Our 2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E repeatedly displays "Pre-Collision Assist Not Available," meaning forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking assistance are unavailable. The Ford app recorded 26 occurrences from April 19, 2026 at 8:52 p.m. through October 11, 2026 at 1:51 p.m. No crash, fire, injury, or death occurred. The vehicle was purchased new on November 5, 2024 and is titled to my spouse; I am reporting as spouse, operator, and case coordinator. Performance Ford in West Covina has had three repair visits for this concern. Visit 1, July 29-August 10, 2026, in at 34,296 miles, repair order 240919: dealer found IPMA camera diagnostic codes B1385:68, B1385:82, and B1578:89, cleaned the camera area, and updated IPMA software under warranty. Visit 2, September 28-October 8, 2026, in at 37,701 miles, invoice 241715: the same IPMA codes appeared among many diagnostic codes, with service-required, brake-assist, and adaptive-cruise faults, and a "Stop Safely Now" fault occurred during the dealer's own test drive; the dealer replaced a frunk/hood latch and charged $841.01, but the warning returned on October 11, three days after pickup. Visit 3 opened October 12, 2026 at 37,911 miles, repair order 241919, and the vehicle remains with the dealer with no diagnosis as of October 19, 2026. Ford corporate case CXH-09594809-Y6H5M7. I am concerned this safety system can become unavailable repeatedly without a durable repair.
2024 Ford Mustang Mach E electrical problems
32 complaints (65% of all complaints for this car).
- owner complaints
- 32
- of this car's complaints
- 65%
- crashes
- 0
- recalls
- 1
Which part fails
- Instrument panel: speedometer/odometer: sensor/sending unit1
- Instrument panel: speedometer/odometer1
At what mileage
Complaints by mileage at the time of the problem.
Ford Mustang Mach E electrical problems in other years
Related recalls
Electrical system: propulsion system: traction battery: management system/energy control module (bms/becm): software
- What is wrong
- Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2023-2025 Mustang Mache E vehicles that received a new Battery Energy Control Module (BECM) during a prior repair. The battery energy control module software may cause an incorrect state of charge to display in the vehicle, or lead to an increased risk of a high voltage battery fire after repeated DC Fast Charging cycles.
- Risk
- An inaccurate state-of-charge reading can lead to an unexpected loss of drive power, increasing the risk of crash. Additionally, a high voltage battery fire increases the risk of injury.
- Remedy
- Dealers will update the BECM software, free of charge. Interim letters, notifying owners of the safety risk, were mailed September 18, 2026. Additional letters will be sent once the remedy is available, anticipated in December 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1‑866‑436‑7332. Ford's number for this recall is 26S68. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall became searchable on on September 9, 2026.
Recall number 26V582000 · Recall details
Related investigations
Collisions Involving Ford BlueCruise
On April 25, 2024, the federal safety agency’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE24012) to assess BlueCruise, a partial driving automation system available on certain vehicles manufactured by Ford Motor Company (Ford). the federal safety agency opened the investigation after the agency received notice of two fatal collisions involving BlueCruise-equipped Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles. Based on the incidents, the federal safety agency scoped the investigation to 2021-2024 Mustang Mach-E vehicles equipped with BlueCruise. In June 2024, ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to Ford requiring that it provide certain information pertaining to crashes, non-crash reports, and technical specifications that relate to BlueCruise, as well as other Ford partial driving automation systems that offer lane and speed maintenance. In its response to ODI’s IR, Ford stated that there are 2,539,962 Ford and Lincoln vehicles (including subject and peer vehicles) equipped with a partial driving automation system within the scope of the request. The majority of these vehicles are equipped with a system that Ford calls Lane Centering Assist (LCA), which is a hands-on partial driving automation system that combines longitudinal control authority governed by Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) and lateral control authority