So I’m out. I will ask my tech friend your question. While I do that, you make your way to the 2-3 Ford dealerships closest to you and talk to the Service Managers and ask them what caused this issue. If you get a hold of anyone worth their salt, you’ll get your answer.

 

[spacemancraig]

you believe it's a design defect/flaw with no supporting evidence. IMO, MUCH more likely it was something like a bad lot of head gaskets that was caught and corrected with no fanfare as it wasn't a big deal. You think Ford won't admit it was a big defect and stand up and make people whole by extending warranty- I don't agree. It's just not that big or widespread of a problem and no proof anything should have been done in redesign to fix a phantom engineering "defect". We both agree Ford knew about the Triton head defect and acknowledged it- and changed the head design because of it. I mentioned it as comparison as to what happens with major design defects and this case- where there is none proven. That's great they had a tech bulletin with an update to the coolant channel just to make it more robust, but the kind of design defect you are making this out to be would have resulted in massive amounts of failures instead of a relative small %. I never suggested ALL the failures were owner caused, just listed it as a possibility on some (#3 on my list) after eliminating bad head gasket, head or block damage. Ask your technician friend how many leaking head gaskets he's seen vs. your design defect theory failures.

I think the consensus at this point is that its a design defect that causes the head gasket to fail at a spot where failure results in coolant leaking into the combustion chamber, this problem always manifests as low coolant (but with no visible leaks, because its all vaporized out the tailpipe) quickly followed by misfires and then "death". I'm not sure why you're being so aggressive about this, your intuition about the head gasket failure is correct, its just that the failure is always at the same spot because of the design.

edit: to be clear, the issue everyone is talking about has been fixed, you wont be seeing the 2.0 with that problem in any mavericks, the 2.0 maverick is 100% going to be a blast to drive and probably way peppier than people expect, especially with the 3.81 ratio in the tow package.

 

[Hot Runr Guy]

edit: to be clear, the issue everyone is talking about has been fixed, you wont be seeing the 2.0 with that problem in any mavericks, the 2.0 maverick is 100% going to be a blast to drive and probably way peppier than people expect, especially with the 3.81 ratio in the tow package.

Agreed! Even though I have been affected by the prior design, I would have no hesitation in getting a Mav with the 2.0EB.

HRG

Sponsored