← New search

2014 Honda Civic

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2014 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

175 reports with mileage · 116 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.

  • Power Train. Review the 98 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 57 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. 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.

30 crash reports4 fire reports19 injury reports

Structure complaints

7 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Jul 7, 2021
Structure

The taffeta white paint started peeling off the car within just three months after originally purchasing in 2014. The paint continues to peel off in various places and is causing the body to corrode and rust. Honda refuses to do anything about this. There is no reason for it to be peeling off at the rate it is. This has been hap…

Read full complaint

The taffeta white paint started peeling off the car within just three months after originally purchasing in 2014. The paint continues to peel off in various places and is causing the body to corrode and rust. Honda refuses to do anything about this. There is no reason for it to be peeling off at the rate it is. This has been happening since just after purchasing the car and will cost thousands to fix the rust and repaint. This is a major issue that Honda has not acknowledged and it’s happening to many people.

NHTSA ODI #11423766

58,000 miles · Apr 24, 2019
Air BagsStructureCrashInjury

I WAS HIT BY A CAR TURNING LEFT AND MY AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE CARS SCREEN HAD AN ALERT ON IT WITH THE WORDS "AIRBAG FAILED". MY VIN IS NOT IN THE RECALL HOWEVER I AM CONCERNED. THE ARIBAGS FAILED AND I'M LUCKY THAT I WAS OK. THE CAR IS DEEMED A TOTAL LOSS DUE TO THE AIRBAGS FAILING.

NHTSA ODI #11203383

29,000 miles · Jun 20, 2018
StructureUnknown Or OtherFire

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, I WOULD LIKE TO REPORT A SAFETY ISSUE WITH A VEHICLE. I AM NOT THE OWNER OF THE VEHICLE THAT I AM REPORTING, BUT I WAS NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY A FIRE THAT THE VEHICLE CAUSED. MY VEHICLE WAS PARKED IN A PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE ON THE 1ST FLOOR. SEVERAL HOURS AFTER PARKING MY CAR, A BMW X5 PARKED NEXT TO MY …

Read full complaint

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, I WOULD LIKE TO REPORT A SAFETY ISSUE WITH A VEHICLE. I AM NOT THE OWNER OF THE VEHICLE THAT I AM REPORTING, BUT I WAS NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY A FIRE THAT THE VEHICLE CAUSED. MY VEHICLE WAS PARKED IN A PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE ON THE 1ST FLOOR. SEVERAL HOURS AFTER PARKING MY CAR, A BMW X5 PARKED NEXT TO MY VEHICLE. THE OWNER OF THE BMW LEFT THEIR VEHICLE AND TURNED THE CAR OFF. HOWEVER, WHILE THE OWNER WAS AWAY FROM THE CAR, THE VEHICLE CAUGHT FIRE. THE FIRE SPREAD TO 4 OTHER VEHICLES INCLUDING MY VEHICLE ' THE TWO VEHICLES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CAR AND TWO VEHICLES ON THE 2ND FLOOR OF THE PARKING GARAGE. MY VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AS A RESULT OF THIS FIRE. THE FIRE ENGULFED THE PASSENGER SIDE OF MY VEHICLE AND COMPLETELY DAMAGED THE INTERIOR. WITH ALL THE DAMAGES THAT MY CAR SUSTAINED, IT IS NOT DRIVEABLE NOR IS IT REPAIRABLE. MY INSURANCE HAS A BETTER RECORD OF THE COMPLETE DAMAGE TO MY VEHICLE. UPON, EXPLORING THIS ISSUE, I FOUND THAT THIS SPECIFIC BMW WAS LISTED AS AN AFFECTED VEHICLE FOR RECALL. NHTSA ISSUED SEVERAL RECALLS FOR PARTS OF THE VEHICLE THAT COULD CATCH FIRE EVEN WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS NOT IN OPERATION. FOR EXAMPLE: REPORT RECEIPT DATE: 10-30-2017 NHTSA CAMPAIGN: 17V683000 MANUFACTURER: BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC CONSEQUENCE: AN ELECTRICAL SHORT CAN CAUSE THE PARTS WITHIN THE PCV VALVE TO MELT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A FIRE, EVEN WHEN THE VEHICLE IS NOT IN USE. THIS IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE AND BMW SHOULD BE MORE ATTENTIVE AND RESPONSIBLE ABOUT THIS ISSUE. AS A RESULT OF THIS, I HAVE LOST MY CAR AND WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RECOUP THE RETAIL VALUE OF THE VEHICLE. THIS INCREDIBLY UNFAIR AND BMW SHOULD BE DOING MORE TO REMEDY THIS ISSUE AND HELP THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN NEGATIVELY AFFECTED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.

