NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
21 reportsClear category filter6,723 miles · Nov 4, 2014
EngineService BrakesVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
I WENT TO PARK IN A DIAGONAL, ON STREET PARKING SPOT, AND APPLIED THE BRAKE TO STOP. THE CAR INSTEAD ACCELERATED, JUMPED THE CURB AND PROCEEDED INTO AN ADJOINING PARKING LOT. I TURNED HARD RIGHT TO AVOID VEHICLES AND STRUCK THE RETAINING WALL AT THE BACK OF THE LOT WITH MY LEFT FRONT QUARTER PANEL. THIS IMPACT STEEPENED THE TURN…
Read full complaint
I WENT TO PARK IN A DIAGONAL, ON STREET PARKING SPOT, AND APPLIED THE BRAKE TO STOP. THE CAR INSTEAD ACCELERATED, JUMPED THE CURB AND PROCEEDED INTO AN ADJOINING PARKING LOT. I TURNED HARD RIGHT TO AVOID VEHICLES AND STRUCK THE RETAINING WALL AT THE BACK OF THE LOT WITH MY LEFT FRONT QUARTER PANEL. THIS IMPACT STEEPENED THE TURN AND SHOT ME BACK OUT OF THE LOT AND ONTO THE STREET. I PROCEEDED UP THE STREET, THE CAR ACCELERATING ALL THE TIME. I TRIED TO DETERMINE IF I WAS ACCIDENTALLY STEPPING ON THE GAS, AND FELT I WAS INDEED ON THE BRAKE. MY CAR PROCEEDED RAPIDLY UP THE STREET, OVER 1/10TH MILE IN DISTANCE. IN A PANIC TO TRY AND STOP THE CAR I STOMPED ON THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, WHICH LOCKED UP THE REAR WHEELS. MY REAR TIRES WERE IN A SKID FOR OVER 150 FEET, WHICH PRODUCED A SIDEWAYS SKID, THE CAR TURNING RIGHT AND SLAMMING BROADSIDE INTO A PARK VEHICLE WHICH STOPPED ME. I FEEL THIS IS A CASE OF UNINTENDED ACCELERATION, AND HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE OF OTHER SUCH INCIDENTS IN LATE MODEL CRVS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10652485
34,625 miles · Oct 1, 2014
Engine And Engine CoolingVehicle Speed Control
GAVE THE GAS TO TAKE OFF FROM A DEAD STOP AND THE CAR HAD NO REACTION. SEEMED LIKE THE ENGINE DIED OR STOPPED RUNNING. I HAD TO GIVE THE GAS HARDER AND THE ENGINE CAUGHT AND THE TIRES SKIDDED. THIS HESITATION LEFT MY CAR IN A DANGEROUS POSITION AS I WAS ENTERING A 55 MPH ROAD. I HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO GET ON THE ROAD UNTIL IT FIN…
Read full complaint
GAVE THE GAS TO TAKE OFF FROM A DEAD STOP AND THE CAR HAD NO REACTION. SEEMED LIKE THE ENGINE DIED OR STOPPED RUNNING. I HAD TO GIVE THE GAS HARDER AND THE ENGINE CAUGHT AND THE TIRES SKIDDED. THIS HESITATION LEFT MY CAR IN A DANGEROUS POSITION AS I WAS ENTERING A 55 MPH ROAD. I HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO GET ON THE ROAD UNTIL IT FINALLY STARTED MOVING. THIS HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIME SINCE. YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AGAIN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10640638
20,056 miles · Mar 27, 2014
Electrical SystemEquipment Adaptive/mobilityVehicle Speed Control
MY 2012 CR-V HAS CUSTOMIZABLE AUTO DOOR LOCK FUNCTION. IT HAS COUPLE OPTION. 1. WITH VEHICLE SPEED, 2. SHIFT FROM P. PROBLEM WITH OPTION 2. I SELECT OPTION 2. BECAUSE I WANT TO GET MORE SECURE SAFETY. NOT LESS THE SECURE SAFETY. WHEN I WAS ESCAPING FROM CLOSE ROAD, I NEED TO DRIVE BACK. I STARTED ENGINE AND OPEN DRIVER DOOR TO M…
Read full complaint
MY 2012 CR-V HAS CUSTOMIZABLE AUTO DOOR LOCK FUNCTION. IT HAS COUPLE OPTION. 1. WITH VEHICLE SPEED, 2. SHIFT FROM P. PROBLEM WITH OPTION 2. I SELECT OPTION 2. BECAUSE I WANT TO GET MORE SECURE SAFETY. NOT LESS THE SECURE SAFETY. WHEN I WAS ESCAPING FROM CLOSE ROAD, I NEED TO DRIVE BACK. I STARTED ENGINE AND OPEN DRIVER DOOR TO MAKE SURE MY REAR TIRE IS GOING RIGHT WAY. CHANGED GEAR P TO R. AND DOOR DIDN'T AUTOMATICALLY LOCK. I GUESS THERE IS PROTECTION FOR WHEN DRIVER DOOR OPEN AND ENGINE RUNNING, DOOR DIDN'T LOCK ITSELF. I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT I ESCAPE FROM THERE AND CLOSE DOOR AND CHANGE GEAR R TO D. AND DRIVE UP TO 40 MPH. AND DOOR IS STILL UNLOCK. THIS IS AN ERROR. THEY CAN NOT ADVERTISE THEY HAVE AUTO LOCK FUNCTION FOR SAFETY. THE FUNCTION GIVE PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND FOR HAVE MORE SECURE SAFETY BY CAR. THEY MUST WATCH SAFETY WHILE CAR IS DRIVING MORE THEN 20MPH OVER 500 FEET. IF THEY THINK REALLY CARE ABOUT SAFETY, THEY SHOULD LOCK OTHER DOORS AT LEAST. AND KEEP WATCH WHAT'S CAR STATUS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10575130
