← New search

2013 Honda CR-V

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2013 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

259 reports with mileage · 123 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 97 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 95 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 38 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

22 crash reports0 fire reports11 injury reports

Service Brakes complaints

25 reports
Clear category filter
54,434 miles · Mar 30, 2016
Service BrakesCrash

TWICE WHEN I TRIED TO STOP WHILE MOVING SLOWLY ON THE HIGHWAY THE CAR'S BRAKES FAILED TO DO SO. ONCE THEY WENT TO THE FLOOR. DEALER COULD FIND NOTHING WRONG.

NHTSA ODI #10852563

28,400 miles · Feb 17, 2016
Service Brakes

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. WHILE DRIVING 28 MPH AND COMING TO A STOP, THE BRAKES FAILED AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP. THE CONTACT HAD TO DOWNSHIFT THE VEHICLE IN ORDER TO STOP. THIS FAILURE WAS A RECURRING ISSUE. THE VEHICLE WAS BEING REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAG…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. WHILE DRIVING 28 MPH AND COMING TO A STOP, THE BRAKES FAILED AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP. THE CONTACT HAD TO DOWNSHIFT THE VEHICLE IN ORDER TO STOP. THIS FAILURE WAS A RECURRING ISSUE. THE VEHICLE WAS BEING REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 28,400.

NHTSA ODI #10836719

30,823 miles · Oct 15, 2015
Service Brakes

WENT TO 802 HONDA BERLIN VERMONT FOR 30,000MILE SERVICE THEY INFORMED ME I NEEDED REAR BRAKES,I SAID REPAIRE THEM.I HAVE OWNED TWO OTHEIR HONDA CRV. AN NEAVER REPLACED BRAKES BEFORE 45000 MILES.$439.21.

NHTSA ODI #10782593

800 miles · Sep 2, 2015
EngineService Brakes

WHEN I TURN ON ENGINE FOR THE FIRST TIME WITHOUT ANY 1-2 HOUR GAP, I HEAR A CRANKY ENGINE SOUND AFTER THE IGNITION. I FOUND THAT IT WAS A MANUFACTURING DEFECT IN 2013 MODEL. MY CLOSE FRIEND RETURNED HIS HONDA CRV AFTER A YEAR AS IT SOUNDED LOUD IN COLD WEATHER CONDITIONS OF MONTANA. IN MY CASE IT WAS NOT SOUNDING EVERYTIME TIL…

Read full complaint

WHEN I TURN ON ENGINE FOR THE FIRST TIME WITHOUT ANY 1-2 HOUR GAP, I HEAR A CRANKY ENGINE SOUND AFTER THE IGNITION. I FOUND THAT IT WAS A MANUFACTURING DEFECT IN 2013 MODEL. MY CLOSE FRIEND RETURNED HIS HONDA CRV AFTER A YEAR AS IT SOUNDED LOUD IN COLD WEATHER CONDITIONS OF MONTANA. IN MY CASE IT WAS NOT SOUNDING EVERYTIME TILL NOW. I NOTIFIED THAT TO MY CAR DEALER WHEN I TOOK THIS VEHICLE FROM BOB ROHRMAN. THESE DAYS IT HAS BECOME A DAILY ROUTINE, THAT SOUND IS HAPPENING EACH TIME YOU IGNITE ENGINE AFTER A GAP OF SAY 1-2 HOURS. MY BRAKES WERE ALWAYS NOISY SINCE DAY ONE OF THE VEHICLE. IT WAS ALSO NOTIFIED TO THE DEALER HOWEVER I WAS TOLD IT WAS DUE TO WET CONDITIONS. HOWEVER IT IS A REGULAR THING. MY CAR IS JUST 7880 MILES AND WELL KEPT, WHY IS THE BRAKE SO NOISY INCLUDING ANOTHER PROBLEM OCCURRING IN ENGINE NOW. PLEASE PROVIDE A RESOLUTION OR I WILL HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO REQUEST FOR REFUND.

NHTSA ODI #10761142

13,900 miles · Mar 19, 2015
Service Brakes

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES FOR THE FIRST TIME EACH DAY, A GRINDING NOISE EMITTED FROM THE REAR BRAKES AND THEN THE GRINDING NOISE WOULD CEASE UNTIL THE NEXT DAY. THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT THE FAILURE EVENTUALLY PROGRESSED TO WHERE THE GRINDING NOISE WAS PRESENT THE FIRST THREE TIMES THE BRA…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES FOR THE FIRST TIME EACH DAY, A GRINDING NOISE EMITTED FROM THE REAR BRAKES AND THEN THE GRINDING NOISE WOULD CEASE UNTIL THE NEXT DAY. THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT THE FAILURE EVENTUALLY PROGRESSED TO WHERE THE GRINDING NOISE WAS PRESENT THE FIRST THREE TIMES THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED AND THEN THE NOISE WOULD STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE NOISE WAS CAUSED BY RUST BUILD UP BEHIND THE REAR ROTORS. THE ROTORS WERE CLEANED AND THE FAILURE WAS SOLVED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 13,900.

