← New search

2012 Honda Civic

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Civic years

Owner complaints for the 2012 Honda Civic are substantially higher than the model-year median of 183.5.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

321 reports with mileage · 133 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.

  • Air Bags. Review the 149 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Steering. Review the 74 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 59 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

55 crash reports5 fire reports28 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

59 reports
Clear category filter
57,000 miles · May 26, 2017
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Steering

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE POWER STEERING, VSA, AND ESC INDICATORS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE LOCAL DEALER (BARBER HONDA PARTS, LOCATED AT 4500 WIBLE RD, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA, 93313) WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE VEHICLE STABILITY ASSIST MODULATOR FAILED AND NEEDED TO B…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE POWER STEERING, VSA, AND ESC INDICATORS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE LOCAL DEALER (BARBER HONDA PARTS, LOCATED AT 4500 WIBLE RD, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA, 93313) WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE VEHICLE STABILITY ASSIST MODULATOR FAILED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 57,000.

NHTSA ODI #10991773

25,000 miles · Apr 12, 2017
Air BagsElectrical System

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT OBSERVED THAT THE AIR BAG WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE COMPUTER MODULE NEEDED TO BE UPDATED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE AIR BAG WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED AGAIN AFTER THE REP…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT OBSERVED THAT THE AIR BAG WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE COMPUTER MODULE NEEDED TO BE UPDATED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE AIR BAG WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED AGAIN AFTER THE REPAIR. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AGAIN WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENTIRE AIR BAG SYSTEM NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THEY NEEDED 24 HOURS TO REVIEW AND WOULD CONTACT THE CONSUMER BACK. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 25,000.

NHTSA ODI #10972009

65,434 miles · Oct 1, 2016
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)

THREE DIFFERENT TIME, THE CAR WAS PARKED OVERNIGHT AND WOULD NOT START THE NEXT MORNING. IT HAD TO BE TOWED. I WAS TOLD THAT RODENTS HAD CHEWED THROUGH THE SOY BASED WIRING INSULATION IN MULTIPLE AREAS, INCLUDING THE FUEL TANK PRESSURE SENSOR, THE FUEL HOSE. THE MECHANIC COULD NOT OFFER ME ANY CONCRETE SOLUTION TO PREVENT THIS F…

Read full complaint

THREE DIFFERENT TIME, THE CAR WAS PARKED OVERNIGHT AND WOULD NOT START THE NEXT MORNING. IT HAD TO BE TOWED. I WAS TOLD THAT RODENTS HAD CHEWED THROUGH THE SOY BASED WIRING INSULATION IN MULTIPLE AREAS, INCLUDING THE FUEL TANK PRESSURE SENSOR, THE FUEL HOSE. THE MECHANIC COULD NOT OFFER ME ANY CONCRETE SOLUTION TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN AND I FEAR A PROBLEM MIGHT OCCUR WHILE I AM ACTUALLY DRIVING.

NHTSA ODI #10910943

49,000 miles · Mar 2, 2016
Electrical System

MY CAR WAS WORKING JUST FINE. ONE MORNING I WENT OUTSIDE TO START MY CAR, NEXT THING I KNOW IT WOULDN'T TURN OVER. MY DASHBOARD WORKED, BUT THE CAR WOULDN'T START. MY CAR WAS PARKED OVERNIGHT. I CALLED MY ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE AND THEY CAME OUT AND GAVE ME A JUMP. AS SOON AS THE CAR WAS TURNED OFF IT WOULD NOT CUT BACK ON. HE JUMP…

Read full complaint

MY CAR WAS WORKING JUST FINE. ONE MORNING I WENT OUTSIDE TO START MY CAR, NEXT THING I KNOW IT WOULDN'T TURN OVER. MY DASHBOARD WORKED, BUT THE CAR WOULDN'T START. MY CAR WAS PARKED OVERNIGHT. I CALLED MY ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE AND THEY CAME OUT AND GAVE ME A JUMP. AS SOON AS THE CAR WAS TURNED OFF IT WOULD NOT CUT BACK ON. HE JUMPED IT AGAIN AND TOLD ME THAT MY ALTERNATOR AND BATTERY WERE BOTH BAD, AND THAT MY CAR WOULD NOT START BACK UP ON ITS ON. SURE ENOUGH IT DID NOT. MY CAR HAS BEEN DOWN FOR ALMOST A WEEK NOW. I PURCHASED IT MAY 2012, AND I HAVE NEVER HAD ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT UNTIL NOW. I LOOKED ONLINE AND I SAW THAT THERE WERE SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE THAT WERE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM.

