← New search

2014 Acura Rdx

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Rdx years

Owner complaints for the 2014 Acura Rdx are substantially higher than the model-year median of 36.5.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Rdx years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

Limited mileage data: 55 of 242 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Exterior Lighting. Review the 162 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 41 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Visibility/wiper. Review the 10 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

2 crash reports1 fire reports3 injury reports

What owners actually said

242 reports
Mileage unknown · Jul 27, 2022
Exterior Lighting

Like many other Acura RDX 2014 owners, I have also experienced the dimming of headlights to the point where it is unsafe to drive in the evening or during severe weather conditions. After replacing the bulbs twice and cleaning the lenses, I took it to an Acura dealership. They checked the wiring and confirmed there were no issue…

Read full complaint

Like many other Acura RDX 2014 owners, I have also experienced the dimming of headlights to the point where it is unsafe to drive in the evening or during severe weather conditions. After replacing the bulbs twice and cleaning the lenses, I took it to an Acura dealership. They checked the wiring and confirmed there were no issues, and said that the headlight assemblies are failing and need to be replaced. After searching the issue, I see it is common so I don't understand why this has not yet been recalled. It is a known issue that this car is unsafe to drive at night, endangering people in the vehicle, other drivers, and pedestrians. The alternative is to turn on high beams and blind oncoming drivers, which is just as dangerous. Acura is aware of this issue and confirmed no active recalls. I am passionate that this should be a recall - how is Acura okay with having cars on the road that are actively dangerous to drive at certain hours of the day? It's a defective vehicle and should be recalled. Get these off the road.

NHTSA ODI #11476158

Mileage unknown · Jul 23, 2022
Exterior LightingUnknown Or Other

I recently purchased this vehicle and had nit driven it at night. On 07/20/22 at approximately 930pm I had to pick my son up at a friends home. We live in Florida and thunderstorms are routine here. While driving I noticed my visibility of the road was not clear. I pulled over during the storm and visually checked that my headla…

Read full complaint

I recently purchased this vehicle and had nit driven it at night. On 07/20/22 at approximately 930pm I had to pick my son up at a friends home. We live in Florida and thunderstorms are routine here. While driving I noticed my visibility of the road was not clear. I pulled over during the storm and visually checked that my headlamps were on. They were except that the lighting was dim. I proceeded to pick up my son and discovered that on a dark road I could not see 5 feet in front of me. I continued my trip and witnessed a dog run across the front of my vehicle. I swerved and applied my brakes. I did not see this animal until it was right on top of me. I turned on my high beams and completed my trip with them on knowing that Law Enforcement could have easily cited me for it. The next day I purchased the two best and brightest bulbs I could find and had them installed in the car. This did not change anything. The headlights are still dim. I have read on message boards that this is a known problem with this vehicle. Have any accidents been reported citing dim headlights? Why has the manufacturer not issued a recall? I have not driven at night since the incident and would like some input from you.

NHTSA ODI #11475487

Mileage unknown · Jul 12, 2022
Exterior Lighting

Despite recently replacing bulbs and cleaning my headlights, my low beams are very dim. I do not feel safe driving at night without high beams on because they are so dim. Other Acura’s have had parts recalled for this issue.

NHTSA ODI #11473593

Mileage unknown · Jul 9, 2022
Exterior LightingVisibility/wiper

The low beam lights have become so dim that it is unsafe to drive the vehicle between dusk and dawn. Visibility is extremely impeded by this issue.

NHTSA ODI #11473093

Mileage unknown · Jul 6, 2022
Exterior Lighting

I recently purchased a 14 Acura RDX about a month ago not realizing it would almost cost a possible fatality due to its poorly designed headlight. It was day time when I purchased the vehicle so I was not aware I would only be able to see approx 3-4 feet out at night using my low beams. That issue almost got me in a very horribl…

