← New search

2013 Honda Civic

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2013 Honda Civic do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 183.5.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

193 reports with mileage · 126 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 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

What owners actually said

319 reports
Mileage unknown · Apr 14, 2017
Air Bags

I HAVE A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. I BOUGHT IS A CERTIFIED PRE-OWNED FROM BROADWAY HONDA, GREENVILLE, SC. IT WENT WELL FOR A YEAR THOUGHT THE ONE YEAR WARRANTY WITH ZERO PROBLEMS. BUT ONCE THE WARRANTY WAS OVER PROBLEMS STARTED TO SHOW UP EVERY OTHER MONTH. DURING THE HARSH WINTER OF MARCH ONE DAY THE BATTERY WENT DEAD AT A WALMART PARK…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. I BOUGHT IS A CERTIFIED PRE-OWNED FROM BROADWAY HONDA, GREENVILLE, SC. IT WENT WELL FOR A YEAR THOUGHT THE ONE YEAR WARRANTY WITH ZERO PROBLEMS. BUT ONCE THE WARRANTY WAS OVER PROBLEMS STARTED TO SHOW UP EVERY OTHER MONTH. DURING THE HARSH WINTER OF MARCH ONE DAY THE BATTERY WENT DEAD AT A WALMART PARKING. I CALLED MY FRIEND AND JUMP STARTED IT AND IT WAS FINE. NEXT DAY I WENT TO THE HONDA SERVICE AND DID A DIAGNOSTIC. THEY SAID THE BATTERY IS ONLY 30%. IN 4 YEARS WITH 53K MILES THE BATTERY WENT BAD AND I REPLACED IT. AND DID A OIL CHANGE AND NYS INSPECTION. 15 DAYS WENT WELL. SUDDENLY ONE DAY MY AIR BAG INDICATOR STARTED TO BLINK WITH A MESSAGE "CHECK AIR BAG SYSTEM" ON THE SCREEN. I TOOK IT TO A FRIEND'S GARAGE AND HE SUSPECTED IT WAS A PASSENGER SIDE SEAT SENSOR THAT HAS AN ERROR. VERY TROUBLED I WENT TO HONDA SERVICE AGAIN. THEY CHARGED $130 JUST FOR SCANNING AND DIAGNOSTICS. THEY CAME BACK SAID THE PASSENGER SEAT AIRBAG SENSOR WENT BAD. I ASKED THEM HOW CAN SOMETHING LIKE A SENSOR GO BAD. BELIEVE ME I ONLY USE MY CAR TO GO TO OFFICE AND ERRANDS. MY WIFE SITS AT THE BACK WITH MY BABY(INFANT). VERY RARELY THE SEAT IS USED. I ASKED THEM HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST AND THEY SAID IT WILL COST ANOTHER $880 DOLLARS TO REPLACE THE SENSOR. I ALSO WANT HONDA TO KNOW THE PROBLEM AS ONE CAN'T PAY SO MUCH TO REPLACE ONE SENSOR.

NHTSA ODI #10972382

63,981 miles · Apr 8, 2017
Engine

WHILE MY WIFE WAS DRIVING DOWN ROUTE 55 IN SOUTH JERSEY AT HIGHWAY SPEED (APPROX. 55 MPH), THE VEHICLE STARTED TO SHAKE UNCONTROLLABLY AND ENGINE POWER WAS DIMINISHED. WAS ABLE TO SLOWLY GET OFF NEARBY EXIT AND DRIVE TO PARKING LOT. VEHICLE ALMOST DID NOT MAKE IT UP EXIT RAMP. TOWED TO DEALERSHIP. DIAGNOSIS WAS #2 CYLINDER HAD F…

