Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
1080–25K
5925–50K
5450–75K
2775–100K
16100–150K
15150K+
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
What owners actually said
403 reports
3,045 miles · Jul 24, 2012
Electrical System
THIS INCIDENT CONCERNS THE HORN. IT IS A JOKE AND A DANGEROUS ON AT THAT. AS I WAS DRIVING ON I-20 OUTSIDE OF ATLANTA I WAS DRIVING ALONE SIDE A PICK-UP TRUCK TO MY RIGHT. MY FRONT BUMPER WAS ABOUT EVEN WITH THE TRUCK'S WINDOWS POST. THE TRUCK STARTED MOVING OVER INTO MY LANE AND SINCE THERE WAS ANOTHER CAR BESIDE ME (ON MY LEFT…
Read full complaint
THIS INCIDENT CONCERNS THE HORN. IT IS A JOKE AND A DANGEROUS ON AT THAT. AS I WAS DRIVING ON I-20 OUTSIDE OF ATLANTA I WAS DRIVING ALONE SIDE A PICK-UP TRUCK TO MY RIGHT. MY FRONT BUMPER WAS ABOUT EVEN WITH THE TRUCK'S WINDOWS POST. THE TRUCK STARTED MOVING OVER INTO MY LANE AND SINCE THERE WAS ANOTHER CAR BESIDE ME (ON MY LEFT) I COULD NOT MOVE OVER SO I STARTED BLOWING THE HORN. I COULD BARELY HEAR IT SO I KNOW DRIVER OF THE TRUCK COULD NOT HEAR IT SO HE CONTINUED TO MOVE OVER INTO MY LANE. MY ONLY CHOICE WAS TO APPLY THE BRAKES AND LET THE CAR TO MY LEFT PASS ME AND MOVE OVER BEHIND IT. I WAS MISSED BY INCHES BY THE CAR THAT WAS FOLLOWING THAT CAR. THAT DRIVER HAD TO APPLY THE BRAKES VERY HARD SO AS NOT TO HIT ME. THE HORN NEEDS TO BE MUCH LOUDER THEN IT IS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10467243
1,795 miles · Jul 24, 2012
Steering
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 15 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL BECAME STIFF AND COULD NOT BE TURNED LEFT OR RIGHT. THERE WERE NO WARNING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER OR REPAIR SHOP FOR INSPECTION OR REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. TH…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 15 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL BECAME STIFF AND COULD NOT BE TURNED LEFT OR RIGHT. THERE WERE NO WARNING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER OR REPAIR SHOP FOR INSPECTION OR REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 1,795. UPDATED 8/24/12 *CN
NHTSA ODI #10467193
4,385 miles · Jul 23, 2012
Electrical SystemLatches/locks/linkages
I WAS DRIVING MY 2012 HONDA CRV WHEN THE DOOR LOCKS STARTED GOING CRAZY THEN THE CAR ALARM STARTED GOING OFF THEN ME AND MY WIFE TRIED TO GET OUT AND THE DOOR WOULD NOT OPEN SO I DROVE THE 3 MONTH OLD CRV BACK TO THE DEALER AT SUNNYSIDE HONDA AND THEY WERE THE RUDEST PEOPLE ON EARTH I TOLD THEM WHAT HAPPENED AND THEY TRIED TO …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY 2012 HONDA CRV WHEN THE DOOR LOCKS STARTED GOING CRAZY THEN THE CAR ALARM STARTED GOING OFF THEN ME AND MY WIFE TRIED TO GET OUT AND THE DOOR WOULD NOT OPEN SO I DROVE THE 3 MONTH OLD CRV BACK TO THE DEALER AT SUNNYSIDE HONDA AND THEY WERE THE RUDEST PEOPLE ON EARTH I TOLD THEM WHAT HAPPENED AND THEY TRIED TO GET ME TO SING A PAPER THAT SAID I MIGHT HAVE TO PAY CAUSE IT MIGHT BE MY FAULT NOT WERE