Read full complaint

I recently purchased a 14 Acura RDX about a month ago not realizing it would almost cost a possible fatality due to its poorly designed headlight. It was day time when I purchased the vehicle so I was not aware I would only be able to see approx 3-4 feet out at night using my low beams. That issue almost got me in a very horrible situation. A few nights ago I was leaving my nieces 5 year old bday party in a residential area that does not have street lighting, it was then that I turned my low beams on for the first time. I thought something was wrong with them because I could barely see. It was a clear night without rain but I was still unable to see anything further than approx 4ft in front of my vehicle (I cant imagine how dangerous it is when raining). As I started to accelerate to the speed limit I was approaching what looked a shadow of parked cars on the left side of the street. Just as I was approaching those cars to pass, a man walked onto the street from in between the cars, Im assuming to cross the street to get to a house. I did not see him and he did not see me until he was feet away from the corner of my car. I slammed on my breaks and he jumped out of the way in impeccable timing. Luckily, I was not going too fast since it was a residential area however, had he not seen me in that exact matter of time, he could have got seriously injured or killed. This was the first time I ever had to use my headlights, had I known how bad the lighting would be, I would never have drove that vehicle at night nor would I have purchased it. What’s the point in purchasing a vehicle you can only drive in the day and lose your freedom of choice to drive at night. That’s ridiculous. Not to mention, I had my 4 year old daughter with me that night who was also at risk in this situation. We all got very lucky nothing serious happened. So apparently after looking into the issue I discovered this model includes low beam projector lens that fail to function.

NHTSA ODI #11472605

Mileage unknown · May 12, 2022
Exterior Lighting

The standard driving headlights have become very dim over the past 2 years. Have replaced the bulbs with two different manufactured light bulbs with no discernable brightness change in the headlight. The lights did not illuminate any of the road when driving at night. Very dangerous situation. Had to use high beams to get any …

Read full complaint

The standard driving headlights have become very dim over the past 2 years. Have replaced the bulbs with two different manufactured light bulbs with no discernable brightness change in the headlight. The lights did not illuminate any of the road when driving at night. Very dangerous situation. Had to use high beams to get any road illumination. Replaced the entire lighting assembly as online forums recommended that the issue was a delamination of the projector in the assembly. Newly installed assemblies on both sides remedied the problem.

NHTSA ODI #11464429

Mileage unknown · Apr 29, 2022
Exterior Lighting

Low beam headlights have become continually worse in the past four years. The bulbs are working fine, but the low beam headlights only project light out a few feet from the front of the car. The car is unsafe and undriveable at night using only the low beam headlights. The high beam headlights are fine, but driving with the …

Read full complaint

Low beam headlights have become continually worse in the past four years. The bulbs are working fine, but the low beam headlights only project light out a few feet from the front of the car. The car is unsafe and undriveable at night using only the low beam headlights. The high beam headlights are fine, but driving with the high beam lights on at all times is also a safety hazard. The dealer told it is problem with the reflectors, not the bulbs. The dealer was familiar with the issue, but called the working of the low beam headlights as presented as "normal" for this year and model. It is NOT normal and is unsafe. This seems to be a common problem on the 2014-2015 model RDX, but Acura refuses to admit this is any kind of manufacturer's problem. The dealer, Acura of Bellevue (Washington) also did not want to offer a repair , even at my cost, but rather referred me to a third party company to seek repairs. Why would a dealer decline to offer a solution? This car should be recalled and the manufacturer should pay for repairs to make it safe.

NHTSA ODI #11462785

Mileage unknown · Feb 16, 2022
Exterior Lighting

Headlamp assemblies have failed due to apparent manufacturer defect. The defects are so significant that the vehicle becomes unsafe to drive at night, and even brand new bulb replacements have no effect. The entire headlamp assemblies are defective and must be replaced. These are known issues, and the predominent complaints li…

Read full complaint

Headlamp assemblies have failed due to apparent manufacturer defect. The defects are so significant that the vehicle becomes unsafe to drive at night, and even brand new bulb replacements have no effect. The entire headlamp assemblies are defective and must be replaced. These are known issues, and the predominent complaints listed not only on replacement part websites on the internet, but in NHTSA's own website for this vehicle - even more then the recalled airbags, are all specifically for this exact same issue being suffered by numerous complainants, but for some reason NHTSA has failed to recognize and enforce a recall on it. Acura/Honda has not even issued a service bulletin on it to allow its dealers to repair it, despite it being a known issue, and Honda Financial Services even deceitfully denies warranty claims, even lying about contract terms to avoid coverage. This is a serious safety issue affecting scores of owners of this vehicle, including the 2013, 2014, and 2015 model years, as reflected on the internet and in complaints. Owners may not even realize they are driving with a defective headlight until they get into or cause an accident. This needs to be flagged as an urgent RECALL requirement.