NHTSA ODI #11102849

Mileage unknown · Mar 27, 2015
Engine And Engine CoolingStructureVisibility

PURCHASED MY VEHICLE 5-28-14 FROM CRISWELL HONDA IN GERMANTOWN, MD. FIRST PROBLEM OCCURRED 7-8-14 I NOTICED THERE WAS A WET SPOT ON THE SIDE PANEL BY THE WINDOW ON THE DRIVERS SIDE. WENT IN TO CRISWELL 7-11-14 TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE ISSUE. WENT BACK 7-14-14 TO COMPLAIN AGAIN. AFTER BEING GIVEN THE RUN AROUND, THE SALES MANAGER AL…

Read full complaint

PURCHASED MY VEHICLE 5-28-14 FROM CRISWELL HONDA IN GERMANTOWN, MD. FIRST PROBLEM OCCURRED 7-8-14 I NOTICED THERE WAS A WET SPOT ON THE SIDE PANEL BY THE WINDOW ON THE DRIVERS SIDE. WENT IN TO CRISWELL 7-11-14 TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE ISSUE. WENT BACK 7-14-14 TO COMPLAIN AGAIN. AFTER BEING GIVEN THE RUN AROUND, THE SALES MANAGER ALLOWED ME TO BRING IT IN ON A SATURDAY (7-19-14)AFTER THE SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME I COULD NOT BRING IT IN ON A WEEKEND, SERVICE HAD TO BE DONE DURING THE WEEK. WAS NOT GOING TO BE PROVIDED A VEHICLE TO GET TO AND FROM WORK. PROBLEM WAS SAID TO BE CAUSED BY A BLOCK IN THE AC VALVE. SECOND PROBLEM OCCURRED 9-13-14, I HEARD A WHISTLING SOUND COMING FROM MY SUNROOF WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, I WAS GOING 75 MPH. TOOK IT IN TO HERSONS HONDA 9-18-14 AND PICKED IT UP 9-19-14. THEY HAD TO REPLACE/ORDER A NEW WINDOW FOR MY SUNROOF BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL WINDOW CAME UNGLUED FROM RUBBER SEALING. COMPLAINED TO AMERICAN HONDA FOR THE SECOND TIME FOR MY CAR, WAS PROVIDED A RENTAL. THIRD PROBLEM, WENT IN FOR ROUTINE OIL CHANGE 3-21-15 AT CRISWELL, SERVICE ADVISOR TOLD ME MY CAR HAD A FLUID LEAK. NO ONE AT THE DEALERSHIP COULD OR WOULD TELL ME WHAT TYPE OF FLUID WAS LEAKING FROM MY CAR OR WHERE THE LEAK WAS. SERVICE ADVISOR ASKED ME TO BRING CAR IN ON 4-4-15 TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT, ALLOWING ME TO LEAVE THEIR DEALERSHIP WITH A LEAKING VEHICLE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10702276

Mileage unknown · Mar 27, 2015
Engine And Engine CoolingStructureVisibility

PURCHASED MY VEHICLE 5-28-14. FIRST PROBLEM OCCURRED 7-8-14. I NOTICED THERE WAS A WET SPOT ON THE SIDE PANEL BY THE WINDOW ON THE DRIVERS SIDE. WENT IN TO CRISWELL 7-11-14 TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE ISSUE. WENT BACK 7-14-14 TO COMPLAIN AGAIN. AFTER BEING GIVEN THE RUN AROUND, THE SALES MANAGER ALLOWED ME TO BRING IT IN ON A SATURD…

