← New search

2016 Chevrolet Spark

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2016 Chevrolet Spark do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 23.5.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Spark 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

22 reports with mileage · 6 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.

  • Service Brakes. Review the 10 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 5 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 4 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 reports1 fire reports1 injury reports

What owners actually said

28 reports
Mileage unknown · Dec 10, 2025
Electrical SystemFuel/propulsion System

While driving in early 2025, my 2016 Chevrolet Spark EV suddenly lost all ability to accelerate. The vehicle remained powered on but would not respond to the accelerator, and I was unable to fully shut it off. This created a safety hazard because I could not properly control or secure the vehicle, and it required towing. I repl…

Read full complaint

While driving in early 2025, my 2016 Chevrolet Spark EV suddenly lost all ability to accelerate. The vehicle remained powered on but would not respond to the accelerator, and I was unable to fully shut it off. This created a safety hazard because I could not properly control or secure the vehicle, and it required towing. I replaced the 12V battery at my own expense. The issue briefly disappeared, but the same failure occurred again within weeks. The replacement 12V battery also failed to hold a charge, indicating the problem was not related to the 12V system. I brought the vehicle to Harbor Chevrolet. Their technicians confirmed the problem was caused by a failure of the high-voltage battery system. They also informed me that the required EV battery is unavailable from the manufacturer with no estimated availability. Because this component is essential for basic propulsion and safety, the vehicle has been completely inoperable since early 2025. The vehicle is available for inspection, but it cannot be driven due to the propulsion failure. The defect has been reproduced and confirmed by the dealership. There were no warning lamps or early indicators prior to the sudden loss of propulsion. I am reporting this because sudden propulsion loss and inability to shut the vehicle down properly present significant safety concerns, especially if this issue affects additional Spark EV vehicles without an available manufacturer remedy.

NHTSA ODI #11704345

Mileage unknown · May 11, 2025
Fuel/propulsion SystemUnknown Or Other

I am the owner of a 2016 Spark EV, and the driver was my family member. The vehicle was charged and had a remaining driving range of 51 miles when the vehicle suddenly shut down on a major city road without any prior warning or symptoms of a problem. The vehicle did not restart immediately, and other drivers behind had to push t…

Read full complaint

I am the owner of a 2016 Spark EV, and the driver was my family member. The vehicle was charged and had a remaining driving range of 51 miles when the vehicle suddenly shut down on a major city road without any prior warning or symptoms of a problem. The vehicle did not restart immediately, and other drivers behind had to push the vehicle to the side of the road. The driver experienced the shutdown of the vehicle while driving again on another day. Since the sudden shutdown of the propulsion power while driving happened without any prior warning light, message, or symptom, the incident could put the safety of the driver and others at risk, especially if the shutdown happened at a higher speed on a highway. Failure of a specific component or system has not been identified, but the vehicle is available for inspection upon request. The service department of a Chevrolet dealer initially provided an estimated diagnostic fee of $170, but the service department raised the diagnostic fee by double upon check-in when the vehicle was brought in on the scheduled appointment. I canceled the appointment in frustration.

NHTSA ODI #11660265

44,813 miles · Oct 20, 2023
Air BagsCrashInjury

The contact owned a 2016 Chevrolet Spark. The contact stated that while driving approximately 35 MPH, the vehicle was T-bone crashed into on the driver's side by a second vehicle. During the crash, the driver-side curtain air bags did not immediately deploy. The contact indicated that the air bag deployed approximately one minut…

Read full complaint

The contact owned a 2016 Chevrolet Spark. The contact stated that while driving approximately 35 MPH, the vehicle was T-bone crashed into on the driver's side by a second vehicle. During the crash, the driver-side curtain air bags did not immediately deploy. The contact indicated that the air bag deployed approximately one minute after the crash had occurred. The driver sustained torso bruises and lower back pain which later required medical treatment. A Police report was taken at the scene. The vehicle was destroyed and towed away. The manufacturer was not yet notified of the failure. The local dealer was contacted but no assistance was offered. The contact was informed of the incomplete recall for NHTSA Campaign Number: 17V307000(Air Bag). The failure mileage was 44,813.