SORRY NOT ARE YOU GUYS OK NO JUST SING I SAID NO ASK FOR THE BOSS HE SAID SAME THING SO I ASK FOR HIS BOSS THE HEAD BOSS AT THE TIME NO SORRY NO ARE U OK WELL HE SAID YOU HAD A REMOTE STARTER PUT IN ITS AN AFTER MARKET ITS THERE FAULT CALL THEM I DIDN'T PUT IT IN VERY RUDE AND LEANING IN TURNS ME SO I SAID HONDA AT THE TIME I BOUGHT THE CRV SAD THEY WERE OUT OF FACTORY REMOTES AND REC-AMENDED THAT ONE IT WAS PUT ON THERE BEFORE I EVEN PICKED UP THE CAR FOR FIRST TIME NOW ME AND MY WIFE WAS TERRIFIED AND ALL THEY COULD DO IS GIVE US BULL NOT JUST SAY WOW IT A BRAND NEW CRV SORRY IT HAPPENED WELL CHECK IT OUT FINALLY AFTER THAT AND A LONG TIME LATTER THEY AGREED TO CHECK IT OUT AND SAID AFTER IT WAS CHECK OUT WELL WE REPLACED THE DOOR ACTUATOR BUT IF IT HAPPENS GAIN YOU NEED TO CALL THE REMOTE PEOPLE NO SORRY I LOVED HONDA BUT NOT NOW I AM LOOKING INTO A LAW SUITE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10467168
100 miles · Jul 17, 2012
Engine
IN STOP AND GO TRAFFIC, WITH AND WITHOUT THE ECON BUTTON ON, THE CAR HESITATES TO ACCELERATE TO THE POINT THAT IT HAS NEARLY CAUSED ACCIDENTS. TOOK IT TO HONDA AND ASKED THEM TO DRIVE TO WITNESS THE PROBLEM. I DON'T THINK THEY DROVE IT. THE PROBLEM IS SOMEWHAT INTERMITTENT, SO YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN. YOU HAVE TO ADJU…
Read full complaint
IN STOP AND GO TRAFFIC, WITH AND WITHOUT THE ECON BUTTON ON, THE CAR HESITATES TO ACCELERATE TO THE POINT THAT IT HAS NEARLY CAUSED ACCIDENTS. TOOK IT TO HONDA AND ASKED THEM TO DRIVE TO WITNESS THE PROBLEM. I DON'T THINK THEY DROVE IT. THE PROBLEM IS SOMEWHAT INTERMITTENT, SO YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN. YOU HAVE TO ADJUST YOUR DRIVING JUST IN CASE IT MIGHT HAPPEN. THE DEALER TOLD ME NOT TO DRIVE WITH ECON BUTTON IN CITY DRIVING CONDITIONS. THAT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE. IT WILL CAUSE ACCIDENT EVENTUALLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10465936
400 miles · Jul 16, 2012
Electrical System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CRV. THE CONTACT STATED THAT BY PUSHING THE LOCK BUTTONS ON THE INSIDE OF THE DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR, THE ENGINE COULD BE STARTED. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE BUT OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND REFERRED THE CONTACT BACK TO THE DEALER. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAI…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CRV. THE CONTACT STATED THAT BY PUSHING THE LOCK BUTTONS ON THE INSIDE OF THE DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR, THE ENGINE COULD BE STARTED. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE BUT OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND REFERRED THE CONTACT BACK TO THE DEALER. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 400.....UPDATED 08-24-12 *BF THE CONSUMER STATED THE DEALER REPLACED THE VEHICLE ON 7/28/2012 *JS
NHTSA ODI #10465796
8,992 miles · Jul 9, 2012
Visibility/wiper
