The contact owned a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving approximately 65 MPH on a two-lane road, the contact pressed the brake pedal to avoid rear-ending the vehicle in front. The contact indicated that when pressing the brake pedal, the driver's air bag erroneously deployed, causing the driver to lose control…
Read full complaint
The contact owned a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving approximately 65 MPH on a two-lane road, the contact pressed the brake pedal to avoid rear-ending the vehicle in front. The contact indicated that when pressing the brake pedal, the driver's air bag erroneously deployed, causing the driver to lose control of the steering and crash into a guardrail, where the vehicle came to a stop. The vehicle in front was not crashed into and left the scene after witnessing the crash into the guardrail. The contact sustained severe facial and oral injuries along with a concussion, chest and arm bruising, which required medical treatment. A police report was filed at the scene. The vehicle was destroyed and towed away. The cause of the failure was not determined. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The dealer was not contacted. The contact was also concerned that metal fragments may have exploded from the air bag deployment. No additional information was available. The failure mileage was 70,000.
NHTSA ODI #11690620
Mileage unknown · May 6, 2024
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrashInjury
The contact owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while her boyfriend was driving through a construction zone at 55 MPH, an aggressive driver hit the front passenger side of the vehicle and drove off. The air bags did not deploy upon impact and the seat belts did secure the driver as needed. The contact's boyfriend su…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while her boyfriend was driving through a construction zone at 55 MPH, an aggressive driver hit the front passenger side of the vehicle and drove off. The air bags did not deploy upon impact and the seat belts did secure the driver as needed. The contact's boyfriend sustained bruises on the neck, lower back, and left arm; the contact's boyfriend had yet to seek medical attention. The whereabouts of the other driver were unknown. The vehicle was towed to an impound lot. The dealer nor the manufacturer had yet to be notified of the failure. The vehicle was totaled due to the accident. The failure mileage was approximately 110,000. The contact did not attempt to file a complaint online.
NHTSA ODI #11587173
Mileage unknown · Feb 4, 2024
Air BagsCrash
My vehicle was involved in an accident on the highway in which no front airbags were deployed. I’m grateful that my family and I weren’t seriously injured. My Vin# shows that their aren’t any recalls on my vehicle but feel there may be something wrong with my airbags.
NHTSA ODI #11569859
Mileage unknown · Oct 18, 2023
Air BagsCrashInjury
I was in a major car accident. My Honda CR-V air bags did not deploy. Due to the accident I have a neck and back injury. My insurance company has declared my vehicle a total loss. Millions of Americans are driving Honda CR-Vs and due to air bag failure their lives are at risk in the case of a collision. I have called Honda and a…
Read full complaint
I was in a major car accident. My Honda CR-V air bags did not deploy. Due to the accident I have a neck and back injury. My insurance company has declared my vehicle a total loss. Millions of Americans are driving Honda CR-Vs and due to air bag failure their lives are at risk in the case of a collision. I have called Honda and asked them to investigate the failure of their air bags deployment. They have refused to do so. I am requesting the NHTSA investigate Honda CR-Vs air bag malfunction and help to save many Americans lives. My case number with Honda is [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA ODI #11550539
Mileage unknown · Apr 7, 2023
Air Bags
On the passenger side the airbag light came on and it won’t go off. I’m the only one that drives my car. I don’t drive that much! The only time I drive is, when I’m going grocery shopping in morning’s and on weekends running a few errands in the morning’s time. I only had this car for five years and a half.
NHTSA ODI #11516025
160,000 miles · Mar 29, 2023
Air Bags
The contact owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that upon starting the vehicle the air bag warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer where it was diagnosed that the driver’s side sensor had been damaged and the wiring harness needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that upon starting the vehicle the air bag warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer where it was diagnosed that the driver’s side sensor had been damaged and the wiring harness needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not contacted. The failure mileage was 160,000.
NHTSA ODI #11514362
Mileage unknown · Dec 4, 2022
Air BagsInjury
I hit a pothole in my car, and the side roof airbags deployed, compressing my neck and back, and left me with a head and back injury. No other airbags deployed, and there isn’t a single mark on the body of my car. No warning or indication lights at all prior to the incident. I have not made an insurance claim or police report, …
Read full complaint
I hit a pothole in my car, and the side roof airbags deployed, compressing my neck and back, and left me with a head and back injury. No other airbags deployed, and there isn’t a single mark on the body of my car. No warning or indication lights at all prior to the incident. I have not made an insurance claim or police report, there were no passengers or other drivers involved. I am not prepared to pay a deductible for repairs that were unexpected and no fault of my own. The airbag deployed for no reason, and I do not want to liable for the repair costs. This also likely totaled my car, and I’m very lucky my son was not in the car with me at the time.
NHTSA ODI #11495949
Mileage unknown · Nov 17, 2022
Air BagsCrashInjury
Airbags did not deploy after being hit. Other driver's vehicle took off the whole front my car. Took a hard hit to the head from the door frame as none of my air bags deployed.
NHTSA ODI #11493925
115,000 miles · May 3, 2021
Air BagsCrash
HIT ACCELERATOR INSTEAD OF BREAK, CAR HIT A COLUM IN GARAGE PRETTY HARD BUT AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY
NHTSA ODI #11414894
61,000 miles · Aug 3, 2020
Air BagsService BrakesStructureFire
ON 5/27/2020 AT 11:20 PM MY 2014 HONDA CRV WAS PARKED IN FRONT OF MY HOME AND SUDDENLY COMBUSTED.FIRST SMOKE APPEARED ON THE DRIVER SIDE THEN FLAMES. IT WAS LAST DRIVEN AROUND 9:45PM THAT EVENING WITHOUT ISSUE. THE VEHICLE HAS NO HISTORY OF PHYSICAL OR MECHANICAL MALFUNCTION. THE INCIDENT SET OFF MY RING BELL CAMERA SINCE IT MOT…
Read full complaint
ON 5/27/2020 AT 11:20 PM MY 2014 HONDA CRV WAS PARKED IN FRONT OF MY HOME AND SUDDENLY COMBUSTED.FIRST SMOKE APPEARED ON THE DRIVER SIDE THEN FLAMES. IT WAS LAST DRIVEN AROUND 9:45PM THAT EVENING WITHOUT ISSUE. THE VEHICLE HAS NO HISTORY OF PHYSICAL OR MECHANICAL MALFUNCTION. THE INCIDENT SET OFF MY RING BELL CAMERA SINCE IT MOTION SENSITIVE (WILL PROVIDE FOOTAGE IF REQUESTED).
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.
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.