Mileage unknown · Jan 22, 2014
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train
SUBMISSION FROM CONSTITUENT RE 2012 HONDA CR-V INTERMITTENT PROBLEM. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WOULD PAUSE, WHEN SHE ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE AFTER THE VEHICLE, HAD BEEN IDLING. THERE WAS ZERO RESPONSE FOR 3-4 SECONDS, THEN THE VEHICLE WOULD UNCONTROLLABLY SURGE FORWARD. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLE…
Read full complaint
SUBMISSION FROM CONSTITUENT RE 2012 HONDA CR-V INTERMITTENT PROBLEM. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WOULD PAUSE, WHEN SHE ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE AFTER THE VEHICLE, HAD BEEN IDLING. THERE WAS ZERO RESPONSE FOR 3-4 SECONDS, THEN THE VEHICLE WOULD UNCONTROLLABLY SURGE FORWARD. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER, THE PROBLEM WAS HER USING HER LEFT FOOT TO BRAKE. THE PROBLEM HAS SINCE BEEN RESOLVED. UPDATED 01/30/14
NHTSA ODI #10560957
8,500 miles · Jan 5, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING IN TOWN AT ABOUT 15 MPH AND WAS SLOWING FOR A LEFT TURN WHEN THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD, THE SURGE LASTED FOR ABOUT 3 SECONDS, I APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT AM NOT SURE IF THIS STOPPED THE SPEED SURGE OR IT WENT AWAY ON ITS OWN. SO FARE THIS HAS ONLY HAPPENED THE ONE TIME AND IN NO TRAFFIC, BUT AM VER CONCERNED ABOUT F…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING IN TOWN AT ABOUT 15 MPH AND WAS SLOWING FOR A LEFT TURN WHEN THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD, THE SURGE LASTED FOR ABOUT 3 SECONDS, I APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT AM NOT SURE IF THIS STOPPED THE SPEED SURGE OR IT WENT AWAY ON ITS OWN. SO FARE THIS HAS ONLY HAPPENED THE ONE TIME AND IN NO TRAFFIC, BUT AM VER CONCERNED ABOUT FUTURE INCIDENT'S. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10558532
100 miles · Sep 29, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
I BOUGHT A NEW CRV IN SEPTEMBER 2012. THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE BEEN HAVING IS THAT AT CERTAIN TIMES, USUALLY AT SLOWER SPEEDS WHEN I STEP ON THE GAS THERE IS A 2-3 SECOND DELAY BEFORE THE CAR ACCELERATES. DURING THIS HESITATIONS PERIOD THE ENGINE DOES NOT REV AND THE CAR JUST COASTS. THIS HAS HAPPENED 15 TIMES THE PAST YEAR. …
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT A NEW CRV IN SEPTEMBER 2012. THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE BEEN HAVING IS THAT AT CERTAIN TIMES, USUALLY AT SLOWER SPEEDS WHEN I STEP ON THE GAS THERE IS A 2-3 SECOND DELAY BEFORE THE CAR ACCELERATES. DURING THIS HESITATIONS PERIOD THE ENGINE DOES NOT REV AND THE CAR JUST COASTS. THIS HAS HAPPENED 15 TIMES THE PAST YEAR. THIS CREATES A MAJOR CONCERN WHEN I'M TRYING TO MERGE INTO TRAFFIC OR PULL OUT FROM AN INTERSECTION. NOTE, MY FOOT WAS NOT ON THE BRAKE AND I'VE HAD THE ECON SWITCH IN BOTH ON AND OFF MODE AND THE PROBLEM STILL OCCURS. I TOOK MY CAR TO THE DEALER IN FEBRUARY 2013 AT WHICH TIME IT HAD 3,500 MILES ON THE ODOMETER. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. IN SEPTEMBER 2013 I HAD WORK DONE ON AN ACCORD I OWN AND I SHOWED THE SERVICE ADVISOR COPIES OF 6 REPORTS THRU SAFERCAR.GOV. THE ADVISOR DID NOT HAVE ANY RESPONSE. I NOW HAVE 8,000 MILES ON MY CRV. I RECENTLY REPORTED THE PROBLEM TO HONDA CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY SAID THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY SIMILAR PROBLEMS REPORTED. IN MY OPINION THEY ARE WRONG AS THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING CAUSING THIS. AT LEAST I HAVE IT ON FILE WITH HONDA. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10546085
