NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
380 reports3,600 miles · Dec 19, 2016
Service Brakes
BRAKE PROBLEM. SAFETY CONCERN. HAD TO PANIC BRAKE HARD AND FAST TO AVOID AN ACCIDENT WHILE GOING STRAIGHT AT STREET SPEED OF LESS THAN 25 MPH. NEW NOISE IMMEDIATELY AFTER EVENT: 'METALLIC CLUCK' SOUND UPON BRAKE PEDAL RETURN COMING FROM FIREWALL WHERE VACUUM BOOSTER AND MASTER CYLINDER ARE LOCATED. ALSO NOW EXPERIENCING INTERMIT…
Read full complaint
BRAKE PROBLEM. SAFETY CONCERN. HAD TO PANIC BRAKE HARD AND FAST TO AVOID AN ACCIDENT WHILE GOING STRAIGHT AT STREET SPEED OF LESS THAN 25 MPH. NEW NOISE IMMEDIATELY AFTER EVENT: 'METALLIC CLUCK' SOUND UPON BRAKE PEDAL RETURN COMING FROM FIREWALL WHERE VACUUM BOOSTER AND MASTER CYLINDER ARE LOCATED. ALSO NOW EXPERIENCING INTERMITTENT 'HIGH HARD BRAKE PEDAL' (VACUUM ASSIST PROBLEM?) SEVERAL TIMES WHILE DRIVING AND WHILE PARKED. TOWED TO DEALER. BRAKE PROBLEMS SHOULD NOT RESULT WHEN THEY ARE USED AS INTENDED. SAFETY CONCERN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10936360
1 miles · Dec 1, 2016
Electrical System
RADIO AND NAVIGATION SYSTEM WILL FREEZE AND BECOME UNRESPONSIVE AFTER USING THE HANDS-FREE PHONE OPTION TO TERMINATE A CALL, OR ACCESS SIRI WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION. THE SYSTEM WILL DISPLAY AN ACTIVE CALL, EVEN AFTER THE CALL HAS BEEN TERMINATED ON THE PHONE. ATTEMPTING TO CHANGE THE AUDIO INPUT THROUGH THE DASH INTERFACE …
Read full complaint
RADIO AND NAVIGATION SYSTEM WILL FREEZE AND BECOME UNRESPONSIVE AFTER USING THE HANDS-FREE PHONE OPTION TO TERMINATE A CALL, OR ACCESS SIRI WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION. THE SYSTEM WILL DISPLAY AN ACTIVE CALL, EVEN AFTER THE CALL HAS BEEN TERMINATED ON THE PHONE. ATTEMPTING TO CHANGE THE AUDIO INPUT THROUGH THE DASH INTERFACE OR STEERING COLUMN CONTROLS WILL NOT CHANGE THE SOURCE. ATTEMPTING TO FORCE THE SYSTEM TO ACCEPT INPUT FROM AN ATTACHED PHONE BY PLUGGING IN THROUGH THE USB PORT WILL NOT LOAD THE DEVICE. A DEVICE ATTACHED VIA USB HAS THE SAME ISSUE, AND WILL NOT RESET IF THE DEVICE IS UNPLUGGED. THIS WILL RESET ONLY AFTER TURNING OFF THE VEHICLE AND RESTARTING AFTER A FEW MINUTES. SO FAR, ONLY THE AUDIO INTERFACE IS AFFECTED.
NHTSA ODI #10929408
35,000 miles · Nov 23, 2016
Seats
ONGOING ISSUE. HEADREST ANGLE IS NONADJUSTABLE (ONLY HEIGHT IS) AND THUS ISN'T SAFE FOR EVERYONE. IT PUSHES THE HEAD DOWN AND COMPROMISES SPINAL ALIGNMENT. PEOPLE WITH THINNER TORSOS OR WHO SIT MORE UPRIGHT ARE AT THE MOST RISK. OPTIONS TO FIX THIS INVOLVE USING PADDING ON THE BACK OF THE SEAT OR BENDING THE BARS IN THE HEADR…
Read full complaint
ONGOING ISSUE. HEADREST ANGLE IS NONADJUSTABLE (ONLY HEIGHT IS) AND THUS ISN'T SAFE FOR EVERYONE. IT PUSHES THE HEAD DOWN AND COMPROMISES SPINAL ALIGNMENT. PEOPLE WITH THINNER TORSOS OR WHO SIT MORE UPRIGHT ARE AT THE MOST RISK. OPTIONS TO FIX THIS INVOLVE USING PADDING ON THE BACK OF THE SEAT OR BENDING THE BARS IN THE HEADREST, BOTH OF WHICH WOULD PROVIDE SUFFICIENT DAILY COMFORT, BUT COULD RESULT IN INJURY IN AN ACCIDENT. A MUCH BETTER SOLUTION WOULD BE THE ABILITY TO ADJUST THE ANGLE OF THE HEAD RESTRAINT FOR PROPER POSITIONING AND ASSOCIATED INSTRUCTIONS IN THE SAFETY SECTION OF THE CAR'S MANUAL.