NHTSA ODI #11550953

Mileage unknown · Oct 9, 2023
Service Brakes

I was driving downhill with the car in L on a highway and brakes failed. I could not engage the brakes at all but somehow the car slowed to a stop and I managed to pull into a parking spot and park. Two lights came on: Service Intellitrak and Service Brake Assist. The car has been inspected by the Chevrolet dealership that sold …

Read full complaint

I was driving downhill with the car in L on a highway and brakes failed. I could not engage the brakes at all but somehow the car slowed to a stop and I managed to pull into a parking spot and park. Two lights came on: Service Intellitrak and Service Brake Assist. The car has been inspected by the Chevrolet dealership that sold the car to me as well as an independant shop. One technician at the Chevrolet dealership reported he got zero brake pressure and claims that the car needs a new brake pressure modulator. The independant shop reported that they could not replicate the poor brake performance. Two technicians from this shop reported that the car is working as intended.

NHTSA ODI #11549067

85,000 miles · Jul 20, 2022
Power Train

The contact owns a 2016 Chevrolet Spark. The contact stated while driving 60 MPH, the transmission was slipping, and the cruise control was not operating correctly. Additionally, the RPM was elevated with the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer and diagnosed; however, no failure was …

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2016 Chevrolet Spark. The contact stated while driving 60 MPH, the transmission was slipping, and the cruise control was not operating correctly. Additionally, the RPM was elevated with the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer and diagnosed; however, no failure was determined. The contact stated that the transmission fluid was flushed and replaced. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 85,000.

NHTSA ODI #11474938

Mileage unknown · Jul 8, 2022
Service Brakes

Both Brake Assist and stabilitrack go out in conjunction with failure lights (no fore-warning). The vehicle was repaired by a Chevrolet dealership with qualified EV tech. Within two weeks that same brake system failures occurred. The issue greatly increases the force needed to press the brake pedal and lengthens braking distance…

Read full complaint

Both Brake Assist and stabilitrack go out in conjunction with failure lights (no fore-warning). The vehicle was repaired by a Chevrolet dealership with qualified EV tech. Within two weeks that same brake system failures occurred. The issue greatly increases the force needed to press the brake pedal and lengthens braking distance significantly. it also causes a failure in the braking system while at a stop. so after about 16 seconds braking power is reduced to the point of the car rolling forward / backward while the brake pedal is fully depressed.

NHTSA ODI #11472968

Mileage unknown · Feb 17, 2022
Service Brakes

I have had my 2016 Chevrolet Spark EV in for repairs to three Chevy dealers for issues regarding random brake stuttering and complete brake failure resulting in running stop lights and stop signs going 30> MPH. Failure and issues are intermittent, but it appears to be an overly sensitive ABS/ regenerative braking system locking …

Read full complaint

I have had my 2016 Chevrolet Spark EV in for repairs to three Chevy dealers for issues regarding random brake stuttering and complete brake failure resulting in running stop lights and stop signs going 30> MPH. Failure and issues are intermittent, but it appears to be an overly sensitive ABS/ regenerative braking system locking up the wheels and causing my brake peddle to become ineffective at stopping the car for brief periods of time. All dealerships have been at a loss for how to resolve this and have put me back on the road only to run more red lights after approaching at safe speeds. The rear right wheel makes odd clicking while this happens, leading the techs to believe it was a faulty sensor issue. However, all parts are out of stock for this car in the US and therefore I cannot get the vehicle repaired.

NHTSA ODI #11452434

96,777 miles · Mar 1, 2021
Electrical SystemPower TrainSteering

RANDOMLY WHEN I GET INTO MY CAR AND CRANK THE LIGHTS ON MY DASH,SCREEN WILL APPEAR- OTHER TIMES THEY WILL NOT. RANDOMLY WHEN DRIVING SHE WILL JUST BE DRIVING NORMAL AND IMMEDIATELY SHE SHUTS DOWN AND OFF WITH NO WARNING SIGNS AND NO WARNING LIGHTS ON DASH. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ONGOING SINCE THE PURCHASE OF HER. IT HAS BEEN ON A…

Read full complaint

RANDOMLY WHEN I GET INTO MY CAR AND CRANK THE LIGHTS ON MY DASH,SCREEN WILL APPEAR- OTHER TIMES THEY WILL NOT. RANDOMLY WHEN DRIVING SHE WILL JUST BE DRIVING NORMAL AND IMMEDIATELY SHE SHUTS DOWN AND OFF WITH NO WARNING SIGNS AND NO WARNING LIGHTS ON DASH. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ONGOING SINCE THE PURCHASE OF HER. IT HAS BEEN ON A INTERSTATE HIGHWAY IN 5PM TRAFFIC, A VERY SMALL TOWN IN NON ON SUNDAY AFTER CHURCH.

