← New search

2014 Acura Rlx

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Limited comparison data

There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Rlx 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

51 reports with mileage · 33 unknown

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.

  • Steering. Review the 49 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Suspension. Review the 17 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electronic Stability Control (esc). Review the 12 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

1 crash reports0 fire reports0 injury reports

Steering complaints

49 reports
Clear category filter
79,000 miles · Aug 13, 2019
Steering

THE 2014 ACURA RLX INTRODUCED ACURA'S NEW PAWS SYSTEM (PRECISION ALL WHEEL STEERING). THE REAR WHEELS TURN SLIGHTLY IN THE DIRECTION OF THE CAR AND ARE CONTROLLED BY THE VEHICLE NOT THE DRIVER (DRIVER CONTROLS ONLY THE STANDARD FRONT WHEEL STEERING). THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY SOUNDS LIKE AN UPGRADE IN THEORY AND MAY EVEN BE IN CAS…

Read full complaint

THE 2014 ACURA RLX INTRODUCED ACURA'S NEW PAWS SYSTEM (PRECISION ALL WHEEL STEERING). THE REAR WHEELS TURN SLIGHTLY IN THE DIRECTION OF THE CAR AND ARE CONTROLLED BY THE VEHICLE NOT THE DRIVER (DRIVER CONTROLS ONLY THE STANDARD FRONT WHEEL STEERING). THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY SOUNDS LIKE AN UPGRADE IN THEORY AND MAY EVEN BE IN CASES AT HIGH SPEEDS WITH THE REAR WHEELS TURNING EVER SO SLIGHTLY. HOWEVER, I HAVE EXPERIENCED NUMEROUS OCCASIONS WHERE IT FEELS LIKE I DO NOT HAVE CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE FROM MY DRIVER'S SEAT. WHILE IN MOTION, IMMEDIATELY AFTER COMPLETING A TURN, THE REAR WHEELS APPEAR TO BE LATE IN CORRECTING BACK TO THE CAR'S NEW DIRECTION (APPROX. 2-3 SECONDS LATE). THIS RESULTS IN A FEELING OF "FISHTAILING". I CAN FEEL THE BACK END OF THE CAR PULLING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION AND MY NATURAL INSTINCT IS TYPICALLY AN OVERCORRECT. MY BEST EXAMPLE WOULD BE A ROUNDABOUT TURN. THE REAR WHEELS ATTEMPT TO STAY IN THE CIRCULAR TURN EVEN WHEN YOU EXIT THE ROUNDABOUT TO STRAIGHTEN OUT. THE PROBLEM IS THE REAR END OF THE VEHICLE IS PULLING TOWARDS THE ONCOMING TRAFFIC. I'VE ALSO EXPERIENCED THIS FEELING IN AN "S" CURVE AND A U-TURN. WHAT PROMPTED ME TO FINALLY SPEAK UP ABOUT THIS IS IN MY MOST RECENT EXPERIENCE IT WAS RAINING. THE WET ROAD MADE THE REAR END OF THE CAR FEEL LIKE IT WAS SLIDING OUT OF MY CONTROL. THERE IS A LOCAL RATHER LARGE ROUNDABOUT WITH 4 LANES AND HIGHER THAN USUAL SPEEDS FOR A ROUNDABOUT. IN THESE INSTANCES, THE REAR WHEEL STEERING SHOULD BE DISABLED FOR SAFETY REASONS.

NHTSA ODI #11243475

49,500 miles · May 30, 2019
Steering

SIMILAR TO OTHER REPORTS. FIRST, WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS UP A HILL OUT OF MY HOUSE, I STARTED TO HEAR A GRINDING NOISE FROM THE REAR SUSPENSION ON A REGULAR BASIS. I WAS TOLD BAD TIRES, I TOOK IT TO GET ALIGNED. I CHANGED TIRES AND HAD THE CAR ALIGNED. STILL HAD THE SOUND. I DONT HEAR IT AS MUCH, BUT DO STILL GET IT FROM…

