← New search

2012 Honda CR-V

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2012 Honda CR-V do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 400.5.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

279 reports with mileage · 124 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.

  • Engine. Review the 89 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 68 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 48 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

27 crash reports4 fire reports19 injury reports

Fuel/propulsion System complaints

6 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Dec 17, 2021
EngineFuel/propulsion System

2012 CR-V was purchased on 4/9/16 with 36,000 miles. During the first winter a startup problem became obvious that was covered and repaired by Honda due to a recall for the faulty Variable Timing Actuator. VTA was replaced on 3/2/17 with 41,000 miles (5000 miles later). During the winter of 2019 symptoms started to sporadicall…

Read full complaint

2012 CR-V was purchased on 4/9/16 with 36,000 miles. During the first winter a startup problem became obvious that was covered and repaired by Honda due to a recall for the faulty Variable Timing Actuator. VTA was replaced on 3/2/17 with 41,000 miles (5000 miles later). During the winter of 2019 symptoms started to sporadically reappear. The same part is failing. A newer upgraded part was supposed to replace the original faulty part the first time. I am now told that Honda will charge me $1000 to replace this part again. Due to Covid the car was barely driven and repair was secondary to other life circumstances. It has become noticeable once again this winter.. the same part should not be failing if it were remedied the first time. Am I to understand that I will have to replace this part every two years on my own dime because Honda is replacing the same faulty part? I would like Honda to replace the faulty part with one that is not guaranteed to fail again. Thank you.

NHTSA ODI #11444130

38,000 miles · Aug 4, 2018
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower TrainFireInjury

PRIOR TO ACCIDENT, VEHICLE HAD NO ISSUES AND WAS SERVICED ROUTINELY. THERE WERE 2 INDIVIDUALS IN THE CAR AND ACCIDENT TOOK PLACE ON A TWO LANE STATE ROAD APPROXIMATELY 2 MILES FROM RESIDENCE. THE WEATHER WAS HOT AND SUNNY ON THE MID-AFTERNOON OF THE ACCIDENT. DRIVER NOTICED SPUTTERING IN THE CAR AND DECIDED TO U-TURN TO R…

Read full complaint

PRIOR TO ACCIDENT, VEHICLE HAD NO ISSUES AND WAS SERVICED ROUTINELY. THERE WERE 2 INDIVIDUALS IN THE CAR AND ACCIDENT TOOK PLACE ON A TWO LANE STATE ROAD APPROXIMATELY 2 MILES FROM RESIDENCE. THE WEATHER WAS HOT AND SUNNY ON THE MID-AFTERNOON OF THE ACCIDENT. DRIVER NOTICED SPUTTERING IN THE CAR AND DECIDED TO U-TURN TO RETURN TO RESIDENCE. AS DRIVER CONTINUED, SPUTTERING WORSENED AND SOMEBODY DROVE ALONGSIDE AND YELLED THAT THE VEHICLE APPEARED TO BE LEAKING GAS. VERY SOON AFTER, WHILE CAR WAS DRIVING AT 5MPH, THE CAR HAD AN EXPLOSION AND FLAMES CAME THROUGH THE PASSENGER WINDOW. BOTH DRIVER AND PASSENGER WERE BURNED AND MEDEVAC'D TO LOCAL BURN CENTER. PASSENGER RECEIVED SEVERE 2ND AND 3RD DEGREE BURNS ON UPPER HALF OF BODY. DRIVER ALSO RECEIVED BURNS BUT NOT AS SEVERE. EACH MANAGED TO EXIT VEHICLE BEFORE THE BEING ENGULFED BY FLAMES. VEHICLE IS COMPLETELY UNREPAIRABLE AND DESTROYED. FIRE MARSHAL REPORT AS FURTHER DETAILS ON POSSIBLE ORIGINS OF THE CAR FIRE.

NHTSA ODI #11115750

2,000 miles · Dec 9, 2017
Fuel/propulsion System

AT DIFFERENT TIMES WHILE DRIVING THERE IS A HESITATION WHEN I PRESS ON THE GAS. THIS IS SCARY WHEN TRYING TO TAKE OFF IN TRAFFIC OR WHEN TURNING A CORNER. I HAVE TO PRESS HARD ON HE GAS PEDDLE A COUPLE TIMES TO GET THE CAR TO GO. I'VE MENTIONED THIS TO THE DEALER EVERY TIME I TAKE THE CAR IN FOR SERVICE BUT THEY CAN'T FIND WH…

Read full complaint

AT DIFFERENT TIMES WHILE DRIVING THERE IS A HESITATION WHEN I PRESS ON THE GAS. THIS IS SCARY WHEN TRYING TO TAKE OFF IN TRAFFIC OR WHEN TURNING A CORNER. I HAVE TO PRESS HARD ON HE GAS PEDDLE A COUPLE TIMES TO GET THE CAR TO GO. I'VE MENTIONED THIS TO THE DEALER EVERY TIME I TAKE THE CAR IN FOR SERVICE BUT THEY CAN'T FIND WHAT IS WRONG. THIS HAPPENS WITH AND WITHOUT THE ECO ENGAGED.. THIS HAPPENS WHEN I'M DRIVING ON THE ROAD MOSTLY BUT HAS HAPPENED A COUPLE TIMES ON THE EXPRESSWAY. IT HAS HAPPENED SINCE I PURCHASED TO VEHICLE IN 2012 UNTIL NOW (12/08/17).