governed by a steerable path. LCA is offered on a wide range of Ford and Lincoln models beginning in model year 2019. Vehicles that are equipped with BlueCruise, the focus of this investigation, have LCA capability and additionally offer hands-free partial driving automation when certain conditions are met. Hands-free BlueCruise operation is only offered on certain roadways and system availability is geofenced using vehicle GPS. BlueCruise-equipped vehicles employ a camera-based driver monitoring system to determine driver attentiveness to the roadway. BlueCruise was introduced in model year 2021 and is currently available in a select range of Ford and Lincoln vehicles. For BlueCruise- and LCA-equipped vehicles, both ACC and Pre-Collision Assist (PCA) features use a combination of camera and radar sensing technologies to detect and classify objects. ACC is specifically designed to detect vehicles (including cars, trucks, and motorcycles) and bicycles in front of the subject vehicle which are either stationary or moving in the same direction as the subject vehicle. Through this investigation, limitations in the detection of stationary vehicles in certain conditions have been identified. Specifically, due to the potential for false detection of stationary objects at long distances, Ford designed ACC to inhibit any response to reported stationary objects when the subject vehicle’s approach speed is at or above 62 mph. Additionally, system performance may be limited when there is poor visibility due to insufficient illumination. In addition to reviewing Ford’s response to ODI’s IR, the agency conducted a review of crash and non-crash reports identified collectively through Ford’s IR response, incident reporting through Standing General Order 2021-01 (SGO), and the federal safety agency vehicle owner questionnaires. In total, 32 crashes and 2,004 non-crash reports on subject and peer Ford vehicles were identified across manufacturer and ODI data sources. A detailed analysis of each crash was conducted including the review of any available police reports, photographs, data recovered from in-vehicle event data recorders, connected vehicle data, and/or other information. In both fatal collisions referenced in the PE24012 opening resume, the subject Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicle was traveling over 70 mph on a controlled-access highway during nighttime lighting conditions with hands-free BlueCruise engaged when it collided with a stationary vehicle. Analysis of data imaged from the vehicles’ event data recorders demonstrates that in each incident, the driver did not apply the brakes or take evasive steering action, and no deceleration was initiated by either the BlueCruise system or PCA prior to impact. Through the agency’s crash analysis, four additional frontal collisions were identified where the subject Ford impacted a stopped or slow-moving lead vehicle or another stationary object located in the travel lane. Two of these four incidents involved BlueCruise-equipped Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles (included in the failure report summary along with the fatal collisions discussed above), while the other two involved other Ford models equipped with the LCA system. Additionally, a trend was identified through analysis of the non-crash reports relating to allegations that ACC (the longitudinal component of both BlueCruise and LCA) failed to detect and/or respond to a stopped or slow-moving lead vehicle. In these reports, consumers often describe that the absence of deceleration initiated by ACC was unexpected and required harsh manual braking or intervention from the PCA to avoid a frontal collision with the lead vehicle. Based on the federal safety agency’s analysis, system limitations relating to the detection of stationary vehicles while traveling at highway speeds and in nighttime lighting conditions appear to be factors in collisions under investigation and several apparently similar near-miss, non-crash reports. This Engineering Analysis (EA) is being opened to further investigate these system limitations and to evaluate drivers’ ability to respond to scenarios that exceed system limitations. During the EA, the agency expects to, among other things, perform vehicle evaluations, review additional technical information, and perform additional analysis of related crashes and non-crash reports. The crashes included in the failure report summary can be found at under the following SGO report identification numbers: 502-7268, 502-7426, 502-6852, 502-8738.
