NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
319 reports9,000 miles · May 6, 2015
Service Brakes
OKAY SO I BOUGHT MY 2013/CIVIC WITH 4200 MIL ....AT 9000 MILES I HAD TO REPLACE MY PADS AND RESURFACE THE ROTORS...MECHANIC SAID IT WAS DUE TO MY DRIVING HABITS...NOW IT HAPPENS AGAIN AT 30K..THIS TIME HAD TO BUY NEW ROTORS AND PADS...MECHANIC SAID THE SAME DUE TO DRIVING HABITS..BUT NOW THAT I SEE OTHER STORIES I REALLY HAVE A …
Read full complaint
OKAY SO I BOUGHT MY 2013/CIVIC WITH 4200 MIL ....AT 9000 MILES I HAD TO REPLACE MY PADS AND RESURFACE THE ROTORS...MECHANIC SAID IT WAS DUE TO MY DRIVING HABITS...NOW IT HAPPENS AGAIN AT 30K..THIS TIME HAD TO BUY NEW ROTORS AND PADS...MECHANIC SAID THE SAME DUE TO DRIVING HABITS..BUT NOW THAT I SEE OTHER STORIES I REALLY HAVE A HARD TIME BELIEVING IT WAS MY DRIVING THAT CAUSED IT...PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS AND THE AIR BAG SITUATION... THANKS *TR
NHTSA ODI #10715003
39,000 miles · May 6, 2015
Air BagsCrashFire
MY WIFE WAS DRIVE AT ABOUT 5MPH..ON A LITTLE STREET IN SACRAMENTO... SHE WAS MAKING A LEFT TURN...WHEN AN SUV DID SEE HER SINGLE AND ALCAM FROM BEHIND AND HIT HER GOING ABOUT 20MPH...THEY BOTH SPIN OUT OF CONTROL... THERE WERE NO INJURIES..BUT A WITNESS STATES THAT THEY SEEN MULTIPLE ACCIDENTS IN THE SAME INTERSECTION.. AND THAT…
Read full complaint
MY WIFE WAS DRIVE AT ABOUT 5MPH..ON A LITTLE STREET IN SACRAMENTO... SHE WAS MAKING A LEFT TURN...WHEN AN SUV DID SEE HER SINGLE AND ALCAM FROM BEHIND AND HIT HER GOING ABOUT 20MPH...THEY BOTH SPIN OUT OF CONTROL... THERE WERE NO INJURIES..BUT A WITNESS STATES THAT THEY SEEN MULTIPLE ACCIDENTS IN THE SAME INTERSECTION.. AND THAT ABOUT ALMOST 100% OF THE TIME ITS A ROLL OVER...DUE TO THE ANGLE ORLF THE ROAD AND SPEED OF THE OTHER VEHICLES...NOW AFTER THE HARD IMPACT SHE SPUN OF CONTROL CAME TO A STOP AND NO AIR BAGS DEPLOYED.. EVER...NOT ONE SINGLE LIGHT CAME ON...I'M JUST CONCERNED BECAUSE IF THE CAR WOULD HAVE ROLLED OVER AND NO AIR BAGS WOULD HAVE DEPLOYED... THEN SHE MIGHT HAVE GOT INJURED REALLY BAD. IF THIS SITUATION IS RESOLVED I'M GOING TO REPLACE THE CIVIC FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10714992
12,345 miles · Apr 10, 2015
Electrical System
STARTED VEHICLE AND NO RADIO STATION APPEAR ON LED COULD NOT CHANGE CHANNELS OR VOLUME. AFTER ABOUT 20 MINUTES CHANNEL APPEARED AND I COULD CHANGE STATION AND VOLUME NOW. THIS HAS OCCURRED 3 TIMES WITHIN THE LAST YEAR. ALSO THE VOLUME CONTROL KNOB FLICKERS MOST OF THE TIME
NHTSA ODI #10705046
18,000 miles · Apr 6, 2015
Service Brakes
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING AT 30 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A NOISE FROM THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE ROTORS AND PADS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIF…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING AT 30 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A NOISE FROM THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE ROTORS AND PADS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 18,000.
