— Ford argues an EcoBoost engine class action lawsuit is unnecessary because a recall and warranty extension fixed the engine problems. And Ford says the proof is found in decisions from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
The class action includes these vehicles equipped with 2.7-liter or 3-liter EcoBoost engines.
- 2022 Ford Bronco
- 2021-2022 Ford F-150
- 2021-2022 Ford Edge
- 2021-2022 Lincoln Nautilus
- 2021-2022 Ford Explorer
- 2021-2022 Lincoln Aviator
Ford previously used an alloy called “Silchrome Lite” for the 2.7L and 3.0L EcoBoost engine intake valves, but in October 2021 Ford stopped using Silchrome Lite because it could become “excessively hard and brittle if exposed to over-temperatures during the machining of the component.”
The automaker switched to an alloy called “Silchrome 1” for the EcoBoost intake valves.
But in March 2022, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration received three petitions (here, here and here) asking NHTSA to investigate the EcoBoost engine intake valves. Ford says the "three virtually identical letters" convinced the government to open an investigation into 2021 Ford Broncos equipped with 2.7L EcoBoost engines.
NHTSA later upgraded its investigation in September 2023 to include 2021-2022 Ford Bronco, Ford Edge, Ford Explorer, Ford F-150, 2021-2022 Lincoln Aviator and Lincoln Nautilus vehicles equipped with 2.7L or 3.0L EcoBoost engines.
In August 2024, Ford issued a recall for 2021-2022 Ford Bronco, Edge, Explorer, F-150, and Lincoln Aviator and Nautilus vehicles equipped with 2.7L or 3.0L EcoBoost engines. The recalled vehicles were built between May 1, 2021, and October 31, 2021.
Ford determined the EcoBoost intake valves “may have grinding burn and over-specification hardness” and could “crack and break” leading to engine damage and loss of motive power. However, Ford estimated no more than 1% of the recalled vehicles had bad intake valves.
To repair the vehicles, Ford dealers were told how to inspect and test the EcoBoost engines and replace any engines that failed the tests. In addition, Ford announced a customer satisfaction program (24N12) that provides a warranty extension for the vehicles. The intake valve warranty extension covers the vehicles up to 10 years or 150,000 miles.
NHTSA closed its 27-month EcoBoost intake valve investigation in October 2024 based on Ford's recall repairs and warranty extension.
The agency said safety inspectors visited Ford facilities and performed a statistical analysis with its National Center for Statistics and Analysis to predict future intake valve failures. Ford alleges NHTSA concluded the EcoBoost engine “defective intake valves will likely fail at a low time in service and . . . the majority of subject vehicles equipped with defective valves have already experienced a failure.”
According to Ford, the analysis “demonstrates that the vast majority of failures have occurred before 20,000 miles with over half of all reported failures occurring before 5,000 miles.”
Motion to Dismiss the Ford EcoBoost Class Action Lawsuit
The Ford EcoBoost class action lawsuit was filed about six weeks after NHTSA closed its intake valve investigation. The plaintiffs complain the EcoBoost intake valves cause a “great risk of bodily harm” to vehicle occupants.
According to the class action, all Ford did was issue a “limited recall,” which “only covers a small fraction of the affected vehicles.” The EcoBoost engine recall allegedly did nothing for other vehicles supposedly equipped with faulty intake valves.
Ford had filed a motion to dismiss the original intake valve class action, but this was followed by the two named plaintiffs filing an amended class action which added a new plaintiff.
Ford notes the allegations made by the plaintiffs are the opposite of federal safety regulators and NHTSA, the very agency with the job of overseeing vehicle safety. And Ford argues the owners making the allegations never identify any "actual defect in their own vehicles," yet they want the court to go around NHTSA and force Ford to issue another EcoBoost recall.
Additionally, the plaintiffs claim they were the victims of fraud and warranty breaches, and they claim they were injured by overpaying for their vehicles.
In its motion to dismiss the lawsuit, Ford argues the entire EcoBoost class action "intrudes on NHTSA’s primary jurisdiction over the recall process" and tries to "end-run NHTSA’s unreviewable decision to close its investigation."
According to Ford, the plaintiffs try to allege fraud and warranty claims, but not based on supposed problems with their own vehicles. Instead, Ford argues the plaintiffs speculate their Ford vehicles might be defective because of a problem affecting a "tiny fraction" of other owners of different vehicles.
"But plaintiffs do not allege their vehicles have suffered from any defect whatsoever. Nor do they allege that they sought and were denied repair for any malfunction. They do not even allege their own intake valves are actually out of specification and thus have any heightened risk of fracture." — Ford
Ford argues the EcoBoost engine intake valve recall didn't include the vehicles owned by the three plaintiffs because those vehicles didn't need to be recalled, as confirmed by Ford and federal safety regulators. But Ford's motion alleges the plaintiffs have alleged no facts to plausibly suggest there is anything wrong with their vehicles.
"All they offer is naked disagreement with the scope of the recall issued by Ford and the investigation conclusions of the federal agency whose special competence is automotive safety. Plaintiffs have alleged an injury-in-imagination, not an injury-in-fact, and this Court should dismiss their claims for lack of standing as well as numerous other deficiencies." — Ford's motion to dismiss
The Ford EcoBoost class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan: Barkus, et al., v. Ford Motor Company.
The plaintiffs are represented by The Miller Law Firm, P.C., DiCello Levitt LLP, and Smith Krivoshey, PLLC.