I WAS DRIVING MY HONDA CR-V APPROX 60 MILES AN HOUR ON THE HIGHWAY IN FORT SMITH, ARKANSAS. I HEARD A LOUD POP AND THE DRIVERS SIDE WINDOW EXPLODED AND COLLAPSED. I IMMEDIATELY DROVE TO THE DEALERSHIP WHICH WAS CLOSE BY TO HAVE THE AUTO EXAMINED. I CONTACTED HONDA TO NOTIFY THEM OF THE ISSUE AND NEITHER HONDA OR THE DEALERSH…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY HONDA CR-V APPROX 60 MILES AN HOUR ON THE HIGHWAY IN FORT SMITH, ARKANSAS. I HEARD A LOUD POP AND THE DRIVERS SIDE WINDOW EXPLODED AND COLLAPSED. I IMMEDIATELY DROVE TO THE DEALERSHIP WHICH WAS CLOSE BY TO HAVE THE AUTO EXAMINED. I CONTACTED HONDA TO NOTIFY THEM OF THE ISSUE AND NEITHER HONDA OR THE DEALERSHIP HAD ANY THOUGHTS ON WHAT MAY HAVE CAUSED THE WINDOW TO EXPLODE OTHER THAN A FOREIGN OBJECT HITTING THE WINDOW. THIS TYPE OF REPAIR WAS NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY ACCORDING TO HONDA. I WAS NOT CLOSE TO ANY OTHER VEHICLES AT THE TIME THE WINDOW EXPLODED. I WAS ALSO NOT NEAR A LARGE TRUCK OR A MOWING VEHICLE THAT WOULD HAVE THROWN UP DEBRIS THAT COULD HAVE HIT THE SIDE WINDOW. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS NOT ANY UNDERLYING ISSUE THAT CAUSED THIS PROBLEM SUCH AS ANY PRESSURE ON THE WINDOW MECHANISM OR PROBLEMS RELATED TO EXCESSIVE TEMPERATURES SUCH AS OUR AREA HAS BEEN HAVING. THIS POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE CAUSED A DANGEROUS ACCIDENT AND OR A FATALITY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10464733
6,242 miles · Jun 27, 2012
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE HESITATED TO ACCELERATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS WORKING UP TO STANDARD. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 6,242.
NHTSA ODI #10463290
5,550 miles · Jun 12, 2012
Electrical System
I WAS DRIVING INTO MY DRIVEWAY AND PUT INTO PARK. THE KEY WOULD NOT COME OUT OF IGNITION. VERY FRUSTRATED IT WAS LATE AT NIGHT AND I TRIED WIGGLING THE KEY. I COULD TURN CAR OFF BUT SO IT WASN'T RUNNING BUT IT WAS ON ENOUGH FOR AUDIO TO STAY ON. I DROVE AROUND HOPING I COULD RESET WHAT PROBLEM WAS BUT DID THE SAME THING WHEN …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING INTO MY DRIVEWAY AND PUT INTO PARK. THE KEY WOULD NOT COME OUT OF IGNITION. VERY FRUSTRATED IT WAS LATE AT NIGHT AND I TRIED WIGGLING THE KEY. I COULD TURN CAR OFF BUT SO IT WASN'T RUNNING BUT IT WAS ON ENOUGH FOR AUDIO TO STAY ON. I DROVE AROUND HOPING I COULD RESET WHAT PROBLEM WAS BUT DID THE SAME THING WHEN I PARKED. I HAD TO LEAVE KEY IN IGNITION TILL THE BATTERY DIED, WHICH TOOK TILL THE NEXT DAY. WE PUT KEY IN AGAIN AFTER IT CAME OUT AND IT DID THE SAME THING AND GOT STUCK AGAIN AND GOT HOT WHEN WE DID GET IT OUT. WE JUMP STARTED CAR ENOUGH TO GET TO DEALERSHIP AND KEY DID SAME THING WHEN I PARKED IT THERE UNTIL THE BATTERY DIED AND THEN IT WAS ABLE TO COME OUT. THEY CALLED AND SAID THEY HAD TO REPLACE THE SHIFT ASSEMBLY. THEY SPECIFICALLY SAID IN SERVICE PAPER THAT "THE SHIFTER ASSEMBLY WAS PINCHING THE WIRE FROM THE PARK PIN SWITCH CAUSING SHORT ELECTRICAL DIG" AND THEY SENT PICS AND INFORMATION TO TECH LINE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10461398