NHTSA ODI #10839587

70,800 miles · Feb 2, 2016
Electrical System

CAR RANDOMLY DOES NOT START. IT WILL GO A WEEK OR TWO, THEN WHEN I TRY TO START IT, IT NEEDS TO BE JUMPED. BATTERY AND ALTERNATOR TESTED GOOD. CAR SAT FOR SEVERAL DAYS COVERED IN SNOW AND THEN STARTED WITHOUT HESITATION, BUT ON A 70 DEGREE DAY, I PULL OVER TO GET GAS AND THEN HAVE TO JUMP IT. HAPPENS EVERY WEEK OR TWO. HONDA…

Read full complaint

CAR RANDOMLY DOES NOT START. IT WILL GO A WEEK OR TWO, THEN WHEN I TRY TO START IT, IT NEEDS TO BE JUMPED. BATTERY AND ALTERNATOR TESTED GOOD. CAR SAT FOR SEVERAL DAYS COVERED IN SNOW AND THEN STARTED WITHOUT HESITATION, BUT ON A 70 DEGREE DAY, I PULL OVER TO GET GAS AND THEN HAVE TO JUMP IT. HAPPENS EVERY WEEK OR TWO. HONDA DID A SOFTWARE UPDATE A FEW MONTHS AGO, AND NOW IT HAPPENS MORE OFTEN.

NHTSA ODI #10823816

200 miles · Oct 2, 2015
Electrical SystemStructureWheels

WHEN YOU BUY A NEW CAR YOU DON'T EXPECT TO HAVE ANY PROBLEMS, WELL THAT WASN'T THE CASE WITH ME. 1. WATER WAS LEAKING IN THE MOON ROOF ALL THE RUBBER HAD TO BE REPLACED 2. SO MUCH RUST BECAUSE OF LEAK 3. HEATING SYSTEM HAD TO BE REPLACED WHEN YOU TURNED IT ON WOULD MAKE SUCH A LOUD NOISE IT WAS UNBELIEVABLE. DEALERSHIP SAID…

Read full complaint

WHEN YOU BUY A NEW CAR YOU DON'T EXPECT TO HAVE ANY PROBLEMS, WELL THAT WASN'T THE CASE WITH ME. 1. WATER WAS LEAKING IN THE MOON ROOF ALL THE RUBBER HAD TO BE REPLACED 2. SO MUCH RUST BECAUSE OF LEAK 3. HEATING SYSTEM HAD TO BE REPLACED WHEN YOU TURNED IT ON WOULD MAKE SUCH A LOUD NOISE IT WAS UNBELIEVABLE. DEALERSHIP SAID NEEDED A PART SPENT ALMOST A DAY AND THEN SAID NEED ANOTHER PART ,, CANT BELIEVE A NEW CAR NEEDS NEW PARTS. 4. TIRE SENSOR LIGHT KEPT COMING ON . 5.KEYS WOULD NOT COME OUT OF THE EGNITION . 6. RIGHT SIDE OF THE WINDOW WOULD RATTLE BETWEEN THE DASHBOARD AND WINDOW, TOP OF VISOR.. 7.NEEDED NEW BATTERY 8. FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU. 9 SPENT MORE TIME GOING BACK AND FORTH TO DEALERSHIP WHICH I SHOULD HAVE NOT HAD TO DO THIS. 10. TOLD THE DEALERSHIP CAR MAKES A THUMBING NOISE WHEN YOU GO OVER A BUMP.WAS TOLD A DEFECTIVE RIGHT REAR SHOCK CAUSING THE THUMBING NOISE . 11. HAD TO REPLACE LIGHT BULB ON RIGHT SIDE. 12.SHOULD NOT , HAD ANY OF THESE PROBLEMS WITH A NEW CAR...

NHTSA ODI #10779441

39,000 miles · Sep 30, 2015
Electrical System

BATTERY WILL NOT CHARGE, ALTERNATOR AND BATTERY ISSUES. DOES NOT WANT TO CHARGE THE BATTERY MOST OF THE TIMES. THIS ECCO MODE AND CHARGING SYSTEM, MUST BE THE ISSUE. I AM A MECHANICAL ENGINEER, LICENSED.