EA25001
Collisions Involving Ford BlueCruise
On April 25, 2024, the federal safety agency’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE24012) to assess BlueCruise, a partial driving automation system available on certain vehicles manufactured by Ford Motor Company (Ford). the federal safety agency opened the investigation after the agency received notice of two fatal collisions involving BlueCruise-equipped Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles. Based on the incidents, the federal safety agency scoped the investigation to 2021-2024 Mustang Mach-E vehicles equipped with BlueCruise. In June 2024, ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to Ford requiring that it provide certain information pertaining to crashes, non-crash reports, and technical specifications that relate to BlueCruise, as well as other Ford partial driving automation systems that offer lane and speed maintenance. In its response to ODI’s IR, Ford stated that there are 2,539,962 Ford and Lincoln vehicles (including subject and peer vehicles) equipped with a partial driving automation system within the scope of the request. The majority of these vehicles are equipped with a system that Ford calls Lane Centering Assist (LCA), which is a hands-on partial driving automation system that combines longitudinal control authority governed by Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) and lateral control authority governed by a steerable path. LCA is offered on a wide range of Ford and Lincoln models beginning in model year 2019. Vehicles that are equipped with BlueCruise, the focus of this investigation, have LCA capability and additionally offer hands-free partial driving automation when certain conditions are met. Hands-free BlueCruise operation is only offered on certain roadways and system availability is geofenced using vehicle GPS. BlueCruise-equipped vehicles employ a camera-based driver monitoring system to determine driver attentiveness to the roadway. BlueCruise was introduced in model year 2021 and is currently available in a select range of Ford and Lincoln vehicles. For BlueCruise- and LCA-equipped vehicles, both ACC and Pre-Collision Assist (PCA) features use a combination of camera and radar sensing technologies to detect and classify objects. ACC is specifically designed to detect vehicles (including cars, trucks, and motorcycles) and bicycles in front of the subject vehicle which are either stationary or moving in the same direction as the subject vehicle. Through this investigation, limitations in the detection of stationary vehicles in certain conditions have been identified. Specifically, due to the potential for false detection of stationary objects at long distances, Ford designed ACC to inhibit any response to reported stationary objects when the subject vehicle’s approach speed is at or above 62 mph. Additionally, system performance may be limited when there is poor visibility due to insufficient illumination. In addition to reviewing Ford’s response to ODI’s IR, the agency conducted a review of crash and non-crash reports identified collectively through Ford’s IR response, incident reporting through Standing General Order 2021-01 (SGO), and the federal safety agency vehicle owner questionnaires. In total, 32 crashes and 2,004 non-crash reports on subject and peer Ford vehicles were identified across manufacturer and ODI data sources. A detailed analysis of each crash was conducted including the review of any available police reports, photographs, data recovered from in-vehicle event data recorders, connected vehicle data, and/or other information. In both fatal collisions referenced in the PE24012 opening resume, the subject Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicle was traveling over 70 mph on a controlled-access highway during nighttime lighting conditions with hands-free BlueCruise engaged when it collided with a stationary vehicle. Analysis of data imaged from the vehicles’ event data recorders demonstrates that in each incident, the driver did not apply the brakes or take evasive steering action, and no deceleration was initiated by either the BlueCruise system or PCA prior to impact. Through the agency’s crash analysis, four additional frontal collisions were identified where the subject Ford impacted a stopped or slow-moving lead vehicle or another stationary object located in the travel lane. Two of these four incidents involved BlueCruise-equipped Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles (included in the failure report summary along with the fatal collisions discussed above), while the other two involved other Ford models equipped with the LCA system. Additionally, a trend was identified through analysis of the non-crash reports relating to allegations that ACC (the longitudinal component of both BlueCruise and LCA) failed to detect and/or respond to a stopped or slow-moving lead vehicle. In these reports, consumers often describe that the absence of deceleration initiated by ACC was unexpected and required harsh manual braking or intervention from the PCA to avoid a frontal collision with the lead vehicle. Based on the federal safety agency’s analysis, system limitations relating to the detection of stationary vehicles while traveling at highway speeds and in nighttime lighting conditions appear to be factors in collisions under investigation and several apparently similar near-miss, non-crash reports. This Preliminary Evaluation is being upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA25001) to further investigate these system limitations and to evaluate drivers’ ability to respond to scenarios that exceed system limitations. During the EA, the agency expects to, among other things, perform vehicle evaluations, review additional technical information, and perform additional analysis of related crashes and non-crash reports. The crashes included in the failure report summary can be found at under the following SGO report identification numbers: 502-7268, 502-7426, 502-6852, 502-8738.
PE24012
What 2024 Ford Mustang Mach E owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
My Ford Mustang Mach-E has repeatedly slowed down unexpectedly while using Adaptive Cruise Control and BlueCruise, even when there were no vehicles in front of me. The vehicle incorrectly displays a car ahead of me on the driver’s screen and begins slowing down as though it is following that car. However, the road ahead is completely clear. This has happened both on the highway while using BlueCruise and on local roads while using Adaptive Cruise Control. In both situations, the vehicle continued slowing down until I manually intervened. I believe it would have continued slowing to a complete stop if I had not taken control. This creates a serious safety concern because the vehicle can unexpectedly and significantly reduce its speed in moving traffic, putting me and other drivers at risk of a rear-end collision. There were no warning lights or error messages before or during these incidents. The only indication was the appearance of a vehicle on the driver’s display that was not actually there. The problem has not yet been inspected or confirmed by a Ford dealership. I am arranging a service appointment to have it investigated. The vehicle is available for inspection. I am concerned that the vehicle’s driver-assistance system is incorrectly detecting vehicles and reducing speed without a valid reason. I am reporting this because the behavior has occurred multiple times under different driving conditions and presents a potential safety hazard. I’ve had a number of electrical issues with this car since I purchased it less than a year ago, and I no longer trust it.