NHTSA ODI #11053601

4,000 miles · Sep 12, 2017
Fuel/propulsion System

WHEN MAKING A HARD LEFT TURN, THERE IS A PAUSE BEFORE ACCELERATING

NHTSA ODI #11022928

6,000 miles · May 19, 2015
Fuel/propulsion System

WHENEVER I STOP AT A STOP SIGN OR LIGHT, UPON RE-STARTING (ONLY IF THERE IS AN INCLINE IN THE STREET) THE MOTOR ALMOST STOPS. I MUST PUMP THE GAS PEDDLE, IT SEEMS, TO CAUSE FUEL TO ENTER. THEN THE CAR TAKES OFF TOO FAST IN THE TRAFFIC. THE MECHANICS AT THE DEALER WHERE I PURCHASED THE CAR CANNOT FIND (OR EXPERIENCE) THE PROBLE…

Read full complaint

WHENEVER I STOP AT A STOP SIGN OR LIGHT, UPON RE-STARTING (ONLY IF THERE IS AN INCLINE IN THE STREET) THE MOTOR ALMOST STOPS. I MUST PUMP THE GAS PEDDLE, IT SEEMS, TO CAUSE FUEL TO ENTER. THEN THE CAR TAKES OFF TOO FAST IN THE TRAFFIC. THE MECHANICS AT THE DEALER WHERE I PURCHASED THE CAR CANNOT FIND (OR EXPERIENCE) THE PROBLEM. BUT THERE IS DEFINITELY A MALFUNCTION--DANGEROUS AS WELL.

NHTSA ODI #10717408

19,575 miles · Sep 6, 2014
Engine And Engine CoolingFuel/propulsion System

THE LISTED VEHICLE ABOVE STALLS OR HESITATES INTERMITTENTLY WHILE DRIVING AND CHANGING SPEEDS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10631274

Official recalls

3

13V143000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission

Apr 15, 2013

Honda is recalling certain model year 2012-2013 CR-V, Odyssey, and model year 2013 Acura RDX vehicles. During sub-freezing temperatures, the brake-shift interlock blocking mechanism may become slow and allow the gear selector to be moved from the Park position without pressing the brake pedal. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 114, "Theft Protection and Rollaway Prevention."

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the gear selector is moved from the park position without pressing the brake pedal it can allow the vehicle to roll away, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners and instruct them to take their vehicle to a Honda or Acura dealer. The dealer will install an updated brake shift interlock blocking mechanism free of charge. The recall began on May 13, 2013. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009. Honda's campaign recall numbers are S96, S97, and S98.

12V501000 · Equipment:other:labels

Oct 16, 2012

Honda is recalling certain model year 2012 CR-V, equipped with the LX trim level and manufactured from August 30, 2012, to August 31, 2012. These vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of 49 CFR Part 567, "Certification." The incorrect values for Gross Vehicle Weight Rating, Gross Axle Weight Rating front and rear, tire size, and rim size were specified on the safety certification label.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A misprinted label could lead to improper vehicle loading. Improper loading could result in a tire failure, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will apply the corrective label free of charge. The safety recall began on November 14, 2012. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009.

12V338000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch

Jul 19, 2012

Honda is recalling certain model year 2012 Honda CR-V and model year 2013 Acura ILX vehicles. If the manual or power door lock is activated while an interior front door handle is being operated by an occupant, the cable connecting the interior door handle to the door latch mechanism may become loose and move out of position. There is a possibility that the cable can move far enough out of position to prevent the door from properly latching.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the door is not fully latched, the door may open while driving or in a crash, increasing the risk of personal injury to the vehicle occupants.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the front door latch assemblies in the affected vehicles, free of charge. Additionally, the interior front door handles in certain Honda CR-Vs will also be replaced, free of charge. The safety recall is expected to begin on, or about, August 16, 2012. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-800-999-1009.

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

3

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.

EQ12002 · Autoliv Air Bag Propellant Mixture

Opened Feb 14, 2012 · Closed May 8, 2012

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:side/window

The summary for this investigation, labeled EQ12-002 Autoliv Closing Resume, can be found attached separately to this resume.This EQ is closed.

Go deeper into Honda CR-V problems