DIFFICULT TO STEER AT BOTH LOW AND HIGH SPEED. A LOT OF RESISTANCE TO TURNING THE WHEEL. TOOK IT TO DEALER WHO COULD FIND NOTHING WRONG, AND WOULD NOT INVESTIGATE FURTHER UNDER WARRANTY. SLIGHTLY MORE THAN 60,000 MILES
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 →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Civic 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
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.
Steering complaints
74 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH, THE POWER STEERING FAILED WITHOUT WARNING AND THE STEERING WHEEL BECAME EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO TURN. THE VEHICLE WAS MANEUVERED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WITH CAUTION. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING, BUT THE RESULTS WERE UNKNOW…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH, THE POWER STEERING FAILED WITHOUT WARNING AND THE STEERING WHEEL BECAME EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO TURN. THE VEHICLE WAS MANEUVERED TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WITH CAUTION. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING, BUT THE RESULTS WERE UNKNOWN. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 36,000.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED. IN ORDER FOR THE STEERING TO OPERATE, THE CONTACT HAD TO TURN THE IGNITION SWITCH ON AND OFF FOUR TIMES. THE FAILURE RECURRED NUMEROUS TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED AND THE POWER STEERING RACK WAS REPLACE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED. IN ORDER FOR THE STEERING TO OPERATE, THE CONTACT HAD TO TURN THE IGNITION SWITCH ON AND OFF FOUR TIMES. THE FAILURE RECURRED NUMEROUS TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED AND THE POWER STEERING RACK WAS REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 35,000. UPDATED 12/13/16*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE STEERING WOULD LOCK UP, PLACING HIM AT RISK. THE DEALER STATED THE POWER STEERING RACK NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. UPDATED 12/19/16. *JB
CHECK YOUR POWER STEERING SYSTEM, ERROR MESSAGE CAME ON WHILE STOPPED. AM UNABLE TO STEER MY CAR. CAR IS ONLY A 2012 WITH 23,000 MILES.
HORN FAILS TO WORK ALL THE TIME. ON THE FOURTH TRIP TO THE DEALER IT WAS FOUND TO BE RELATED TO POSITION OF STEERING WHEEL. THE DEALER REPLACED THE RIBBON CABLE ASSOCIATED WITH THE HORN (BROKEN/ INTERMITTENT WIRING). NOW CAR OUT OF WARRANTY PROBLEM CAME BACK. IS THIS POOR WORKMANSHIP? BAD DESIGN? LEMON??? NOT A HAPPY CAMPER!
I WAS DRIVING AT 35 MPH ON A CITY STREET WITH HIGH TRAFFIC VOLUMERWHEN I LOST ALL POWER STEERING AND THE INDICATOR LIGHT WENT ON STATTING CHECK POWER STEERING SYSTEM.. THE CAR WAS UNABLE TO BE STEERED PROPERLY AND IS CURRENTLY AT THE SHOP IN TENAFLY NJ- TENAFLY OF HONDA. THIS INCIDENT IS EXTREMELY TROUBLESOME AS I NOW DOUBT THE …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING AT 35 MPH ON A CITY STREET WITH HIGH TRAFFIC VOLUMERWHEN I LOST ALL POWER STEERING AND THE INDICATOR LIGHT WENT ON STATTING CHECK POWER STEERING SYSTEM.. THE CAR WAS UNABLE TO BE STEERED PROPERLY AND IS CURRENTLY AT THE SHOP IN TENAFLY NJ- TENAFLY OF HONDA. THIS INCIDENT IS EXTREMELY TROUBLESOME AS I NOW DOUBT THE RELIABILITY OF THE VEHICLE.
DRIVING ON A SURFACE ROAD AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH AND THE POWER STEERING FAILED WITH A POWER STEERING WARNING MESSAGE ON THE DASH DISPLAY. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
THE INCIDENT HAPPENED TWICE WITH TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. I STOPPED IN A PARKING LOT TO RUN AN ERRAND AND WHEN I CAME BACK AND STARTED THE VEHICLE 2012 HONDA CIVIC THE CHECK POWER STEERING SYSTEM LIGHT CAME ON AND IT WAS DIFFICULT TO STEER THE VEHICLE. I DROVE IT TO A SHOP THINKING LIKE THE OLDER CARS THAT THE POWER STEERING F…
Read full complaint
THE INCIDENT HAPPENED TWICE WITH TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. I STOPPED IN A PARKING LOT TO RUN AN ERRAND AND WHEN I CAME BACK AND STARTED THE VEHICLE 2012 HONDA CIVIC THE CHECK POWER STEERING SYSTEM LIGHT CAME ON AND IT WAS DIFFICULT TO STEER THE VEHICLE. I DROVE IT TO A SHOP THINKING LIKE THE OLDER CARS THAT THE POWER STEERING FLUID WAS LOW, BUT I WAS TOLD THAT IT IS AN INTERNAL SYSTEM NOW AND I WOULD HAVE TO CONTACT THE DEALER. THE NEXT MORNING WHEN I STARTED THE CAR THE LIGHT WAS OFF AND THE POWER STEERING WORKED AS NORMAL. I DROVE THE VEHICLE FOR ABOUT TWO WEEKS WHEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN. THIS TIME I WAS TRAVELING DOWN A GRADE ON A HIGHWAY ABOUT 60 MILES AN HOUR WHEN THE CHECK POWER STEERING SYSTEM LIGHT CAME ON AND I LOST THE POWER STEERING. IT TOOK EVERYTHING I HAD TO HOLD THE WHEEL WITH BOTH HANDS TO MANEUVER THE CURVES. I SLOWED MY SPEED AND DROVE HOME. IT WAS LATE AND ALL SERVICE PLACES WERE CLOSED. THE NEXT MORNING THE LIGHT WAS STILL ON AND I STILL HAD NO POWER STEERING. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND I COULD NOT GET AN APPOINTMENT UNTIL A WEEK LATER. I THINK THIS IS AN EXTREME SAFETY HAZARD SINCE IT HAPPENS WHILE YOU ARE DRIVING AND YOU LOSE STEERING WITHOUT ANY WARNING. THIS SHOULD BE A RECALL.
WHEN TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL RIGHT AND LEFT, THERE IS A LOUD CLANKING NOISE. IT HAPPENS 95% OF THE TIME. THE DEALER TOLD ME IT WAS THE POWER STEERING FLUID (EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO POWER STEERING FLUID AS THE 2012 MODEL HAS AN ELECTRONIC SYSTEM). THE NOISE HAS CONTINUED AND GETS WORSE. THEY TOLD ME OTHER MODELS HAD A RECALL O…
Read full complaint
WHEN TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL RIGHT AND LEFT, THERE IS A LOUD CLANKING NOISE. IT HAPPENS 95% OF THE TIME. THE DEALER TOLD ME IT WAS THE POWER STEERING FLUID (EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO POWER STEERING FLUID AS THE 2012 MODEL HAS AN ELECTRONIC SYSTEM). THE NOISE HAS CONTINUED AND GETS WORSE. THEY TOLD ME OTHER MODELS HAD A RECALL ON THE DRIVESHAFT WHICH MAY BE THE ISSUE BUT THEY CANT DO ANYTHING UNLESS I PAY OUT OF POCKET BECAUSE MY CAR WAS NOT UNDER THE RECALL.
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
Official recalls
312V548000 · 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 DRIVERS 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
2EA21002 · 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.
Illustration