Read full complaint

WHILE MY WIFE WAS DRIVING DOWN ROUTE 55 IN SOUTH JERSEY AT HIGHWAY SPEED (APPROX. 55 MPH), THE VEHICLE STARTED TO SHAKE UNCONTROLLABLY AND ENGINE POWER WAS DIMINISHED. WAS ABLE TO SLOWLY GET OFF NEARBY EXIT AND DRIVE TO PARKING LOT. VEHICLE ALMOST DID NOT MAKE IT UP EXIT RAMP. TOWED TO DEALERSHIP. DIAGNOSIS WAS #2 CYLINDER HAD FAILED. CAR ONLY HAD JUST OVER 63,000 MILES ON IT. NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY BUT HONDA EVENTUALLY COVERED 50% ($2,545.30). CAR WAS GARAGED KEPT AND ALL SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE DONE. I WANTED TO REPORT THIS BECAUSE I THINK IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE SINCE IT HAPPENED WITHOUT WARNING AND THE CAR COULD NOT KEEP UP WITH DANGEROUS HIGHWAY TRAFFIC. ALSO, I WOULD LIKE IT ON RECORD IN CASE THERE ARE OTHER REPORTS OF SIMILAR FAILURES WHICH MAY INDICATE A MANUFACTURING DEFECT, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT OCCURRED ON A WELL-MAINTAINED, GARAGE KEPT CAR AT ONLY 63,000 MILES. I HAVE UPLOADED A COPY OF THE REPAIR ORDER INDICATING WHAT COMPONENTS FAILED AND WERE REPLACED.

NHTSA ODI #10971430

Mileage unknown · Mar 20, 2017
Air BagsService Brakes

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT A WARNING INDICATOR RANDOMLY KEPT FLASHING TO CHECK THE AIR BAG SYSTEM. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AT LEAST THREE TIMES, BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO PROVIDE A SOLUTION. THE CONTACT FELT AS IF THEY MISDIAGNOSED PROVIDING A SOLUTION AND REQUIRED THAT BRAKE REPAI…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT A WARNING INDICATOR RANDOMLY KEPT FLASHING TO CHECK THE AIR BAG SYSTEM. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AT LEAST THREE TIMES, BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO PROVIDE A SOLUTION. THE CONTACT FELT AS IF THEY MISDIAGNOSED PROVIDING A SOLUTION AND REQUIRED THAT BRAKE REPAIRS BE COMPLETED BEFORE SERVICING THE AIR BAG SYSTEM. THE FIRST REPAIR FROM THE DEALER INDICATED THAT THE ABS INDICATOR WAS ILLUMINATED, BUT THE CONTACT STATED THAT IT WAS THE AIR BAG WARNING INDICATOR. THE DEALER CLEANED THE REAR BRAKES AND ADJUSTED THE REAR BRAKES DURING THE FIRST REPAIR. DURING THE SECOND REPAIR, THE DEALER REPLACED AND RESURFACED THE FRONT BRAKE PADS. THE BRAKE FLUID EXCHANGE WAS SERVICED AS WELL. TWO DAYS AFTER THE REPAIRS, THE SERVICE AIR BAGS INDICATOR ILLUMINATED AGAIN. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE A THIRD TIME AND INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD FOLLOW UP, BUT THE CONTACT RECEIVED NO RESPONSE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS NOT AVAILABLE.

NHTSA ODI #10967158

Mileage unknown · Mar 14, 2017
Seats

HEAD RESTRAINTS ARE EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE AND CAUSE BACK AND NECK PAIN. NO WAY TO ADJUST THE SEAT OF RESTRAINTS ENOUGH TO ALLEVIATE THE DISCOMFORT.

NHTSA ODI #10965921

Mileage unknown · Feb 21, 2017
Air Bags

TAKATA RECALL. I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER. NO AIRBAG HAS BEEN SCHEDULED AND HONDA IS NOT ANSWERING QUESTIONS! WHY?

