Air Bags. Review the 114 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Electrical System. Review the 39 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Steering. Review the 38 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

29 crash reports1 fire reports24 injury reports

Vehicle Speed Control complaints

20 reports

Clear category filter

10,780 miles · Nov 28, 2014

Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

Read full complaint

DRIVING HOME UP 50 DEGREE HILL. APPROXIMATE SPEED 35 MPH. I TOOK MY FOOT OFF ACCELERATOR BECAUSE I LIKE TO COAST THE LAST 1/4 OF THE HILL FOR SAFETY, SLOWING DOWN FOR ANY POTENTIAL IDIOTS WHO MIGHT SAIL AROUND THE CORNER FROM THE FLAT CROSS STREET, CUTTING OFF THE PART OF THE STREET THAT, BY LAW, SHOULD BE LEFT CLEAR FOR THE CAR COMING UPHILL. IN A SPLIT SECOND, MY CAR ACCELERATES SUDDENLY, AS THOUGH I HAD STOMPED DOWN ON THE ACCELERATOR AGAIN. NOW WHAT DO I DO? MY 2012 HONDA CIVIC HAD PREMATURE BRAKE FAILURE THAT IS NOW THE SUBJECT OF A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT. DO I GET RID OF THIS "NEW" HONDA THAT TURNED ONE MID-OCTOBER??? I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO, GIVEN THE OTHER STORIES ABOUT UNINTENDED ACCELERATION IN NEW HONDAS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10661215

100 miles · Nov 27, 2014

Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

VEHICLE HESITATES OCCASIONALLY ON START UP. THIS IS COMPLETELY UNPREDICTABLE AND REQUIRES PUSHING HARD ON THE ACCELERATOR, WHICH RESULTS IN A VERY FAST TAKEOFF. IF YOU LEAVE AN EVEN PRESSURE ON THE PEDAL, THE CAR WILL EVENTUALLY MOVE OFF, BUT THIS UNPREDICTABILITY CAN BE QUITE DANGEROUS IF YOU ARE TRYING TO PULL OUT INTO A STRE…

Read full complaint

NHTSA ODI #10661145

25 miles · Nov 2, 2014

Vehicle Speed Control

Read full complaint

FOR ANY SPEED ABOVE 25MPH THIS ISSUE OCCURS AT ANY SPEED THE CRUISE CONTROL IS ACTIVE. I NOTICED THIS ISSUE ALMOST AROUND AUGUST 2014. ISSUE OCCURS WITH SETTING SPEED CONTROL. IN THIS MODEL, THE CUSTOMER CAN CHOOSE EITHER CHOOSE RES +, RES ??. I FOUND OUT IF I CHOOSE RES -, THE VEHICLE SETS THE SPEED CORRECTLY MOST OF THE TIME WITH +/-1 MILE WHICH IS OK. DURING THIS MODE, EACH TIME THE CUSTOMER PRESS ??-??, THE VEHICLE SPEED DECREASES BY ONE MILE WHICH IS AS DESIGNED. SOMETIMES, THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HOLD THE SPEED AT THE REQUESTED SET SPEED AND THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTINUE DECREASE WITHOUT LIMIT I FOUND OUT IF I CHOOSE RES +, THE VEHICLE SETS THE SPEED CORRECTLY MOST OF THE TIME WITH +/-1 MILE WHICH IS OK. DURING THIS MODE, EACH TIME THE CUSTOMER PRESS ??+??, THE VEHICLE SPEED INCREASES BY ONE MILE WHICH IS AS DESIGNED. SOMETIMES, THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HOLD THE SPEED AT THE REQUESTED SET SPEED AND THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTINUE DECREASE WITHOUT LIMIT THE MAIN AND THE MOST SERIOUS ISSUE IS, IF THE CUSTOMER CHOOSE RES -, THEN APPLY/PRESS THE BRAKE THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL BE CANCELLED WHICH IS OK THEN IF THE CUSTOMER CHOOSE RES + AFTER THAT, THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTINUE RISING WITHOUT LIMIT. THIS COULD CAUSE ACCIDENT IF THE DRIVER DID NOT PAY ATTENTIONS ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT IS NOT THE NORMAL OPERATION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10651958