NHTSA ODI #10778858

28,000 miles · Sep 1, 2015
Electrical System

THE CAR STALLED IN TRAFFIC DUE TO RODENT DAMAGED WIRES AND WOULD NOT RESTART. THE DAMAGED WIRES WERE HIDDEN, OUT OF SIGHT, IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT, UNDER THE AIR FILTER HOUSING. THE DAMAGE SEEMED TO BE WHERE THE WIRES WERE EXPOSED NEAR A CONNECTOR (NOT COVERED BY BLACK PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SHEATH). THE ENGINE ROOM WIRING HARN…

Read full complaint

THE CAR STALLED IN TRAFFIC DUE TO RODENT DAMAGED WIRES AND WOULD NOT RESTART. THE DAMAGED WIRES WERE HIDDEN, OUT OF SIGHT, IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT, UNDER THE AIR FILTER HOUSING. THE DAMAGE SEEMED TO BE WHERE THE WIRES WERE EXPOSED NEAR A CONNECTOR (NOT COVERED BY BLACK PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SHEATH). THE ENGINE ROOM WIRING HARNESS P/N# 32200-TR0-A00 WAS REPLACED BY HONDA TO FIX THE PROBLEM. MY VEHICLE SPEED IS JUST A BEST GUESS AS I WAS RIDING THE BRAKE PEDAL IN TRAFFIC AND NOTICED THAT MY DASH WAS LIT UP WITH ERROR CODES AND THE ENGINE WENT SILENT. I AM POSTING THIS HERE BECAUSE THE INTERNET IS FULL OF RODENT DAMAGED WIRE CASES AND SOME PEOPLE ARE SAYING THAT THE CAUSE IS THE MATERIAL BEING USED IN TODAY'S AUTOMOBILE WIRE INSULATION. THERE ARE COMMENTS THAT SOY AND PLANT BASED, ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY MATERIALS ARE BEING USED INSTEAD OF PETROLEUM BASED PLASTICS, WHICH MIGHT ATTRACT RODENTS (OR MAYBE JUST EASIER TO CHEW THROUGH?). CAR MANUFACTURERS SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE IF THEY HAVE SWITCHED TO SOMETHING THAT ATTRACTS RODENTS OR IS MUCH EASIER TO DAMAGE BY RODENTS. CAR MANUFACTURERS SHOULD DESIGN RODENT PROOF WIRING AND NOT LEAVE WIRES EXPOSED AND UNPROTECTED NEAR CONNECTORS. IF RODENT DAMAGE CAUSES A CAR TO STALL AT THE WRONG TIME OR LOSES AN IMPORTANT ELECTRICAL SYSTEM COMPONENT, SUCH AS LIGHTS AT NIGHT, OR ELECTRIC STEERING, IT COULD BE VERY DANGEROUS. MANY OTHER CAR COMPONENTS WERE REPLACED PRIOR TO HONDA FINDING THE ACTUAL CAUSE OF MY CAR'S PROBLEM. PEOPLE SHOULD BE AWARE THAT RODENT DAMAGE IS COVERED BY YOUR AUTO INSURANCE, "COMPREHENSIVE" COVERAGE, WHICH MOST PEOPLE THINK OF AS COLLISION AND "COMP.", BUT IS SUBJECT TO YOUR COMP'S DEDUCTIBLE. RODENT DAMAGED WIRES CAN BE VERY EXPENSIVE TO REPAIR IF THEY HAVE TO REPLACE AN ENTIRE WIRING HARNESS INSTEAD OF JUST SPLICING SOME DAMAGED WIRES (IN MY CASE WAS $APPROX $1,700 TOTAL).

NHTSA ODI #10760673

50,000 miles · Apr 28, 2015
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Steering

WHILE I WAS DRIVING MY CAR 40MPH SOMETHING HAPPENED AND SUDDENLY POWER STEERING WENT OFF ALONG WITH A MESSAGE. IT IS SO DIFFICULT TO STEER. AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG. IT'S STILL AT THE DEALER. HOWEVER PROBLEM KEEPS GOING ON. I THINK IT HAS TO BE RECALLED, TOO. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10713357

25,000 miles · Mar 4, 2015
Electrical System

ON THE FIRST OCCASION, UPON TURNING THE KEY TO START THE ENGINE THERE WAS NO IGNITION. I TURNED THE KEY OFF AND TRIED IT AGAIN AND THE ENGINE STARTED SO I THOUGHT IT JUST MY IMAGINATION PLAYING TRICKS ON ME. ABOUT SIX MONTHS LATER, THIS OCCURRED AGAIN AND IT TOOK NUMEROUS TURNS OF THE KEY TO START THE CAR. HONDA INSPECTED THE CA…