NHTSA ODI #10927692
1,000 miles · Nov 3, 2016
Unknown Or OtherCrash
MY MOTHER LEASES A HONDA CIVIC 2015 AND WAS PARKING THE CAR AT A SLOW SPEED , FOOT ON BREAK THE ENGINE SURGED AND THE CAR SPED FORWARD. THE CAR HIT THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME. I IMMEDIATELY PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND SHUT IT OFF. AFTER A FEW MINUTES I RESTARTED THE CAR TO BACK IT UP --AS SOON AS I PUT IT IN REVERSE (WITH MY FOOT COVERI…
Read full complaint
MY MOTHER LEASES A HONDA CIVIC 2015 AND WAS PARKING THE CAR AT A SLOW SPEED , FOOT ON BREAK THE ENGINE SURGED AND THE CAR SPED FORWARD. THE CAR HIT THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME. I IMMEDIATELY PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND SHUT IT OFF. AFTER A FEW MINUTES I RESTARTED THE CAR TO BACK IT UP --AS SOON AS I PUT IT IN REVERSE (WITH MY FOOT COVERING THE BREAK) IT SURGED AGAIN AND THE CAR SPED BACKWARDS. I FILED A CASE WITH HONDA AMERICA 05128777 - THEY INSPECTED THE CAR AND SAY THEY CAN NOT FIND ANY REASON FOR THIS. I AM POSTING THIS BECAUSE IT WAS REALLY FRIGHTENING AND I DO NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN TO ANYONE ELSE.
NHTSA ODI #10924012
12,250 miles · Sep 30, 2016
SteeringInjury
AROUND 8500 MILES WHILE DRIVE 35 MPH THE CAR SUDDENLY VEERED TO THE RIGHT HITTING THE CURB CAUSING $1200 PLUS DAMAGES TO THE WHEEL, ETC. AROUND 12,250 MILES WHILE DRIVING 45-50 MPH THE CAR SUDDENLY VEERED TO THE RIGHT AND RAN OFF THE ROAD CAUSING A BROKEN BACK AND $725 IN DAMAGE TO THE WHEEL SKIRTS. THIS HAPPENED 5/13/16. …
Read full complaint
AROUND 8500 MILES WHILE DRIVE 35 MPH THE CAR SUDDENLY VEERED TO THE RIGHT HITTING THE CURB CAUSING $1200 PLUS DAMAGES TO THE WHEEL, ETC. AROUND 12,250 MILES WHILE DRIVING 45-50 MPH THE CAR SUDDENLY VEERED TO THE RIGHT AND RAN OFF THE ROAD CAUSING A BROKEN BACK AND $725 IN DAMAGE TO THE WHEEL SKIRTS. THIS HAPPENED 5/13/16. SUBSEQUENTLY THIS HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES AROUND 40-45 MPH BUT WITH NO ACCIDENTS AS NO CARS WERE IN THE RIGHT LANE. REPORTED TO AMERICAN HONDA AND THE CASE WAS DISMISSED AS THEY CAN'T IDENTIFY ANY PROBLEMS. THE STEERING WHEEL WOBBLES BUT NOT CODES SHOW UP.
NHTSA ODI #10910867
9,230 miles · Sep 21, 2016
Steering
TAKATA THIS MORNING WHEN I DID START THE CAR, THERE WAS A WARNING SIGN " CHECK POWER STEERING SYSTEM" AND THE STEERING WHEEL EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO TURN. I DID CALL THE DEALER AND LEFT THE CAR TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM. IT IS ONLY 10 MONTHS AND MILLAGE AROUND 9000. DEALER TOLD ME SOME PART NEEDED TO REPLACE (HARNESS) AND WILL CO…
Read full complaint
TAKATA THIS MORNING WHEN I DID START THE CAR, THERE WAS A WARNING SIGN " CHECK POWER STEERING SYSTEM" AND THE STEERING WHEEL EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO TURN. I DID CALL THE DEALER AND LEFT THE CAR TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM. IT IS ONLY 10 MONTHS AND MILLAGE AROUND 9000. DEALER TOLD ME SOME PART NEEDED TO REPLACE (HARNESS) AND WILL COST AROUND $450. IS THIS MANUFACTURED PROBLEM ? RECALL?