30 miles · Oct 29, 2014

Vehicle Speed Control

Read full complaint

ISSUE OCCURS WITH SETTING SPEED CONTROL. IN THIS MODEL, THE CUSTOMER CAN CHOOSE EITHER CHOOSE RES +, RES ?. I FOUND OUT IF I CHOOSE RES -, THE VEHICLE SETS THE SPEED CORRECTLY MOST OF THE TIME WITH +/-1 MILE WHICH IS OK. DURING THIS MODE, EACH TIME THE CUSTOMER PRESS ?-?, THE VEHICLE SPEED DECREASES BY ONE MILE WHICH IS AS DESIGNED. SOMETIMES, THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HOLD THE SPEED AT THE REQUESTED SET SPEED AND THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTINUE DECREASE I FOUND OUT IF I CHOOSE RES +, THE VEHICLE SETS THE SPEED CORRECTLY MOST OF THE TIME WITH +/-1 MILE WHICH IS OK. DURING THIS MODE, EACH TIME THE CUSTOMER PRESS ?+?, THE VEHICLE SPEED INCREASES BY ONE MILE WHICH IS AS DESIGNED. SOMETIMES, THE VEHICLE DOES NOT HOLD THE SPEED AT THE REQUESTED SET SPEED AND THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTINUE DECREASE THE MAIN AND THE MOST SERIOUS ISSUE IS, IF THE CUSTOMER CHOOSE RES -, THEN APPLY/PRESS THE BRAKE THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL BE CANCELLED WHICH IS OK THEN IF THE CUSTOMER CHOOSE RES + AFTER THAT, THE VEHICLE SPEED CONTINUE RISING WITHOUT LIMIT. THIS COULD CAUSE ACCIDENT IF THE DRIVER DID NOT PAY ATTENTIONS ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT IS NOT THE NORMAL OPERATION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10650939

6,600 miles · Jul 27, 2014

Vehicle Speed Control

Read full complaint

SOMETIMES WHEN I SLOW DOWN TO MAKE A LEFT OR RIGHT TURN, I PRESS THE ACCELERATER AND NOTHING HAPPENS. THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR SEVERAL MONTHS. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND THEY SAID IT WAS BECAUSE OF BEING IN ECON MODE. I DON'T USE ECON MODE IN SPRING, SUMMER & FALL AND IT STILL HAPPENS; NOT EVERY TIME BUT 2 OR 3 TIMES A WEEK. IF I WERE TO TRY TO MAKE A QUICK TURN AND IT DID THAT II COULD HAVE AN ACCIDENT. I'VE BEEN DRIVING MOSTLY HONDAS SINCE 1984 AND HAVE NEVER HAD THIS OR ANY OTHER PROBLEM. PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS AS IT COULD HAVE SERIOUS REPERCUSSIONS. UPDATED 04/3/2015 *JS

NHTSA ODI #10616655

11,000 miles · May 12, 2014

EngineStructureVehicle Speed ControlCrash

Read full complaint

THIS LETTER IS TO INFORM YOU ABOUT A SEVERE MALFUNCTION THAT CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. I WAS TRAUMATIZED BY A SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION WITH MY 2013 HONDA CIVIC. LUCKILY NO ONE GOT HURT IN THIS EVENT, BUT I?M HOPING THAT THIS FACT WILL NOT REDUCE THE ATTENTION FROM THIS SEVERE MALFUNCTION. FOLLOWING IS A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE EVENT THAT HAPPENED ON MAY 10, 2014 AT 6:30PM: I WAS DRIVING SLOWLY, UNDER 5 MILES PER HOUR, APPROACHING A PARKING NEAR THE SIDEWAYS. THERE WAS ONE CAR ALREADY PARKED, AND I WAS GOING TO PARK BEHIND IT. I WAS ABOUT TO COMPLETE MY PARKING, AND MY LEG WAS GENTLY APPLYING THE BRAKES (I WAS ALMOST AT A COMPLETE HALT). SUDDENLY, THE CAR MADE A VERY LOUD NOISE AS IF SOMEONE PRESSED ON THE GAS ALL THE WAY (IT WAS AN AWFUL NOISE), AND THEN IT SHOT ITSELF FORWARD AT A CRAZY SPEED. AS THE CAR DROVE ITSELF INTO THE PARKED CAR IN FRONT, I PULLED THE HANDBRAKE AND PRESSED HARDER ON THE BREAKS IN THE SPLIT SECOND THAT I HAD TO REALIZE SOMETHING IS WRONG. SINCE I WAS AT A VERY LOW SPEED, THE IMPACT DIDN'T DEPLOY THE AIRBAGS. THE PARKED CAR IN FRONT OF ME STOPPED THE CAR FROM GOING FORWARD UNCONTROLLABLY. ALL OF THIS HAPPENED IN A MATTER OF SECONDS. AT THIS POINT THE CARS ENGINE DECREASED THE RPM BACK TO NORMAL, AND THE CAR STOPPED PUSHING ITSELF FORWARD, THOUGH AT THAT POINT I ALREADY DEPLOYED THE HAND BRAKE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10587718