NHTSA ODI #10703912
300 miles · Mar 20, 2015
Equipment Adaptive/mobilityFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
BEING MALE AND CAPABLE OF DRIVING STANDARD SHIFT, I DRIVE 2 FOOTED. THIS VEHICLE IS AN AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION WITH DRIVE BY WIRE FEATURE. LEFT ON BRAKE,RIGHT ON ACCELERATOR. WHEN ACCELERATING FROM A STOP OR A SLOW TO MAKE A LEFT TURN, THE VEHICLE DOES NOT MOVE AS EXPECTED, IT SEEMS TO DELAY COMPETING THE TURN, AND EVEN DOES IT W…
Read full complaint
BEING MALE AND CAPABLE OF DRIVING STANDARD SHIFT, I DRIVE 2 FOOTED. THIS VEHICLE IS AN AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION WITH DRIVE BY WIRE FEATURE. LEFT ON BRAKE,RIGHT ON ACCELERATOR. WHEN ACCELERATING FROM A STOP OR A SLOW TO MAKE A LEFT TURN, THE VEHICLE DOES NOT MOVE AS EXPECTED, IT SEEMS TO DELAY COMPETING THE TURN, AND EVEN DOES IT WHEN TRYING TO PASS A VEHICLE ON THE FWY. IT IS AN INTERMITTENT OCCURRENCE. I HAVE TAKEN IT BACK TO THE DEALER AND THEY SAY THEY CAN NOT FIND ANY PROBLEM. I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT WITH THEM FOR ONE WEEK AND HAVE THE MECHANIC DRIVE IT FOR ONE WEEK TO AND FROM WORK. BUT I DO NOT WANT TO PAY FOR A RENTAL DURING THE TIME. I WILL DO SO IF THERE IS NO TROUBLE FOUND BY THE REGION SERVICE MANAGER. BUT OTHERWISE I WOULD LIKE THE DEALERSHIP TO PICK UP THE RENTAL. I NOW HAVE HAD IT FOR ABOUT 16 MONTHS AND HAVE HAD TO ADJUST MY DRIVING HABITS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE DELAY IN ORDER TO AVOID A CRASH. OTHER WISE I HAVE HAD GOOD SERVICE FROM THE DEALERSHIP. I NOW HAVE APPROXIMATELY 10, 300 MILES ON THE VEHICLE. THANK YOU. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10695535
16,756 miles · Mar 18, 2015
Suspension
I AM WRITING TO EXPRESS CONCERN ABOUT AN ISSUE I RECENTLY HAD WITH MY 2013 HONDA CIVIC AND TO SEE IF THE ISSUE I HAD IS A KNOWN ISSUE WITH HONDA CIVICS. ON 11 FEBRUARY, MY CAR HIT A CURB AND THE HONDA DEALERSHIP, UPON INSPECTING THE CAR, TOLD ME THAT MY FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM WAS BROKEN, FORCING A REPAIR OF THE CONTROL ARM, STE…
Read full complaint
I AM WRITING TO EXPRESS CONCERN ABOUT AN ISSUE I RECENTLY HAD WITH MY 2013 HONDA CIVIC AND TO SEE IF THE ISSUE I HAD IS A KNOWN ISSUE WITH HONDA CIVICS. ON 11 FEBRUARY, MY CAR HIT A CURB AND THE HONDA DEALERSHIP, UPON INSPECTING THE CAR, TOLD ME THAT MY FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM WAS BROKEN, FORCING A REPAIR OF THE CONTROL ARM, STEERING KNUCKLE, FRONT WHEEL BEARING, AND FRONT DAMPER/STRUT. THE DAMAGE ALLEGEDLY CAUSED BY THE CURB SEEMS EXCESSIVE TO THE LEVEL OF IMPACT. I AM AWARE OF PREVIOUS ISSUES WITH CONTROL ARMS IN HONDA CIVICS, WHICH IS THE REASON I AM ASKING IF SIMILAR ISSUES HAVE ARISEN IN MORE RECENT MODELS. PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS INCIDENT OR IF THIS IS PART OF A LARGER PROBLEM WITH HONDA CIVICS FOR WHICH THEY SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO FIX. THANK YOU. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10695218
14,000 miles · Mar 5, 2015
SeatsInjury
THE HEAD RESTRAINT IS UNCOMFORTABLE ENOUGH TO CAUSE SEVER NECK PAIN/INJURY FOR ME. TO PROTECT FROM WHIP LASH THE DESIGN IS DONE IN WAY TO CAUSE INJURY TO NECK. THIS IS REALLY BAD, MANY ARE GOING TO END UP IN THERAPY OR ORTHOPEDICS DUE TO POOR DESIGN LIKE ME :-( *TR
NHTSA ODI #10692234
4,000 miles · Feb 23, 2015
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS MY MANUAL TRANSMISSION 2013 HONDA CIVIC HAS ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN IN 2ND AND 3RD GEARS. IT OCCURS MUCH MORE OFTEN IN 3RD GEAR AND HAPPENED TWICE JUST TODAY; IT HAS NEVER DONE THIS IN 1ST, 4TH, OR 5TH GEARS. I DON'T USE CRUISE CONTROL SO, UNLESS THE CRUISE CONTROL IS KICKING IN ON ITS OWN SOMEHOW, THAT IS…