NHTSA ODI #10908579
24,000 miles · Sep 5, 2016
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrashInjury
THE VEHICLE (V-2) WAS INVOLVED IN A COLLISION AT THE 1-5 NB CYPRESS OFF RAMP IN REDDING CALIFORNIA IN EVENING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC (AT 1810). V-2 WAS STRUCK BY V-1, WHICH IN TURN PUSHED V-2 INTO V-3. BOTH V-1 AND V-2 WERE STATIONARY AT THE TIME OF COLLISION. V-1, A ISUZA TROOPER SUSTAINED MINOR FRONT END DAMAGE. V-2 RECEIVED MI…
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE (V-2) WAS INVOLVED IN A COLLISION AT THE 1-5 NB CYPRESS OFF RAMP IN REDDING CALIFORNIA IN EVENING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC (AT 1810). V-2 WAS STRUCK BY V-1, WHICH IN TURN PUSHED V-2 INTO V-3. BOTH V-1 AND V-2 WERE STATIONARY AT THE TIME OF COLLISION. V-1, A ISUZA TROOPER SUSTAINED MINOR FRONT END DAMAGE. V-2 RECEIVED MINOR FRONT END DAMAGE, AND MAJOR REAR END DAMAGE. V-3, A KIA SOUL RECEIVED MINOR REAR END DAMAGE. THE ISSUE IS THAT THE V-2 AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY OR THE SEAT-BELT RESTRAIN THE DRIVER IN THE VEHICLE. THE DRIVER STRUCK THE STEERING WHEEL RECEIVING A MAJOR BRAIN CONCUSSION AND BROKEN NOSE UPON BEING PUSHED BY V-1 INTO V-3. SEVERAL ON THE SCENE QUESTIONED THE LACK OF AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT OR THE SEAT-BELT NOT PROVIDING THE RESTRAINT NECESSARY TO PREVENT THE INJURY. MY CONCERN IS THIS IS A FAILURE OF THE SAFETY SYSTEMS NECESSARY TO RESTRAIN THE DRIVER. REPORTING PARTY IS THE FATHER OF THE DRIVER OF V-2, A TEEN DRIVER.
NHTSA ODI #10903675
8,500 miles · Aug 2, 2016
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemSteeringCrashFire
MY DAUGHTER (17 YEARS OLD) WAS DRIVING AT 35 MILES IN LEONA VALLEY CA ON LAST FRIDAY 2015 HER HONDA CIVIC (7,000 MILES ON ODOMETER). HER CAR LOW-PRESSURE AIR LIGHT CAME ON AND THEN CAR STARTED TO SWERVE VIOLENTLY LEFT TO RIGHT. WITHIN FEW MINUTES THE CAR BRAKES STOPPED FUNCTIONING (ACCORDING TO HER, IT FELT SHE WAS PUSHING ON …
Read full complaint
MY DAUGHTER (17 YEARS OLD) WAS DRIVING AT 35 MILES IN LEONA VALLEY CA ON LAST FRIDAY 2015 HER HONDA CIVIC (7,000 MILES ON ODOMETER). HER CAR LOW-PRESSURE AIR LIGHT CAME ON AND THEN CAR STARTED TO SWERVE VIOLENTLY LEFT TO RIGHT. WITHIN FEW MINUTES THE CAR BRAKES STOPPED FUNCTIONING (ACCORDING TO HER, IT FELT SHE WAS PUSHING ON AIR WHEN SHE PRESSED THE BRAKE PADDLE) AND THEN THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKED. THE CAR ENDED UP ON ITS SIDE AND CAUGHT FIRE. IT STARTED A BRUSH FIRE (25 ACRES) HERE IN CA. WHEN MY DAUGHTER AND HER TWO FRIENDS TRIED TO GET OUT THE DOOR, THE OTHER DOOR WON'T OPEN. THEY HAD TO JUMP OUT OF THE SUN ROOF. THE QUESTION I HAVE IS WHAT CAUSED THE FIRE AND WHY DID THE CAR'S BRAKES AND STEERING WHEEL LOCKED? WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO FIND OUT WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF ROOT CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT?
NHTSA ODI #10892410
18,900 miles · Jul 23, 2016
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrash
I HAD A CAR ACCIDENT A COUPLE DAYS AGO I GOT INJURED FROM MY NECK AND MY BACK I HIT MY HEAD ON THE STEERING WHEEL DUE TO A MALFUNCTION OF MY AIR BAGS. THEY DIDN'T DEPLOY. BUT MY CAR IS ASKING ME TO CHECK THE AIR BAG SYSTEM AND THEY TURNED OFF ALSO MY SEAT BELT FOR SOME REASON GOT STUCKED IT WON'T PULL MORE.
NHTSA ODI #10887938
18,000 miles · Jul 10, 2016
Air BagsSeatsStructureCrashInjury
WE WERE STOPPED IN TRAFFIC, SEAT BELTS WERE FASTENED, TURN SIGNAL ON, AND WE WERE REAR-ENDED BY A WORK VAN MOVING AT VERY HIGH SPEED. OUR CAR WAS TOTALED. THE FRONT SEATS WERE BROKEN DUE TO THE IMPACT. NO AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. NOT FRONT, NOT SIDE.
NHTSA ODI #10883803
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.