3,100 miles · Apr 26, 2014

SteeringVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

Read full complaint

ON APRIL 23, 2014 AT ABOUT 4:40 P. M. MY SON WAS DRIVING 30 MPH WHICH IS 5 MILES UNDER THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT FOR THAT AREA WHERE HE LIVES. THE ROAD LEADING TO THE BACK ENTRANCE OF HIS HOUSING COMPLEX IS A SINGLE ONE-WAY LANE WITH A WIDE BICYCLE LANE. THIS ROADWAY CURVES SLIGHTLY TO THE LEFT LEADING INTO THE ENTRANCE OF HIS HOUSING COMPLEX. ON APPROACHING THE END OF THE ROAD MY SON TOOK HIS FOOT OF THE GAS TO SLOW DOWN THE VEHICLE, TURN THE STEERING WHEEL TO THE LEFT (AS THE ROAD CURVES NATURALLY TO THE LEFT) THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND STEERED TO THE RIGHT. MY SON TRIED VERY HARD TO PULL THE STEERING WHEEL TO THE LEFT TO CORRECT THE STEERING BUT IT WOULD NOT TURN. THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKED AND THE VEHICLE STEERED UNCONTROLLABLY TO THE RIGHT, JUMPING THE CONCRETE CURB AND STUCK A CONCRETE STREET LIGHT POLE, FLIPPED OVER AND LANDED A FEW FEET AWAY ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE WITH FIVE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. (ONE ON THE STEERING WHEEL, AND FOUR OVER THE DOORS). HE WAS EXAMINED BY PARAMEDIC'S ON THE SCENE AND LATER OBSERVED SEVERE BRUISING ON HIS ABDOMEN AND NECK WHICH REQUIRED FURTHER MEDICAL ATTENTION. THE VEHICLE SUSTAINED EXTENSIVE DAMAGE AND DECLARED A TOTAL LOST BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10585098

6,450 miles · Mar 24, 2014

Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

Read full complaint

ON 22ND MARCH 2014, I WAS DRIVING MY ONE YEAR OLD CIVIC ON INTERSTATE 55 FROM JACKSON TOWARDS BATON ROUGE. AFTER TRAVELING ABOUT 50 MILES WITH AN AVERAGE SPEED OF 65 TO 70 MILES PER HOUR, I SUDDENLY FACED PROBLEM WITH ACCELERATION. THE ACCELERATION WENT CRAZY SPIKING THE TACHOMETER BETWEEN 4000 AND 6000 RPM AND THE CAR WAS SLOWING DOWN THOUGH I GAVE THE ACCELERATION. WHEN I GAVE THE ACCELERATION, IT WAS MAKING ROARING SOUND AND RPM ON TACHOMETER IS SPIKING BETWEEN 4000 AND 6000 RPM. CAR WAS COMING TO STALL SLOWLY FROM 65 MPH, BEFORE IT COULD COME DOWN TO STANDSTILL I TURNED ON EMERGENCY LIGHTS AND PULLED THE VEHICLE ON TO THE SHOULDER. FORTUNATELY TWO VEHICLES BEHIND ME PAST MY CAR MERGING TO LEFT LANE SEEING MY EMERGENCY LIGHTS ON. AFTER PULLING THE CAR ON TO THE SHOULDER, I HAVE PUT THE CAR ON TO PARKING GEAR FOR FEW MINUTES AND THEN AGAIN SHIFTED BACK TO DRIVE. FROM THEREON I DID NOT FACE ANY ACCELERATION PROBLEM AGAIN FOR THE REST OF MY 2.5 HOURS JOURNEY. FOR SAFETY, I JUST STAYED ON RIGHT LANE AND DROVE WITH CONSTANT SPEED OF ABOUT 65 MPH THROUGH OUT MY JOURNEY. IT WAS REALLY FRIGHTENING EXPERIENCE WHEN I WAS DRIVING AT 65 MPH AND SUDDENLY ACCELERATOR NOT WORKING AND GOING BERSERK AND CAR SLOWING DOWN ON INTERSTATE. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT COULD BE THE PROBLEM WITH MY CAR AND IF THERE ARE ANY SOLUTIONS FOR THIS. PLEASE LET ME KNOW, I AM REALLY WORRIED NOW TO DRIVE MY CAR ON HIGHWAYS AND TO GO ON LONG DRIVES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10574606