On [XXX] while traveling south on [XXX] at highway speed (in heavy traffic), multiple dashboard messages started to flash, and the car came to a stop in the middle lane. Thankfully, the people behind me were paying attention and did not hit me. I could not get the car to start or put it in neutral. I called 911 and police were dispatched. They blocked two lanes of the highway to push the car to the side. I was able to override the emergency brake to get it into neutral. It was put on a flatbed and taken to Kings Ford for diagnostics. Kings Ford service said that there were pins that came disconnected that resulted in this. They said this was resolved. I have not had a recurrence since, but I can no longer trust the car. My concern is that there could be other 2024 Mustang Mach-E's with the same issue that could result in someone getting hurt. I have also opened a case with Ford EV support directly. I do have a video showing the dashboard messages that I was receiving. I was unable to attach this to the submission as it is a .MOV file. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
While driving my 2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E GT in mild 49°F weather with a 95% battery state of charge, the vehicle suddenly displayed a 'Performance reduced to lower temperature' message on the dashboard. The vehicle entered a protective 'limp mode,' abruptly and unexpectedly reducing available motor power while actively driving in traffic. This sudden loss of propulsion created a hazardous driving condition. No secondary warning icons or wrench lights appeared. Contacted the Ford dealership, but they refused immediate diagnostic service due to technician availability. This code appeared on 9/15/26 dealership failed to return my call.
Ford completed OTA for software update. After that happened, wireless phone calls no longer work.
The exact failed component is unknown to me at this time, but the issue appears related to the vehicle’s electrical system. Prior to the incident, I received a charging error notification while the vehicle was plugged in. I unplugged the charger from the wall outlet, waited briefly, and plugged it back in. Later that same day, the vehicle entered a no-start condition and would not start despite repeated attempts over approximately two hours. The vehicle is available for inspection upon request. The vehicle left me stranded at night for approximately two hours without warning. Because the vehicle would not start, I was unable to reliably move or operate the vehicle. Depending on location, weather conditions, surrounding traffic, and other circumstances or emergency situations, this type of failure could place occupants and other drivers at risk. Additionally, I previously reported a separate safety-related incident involving this same vehicle in February 2026 in which the vehicle suddenly and unexpectedly accelerated in my daughter’s daycare parking lot. This has not been reproduced. The vehicle unexpectedly started and operated again at approximately the same time the tow truck arrived, after remaining inoperable for roughly two hours. Because the issue resolved itself without repair, it’s not clear what the root cause is. The vehicle has not yet been inspected. The vehicle has remained garaged following the incident pending further evaluation and communication with Ford. There were some warnings. Prior to operating the vehicle that evening, I received a charging error notification while the vehicle was plugged in. After unplugging and reconnecting the charger, the vehicle later experienced the no-start condition. During the incident, the vehicle provided no clear indication through the vehicle interface or mobile app explaining why it would not start, only “Stop safely now.”
The vehicle experiences a drivability issue where it stalls or loses power and is not safe to operate. The vehicle is currently undrivable and has been at the dealership for nearly one month without a completed diagnosis or repair. The dealership has indicated a possible powertrain or transmission-related issue, but no confirmed repair has been completed. Additionally, there is an active safety recall associated with the vehicle that has not been repaired multiple notifications. This situation poses a safety risk and remains unresolved despite repeated follow-ups.