Read full complaint

ON THE FIRST OCCASION, UPON TURNING THE KEY TO START THE ENGINE THERE WAS NO IGNITION. I TURNED THE KEY OFF AND TRIED IT AGAIN AND THE ENGINE STARTED SO I THOUGHT IT JUST MY IMAGINATION PLAYING TRICKS ON ME. ABOUT SIX MONTHS LATER, THIS OCCURRED AGAIN AND IT TOOK NUMEROUS TURNS OF THE KEY TO START THE CAR. HONDA INSPECTED THE CAR AND REPORTED NOTHING WRONG. ON THE NEXT OCCASION, I LEFT THE CAR WITH HONDA FOR A WEEK. THE RELATIVELY NEW LOANER CAR (HONDA CROSSTOUR) GAVE ME THE SAME PROBLEM ONE DAY WHILE MY CAR WAS BEING INSPECTED. I PRESENTED VIDEO TO THE SERVICE MANAGER WHEN I PICKED MY CAR UP AND RECEIVED THE SAME DUMBFOUNDED LOOK I HAD BEEN GETTING ALL ALONG FROM THE SERVICE REPS AT CARY, NC AUTOPARK HONDA. UPON PICKING MY CAR UP, I WAS TOLD THEY HAD FOUND A TECHLINE REFERENCE CONCERNING OCCASIONAL STARTER ISSUES WITH SOME OF THE NEWER HONDAS. THEY WOULD NOT PROVIDE A COPY UPON MY REQUEST, BUT THEY DID CHANGE OUT THE STARTER. WHEN I CONTACTED AMERICAN HONDA, MY REQUEST TO GET THIS CHANGE OF STARTER AND THE ISSUE IN WRITING FOR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS IN THE FUTURE, THE REQUEST WAS DENIED AND I WAS TOLD ALL MY FILES ARE SAVED BY HONDA AND THAT IF ANY NEEDS WERE TO ARISE IN THE FUTURE, THEY WOULD EVALUATE COVERAGE FOR THE REPAIR. ON A SEPARATE OCCASION (BATTERY WOULDN'T CHARGE PROPERLY), I WAS TOLD (AFTER THE UPDATE) THAT THE CHARGING FREQUENCY SOFTWARE HAD TO BE UPDATED AND THAT IT WOULD ONLY COST ME $60. I WAS QUITE IRRITATED WITH HONDA TRYING TO MAKE ME PAY FOR THE SUB-PAR SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AT THE MANUFACTURING LEVEL AND REFUSED TO PAY A DIME. IT IS A SHAME HONDA SEEMS TO BE CONTENT WITH SINKING TO THE DEPTHS OF OTHER CAR MANUFACTURERS, AND I WILL BE LOOKING AT OTHER MAKES NEXT TIME AS HONDA IS NO LONGER THE COMPANY I HAD BELIEVED IT WAS. IT IS A REAL SHAME WHEN LOYAL CUSTOMERS ARE TREATED LIKE THEY ARE NOT NEEDED FOR THE CONTINUED SUCCESS OF HONDA. OH WELL! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10692199

Official recalls

3

12V548000 · Steering:column

Nov 21, 2012

Honda is recalling certain model year 2012 Civic passenger vehicles, manufactured from October 26, 2012, through October 30, 2012. These vehicles were assembled with the incorrect steering column assembly.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The steering column may not have proper energy absorbing characteristics, which could increase the risk of injury during a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect and replace the steering column, as necessary, free of charge. The safety recall began on December 10, 2012. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009.

12V256000 · Power Train:driveline:driveshaft

Jun 4, 2012

HONDA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2012 HONDA CIVIC VEHICLES. DURING ASSEMBLY, THE PROCESS REQUIRED TO SEAT THE DRIVER’S SIDE DRIVESHAFT AND SET THE RETAINING CLIP WAS NOT COMPLETED. AS A RESULT, THE DRIVESHAFT MAY SEPARATE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS, THE VEHICLE WILL HAVE A LOSS OF DRIVE POWER AND MAY ROLL AWAY IF THE PARKING BRAKE HAS NOT BEEN SET WHEN THE GEAR SELECTOR HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE “PARK” POSITION, INCREASING THE RISK OF CRASH OR PEDESTRIAN INJURY.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver's side driveshaft and install a new driveshaft as needed, free of charge. The safety recall began on June 21. 2012. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-800-999-1009.

11V288000 · Fuel System, Other:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings

May 18, 2011

HONDA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2012 CIVIC 2-DOOR AND 4-DOOR VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM APRIL 21, 2011, THROUGH MAY 2, 2011. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT AN O-RING, WHICH SEALS A CONNECTION IN THE FUEL FEED LINE, IS MISALIGNED. IF THE O-RING IS MISALIGNED, A SMALL FUEL LEAK MAY OCCUR.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE, IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FUEL FEED LINE ASSEMBLY FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT HONDA AT 1-800-999-1009.

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.

Go deeper into Honda Civic problems