NHTSA ODI #11452213

Mileage unknown · Feb 11, 2022
Exterior LightingCrashInjury

See attached letter for details. Incident date below reflects the VIN I currently own, when testing identified the safety-related defect. Accident details from previous same model. The same headlamps were the subject of the July 14, 2014 NHTSA Acura ILX Electrical & Lights Recall: 14V323000 on the 2013-2014 Acura ILX model. Ye…

Read full complaint

See attached letter for details. Incident date below reflects the VIN I currently own, when testing identified the safety-related defect. Accident details from previous same model. The same headlamps were the subject of the July 14, 2014 NHTSA Acura ILX Electrical & Lights Recall: 14V323000 on the 2013-2014 Acura ILX model. Yet, Acura continued to use these headlamps and failed to rectify the defect across its model lineup. Instead, the inherently faulty engineering, material, and manufacturing was destined to slowly degrade the reflective surface of the projector cup and lens under the heat output of the low beam halogen bulb that was, by Acura design, the automatic daytime running lights that remain on whenever the engine is running.

NHTSA ODI #11451614

Mileage unknown · Feb 6, 2022
Exterior Lighting

Vehicle is 2014 with 130K miles. We noticed that the headlights are getting dimmer to the point where it is unsafe to drive at night. The internal low beam reflector lens is fogged up preventing the headlight to light the road adequately. Called Acura dealer in Greenville SC and spoke to the service manager on 2/4/2022. He told …

Read full complaint

Vehicle is 2014 with 130K miles. We noticed that the headlights are getting dimmer to the point where it is unsafe to drive at night. The internal low beam reflector lens is fogged up preventing the headlight to light the road adequately. Called Acura dealer in Greenville SC and spoke to the service manager on 2/4/2022. He told me the heat from the headlamp is intense and the coating is starting to de-laminate causing the headlights to dim. He said Acura is aware of the problem but no recalls have been issued. He told me that Acura would not cover the repair and it would cost $2400 to replace both headlight assemblies. Many people have reported this problem but no recall has been issued....yet. This vehicle is unsafe to drive at night. I will be replacing the headlights at my own expense and keeping the headlight assemblies for further inspection if required. Dimming headlights is a slow process and we really started noticing it about a year ago.

NHTSA ODI #11450638

Official recalls

3

23V858000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump

Dec 18, 2023

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2013-2023 Honda Accord, Civic Coupe, Civic Sedan, Civic Hatchback, Civic Type R, CR-V, HR-V, Ridgeline, Odyssey, Acura ILX, MDX, MDX Hybrid, RDX, RLX, TLX, 2019-2022 Honda Insight, Passport, 2020 Honda CR-V Hybrid, 2018-2019 Honda Clarity PHEV, Fit, and 2015-2020 Honda Accord Hybrid, Pilot, Acura NSX vehicles. The fuel pump inside the fuel tank may fail.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Fuel pump failure can cause an engine stall while driving, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Dealers will replace the fuel pump module, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed September 6, 2024. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are KGC and KGD. This recall is an expansion of NHTSA recall numbers 21V-215 and 20V-314.

19V182000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Mar 6, 2019

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling specific 2003 Acura 3.2CL, 2013-2016 ILX, 2013-2014 ILX Hybrid, 2003-2006 MDX, 2007-2016 RDX, 2002-2003 3.2TL, 2004-2006, and 2009-2014 TL, 2010-2013 ZDX and 2001-2007 and 2009 Honda Accord, 2001-2005 Civic, 2003-2005 Civic Hybrid, 2001-2005 Civic GX NGV, 2002-2007 and 2010-2011 CR-V, 2003-2011 Element, 2007 Fit, 2002-2004 Odyssey, 2003-2008 Pilot, and 2006-2014 Ridgeline vehicles. The affected vehicles received a replacement driver air bag inflator as part of a previous Takata inflator recall remedy or a replacement driver air bag module containing the same inflator type as a service part. Due to a manufacturing error, in the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the driver frontal air bag, these inflators may explode.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An explosion of an inflator within the driver frontal air bag module may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver, front seat passenger or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the driver's air bag inflator with an alternate inflator, free of charge. The recall began April 10, 2019. Honda owners may contact customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's number for this recall is O41. Acura owners may contact customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Acura's number for this recall is U40.

16V061000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Feb 3, 2016

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain model year 2007-2011 Honda CR-V, 2011-2015 CR-Z, 2010-2014 FCX, and Insight, 2009-2013 Fit, 2013-2014 Fit EV, 2007-2014 Ridgeline, 2013-2016 Acura ILX, 2013-2014 Acura ILX Hybrid, 2007-2016 RDX, 2005-2012 Acura RL, 2009-2014 Acura TL, and 2010-2013 Acura ZDX vehicles. The affected vehicles are equipped with a dual-stage driver frontal air bag that may be susceptible to moisture intrusion which, over time, could cause the inflator to rupture.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the inflator, free of charge. The recall began March 2017. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are JY0, JY1, and JY2.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

1

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

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.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

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.

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

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.