I was proceeding to drive home from an appointment with a friend, the car suddenly lost power and I had no control over anything. I was able to keep the steering wheel in the locked position trying to get to the side of the road. Thankfully the speed was only 25mph, as someone had just switched lanes and came in front of me. I was in the process of turning to enter the highway. I've been having a problem with this car since I purchased. I told Ford after this incident, that I fear to drive the vehicle with my family, because that's how scared I was when I had no control. I requested multiple times for someone from Ford Corporate to contact me, and still have not heard from anyone. On 11/26 I received a recall for the 12v battery, which is pretty much what keeps the car on and off, and I still have not heard from anyone in Ford corporate.
My name is [XXX] , and I am formally reporting an unacceptable and irresponsible delay regarding my Ford Mustang Mach-E (VIN: [XXX] ), serviced at Group 1 Ford of Southwest Houston (formerly Sterling McCall Ford). My vehicle is only 1.5 years old, yet the clear-coat paint has already deteriorated, and the vehicle is also subject to an official Ford recall. I reported both issues to the dealer more than two months ago. Despite multiple calls and follow-ups, the service department continues giving me the same unacceptable excuse: “We cannot take your vehicle because we do not have a loaner car available.” This is completely unreasonable. This is a recall, and refusal to accept my car due to a lack of loaner vehicles is not my responsibility — it is a failure of Ford and the dealer to provide required support. As a result: •My recall remains unresolved •The paint defect continues to worsen •I have no scheduled service date •I have been told to “wait indefinitely” with no solution This level of customer support is unprofessional, unacceptable, and harmful to the Ford brand. My Demands I request immediate corporate intervention: 1.A guaranteed service appointment without any further delay 2.A loaner vehicle or alternative transportation solution provided by Ford 3.Full repair of the recall and the paint clear-coat defect under warranty 4.Written confirmation of Ford’s next steps if the dealer continues refusing to accept my vehicle If this is not resolved immediately, I will escalate the issue to: •the federal safety agency (for failure to resolve an active recall), •Texas DMV / Consumer Protection, and •Public consumer platforms. I expect a response within 48 hours. Sincerely, [XXX] [XXX] Email: [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
I lease a 2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E. On [XXX] the vehicle suddenly displayed a High-Voltage Battery Fault, Powertrain Malfunction / Reduced Power warning. The dealer replaced the High-Voltage Junction Box (HVJB), however I am unsure whether the actual root cause was ever identified. This failure shows a major defect in the high-voltage electrical system. Separately, my vehicle is also subject to Recall 25S65 / the federal safety agency 25V404, where a discharged 12-volt battery can prevent the electronic door latches from opening, risking passenger entrapment. Ford has no remedy available and has only projected a future software update. My car is still at the dealership. These two issues are connected: the HV system (through the HVJB) powers the DC-DC converter that keeps the 12-volt battery charged. A failure on the HV side can starve the 12-volt system, which directly creates the entrapment risk described in the recall. I live in Florida, where extreme heat makes this risk especially dangerous for children, pets, and elderly passengers. What is my emergency plan...carry a hammer to break the windows on every trip? This is an unreasonable and unsafe expectation for consumers. Ford has not provided any fix or assurance of safety. I have specifically asked Ford whether my car is safe to drive — they have not provided any assurances, merely repeating that Ford has not issued a stop-driving order on the vehicle. This unresolved defect substantially impairs the use, value, and safety of my vehicle, and Ford has failed to provide an adequate repair. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Questions about the 2024 Ford Mustang Mach E electrical
Does the 2024 Ford Mustang Mach E have electrical problems?
Owners have filed 32 complaints about the electrical of the 2024 Ford Mustang Mach E, 65% of all its complaints, more than any other problem.
At what mileage do 2024 Ford Mustang Mach E electrical problems start?
Not enough complaints include the mileage to tell.
Was there a recall on the 2024 Ford Mustang Mach E electrical?
Yes, 1 recall: 26V582000. Check your VIN to see if your car still needs the free repair.
What year does the Ford Mustang Mach E have the most electrical problems?
The Ford Mustang Mach E model years with the most electrical complaints are 2021 (156 complaints), 2022 (79 complaints) and 2023 (53 complaints).
Other 2024 Ford Mustang Mach E problems
Transmission 9Acceleration 8Brakes 8Driver assistance 8Fuel system 8Locks 5Steering 3Body 1Seat belts 1Suspension 1Visibility 1Wheels 1
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2024 Ford Mustang Mach E?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history