Read full complaint

PURCHASED MY VEHICLE 5-28-14. FIRST PROBLEM OCCURRED 7-8-14. I NOTICED THERE WAS A WET SPOT ON THE SIDE PANEL BY THE WINDOW ON THE DRIVERS SIDE. WENT IN TO CRISWELL 7-11-14 TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE ISSUE. WENT BACK 7-14-14 TO COMPLAIN AGAIN. AFTER BEING GIVEN THE RUN AROUND, THE SALES MANAGER ALLOWED ME TO BRING IT IN ON A SATURDAY (7-19-14)AFTER THE SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME I COULD NOT BRING IT IN ON A WEEKEND, SERVICE HAD TO BE DONE DURING THE WEEK. WAS NOT GOING TO BE PROVIDED A VEHICLE TO GET TO AND FROM WORK. PROBLEM WAS SAID TO BE CAUSED BY A BLOCK IN THE AC VALVE. SECOND PROBLEM OCCURRED 9-13-14, I HEARD A WHISTLING SOUND COMING FROM MY SUNROOF WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, I WAS GOING 75 MPH. TOOK IT IN TO HERSONS HONDA 9-18-14 AND PICKED IT UP 9-19-14. THEY HAD TO REPLACE/ORDER A NEW WINDOW FOR MY SUNROOF BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL WINDOW CAME UNGLUED FROM RUBBER SEALING. COMPLAINED TO AMERICAN HONDA FOR THE SECOND TIME FOR MY CAR, WAS PROVIDED A RENTAL. THIRD PROBLEM, WENT IN FOR ROUTINE OIL CHANGE 3-21-15, SERVICE ADVISOR TOLD ME MY CAR HAD A FLUID LEAK. NO ONE AT THE DEALERSHIP COULD OR WOULD TELL ME WHAT TYPE OF FLUID WAS LEAKING FROM MY CAR OR WHERE THE LEAK WAS. SERVICE ADVISOR ASKED ME TO BRING CAR IN ON 4-4-15 TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT, ALLOWING ME TO LEAVE THEIR DEALERSHIP WITH A LEAKING VEHICLE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10702274

28,000 miles · Nov 6, 2014
Exterior LightingStructure

THERE SEEMS LITTLE TO NO CLEAR COAT ON THE CAR AND SCRATCHES EASILY APPEARS ON PAINT OF CAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10653185

2,600 miles · Sep 25, 2014
Structure

THE NEW HONDA CIVIC 2014 WAS PURCHASED FROM A DEALER THREE MONTHS AGO. CAR ONLY HAS 2600 MILES NOW. BIG CHIP ON OWNERS DOOR HANDLE, AND ONE OTHER SIGNIFICANT CHIP ON SIDE PANEL. ALSO MULTIPLE LITTLE CHIPS ON HOOD AND ON FRONT BUMPER ONCE I LOOKED CAREFULLY. SMALL NOW BUT WILL RUST AND PEEL AND UNFAIR TO SELL CAR LIKE THIS. SALE…

Read full complaint

THE NEW HONDA CIVIC 2014 WAS PURCHASED FROM A DEALER THREE MONTHS AGO. CAR ONLY HAS 2600 MILES NOW. BIG CHIP ON OWNERS DOOR HANDLE, AND ONE OTHER SIGNIFICANT CHIP ON SIDE PANEL. ALSO MULTIPLE LITTLE CHIPS ON HOOD AND ON FRONT BUMPER ONCE I LOOKED CAREFULLY. SMALL NOW BUT WILL RUST AND PEEL AND UNFAIR TO SELL CAR LIKE THIS. SALESMAN SAID I JUST SELL THEM NOT FIX THEM. TOOK IT TO A BODY SHOP THAT I PAID TO REPLACE PLASTIC DOOR HANDLE. AND USED SILVER BOTTLE OF PAINT I BOUGHT FROM DEALER AND TRIED TO TOUCH UP SPOTS SO WON'T RUST BUT CAN SEE SPOTS AND DOESN'T MATCH. FEEL LIKE PAID NEW CAR PRICE FOR USED CAR. GOT RIPPED OFF. SALESMAN SAID ONCE YOU INSPECT CAR IT IS YOUR PROBLEM. NOW READ OTHERS HAVE SAME PROBLEM. LAST CIVIC. LAST HONDA. BAD DEALER AND SALESMAN TOO. ONCE YOU BUY CAR THEY NO LONGER CARE. NOTE-AUTO BODY SHOP ALSO SAW IMPERFECTIONS AND SAID THAT WAS NOT RIGHT FOR BRAND NEW CAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10639100

Official recalls

2

15V574000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission:control Module (tcm/pcm/tecm)

Sep 15, 2015

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain model year 2014-2015 Civic vehicles manufactured January 16, 2014, to November 6, 2014 and 2015 Fit vehicles manufactured March 12, 2014, to May 12, 2015. The software settings that control the transmission operation may result in damage to the transmission drive pulley shaft.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the transmission drive pulley shaft is damaged, it may break, and the vehicle may lose acceleration or the front wheels may lock up while driving, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will update the software for the transmission, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin October 30, 2015. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are JU2 (Civic) and JU3(Fit).

14V109000 · Tires:bead

Mar 10, 2014

American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (Honda) is recalling certain model year 2014 Honda Civic LX vehicles manufactured November 26, 2013, through January 21, 2014. In the affected vehicles, during mounting of the tires, the tire bead may have gotten pinched between the assembly equipment and the steel wheel rims, resulting in damage to the tire.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The tire damage could cause the tire to lose air, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect and replace any damaged tire, free of charge. The recall began on April 15, 2014. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009. Honda's number for this recall is JD8.

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