Mileage unknown · May 8, 2012
Structure
WHILE DRIVING A FEW WEEKS AGO I NOTICED A VERY YELLOW LARGE SPIDER CRAWLING ACROSS MY DASHBOARD. I ALMOST RAN OFF THE ROAD FINDING A NAPKIN TO KILL IT SO IT DIDN'T GET ON ME AS IT WAS MAKING IT'S WAY TO ME VERY QUICKLY FROM THE DASH TOWARDS THE STEERING WHEEL!!! THEN A COUPLE DAYS LATER, ANOTHER SPIDER. (ME THINKING I DIDN'T G…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING A FEW WEEKS AGO I NOTICED A VERY YELLOW LARGE SPIDER CRAWLING ACROSS MY DASHBOARD. I ALMOST RAN OFF THE ROAD FINDING A NAPKIN TO KILL IT SO IT DIDN'T GET ON ME AS IT WAS MAKING IT'S WAY TO ME VERY QUICKLY FROM THE DASH TOWARDS THE STEERING WHEEL!!! THEN A COUPLE DAYS LATER, ANOTHER SPIDER. (ME THINKING I DIDN'T GET THE FIRST ONE!?) THEN A COUPLE DAYS LATER ANOTHER SPIDER AND THIS MORNING WHILE AT THE DUNKIN DONUTS DRIVE-THRU, ANOTHER SPIDER!!!!! ALL OF THESE I HAVE MANAGED TO KILL WHICH ONLY TELLS ME THAT THERE ARE A BUNCH OF SPIDERS IN MY DASHBOARD OR SOMETHING!!! THE ONE TODAY CAME OUT OF THE VENT JUST OVER THE A/C VENT DRIVERS SIDE!??!?! EACH TIME I SEE ONE, IT'S ON THE DASHBOARD INITIALLY AND THEN QUICKLY MOVES AROUND. THIS IS THE LAST THING I NEED AND I WANT THE CAR TORN APART TO FIND OUT WHERE THEY ARE COMING FROM AND HAVE THEM REMOVED IMMEDIATELY! I'M FREAKING OUT! I AM WAITING ON CALL BACKS FROM BOTH HOLLMAN HONDA (THE DEALERSHIP WHICH HAS NEVER HEARD ABOUT ANY SPIDER ISSUES) AS WELL AS THE CUSTOMER SERVICE DEPT. OF HONDA ITSELF TO OPEN A CASE ABOUT THIS MATTER. BEING THAT THEY ARE POISONOUS (MAZDA HAD A RECALL ABOUT THIS VERY ISSUE EVIDENTLY ALTHOUGH HONDA ISN'T ISSUING A RECALL AT THE MOMENT). THE CAR IS BRAND NEW AND I PAID CASH FOR IT OTHERWISE, I WOULD TRADE IT IN IF IT WERE A LEASE. I AM TERRIFIED OF SPIDERS AND THESE ARE POISONOUS!!!! HELP!! I CAN'T KEEP DRIVING THIS CAR! SCARED OUT OF MY MIND AND NEEDING A REMEDY FAST! [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10457778
115 miles · Apr 11, 2012
VisibilityVisibility/wiper
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 21012 HONDA CRV. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE REAR LIFT GATE WINDOW WAS STRUCK BY A ROCK AND CAUSED THE WIPER BLADE TO SEPARATE FROM THE WINDOW AS THE GLASS EXPLODED AND SHATTERED INTO SEVERAL PIECES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT M…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 21012 HONDA CRV. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE REAR LIFT GATE WINDOW WAS STRUCK BY A ROCK AND CAUSED THE WIPER BLADE TO SEPARATE FROM THE WINDOW AS THE GLASS EXPLODED AND SHATTERED INTO SEVERAL PIECES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 115. ...UPDATED 10/03/12 *BF UPDATED 10/09/2012 *JS
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.
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.
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.