← New search

2015 Honda Civic

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Civic years

Owner complaints for the 2015 Honda Civic are substantially higher than the model-year median of 183.5.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

200 reports with mileage · 180 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 176 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 58 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 31 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

37 crash reports2 fire reports18 injury reports

Electronic Stability Control (esc) complaints

3 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Oct 29, 2020
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Unknown Or Other

RE. 2015 HONDA CIVIC-EX (VIN #: [XXX]) DEAR SIR, OUR REFERENCED CAR HAS HAD NUMEROUS DEFECTS AND DEFICIENCIES AND IS CURRENTLY INOPERABLE. WHILE WE'VE HAD TO REPAIR THE CAR ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS WITHIN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WHAT HAS OCCURRED WITHIN THE PAST 6 MONTHS HAS BEEN NOTHING SHORT OF A NIGHTMARE EXPERIENCE; …

Read full complaint

RE. 2015 HONDA CIVIC-EX (VIN #: [XXX]) DEAR SIR, OUR REFERENCED CAR HAS HAD NUMEROUS DEFECTS AND DEFICIENCIES AND IS CURRENTLY INOPERABLE. WHILE WE'VE HAD TO REPAIR THE CAR ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS WITHIN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WHAT HAS OCCURRED WITHIN THE PAST 6 MONTHS HAS BEEN NOTHING SHORT OF A NIGHTMARE EXPERIENCE; STARTING IN FEBRUARY AND CONTINUING TO THE PRESENT DAY. THERE IS SOMETHING STRUCTURALLY WRONG WITH THE HONDA CIVIC AS THERE APPEARS TO BE OEM SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS RELATED DEFECTS AND MALFUNCTIONS THAT ARE UNUSUAL, ANOMALOUS AND TOTALLY ABNORMAL. IN ONE INSTANCE, THE CAR BECAME VERY ERRATIC AND WAS SHAKING AND AERODYNAMICALLY UNSTABLE AND IT ALMOST LOST CONTROL, AS THE STEERING COLUMN BECAME VERY RIGID/STIFF AND WAS NOT ABLE TO INITIALLY ROTATE/TORQUE THE STEERING WHEEL TO NEGOTIATE CERTAIN CORNER TURNS. NUMEROUS DASHBOARD LIGHTS FLASHED SIMULTANEOUSLY INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CHECK ENGINE SIGN, VSA, TPMS, HSAS, POWER STEERING MALFUNCTION, EXCLAMATION SIGN, ETC. WE'VE REPLACED THE ALTERNATOR II) REPLACED THE BATTERY FIVE TIMES; AND III) CONDUCTED THE REQUISITE ALIGNMENT ADJUSTMENTS AND TIRE PRESSURE AND ROTATION APPLICATIONS AND OTHER RELATED REPAIRS, ETC. NONE OF THE ABOVE REPAIRS FIXED THE ROOT CAUSES OF THE PROBLEM. WE'RE NOT ABLE TO OPEN THE CAR DOORS AT THE PRESENT TIME AS THE VEHICLE IS NOT IN AN OPERATIONAL MODE. THIS CAR IS POTENTIALLY A "LEMON" AND FRANKLY WHATEVER TURNS-OUT TO BE THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM(S), THIS MODEL VEHICLE SHOULD BE A CANDIDATE FOR A RECALL. PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING AND TAKE THE NECESSARY CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TO HAVE HONDA SATISFACTORILY RESOLVE THIS MATTER ASAP AND WE REQUEST NHTSA TO REPORT THIS INCIDENT SO THAT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN TO ANOTHER DRIVER AS THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PROMPT AND PROFESSIONAL COOPERATION. SINCERELY, [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #11372304

75,500 miles · Dec 9, 2018
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Unknown Or Other