Mileage unknown · Dec 21, 2012
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH AND STOPPED FOR A TRAFFIC STOP. AS THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE FROM THE STOP, THERE WAS A DELAYED RESPONSE FROM THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE RECURRED TEN TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER THREE TIMES WHERE THE CONTACT WAS …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH AND STOPPED FOR A TRAFFIC STOP. AS THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE FROM THE STOP, THERE WAS A DELAYED RESPONSE FROM THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE RECURRED TEN TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER THREE TIMES WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED BY THE MANUFACTURER THAT THERE WAS A DEFECT IN THE VEHICLE. THE TECHNICIAN WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE SAFETY ISSUE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNAVAILABLE. UPDATED 01/05/13*LJ UPDATED 02/6/2013 *JS
NHTSA ODI #10489488
200 miles · Dec 13, 2012
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
BOUGHT THIS CAR NEW ABOUT A MONTH AGO. THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE BEEN HAVING IS THAT AT CERTAIN TIMES, USUALLY AT SLOWER SPEEDS, WHEN I STEP ON THE GAS THERE IS A 2-3 SECOND DELAY BEFORE THE CAR ACCELERATES. DURING THIS HESITATION PERIOD, THE ENGINE DOES NOT REV, AND THE CAR JUST COASTS. THIS HAS HAPPENED 10-12 TIME THIS PAST M…
Read full complaint
BOUGHT THIS CAR NEW ABOUT A MONTH AGO. THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE BEEN HAVING IS THAT AT CERTAIN TIMES, USUALLY AT SLOWER SPEEDS, WHEN I STEP ON THE GAS THERE IS A 2-3 SECOND DELAY BEFORE THE CAR ACCELERATES. DURING THIS HESITATION PERIOD, THE ENGINE DOES NOT REV, AND THE CAR JUST COASTS. THIS HAS HAPPENED 10-12 TIME THIS PAST MONTH. THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS WHEN I AM TRYING TO MERGE INTO FASTER MOVING TRAFFIC. I TOOK MY CAR TO THE DEALER, BUT THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE CONDITION NOR FIND ANYTHING WRONG. THEY TOLD ME THEY REPORTED THE ISSUE TO HONDA NATIONAL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10488654
2,000 miles · Nov 20, 2012
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CRV. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PULLING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE AT 10 MPH THE VEHICLE RPMS STARTED TO INCREASE EXCESSIVELY THEN THERE WAS A SUDDEN ACCELERATION. THE VEHICLE DROVE OVER A CURB, CRASH INTO A BUILDING AND THEN ROLLED OVER. THE CONTACT DID NOT HAVE ANY PHYSICAL INJURIES. THE VEHIC…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CRV. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PULLING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE AT 10 MPH THE VEHICLE RPMS STARTED TO INCREASE EXCESSIVELY THEN THERE WAS A SUDDEN ACCELERATION. THE VEHICLE DROVE OVER A CURB, CRASH INTO A BUILDING AND THEN ROLLED OVER. THE CONTACT DID NOT HAVE ANY PHYSICAL INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE POLICE WERE NOTIFIED AND A REPORT WAS FILED. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED WHICH OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 2,000.
NHTSA ODI #10485263
Mileage unknown · Nov 5, 2012
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
2012 HONDA CRV. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE GAS PEDAL.*SMD THE CONSUMER STATED, WHEN HE STEPPED ON THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, THE VEHICLE WOULD BOGGED DOWN. HE WOULD HAVE TO PUMP THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, IN ORDER TO GET THE VEHICLE TO MOVE. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO FIND A PROBLEM.
NHTSA ODI #10483043
Official recalls
3Apr 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.
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.
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
3EA21002 · 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.