Read full complaint

SIMILAR TO OTHER REPORTS. FIRST, WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS UP A HILL OUT OF MY HOUSE, I STARTED TO HEAR A GRINDING NOISE FROM THE REAR SUSPENSION ON A REGULAR BASIS. I WAS TOLD BAD TIRES, I TOOK IT TO GET ALIGNED. I CHANGED TIRES AND HAD THE CAR ALIGNED. STILL HAD THE SOUND. I DONT HEAR IT AS MUCH, BUT DO STILL GET IT FROM TIME TO TIME. MOST RECENTLY, ALMOST A DOZEN TIMES I WOULD FEEL LIKE MY CAR WOULD ACCELERATE AND SLIDE IN THE BACK END AND QUICKLY CORRECT ITSELF. AT FIRST I THOUGHT I WAS ON A METAL GRATE AND SLIPPED. AFTER A FEW SECONDS IT CORRECTS ITSELF. IT HAPPENS WHEN I AM AT A SLOW SPEED AND MAKING A TURN AND ACCELERATING. IT HAPPENS BOTH WHEN MAKING A RIGHT OR A LEFT TURN. ITS QUICK AND VERY STARTLING. THE VEHICLE IS EQUIPPED WITH PAWS. LESS THAN 50K. LOOKS LIKE OTHER DRIVERS ARE HAVING A SIMILAR ISSUE..BOTH WITH NOISE AND THE SLIPPING. ACURA HAS PLACED SERVICE BULLETINS FOR THE ACTUATORS REGARDING THE NOISE BUT NOTHING REGARDING THE ISSUE WITH THE PAWS. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE ACURA DEALERSHIP, BUT BECAUSE THEY CAN NOT REPLICATE, THEY CAN NOT DIAGNOSE AND FIX.

NHTSA ODI #11216932

80,000 miles · Apr 23, 2019
Electronic Stability Control (esc)SteeringVehicle Speed Control

IT WAS THE SCARIEST THING EVER I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY IN THE CAR WITH MY SON WHEN MY VEHICLE STARTED DECELERATING WHAT A VERY DANGEROUS THING TO HAPPEN . I PURCHASED THE CAR 94 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS INCIDENT. I TOOK IT TO THE ACURA DEALER WHICH THEY SAID IT WASN'T COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. THE RECALL FOR FRONT COLLISION…

Read full complaint

IT WAS THE SCARIEST THING EVER I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY IN THE CAR WITH MY SON WHEN MY VEHICLE STARTED DECELERATING WHAT A VERY DANGEROUS THING TO HAPPEN . I PURCHASED THE CAR 94 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS INCIDENT. I TOOK IT TO THE ACURA DEALER WHICH THEY SAID IT WASN'T COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. THE RECALL FOR FRONT COLLISION WARNING LIGHT THAT COMES ON WAS NOT DONE EVER ON THIS CAR . THE INFORMATION EMAILED TO ME FROM THE GENTLEMAN I SPOKE WITH ON THE PHONE DOES NOT SHOW THE WORK DONE I'M VERY ANGRY AND FEEL LIKE MY LIFE COULD'VE BEEN ENDED ALL BECAUSE OF A PROBLEM THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FIXED

NHTSA ODI #11203292

72,000 miles · Nov 12, 2018
Steering

PAWS REAR WHEEL STEERING STICKING CAUSING SUDDEN CORRECTION TO REAR WHEEL ALIGNMENT. AFTER TURNING LEFT OR RIGHT FROM A FULL STOP SUDDEN CORRECTION FEELS LIKE REAR OF CAR IS FALLING OUT, DRIVER MAY RESPOND WITH AN OVER CORRECTION PLACING EVERYONE IN DANGER. THIS HAS HAPPENED NUMEROUS TIMES OVER THE PAST MONTH, DEALER SEEMS CONC…

Read full complaint

PAWS REAR WHEEL STEERING STICKING CAUSING SUDDEN CORRECTION TO REAR WHEEL ALIGNMENT. AFTER TURNING LEFT OR RIGHT FROM A FULL STOP SUDDEN CORRECTION FEELS LIKE REAR OF CAR IS FALLING OUT, DRIVER MAY RESPOND WITH AN OVER CORRECTION PLACING EVERYONE IN DANGER. THIS HAS HAPPENED NUMEROUS TIMES OVER THE PAST MONTH, DEALER SEEMS CONCERNED BUT BRING MONEY. CONTACTED ACURA AMERICA, THEY DENY ANY KNOWLEDGE, WILL TAKE MY REPORT WITHOUT ANY FOLLOW UP. ACTUATORS FOR PAWS SYSTEM WERE REPLACED AT APPROXIMATELY 9000 MILES BECAUSE OF NOISE, DIDN'T HELP, ACURA SHOULD STEP UP. OTHER OWNERS HAVE REPORTED THIS PROBLEM TO NHTSA.

