My car was part of recall number 22V465, which was supposed to fix a problem with the electronic brake assist system. The recall repair was done in 2023, but after my battery recently died, the same problem has come back — my brakes are very firm, and I have to press hard to stop. The car is showing trouble codes C028F:04, C158…
Read full complaint
My car was part of recall number 22V465, which was supposed to fix a problem with the electronic brake assist system. The recall repair was done in 2023, but after my battery recently died, the same problem has come back — my brakes are very firm, and I have to press hard to stop. The car is showing trouble codes C028F:04, C1586:04, and V0420:71, all related to the electronic brake control module.
NHTSA ODI #11692646
Mileage unknown · Oct 28, 2024
Service Brakes
Was driving home from work and my brakes suddenly stopped working, if I press all the way down on the brakes they somewhat work. Checked brake fluid and brake lines and everything seems fine. Could this be from vacuum power brake assist fail?
NHTSA ODI #11622365
Mileage unknown · Dec 14, 2023
Electrical SystemService Brakes
Increased stopping distance during certain brake vacuum loss events. My check engine light goes on and off periodically. When I’m at a red light my whole car shuts off and goes into a neutral mode then once I press the brake it starts back up.
NHTSA ODI #11560213
Mileage unknown · Aug 17, 2023
Air BagsSeat BeltsService BrakesCrashInjury
On Monday, August 14th, at approximately 5 pm, my wife and I were traveling in our 2018 Buick Regal towards a red streetlight. I began applying my brakes to come to a stop. I was several car lengths behind a vehicle that was up ahead. My car's engine then revved up and our vehicle kept on going and jerking front and back althou…
Read full complaint
On Monday, August 14th, at approximately 5 pm, my wife and I were traveling in our 2018 Buick Regal towards a red streetlight. I began applying my brakes to come to a stop. I was several car lengths behind a vehicle that was up ahead. My car's engine then revved up and our vehicle kept on going and jerking front and back although I was applying the brakes. Our car failed to stop so I struck the stationary vehicle. I kept on applying the brakes, but the car kept on going and jerking until I struck the car in front a second time. Our vehicles engine continued to revve up and the brakes continued to fail and I struck the rear end of the car in front of me again. The other driver crossed the intersection with us traveling right behind with no control over our vehicle. When we crossed the intersection there was an incline, so this slowed down our car since our brakes did not work, I pulled the steering wheel to the right towards the cement curb, then I put the transmission into Park, then the car's engine revved up once again and made a loud noise. Both vehicles sustained damage. I then was able to turn the engine off. This action was the only maneuver which stopped our car. Both my wife and I had injuries which we were checked at a hospital emergency room. We have our vehicle parked at our home's driveway and it it available for inspection. The fact that our vehicle's brakes failed to function placed me and my passenger and others at risk. My wife called our dealership the following day, and a manager stated we needed to report this incident. Our vehicle has not been inspected at this point. There were no symptoms of the problem that appeared other than the engine making a sound like increasing in speed and the brakes failing. At the hospital I was diagnosed with a concussion. My wife was diagnosed with neck pain since her head kept snapping back and forth and hitting the dashboard area and the headrest. The seatbelts plus the airbags also failed to properly function.
NHTSA ODI #11539236
Mileage unknown · Sep 28, 2022
Service BrakesCrashInjury
September 10, 2022 I was backing out of my driveway, but the car would not slow down, and I hit a tree on my neighbor's easement across the street. After a minute, I decided to move the car, put the car in drive, and again the car would not slow down, and wound up hitting the porch of my neighbor 2 houses over. I have used my…
Read full complaint
September 10, 2022 I was backing out of my driveway, but the car would not slow down, and I hit a tree on my neighbor's easement across the street. After a minute, I decided to move the car, put the car in drive, and again the car would not slow down, and wound up hitting the porch of my neighbor 2 houses over. I have used my left foot for braking since 1966, so it is not a case of mixing up pedals. My wife called 911, the police and ambulance showed up, and I was taken to the hospital. After x-rays, ultrasound, and 2 CT scans, it was determined that I did not have a brain bleed and I was sent home. The car was towed, examined by the insurance adjustor and body shop, and determined totalled. There were no warning lights, and only later that night did I remember that I had received a recall letter.