AS I STARTED TO DRIVE I NOTICED THAT WAS RUNNING REALLY SLOW AND MAKING A LOUD NOISE.AFTER 2 MILES I TURNED AROUND AND WENT BACK TO MY WORKPLACE.AS SOON IT REACHED UPHILL THE CAR WAS DRIVING BACKWARD.THIS IS 3 YR OLD CAR,THE AUTO REPAIR GUY SAID ITS THE TRANSMISSION. I FIND IT ODD FOR A 3 YR OLD CAR WITH 75,500 MILES ONLY.ALSO F…

Read full complaint

AS I STARTED TO DRIVE I NOTICED THAT WAS RUNNING REALLY SLOW AND MAKING A LOUD NOISE.AFTER 2 MILES I TURNED AROUND AND WENT BACK TO MY WORKPLACE.AS SOON IT REACHED UPHILL THE CAR WAS DRIVING BACKWARD.THIS IS 3 YR OLD CAR,THE AUTO REPAIR GUY SAID ITS THE TRANSMISSION. I FIND IT ODD FOR A 3 YR OLD CAR WITH 75,500 MILES ONLY.ALSO FIRST WEEK WHEN I HAD IT THE TIRE PRESSURE KEPT COMING ON. I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE A SENSOR PROBLEM OR MAYBE SOFTWARE BUT THE CAR COMPANY DEALER WHERE I BOUGHT IT KEPT TELLING ME IT'S SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE WEATHER.THE LIGHT IS ON FOR 3 YRS NOW SO HOW DO I REALLY KNOW IF MY TIRES ARE OK OR NOT..MY CAR WENT TO HYDROPLANE ONE WHEN RAINSTORM AND COME TO FIND OUT MY TIRES WERE BAD AND BEC THE TIRE PRESSUE LIGHT WAS ON ALL THE TIME IT DIDN'T REALLY GAVE ME A REAL WARNING REGARDING MY TIRES.THE CAR DEALERSHIP COMPANY JUST IGNORED ME.DO THEY HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL I REALLY HAVE A BAD WRECK?? PLS. HELP ME,I REALLY WANT HONDA CARE TO KNOW BEFORE ITS TOO LATE.THANK YOU.

NHTSA ODI #11157145

Mileage unknown · Jul 7, 2016
Electronic Stability Control (esc)

WE BOUGHT A BRAND NEW HONDA A COUPLE MONTHS AGO WE USUALLY DO NOT DRIVE IT MUCH SINCE IT IS FOR MY WIFE WHO TAKES THE BUS TO WORK. ONR DAY WR GOT A CHECK TIRE PRESSURE WARNING. SO I CHECKED TIRED AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE WITH THEM. THE WARNING WE WERE RECEIVING ACCORDING TO HONDA IS TPMS. AND IT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING TO ALOT OF…

Read full complaint

WE BOUGHT A BRAND NEW HONDA A COUPLE MONTHS AGO WE USUALLY DO NOT DRIVE IT MUCH SINCE IT IS FOR MY WIFE WHO TAKES THE BUS TO WORK. ONR DAY WR GOT A CHECK TIRE PRESSURE WARNING. SO I CHECKED TIRED AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE WITH THEM. THE WARNING WE WERE RECEIVING ACCORDING TO HONDA IS TPMS. AND IT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING TO ALOT OF THERE CARS. FIESTA AND FOREMOST THIS IS SUCH A SAFETY HAZARD. BECAUSE WHEN THE REAL DAY COMES WHEN I DO NEED AIR I WILL NEVER KNOW. IT IS ALSO SAD THAT HONDA WAD AWARE OF THIS AND NEGLECTED TO MENTION IT TO US. THE OTHER THIN IS MY OLD CAR HAD FOR 15 PLUS YE AS DIDN'T HAVE ANY OF THESE HIGH TECH GADGETS,AND THESE NEW ONES I KEEP READING HAVE THIS ISSUE OR THAT. I'M STARTING TO BECOME EXTREMELY WORRY AND WONDER IF IT'S SAFE TO DRIVE. I AM CALLING THEM TODAY TO SET AN APPOINTMENT TO GT IT FIX

NHTSA ODI #10883181

Official recalls

1

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).

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