NHTSA ODI #10955755

Mileage unknown · Feb 13, 2017
Unknown Or Other

THE PAINT ON MY VEHICAL IS BEEN PEELING SINCE I BROUGHT THE CAR. ITS SMALL AMOUNTS AROUND THE CAR THAT NOTICEABLE. ON THE ROOF,SIDE DOORS,AND TRUCK

NHTSA ODI #10954203

145,000 miles · Feb 8, 2017
Air Bags

CHECK AIRBAG SYSTEM WARNING LIGHT COMING ON AND OFF INTERMITTENTLY, WHETHER THE VEHICLE IS MOVING OR NOT. DEALERSHIP TECH UNABLE TO POSITIVELY IDENTIFY EXACT PROBLEM OR COMPONENT UNLESS ALARM STAYS ON ALL THE TIME. THEY COULD ONLY PROVIDE BEST EDUCATED GUESS. THEY SUSPECT CABLE REEL IS BAD. APPARENTLY, WHEN THE LIGHT IS ON, A…

Read full complaint

CHECK AIRBAG SYSTEM WARNING LIGHT COMING ON AND OFF INTERMITTENTLY, WHETHER THE VEHICLE IS MOVING OR NOT. DEALERSHIP TECH UNABLE TO POSITIVELY IDENTIFY EXACT PROBLEM OR COMPONENT UNLESS ALARM STAYS ON ALL THE TIME. THEY COULD ONLY PROVIDE BEST EDUCATED GUESS. THEY SUSPECT CABLE REEL IS BAD. APPARENTLY, WHEN THE LIGHT IS ON, AIR BAGS APPARENTLY WILL NOT WORK. UNACCEPTABLE. HAVE PREVIOUSLY OWNED 3 OTHER CIVIC 'S, NEVER HAD A SINGLE PROBLEM WITH THE AIR BAG SYSTEM. HONDA SHOULD HAVE A BETTER WAY TO TROUBLESHOOT THE SYSTEM TO DEFINITIVELY IDENTIFY THE SPECIFIC DEFECTIVE COMPONENT IN THE SYSTEM. WARNING LIGHT CAME ON CONSTANTLY YESTERDAY AFTER APPROX. A MONTH, BUT RESIDENCE IS 400 MILES FROM PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT SO IT WILL BE A COUPLE DAYS TO GET VEHICLE IN TO DEALERSHIP TO EFFECT REPAIRS. IF THE GOVERNMENT IS REQUIRING THESE SYSTEMS FOR SAFETY, THEN AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED THEY SHOULD NEVER FAIL. PERIOD. ANY DEFECT OR PROBLEM WITH THE SYSTEM SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY CORRECTED BY THE MANUFACTURER AT ZERO EXPENSE TO THE VEHICLE OWNER. I DEFINITELY DO NOT FEEL AS SAFE IN THE VEHICLE AT THE MOMENT, AND HOPE I DON'T GET INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT WITH THIS SYSTEM NOT WORKING. JUST WANTED TO INFORM IN CASE OTHERS MAY HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS SAME ISSUE.

NHTSA ODI #10950354

15,213 miles · Feb 1, 2017
Visibility

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PANORAMIC SUN ROOF LEAKED CONTINUOUSLY ONTO THE REAR SEAT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE SUN ROOF NEEDED TO BE CLEANED OUT. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED; HOWEVER, THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER WHE…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PANORAMIC SUN ROOF LEAKED CONTINUOUSLY ONTO THE REAR SEAT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE SUN ROOF NEEDED TO BE CLEANED OUT. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED; HOWEVER, THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE DRAINAGE TO THE SUN ROOF WAS MISALIGNED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED, BUT THE FAILURE WAS PERSISTENT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 15,213.

NHTSA ODI #10948925

Mileage unknown · Dec 25, 2016
Unknown Or Other

TAKATA RECALL

NHTSA ODI #10937377

36,000 miles · Dec 15, 2016
Engine

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT NOTICED OIL LEAKING UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE OIL SEAL WAS MISSING AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. IT WAS ALSO DIAGNOSED THAT THE OIL WAS LEAKING FROM BETWEEN THE ENGINE BLOCK AND THE TIMING BELT. THE VE…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT NOTICED OIL LEAKING UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE OIL SEAL WAS MISSING AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. IT WAS ALSO DIAGNOSED THAT THE OIL WAS LEAKING FROM BETWEEN THE ENGINE BLOCK AND THE TIMING BELT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS UNKNOWN. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 36,000.

NHTSA ODI #10935447

Official recalls

0

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

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