NHTSA ODI #11486889
169 miles · Jun 25, 2018
Service BrakesCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 BUICK REGAL. THE CONTACT PURCHASED THE VEHICLE IN FEBRUARY OF 2018, BUT DID NOT OBTAIN IT UNTIL JUNE 15, 2018. WHILE IN A DRIVE-THRU LINE, THE CONTACT REMOVED HIS FOOT FROM THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE FENDER, BUMPER, AND HEADLIGHT WERE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 BUICK REGAL. THE CONTACT PURCHASED THE VEHICLE IN FEBRUARY OF 2018, BUT DID NOT OBTAIN IT UNTIL JUNE 15, 2018. WHILE IN A DRIVE-THRU LINE, THE CONTACT REMOVED HIS FOOT FROM THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE FENDER, BUMPER, AND HEADLIGHT WERE DAMAGED. THERE WERE NO INJURIES AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DEALER (GREINER BUICK GMC, 14555 CIVIC DR., VICTORVILLE, CA 92394) WAS CONTACTED AND REFERRED THE CONTACT TO AN AUTHORIZED BUICK BODY SHOP FOR THE DAMAGES. THE FAILURE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALER. THE MANUFACTURER HAD NOT BEEN CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 169. *TT
NHTSA ODI #11103736
169 miles · Jun 21, 2018
Service BrakesVehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 BUICK REGAL. WHILE DRIVING THROUGH A DRIVE'THRU, THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED, BUT THE VEHICLE INADVERTENTLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THE CONTACT EXITED THE VEHICLE, INSPECTED THE DAMAGE, AND CONCLUDED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO BE DRIVEN. THE DEALER (GREINER BUICK GMC, 14555 CIVIC DR.,…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 BUICK REGAL. WHILE DRIVING THROUGH A DRIVE'THRU, THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED, BUT THE VEHICLE INADVERTENTLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THE CONTACT EXITED THE VEHICLE, INSPECTED THE DAMAGE, AND CONCLUDED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO BE DRIVEN. THE DEALER (GREINER BUICK GMC, 14555 CIVIC DR., VICTORVILLE, CA 92394, (760) 245-3451) WAS CONTACTED, BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTO BODY SHOP WHERE IT WAS AWAITING REPAIRS FOR THE BODY DAMAGE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 169. *TT *TR
General Motors, LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2018-2020 Buick Regal vehicles. In the event of a vacuum-power brake assist failure, a software error in the electronic brake control module (EBCM) may result in a loss of power brake assist. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 135, "Light vehicle brake systems."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A loss of power brake assist can extend the distance required to stop the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will update the EBCM software, free of charge. Interim owner notification letters advising owners of the safety risk were mailed on August 19, 2022. Owner notification letters were mailed September 16, 2022. Owners may contact Buick's customer service at 1-800-521-7300.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:electric:control Module:software
General Motors, LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2018-2020 Buick Regal vehicles. In the event of a vacuum-power brake assist failure, a software error in the electronic brake control module (EBCM) may result in a loss of power brake assist. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 135, "Light vehicle brake systems."
Consequence: A loss of power brake assist can extend the distance required to stop the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will update the EBCM software, free of charge. Interim owner notification letters advising owners of the safety risk were mailed on August 19, 2022. Owner notification letters were mailed September 16, 2022. Owners may contact Buick's customer service at 1-800-521-7300.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum
General Motors, LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2018-2020 Buick Regal vehicles. In the event of a vacuum-power brake assist failure, a software error in the electronic brake control module (EBCM) may result in a loss of power brake assist. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 135, "Light vehicle brake systems."
Consequence: A loss of power brake assist can extend the distance required to stop the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will update the EBCM software, free of charge. Interim owner notification letters advising owners of the safety risk were mailed on August 19, 2022. Owner notification letters were mailed September 16, 2022. Owners may contact Buick's customer service at 1-800-521-7300.
General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2018-2019 Chevrolet Equinox, Impala, Cruze, Volt and Bolt EV vehicles, GMC Terrain vehicles, Buick Lacrosse and Regal vehicles, Cadillac XTS and XTS Professional vehicles and 2018 Chevrolet Malibu vehicles. The rear brake caliper pistons may have an insufficient coating causing gas pockets to form, potentially reducing rear brake performance.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A reduction of braking performance can increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: GM will notify owners, and dealers will bleed the vehicle's brake system, free of charge. The recall began October 11, 2018. Owners may contact Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300, Cadillac customer service at 1-800-458-8006, Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020, or GMC customer service at 1-800-462-8782. GM's number for this recall is 18279.
General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2018 Buick Regal vehicles. During the manufacturing process, the rear seat belts may have been improperly routed around the bolster bracket on the rear outboard seats, which can cause inadequate restraint of the passengers.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the seat belt fails to adequately restrain the passengers in a crash, it can increase the risk of injury.
Remedy: GM will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the rear outboard seat belts, correcting the routing of the seat belts as necessary, free of charge. The recall began May 14, 2018. Owners may contact Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300. GM's number for this recall is 18117.
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.
2018 Buick Regal Problems, Complaints & Recalls | Skip That Year
Illustration