NHTSA ODI #10695441

14,000 miles · Mar 19, 2015
Service Brakes

REAR BRAKES STARTED MAKING A GRINDING NOISE WHEN FIRST TIME APPLIED EACH MORNING. SLOWLY CONDITION KEPT GETTING WORSE, BUT AFTER NO MORE THAN THREE APPLICATIONS OF BRAKES, CONDITION CEASES FOR THAT DAY ONLY TO RE APPEAR THE NEXT DAY. I THOUGHT IT MIGHT JUST BE A COLD WEATHER CONDITION. HOWEVER, HAVING JUST RETURNED FROM SOUTH…

Read full complaint

REAR BRAKES STARTED MAKING A GRINDING NOISE WHEN FIRST TIME APPLIED EACH MORNING. SLOWLY CONDITION KEPT GETTING WORSE, BUT AFTER NO MORE THAN THREE APPLICATIONS OF BRAKES, CONDITION CEASES FOR THAT DAY ONLY TO RE APPEAR THE NEXT DAY. I THOUGHT IT MIGHT JUST BE A COLD WEATHER CONDITION. HOWEVER, HAVING JUST RETURNED FROM SOUTHERN FLORIDA FOR SIX WEEKS WITH THE CONDITION CONTINUING, I TOOK IT TO THE LOCAL HONDA DEALER UPON MY RETURN ON MARCH 12, 2015. THEY TOLD ME THIS WAS A NORMAL SERVICE CONDITION CAUSED BY RUST BUILD UP BEHIND THE ROTORS AND NEEDED TO CLEAN THE BRAKES EVERY 20,000 MILES. I TOLD THEM I HAVE OWNED NUMEROUS CARS IN THE LAST 60 YEARS PUTTING OVER 100 K MILES ON SEVERAL AND NEVER HEARD OF THIS CONDITION. I HAVE ALSO CONTACTED HONDA CORPORATION HOTLINE AND THEY WOULD NOT CONFIRM OR DENY THIS TO BE A SERVICE CONDITION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10695440

32,000 miles · Jan 8, 2015
EngineService BrakesVehicle Speed ControlCrash

I HAD LEFT MY OFFICE ABOUT 10 MINUTES PRIOR TO PULLING INTO A SHOPPING CENTER AND WAS DRIVING ABOUT 5 MPH IN THE PARKING LOT, LOOKING FOR A PARKING SPACE. I SAW ONE AND SLOWED DOWN EVEN MORE TO BARELY MOVING, AND WAS EASING INTO THE PARKING SPACE WITH MY RIGHT FOOT ON THE BRAKE. JUST AS THE CAR STOPPED AND I WAS GETTING READY …

Read full complaint

I HAD LEFT MY OFFICE ABOUT 10 MINUTES PRIOR TO PULLING INTO A SHOPPING CENTER AND WAS DRIVING ABOUT 5 MPH IN THE PARKING LOT, LOOKING FOR A PARKING SPACE. I SAW ONE AND SLOWED DOWN EVEN MORE TO BARELY MOVING, AND WAS EASING INTO THE PARKING SPACE WITH MY RIGHT FOOT ON THE BRAKE. JUST AS THE CAR STOPPED AND I WAS GETTING READY TO PUT IT INTO PARK, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY REVVED UP AND THE CAR JUMPED THE CURB AND HIT A TREE ABOUT 5 FEET IN FRONT OF THE PARKING SPACE AT FULL FORCE. IT WAS LIKE THE ACCELERATOR HAD BEEN PRESSED ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR. I WAS TOTALLY STUNNED. THE ENTIRE FRONT OF THE CAR WAS SMASHED IN AND RADIATOR FLUID WAS COMING OUT OF THE BOTTOM OF THE CAR. WHEN THIS INCIDENT OCCURRED, I WAS NOT TALKING ON THE PHONE; I WAS NOT DRINKING OR EATING ANYTHING IN THE CAR; I DID NOT EVEN HAVE THE RADIO TURNED ON. I WAS NOT IN AN EMOTIONAL STATE; I AM NOT PSYCHOTIC, HOMICIDAL ,OR SUICIDAL. I HAD BOTH HANDS ON THE STEERING WHEEL AS I HAD JUST MADE A SLOW LEFT TURN INTO THE PARKING SPACE AND WAS BARELY MOVING, WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE. I HAVE GONE ON THE INTERNET TO RESEARCH ANYTHING LIKE THIS OCCURRING WITH OTHER HONDA CRV'S, AND THERE ARE NUMEROUS INCIDENCES CITED INVOLVING THE 2011 AND 2013 MODELS. IT HAPPENS IN VERY COLD WEATHER (FREEZING OR BELOW) , WHILE THE BRAKE IS ENGAGED. IT WAS IN THE LOW 30'S AT THE TIME AND MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE. LUCKILY, THE TREE STOPPED MY FORWARD MOTION, OR I WOULD HAVE ENDED UP DRIVING THRU THE PLATE GLASS WINDOW OF THE UPS STORE. OTHER DRIVERS HAVE NOT BEEN SO LUCKY - SOME HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL, OTHER CARS INVOLVED, OTHER PEOPLE INJURED. I AM ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIED OF DRIVING THIS VEHICLE AGAIN.