Read full complaint
ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS MY MANUAL TRANSMISSION 2013 HONDA CIVIC HAS ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN IN 2ND AND 3RD GEARS. IT OCCURS MUCH MORE OFTEN IN 3RD GEAR AND HAPPENED TWICE JUST TODAY; IT HAS NEVER DONE THIS IN 1ST, 4TH, OR 5TH GEARS. I DON'T USE CRUISE CONTROL SO, UNLESS THE CRUISE CONTROL IS KICKING IN ON ITS OWN SOMEHOW, THAT IS NOT THE CAUSE. WHEN THE CAR STARTS ACCELERATING ON ITS OWN, I AM UNABLE TO EASILY MOVE THE GEAR SHIFT FROM 2ND OR 3RD INTO NEUTRAL AND HAVE TO EITHER APPLY ALOT OF PRESSURE TO MOVE IT INTO NEUTRAL OR USE THE CLUTCH. BREAKING WILL SOMETIMES STOP THE ACCELERATION BUT NOT ALWAYS AND SOMETIMES EVEN WHEN I USE THE BRAKE, WHEN I TAKE MY FOOT OFF THE BRAKE THE CAR WILL CONTINUE ACCELERATING ON ITS OWN. THIS HAS OCCURRED MOST OFTEN AT SPEEDS BETWEEN 25 AND 35. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED NEW FROM THE DEALER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10689930
15,000 miles · Feb 9, 2015
Exterior LightingTiresWheels
WE BOUGHT THE CAR NEW AND OVER THE LAST 6 MONTHS YOU CANNOT SEE THE ROAD VARY WELL AT NIGHT HEAD LIGHTS ARE NOT BRIGHT ENOUGH,ALSO THE TIRES THAT CAME ON THE CAR ARE HORRIBLE AND CHEAP THEY DID NOT LAST BARLEY 1 YEAR AND ARE NOT RATED FOR MILES. THE CAR IS NOT SAFE ON THE ROAD TIRES WILL HYDRO PLANE AND SLIP ALL OVER THE ROAD W…
Read full complaint
WE BOUGHT THE CAR NEW AND OVER THE LAST 6 MONTHS YOU CANNOT SEE THE ROAD VARY WELL AT NIGHT HEAD LIGHTS ARE NOT BRIGHT ENOUGH,ALSO THE TIRES THAT CAME ON THE CAR ARE HORRIBLE AND CHEAP THEY DID NOT LAST BARLEY 1 YEAR AND ARE NOT RATED FOR MILES. THE CAR IS NOT SAFE ON THE ROAD TIRES WILL HYDRO PLANE AND SLIP ALL OVER THE ROAD WITH SNOW THIS SHOULD BE A SAFETY ITEM AND HONDA SAID IT IS OUR PROBLEM NOT HONDAS @ 1-800 999-1009 FIRESTONE HAS BEEN MORE COOPERATIVE THAN HONDA I HOPE NO ONE GETS HURT BUY THE TIRES ON HONDA CIVIC .[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10682257
1,000 miles · Jan 30, 2015
Suspension
I JUST WANT IT ON THE RECORD THAT THE CAR RODE/ FELT SQUIRRELLY FROM THE GET-GO. I KEEP THINKING - EITHER SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG W/ THIS CAR, OR IT'S THE TIRES. SO, TO DO AN EXPENSIVE TEST, I SPENT THE 1100.00, YES, ONE THOUSAND, ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ON NEW TIRES AND WHEELS. I PURCHASED MICHELIN. AND YES - IT WAS A "NEW…
Read full complaint
I JUST WANT IT ON THE RECORD THAT THE CAR RODE/ FELT SQUIRRELLY FROM THE GET-GO. I KEEP THINKING - EITHER SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG W/ THIS CAR, OR IT'S THE TIRES. SO, TO DO AN EXPENSIVE TEST, I SPENT THE 1100.00, YES, ONE THOUSAND, ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ON NEW TIRES AND WHEELS. I PURCHASED MICHELIN. AND YES - IT WAS A "NEW CAR". MY CAR DROVE SO MUCH BETTER THAN CONTINENTAL TIRES. THEIR PRODUCT, IN MY OPINION, IS HORRIBLE, BAR-NONE HORRIBLE! MY COMPLAINT IS STILL MY VISIBILITY ON THE FRONT - I DO NOT LIKE THE DESIGN OF THIS HONDA CIVIC 2013 AT ALL - THE FRONT MIRRORS ARE PLACED TERRIBLE. THE ROUND BUBBLE OF THE WHOLE FRONT DESIGN IS SO HORRIBLE THAT I CANNOT WAIT TO PAY THIS CAR OFF AND GIVE IT AWAY TO MY FAMILY MEMBER. I CANNOT WAIT TO PURCHASE A NEW CAR - AND I KNOW I WILL NOT PURCHASE HONDA. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10679916
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