NHTSA ODI #11151088

69,000 miles · Jul 11, 2018
SteeringSuspension

WHILE DRIVING MY VEHICLE STRAIT AT LOW SPEEDS, I STARTED TO HEAR MOANING OR RUBBING NOISES FROM THE REAR SUSPENSION ON A REGULAR BASIS. A FEW TIMES, I WOULD FEEL LIKE MY CAR WOULD SLIDE IN THE BACK END AND QUICKLY CORRECT ITSELF. ON A PARTICULAR TIME ON A LOCAL CITY STREET TRAVELING STRAIGHT AT ABOUT 30MPH, MY VEHICLE'S REAR ST…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING MY VEHICLE STRAIT AT LOW SPEEDS, I STARTED TO HEAR MOANING OR RUBBING NOISES FROM THE REAR SUSPENSION ON A REGULAR BASIS. A FEW TIMES, I WOULD FEEL LIKE MY CAR WOULD SLIDE IN THE BACK END AND QUICKLY CORRECT ITSELF. ON A PARTICULAR TIME ON A LOCAL CITY STREET TRAVELING STRAIGHT AT ABOUT 30MPH, MY VEHICLE'S REAR STARTED TO DRIVE SIDEWAYS TAKING MY CAR TOWARDS A DITCH ALONG THE ROAD. AFTER 2-3 SECONDS, THE CAR CORRECTED ITSELF. THE VEHICLE IS EQUIPPED WITH A PRECISION-ALL WHEEL STEER SYSTEM (PAWS) NEW FOR THE 2014 YEAR MODEL RLX. AFTER INVESTIGATING THIS THROUGH THE INTERNET, I LEARNED THAT MANY OTHER DRIVERS WERE HEARING THE SAME NOISES AND FEELING THE SAME LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THERE IS ONE RECALL ON THIS VEHICLE THAT WAS AIMED AT SOME LOOSE REAR SUSPENSION BOLTS BELIEVED TO BE CAUSING SOME OF THE PROBLEMS. THE OTHER HAS BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO REAR TOE ACTUATORS IN THE PAWS SYSTEM. ACURA HAS PLACED SERVICE BULLETINS FOR THE ACTUATORS BUT IS NOT TAKING OWNERSHIP OF THE FLAWS OF THE PAWS SYSTEM AND DEFECTIVE PARTS. WE HAVE NO IDEA WHEN THE VEHICLE WILL REPEAT THE SAME UNSAFE ACTION AND FEEL THAT IT IS A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE WE OR SOMEONE ELSE GETS HURT FROM AN ACCIDENT. WE ARE TRYING TO ALSO ADDRESS THIS WITH ACURA AND ARE AWAITING A RESPONSE. THERE ARE NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS BY OTHER OWNERS ON THE INTERNET AND THEY MIGHT NOT BE AWARE TO FILE A COMPLAINT WITH NHTSA. THIS VEHICLE IS ONLY 4 YEARS OLD WITH 69,0000 MILES. PLEASE HELP WITH THIS ISSUE.

NHTSA ODI #11110760

30 miles · Jun 28, 2018
Steering

THE PWS IN THE REAR OF CAR, IS LOCKING AT TIMES WHEN MAKING RIGHT OR LEFT TURN.. THEY IT WILL ADJUST ITSELF ABRUPTLY WHILE DRIVING CAUSING NEAR DEATH SITUATIONS..

NHTSA ODI #11104559

15,847 miles · Nov 20, 2015
Steering

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 ACURA RLX. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR REGULAR SERVICE AND THE TECHNICIAN DETERMINED THAT THE DRIVER SIDE OUTER AND INNER TIE RODS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED FOR HIS SAFETY AND DID NOT DRIVE THE VEHICLE SINCE THE REPAIR.…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 ACURA RLX. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR REGULAR SERVICE AND THE TECHNICIAN DETERMINED THAT THE DRIVER SIDE OUTER AND INNER TIE RODS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED FOR HIS SAFETY AND DID NOT DRIVE THE VEHICLE SINCE THE REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. UPDATED 01/20/16*LJ; UPDATED 04/25/16*JB *TR

NHTSA ODI #10795135

12,800 miles · Aug 20, 2014
Steering

THE RLX HAS ALL WHEEL STEERING. THE REAR STEERING WHEEL ACTUATORS MAKE A GROANING SOUND, WHICH ACURA HAS NOT EVALUATED FOR POTENTIAL SAFETY CONCERNS. I AM CONCERNED THAT THE PART IS DEFECTIVE AND COULD LEAD TO LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE IF IT FAILS. ACURA KNOWS OF THE PROBLEM AND HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIX IT DUE TO THE UNA…

Read full complaint

THE RLX HAS ALL WHEEL STEERING. THE REAR STEERING WHEEL ACTUATORS MAKE A GROANING SOUND, WHICH ACURA HAS NOT EVALUATED FOR POTENTIAL SAFETY CONCERNS. I AM CONCERNED THAT THE PART IS DEFECTIVE AND COULD LEAD TO LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE IF IT FAILS. ACURA KNOWS OF THE PROBLEM AND HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIX IT DUE TO THE UNAVAILABILITY OF CORRECTED PARTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10626646