NHTSA ODI #10670905

15,000 miles · Dec 27, 2014
Service Brakes

WHEN PARKING BRAKE WAS NOT RELEASED, THERE WAS NO BRAKE LIGHT AND NO BEEPER SOUNDS (ACCORDING TO THE MANUAL, I CHECKED LATER). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10668428

9,671 miles · Jun 27, 2014
Service Brakes

VEHICLE WAS 14 MONTHS OLD AND WAS DRIVEN EVERY 1-2 DAYS. VEHICLE HAD TO BE TOWED TO DEALERSHIP AFTER A CALIPER "FROZE" TO THE RIGHT REAR ROTOR AFTER SITTING OVERNIGHT IN THE GARAGE. DEALER REPORTED THAT ALL FOUR ROTORS WERE HEAVILY OXIDIZED AND KEPT INSISTING THAT THE CAR MUST HAVE BEEN SITTING FOR MANY WEEKS OR MONTHS. DEALER C…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE WAS 14 MONTHS OLD AND WAS DRIVEN EVERY 1-2 DAYS. VEHICLE HAD TO BE TOWED TO DEALERSHIP AFTER A CALIPER "FROZE" TO THE RIGHT REAR ROTOR AFTER SITTING OVERNIGHT IN THE GARAGE. DEALER REPORTED THAT ALL FOUR ROTORS WERE HEAVILY OXIDIZED AND KEPT INSISTING THAT THE CAR MUST HAVE BEEN SITTING FOR MANY WEEKS OR MONTHS. DEALER CLAIMED THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BRAKE PADS AND ONLY RESURFACED THE ROTORS. DEALER REPEATEDLY MADE FALSE CLAIM ABOUT HONDA MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENT THAT THE ROTORS BE CLEANED EVERY YEAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10606582

Mileage unknown · Apr 30, 2014
Service Brakes

I DON'T EVEN HAVE A YEAR WITH MY CAR AND THE BRAKES KEEP SQUISHING SQUIRING I CANT BELIEVE THIS IS HAPPENING TO A BRAND NEW CAR. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND THE RESURFACE THE FRONT ROTORS AND THE NOISE WAS STILL THERE WHEN I TEST THE CAR AFTER THE SERVICE. I TOOK IT BACK AND THE RESURFACE THE BACK ROTORS AND THE NOISE WENT AWA…

Read full complaint

I DON'T EVEN HAVE A YEAR WITH MY CAR AND THE BRAKES KEEP SQUISHING SQUIRING I CANT BELIEVE THIS IS HAPPENING TO A BRAND NEW CAR. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND THE RESURFACE THE FRONT ROTORS AND THE NOISE WAS STILL THERE WHEN I TEST THE CAR AFTER THE SERVICE. I TOOK IT BACK AND THE RESURFACE THE BACK ROTORS AND THE NOISE WENT AWAY FOR A WHILE BUT NOW THE NOISE IS BACK I AM GOING TO TAKE TO THE BACK TO THE DEALER FIRST WEEKEND OF MAY 2014. I AM TIRED OF THIS NOISE. *JS

NHTSA ODI #10585785

Official recalls

2

23V858000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump

Dec 18, 2023

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2013-2023 Honda Accord, Civic Coupe, Civic Sedan, Civic Hatchback, Civic Type R, CR-V, HR-V, Ridgeline, Odyssey, Acura ILX, MDX, MDX Hybrid, RDX, RLX, TLX, 2019-2022 Honda Insight, Passport, 2020 Honda CR-V Hybrid, 2018-2019 Honda Clarity PHEV, Fit, and 2015-2020 Honda Accord Hybrid, Pilot, Acura NSX vehicles. The fuel pump inside the fuel tank may fail.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Fuel pump failure can cause an engine stall while driving, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Dealers will replace the fuel pump module, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed September 6, 2024. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are KGC and KGD. This recall is an expansion of NHTSA recall numbers 21V-215 and 20V-314.

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.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

2

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

EA19001 · Electrical Overstress

Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect.  During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications.  The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU.  In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment.  FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle.  Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW.  These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes.  An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time.   In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU.  This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners.  Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation.  The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage.  There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation.  The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU.  If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC.  Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC.  All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled.  In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024.  With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Go deeper into Honda CR-V problems