NHTSA ODI #11398554

31,000 miles · Jan 19, 2021
Service Brakes

WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE EITHER A 'SERVICE STABILITRAK' OR 'SERVICE BRAKE ASSIST' WARNING LIGHT GOES ON ALONG WITH THE EMERGENCY BRAKE LIGHT AND THE BRAKES LOSE THEIR POWER. IT FEELS LIKE THE POWER STEERING HAS GONE OUT ONLY IT'S THE BRAKES. YOU HAVE TO PUSH WITH ALL OF YOUR POWER TO GET THE CAR TO STOP. ONCE YOU STOP AND TURN …

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE EITHER A 'SERVICE STABILITRAK' OR 'SERVICE BRAKE ASSIST' WARNING LIGHT GOES ON ALONG WITH THE EMERGENCY BRAKE LIGHT AND THE BRAKES LOSE THEIR POWER. IT FEELS LIKE THE POWER STEERING HAS GONE OUT ONLY IT'S THE BRAKES. YOU HAVE TO PUSH WITH ALL OF YOUR POWER TO GET THE CAR TO STOP. ONCE YOU STOP AND TURN THE CAR OFF AND THEN BACK ON THE WARNING LIGHT DISAPPEARS AND YOU CAN KEEP DRIVING. AFTER THIS HAPPENED A COUPLE OF TIMES WE BROUGHT THIS INTO PUTNAM CHEVROLET IN BURLINGAME AND SPENT $1583.97 TO HAVE THE BRAKES COMPLETELY REPLACED. THE MORNING AFTER WE PICKED THE CAR UP THE 'CHECK ENGINE LIGHT' WENT ON AND WE BROUGHT THE VEHICLE BACK TO PUTNAM CHEVROLET WHO SAID, 'ONE OF THE MODULES THAT WE REPLACED WENT BAD,' AND STATED THAT THEY HAD TO REDO THE BRAKES. THEY ALSO TRIED TO CHARGE ME FOR ADDITIONAL ISSUES THAT WERE NOT FOUND IN THE INITIAL DIAGNOSTIC AND THEY HAD TO REPLACE THE 'BODY CONTROL MODULE'. WE PICKED THE CAR UP IN OCTOBER. ON DECEMBER 9TH, 2020 THE 'SERVICE STABILITRAK' AND 'SERVICE BRAKE ASSIST' LIGHTS CAME ON WHILE I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY. HERE IS A VIDEO OF THE EVENT: [XXX]. EACH TIME THIS HAPPENS CHEVY RISKS MY LIFE, MY PASSENGER'S LIFE, AND OTHER PEOPLE ON THE ROAD. PARTS OF THIS DOCUMENT HAVE BEEN REDACTED TO PROTECT PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).

NHTSA ODI #11388919

49,500 miles · Dec 15, 2020
Visibility/wiper

THE WINDSHIELD WIPERS STOPPED OPERATING WHILE DRIVING ON A HIGHWAY IN THE RAIN. THE CAR WAS AT HIGHWAY SPEED. EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. THE MECHANIC FOUND THE WIPER MOTOR WAS DEFECTIVE AND PULLED TOO MUCH AMPERAGE THAT IT BURNED INTERNAL FUSE BOX RELAY. WIPER MOTOR AND FUSE BOX HAD TO BE REPLACED.

NHTSA ODI #11383516

Official recalls

1

17V307000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

May 9, 2017

General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain 2016-2017 Chevrolet Spark vehicles. In the event of a crash, if a young child is seated improperly and not wearing a seat belt while in the front passenger seat, deployment of the front passenger air bag may injure the occupant's neck. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 208, "Occupant Crash Protection."

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash with a frontal air bag deployment, an unbelted child in the front passenger seat has an increased risk of injury.

Remedy: GM will notify owners, and dealers will replace the passenger air bag module, free of charge. The recall began July 5, 2017. Owners may contact GM customer service at 1-800-222-1020. GM's number for this recall is 17199.

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.