3,000 miles · Oct 14, 2013
SteeringSuspension

I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE FREEWAY WHEN THE BACK-END OF THE CAR BECAME VERY LOOSE AND OUT OF CONTROL. THE CAR WAS SWERVING BACK AND FORTH VIOLENTLY. I WAS ABLE TO GAIN CONTROL AVOIDING THE CARS TO THE LEFT OF ME AND THE DITCH TO THE RIGHT. I WAS ABLE TO GET THE CAR UNDER CONTROL AND I SLOWED THE SPEED WAY DOWN. I PULLED OFF THE …

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE FREEWAY WHEN THE BACK-END OF THE CAR BECAME VERY LOOSE AND OUT OF CONTROL. THE CAR WAS SWERVING BACK AND FORTH VIOLENTLY. I WAS ABLE TO GAIN CONTROL AVOIDING THE CARS TO THE LEFT OF ME AND THE DITCH TO THE RIGHT. I WAS ABLE TO GET THE CAR UNDER CONTROL AND I SLOWED THE SPEED WAY DOWN. I PULLED OFF THE HIGHWAY AND INTO A DRIVEWAY TO INSPECT. I FOUND THE PASSENGER REAR TIRE TILTED INWARDS TOWARDS THE CAR AT ABOUT A 20 DEGREE ANGLE AND FOUND THE TIE ROD THAT CONNECTS THE CAR TO THE NEW ALL WHEEL STEERING DEVICE DISCONNECTED AND LAYING ON THE GROUND. THE BOLT EITHER CAME OUT OR SHEERED OFF. THE CAR WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND INSPECTED. THEY TOLD ME IT WAS A DEFECT AND REPAIRED IT UNDER WARRANTY. ACURA CLIENT CARE RECEIVED THE PHOTOS AND A DESCRIPTION FROM THE DEALER. I WAS INFORMED THE BOLT PROBABLY VIBRATED LOOSE. UPDATED 10/22/13*LJ UPDATED 10/23/2013 *JS *TR

NHTSA ODI #10547849

Official recalls

5

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.

15V301000 · Forward Collision Avoidance: Crash Imminent Braking

May 20, 2015

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain model year 2014-2015 Acura MDX 2WD and AWD, RLX and 2014 Acura RLX Hybrid vehicles. In certain driving conditions, the Collision Mitigation Braking System (CMBS) may incorrectly interpret certain roadside objects such as metal fences or metal guardrails as obstacles and unexpectedly apply the brakes.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the CMBS unexpectedly applies emergency braking force while driving, there is an increased risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will update the CMBS software, free of charge. The recall began on July 6, 2015. Owners may contact Acura customer service at 1-800-382-2238. Honda's numbers for this recall is JQ4, JQ5 and JQ6.

14V792000 · Exterior Lighting:headlights

Dec 16, 2014

American Honda Motor Co. (Honda) is recalling certain model year 2014 Acura RLX vehicles manufactured November 22, 2012, to January 30, 2014, 2015 Acura RLX vehicles manufactured June 4, 2014, to November 18, 2014, and 2014 Acura RLX Hybrid vehicles manufactured November 5, 2013, to July 25, 2014. An aluminum film applied to the inner reflector of the headlight may experience adhesion issues causing the film to delaminate. Thus, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, "Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment."

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Delamination of the aluminum film may diminish output of the headlight, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace both of the headlights, free of charge. The recall began February 2, 2015. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-310-783-2000. Honda's number for this recall is JN2.

14V639000 · Seat Belts

Oct 10, 2014

American Honda Motor Company (Honda) is recalling certain model year 2014-2015 Acura MDX vehicles manufactured April 23, 2013, to August 25, 2014, and 2014 Acura RLX vehicles manufactured November 5, 2012, to November 25, 2013. In the affected vehicles, the driver and front passenger seat belt may not extend or retract in low temperatures.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A seatbelt that does not function increases the risk of injury in a crash.

Remedy: Honda has notified owners, and dealers will replace the driver and front passenger seat belts, free of charge. The recall began in November 2014. Owners may contact Acura customer service at 1-800-382-2238. Honda's number for this recall is JK7 for the MKX, and JK8 for the RLX.

13V622000 · Suspension:rear

Dec 16, 2013

American Honda Motor Company (Honda) is recalling certain model year 2014 Acura RLX vehicles manufactured August 7, 2012, through November 5, 2013. The bolts that attach the rear lower control arms to the sub-frame of the vehicle may have loosened during transport to dealerships.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Loose rear lower control arm bolts may reduce steering ability, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the rear suspension lower control arm bolts, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin in early January 2014. Customers may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009. Honda's number for this recall is JD0.

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

2

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.

EA19001 · Electrical Overstress

Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect.  During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications.  The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU.  In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment.  FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle.  Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW.  These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes.  An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time.   In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU.  This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners.  Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation.  The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage.  There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation.  The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU.  If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC.  Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC.  All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled.  In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024.  With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.