4,000 miles · Oct 30, 2013

Vehicle Speed Control

Read full complaint

I SET THE SPEED, USING THE CRUISE CONTROL, AT 65 MPH OR 70 MPH. UPON ENCOUNTERING A HILL THE CAR WILL SLOW DOWN TO AS MUCH AS 60 OR 65. EVENTUALLY THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL KICK IN AND THE AUTO-THROTTLE WILL ACCELERATE THE CAR QUICKLY TO 5 MPH BEYOND THE SET SPEED. IF IT WERE SET AT 65, THE CAR MIGHT ACCELERATE TO 70; SET AT 70 IT MIGHT GO TO 75. ADDITIONALLY, WHEN I HIT THE BRAKE TO DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL, IT MAY TAKE A COUPLE OF SECONDS FOR THE THROTTLE TO DISENGAGE. SEVERAL TIMES CARS HAVE PASSED ME WHEN THE CAR AUTOMATICALLY SLOWED GOING UP A HILL. AFTER PASSING ME, OTHER VEHICLES THOUGHT IT WAS SAFE TO PULL BACK INTO MY LANE, IN FRONT OF ME. IF THE CRUISE CONTROL KICKED IN AT SOME POINT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THEY PASSED, AND MY CAR STARTED RACING FORWARD, PUTTING LITTLE OR NO DISTANCE BETWEEN MYSELF AND THE CAR THAT JUST PASSED ME, THEN I HAD TO SWERVE TO AVOID AN ACCIDENT WITH THE CAR THAT JUST PASSED BECAUSE MY CAR WAS LUNGING FORWARD. UNKNOWN TO THE CAR THAT PASSED, IT WAS NO LONGER SAFE FOR THEM TO PULL BACK INTO THE RIGHT LANE (TWO LANES GOING SAME DIRECTION). UPON COMPLAINING TO TWO DEALERSHIPS, THEY STATED THAT WHAT I WAS SAYING JUST WASN'T TRUE, BUT THEY WERE UNWILLING TO TAKE A TEST DRIVE WITH ME TO CONFIRM MY EXPERIENCE. THEY NOTED THAT THEY HAD RECEIVED SEVERAL COMPLAINTS, BUT STATED THAT THE GAIN AND LOSS VARIANCE IN SPEED WAS NO MORE THAN 2 OR 3 MILES PER HOUR DUE TO THE DEFECTIVE CRUISE CONTROL. I BELIEVE HONDA IS WELL AWARE OF THIS DANGEROUS FEATURE, AND THAT THEY ARE DOING THEIR BEST TO SWEEP IT UNDER THE RUG. AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, THEY CAN FIX IT, OR TAKE THE CAR BACK. AT THIS POINT, I REALLY DON'T CARE. I DO NOT LIKE HAVING A CAR WITH A FEATURE I CAN NOT USE BECAUSE USING THE FEATURE CREATES TOO MUCH OF A ROAD HAZARD. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10550289

4,000 miles · Sep 9, 2013

Vehicle Speed Control

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE ACCELERATOR FAILED TO RESPOND TO ACCELERATION ATTEMPTS. THE CONTACT ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE VEHICLE ERRONEOUSLY DECELERATED WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 4,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 5,200. RETURNED BY USPS ON 11-14-2013, SECONG ATTEMPT ON 11-14-2013 FAILED. *KB

NHTSA ODI #10542675

Official recalls

No recalls in this snapshot.

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

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

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

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

Honda Civic transmission problems →Honda Civic electrical problems →