New Recall 25V-158, Loss of Power from Undetected Low Battery

[DWG]

11,620 Bronco Sports affected. Summary of Recall below but the Safety Recall Report that can be found in the link also mentions that the affected vehicles may not contain the remedy PCM/BCM software update from recall 24S24. A little confusing.

Summary of Recall 25V-158

Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2024 Bronco Sport and 2022-2023 Maverick vehicles previously repaired incorrectly under recall number 24V-267. The body and power train control modules may fail to detect a change in the 12-volt battery state of charge.

Remedy

Dealers will recalibrate the body control module and power train control module, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed April 24, 2025. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S26.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/?nhtsaId=25V158000

Sponsored

 

[Major Kong]

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2025/RCLRPT-25V158-5493.PDF

so if I recall correctly, it's a recall of a recall

 

[wireman]

Or a recall of a recall of a recall, etc.

 

[Colonel Angus]

Brother...

 

[baybronco]

Had my Bronco die while driving it. No signs it was going to happen either. Pressed down on the gas Bronco literally bucked all the lights including headlights flickered dash lit like a Xmas tree with every warning possible then completely died. Just shut off completely. Very fortunate to be in an empty parking lot when it happened. Went to start it up again faster a min. Started up but battery light was on. Drove fine but took it straight home just 15 mins from where I was. Made an appointment at pep boys down the street from me and they informed me of my he battery drawing low. 3 ish years old not unheard of. But a lil early. Then once after the battery change. Wife was driving on the freeway and the whole dash and stereo go out but the battery light stayed on. This thing feels like a death trap now!

 

[coopny]

EDIT: The criticism of this post is not founded - see details in my subsequent post #10 downthread.

I'm sorry, but how the hell did Ford do a recall that required a new BCM/PCM config to be flashed and then discover essentially one year later that a vehicle could be marked as having the recall done (modules flashed with updated versions) without it actually occurring? Even worse, Ford does not seem to have any sort of logging of the events from the vehicle level to be able to go back and determine which vehicles actually updated the firmware correctly and those that did not.

This is embarrassing, and I'd rather Ford admit the problem and admit they screwed up the initial recall, but it's not inspiring a lot of confidence that this is a safe vehicle to continually own.

 

[Major Kong]

latest recall might be the result of the battery recall
Zubo uncovers software flaws as part of investigation perhaps?
Zubo may have done BS owners a favor

"Any assertions that the battery is the cause of the issue are premature and inaccurate at this stage" - Zubo Zhang, President, Camel Energy

"This investigation identified internal manufacturing defects in the Camel EFB batteries, including failures of the battery’s COS and internal weld failures, both of which can lead to open circuits," - Safety Recall Report

"The remedy involves software updates to improve detection of battery problems and provide warnings to drivers." - Ford

We gonna get your Wang Zhang Doodle all nite long - Zubo

 

[Dude]

Maybe you have been waiting a long time to use that phrase

“We gonna get your Wang Zhang Doodle all nite long - Zubo”

Pretty accurately describes the battery situation aka battery gate

 

[Major Kong]

Maybe you have been waiting a long time to use that phrase

“We gonna get your Wang Zhang Doodle all nite long - Zubo”

Pretty accurately describes the battery situation aka battery gate

all nite long
all nite long

 

[coopny]

So after my initial outrage/befuddlement over how Ford could fail to realize the vehicles subject to this question, I decided to put my 2000s era internet user hat on and do something that many people (myself included) often don't do: read sources beyond news summaries. Specifically @Major Kong linked the NHTSA document on the recall that Ford filed, but I initially just read the screenshot and did not read the document myself.

I have to eat crow on my earlier criticisms and give Ford overall props on the recall, based on what's stated in that document:

1. Ford's Quality Office Forum highlighted concerns that software recalls could be potentially incomplete. This was brought to the attention of Ford's Critical Concerns Group (CCG).
2. CCG responded by founding a team to investigate all software field service actions that used the FDRS tool to apply them. They talk about "track[ing] software lineage part numbers" - which seems to be tracking what software part was applied to a vehicle in a recall, versus what the recall contained.
3. Ford's audit of the FDRS tool data and what was actually applied to vehicles had a 96% match. However, they were able to identify vehicles where the data in FDRS reflected the updated (recall fixed) software, but the vehicle did not have it.
4. Ford's logging from FDRS is complete enough to identify the 96% of vehicles that received the recall properly and the 4% that did not down to the VIN level, and to notify the 4% of owners who did not receive the recall fix software for BCM/PCM.

So, much of my criticism of the previous post is invalid. In an ideal world, all vehicles would have been patched properly in 24S24. However, we don't live in a perfect world, and Ford identified this subset of vehicles based on a general concern for quality, doing a deep dive to check their homework, and then doing sufficient cross-checks to determine the small minority of vehicles that had an issue.

Working in software that isn't critical to life and limb I have it a bit easier, but I have a deep appreciation for overall quality improvement, root cause analysis, and taking preventative action. And while the language given to the NHTSA in this new recall does not mention a specific preventative action intended to mitigate software recalls being incomplete but marked as complete in the future, I do have confidence that the way in which Ford conducted this investigation (investigating it as a general quality concern for overall software recalls, vs. this becoming a specific concern due to reported issues of vehicles stopping dead while driving due to this recall in particular being incomplete) will lead to it.

So kudos to Dearborn. I get to now edit my prior post and strikethrough the text.

 

[Dude]

That’s a great assessment of the post failure analysis @coopny !

A 96% success rate is pretty terrible … sounds good but Ford should be able to achieve a 99.999% (5 9s) on a software update.

Recall 24S24 was applicable to about 450,000 vehicles (Bronco Sports, Mavericks). 4% failure is about 18,000 vehicles but likely not all 450,000 received Recall 24S24. A 5 9s process would result in a much lower 5 vehicles impacted (450,000 * 0.00001 = 4.5).

A software update with so many ways to assure success (checksums, hash verification, digital signatures, etc.) is easy to achieve. Ford does a very large number of software updates and there’s no excuse for not having methods to validate integrity, completeness, and functionality of a software update.

However, Recall 24S24 was a BCM/PCM Configuration update and may not have involved actual changes to the code (software). Configuration updates are not so easy to check for correctness unless the data was designed from the beginning to support robust and error free updates. I suspect that is why the failure rate for 24S24 was so high.

And now this:
Ford Outlines New Software Update Strategy With Dealers
https://fordauthority.com/2025/03/ford-outlines-new-software-update-strategy-with-dealers/

 

[SnoopyBroncoSport]

Two new recalls from Transport Canada in relation to this one.

2025-134
2025-139

 

[Colonel Angus]

So, I guess now it's wait until April to see if your Bronco falls into the 4%?
My "update" was done by Ford Mobile Service right in my driveway.

 

[Dude]

The actual Number of vehicles affected is 12,833 models in total

11,620 Bronco Sports and
1,213 Mavericks

 

[Dude]

Remember if you are worried about the state of health and state of charge of your battery, Ford will check it for free.

Typically the best check will be at the dealership using their capable load test tool whereas the mobile service typically would use a less accurate hand held tool.

Sponsored