Engine. Review the 86 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Exterior Lighting. Review the 18 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Electrical System. Review the 12 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

8 crash reports6 fire reports6 injury reports

What owners actually said

161 reports

Mileage unknown · Aug 31, 2024

EnginePower Train

Car has a rod knock, has been looked at by a private mechanic, seen online there was a recall on Hyundai Sonatas for rod knock issues.

NHTSA ODI #11611921

Mileage unknown · Aug 29, 2024

Engine And Engine Cooling

See attached document for complaint.

NHTSA ODI #11611608

Mileage unknown · Aug 3, 2024

EngineUnknown Or Other

I have had to change my spark plugs 3 times since May due to the fact that I keep getting oil in them. My car also goes through an excessive amount of oil. Within 2 weeks of having my oil changed I had to start adding more oil. But it does not ever have any on the ground under my car. My piston oil rings are not keeping oil out…

Read full complaint

NHTSA ODI #11606260

Mileage unknown · Jul 16, 2024

Engine

Read full complaint

Engine has been leaking oil for awhile. After close inspection i discovered a tiny crack in oil pan. There is no damage whatsoever to the oil pan. After much research online it appears many other hyundai owners have the same leak from a crack in oil pan in exact same spot. If left unchecked it would result in engine damage from low oil level. There is a spot weld for drain plug backing and the crack develops at this spot weld. No damage or impact has caused this crack as other owners experience same issue. Oil pan had to be replaced as leak was getting worse at crack

NHTSA ODI #11602717

Mileage unknown · Jul 12, 2024

Seat Belts

Read full complaint

Drivers side seat belt strap does not retract back when removed and has faulty latch which sometimes pops out. Dealer told us that because the car had over 60,000 miles on it that we would be responsible for payment to replace the pretensions and other internal parts plus the latch. This car was bought new in 2019 and had only been involved in one accident which the seat belt was not used due to the fact that the car was parked when it was struck. Since this is a safety issue which could result in my death or serious injury in the event of a vehicle accident I am taking a chance evey time i drive this vehicle. The approximate cost according to hyundai would be around $1800.00 - $2000.00. I consider this a manufacturer defect that hyundai should replace and be responsible for the cost. They refuse to fix this issue unless I pay for the repair. I never heard of a seat belt having a mileage cut off at any amount of mileage. Please advise me if you can enforce safety defect repair to be paid for by hyundai. If you are not able to hold hyundai liable I would appreciate any entity that you may know of that can make them replace for free the defective belt and latch. I'm afraid to drive this car without a working seat belt on the drivers side nor do I have the outrageous money for it to be repaired at my expense.

NHTSA ODI #11601401

56,000 miles · Jul 10, 2024

Engine

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2019 Hyundai Sonata. The contact stated that the vehicle was consuming an excessive amount of engine oil. The oil warning light was occasionally illuminated. The contact added a quart of oil, but the oil level failed to register on the dipstick. The contact stated that the vehicle was two quarts low in approximately 5,000 miles. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer, who competed an oil change and informed the contact to bring the vehicle back within 1,000 miles. The mechanic informed the contact that the vehicle was meeting the specifications for the oil requirements. The manufacturer was not contacted. The failure mileage was approximately 56,000.

NHTSA ODI #11600882

Mileage unknown · Jul 3, 2024

Structure

Paint started chipping away from hood and roof 2 months after purchase I am the 2nd owner so warranty is voided

NHTSA ODI #11598682

Mileage unknown · Jun 25, 2024

Engine

Read full complaint

I have noticed a great amount of oil usage here in the past 2 months, I have been having my oil changed every 4,500 miles for the last 4 years. After having it changed 6 weeks ago I was coming home from work and my oil light came on so when I got up the next morning I went out and checked the level of my oil and it was barely any oil in my car, so I immediately added the oil I needed to fill what was needed . I then started to monitor my oil levels and it seems that my car was using about a quart to a quart and a half every 6-7 days, I took my car to the mechanic shop and they told me return my back to the dealer because they have been seeing at least 3-4 Hyundia's weekly come in with the same problems. So today as I was coming home from work I tried to accelerate and my car just started sputtering and slowing down so I had to gradually accelerate while noticing my engine light flashing, so I had to drive 30mph in order to get to auto parts store to get the code read for the engine light and the guy told me that he also has seen a few these same codes on the Hyundia's lately. I think this really needs to be addressed immediately and put on the recall list , because this is a serious problem because my car stalling in the middle of the highway is not safe and causing people some real life head aches and serious out of pocket money that we don't have , so now my engine has completely shut down and I don't have a second vehicle and i have to get my car to the dealer tomorrow to see what can be done. Safety and taking ownership of the problem should be #1 priority .

NHTSA ODI #11596619

Mileage unknown · Jun 7, 2024

EngineLane Departure

The check hybrid system malfunction light and the blind spot detection came on january 13 2024 for the forth time towed to dealship they attempted repair then again same issue for the fifth March 23 2024 and the last time was today June 7 2024 was towed in.

NHTSA ODI #11593151

Mileage unknown · Jun 3, 2024

Unknown Or Other

2019 white Hyundai Sonata has same paint peeling issue as 2017-2018 Sonata. Two different locations on the Sonata started peeling. The paint recall needs to be extended to 2019 model.

NHTSA ODI #11592103

Official recalls

No recalls in this snapshot.

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

DP22003 · Loss Of Motive Power

Opened Sep 12, 2022 · Closed Dec 12, 2023

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) received a letter dated July 13, 2022, petitioning the Agency to initiate a safety defect investigation into loss of motive power allegations attributed to oil drain pan assembly failures on certain Hyundai Motor America, Inc. and Kia America, Inc. vehicles spanning Model Years (MY) 2005-2021. The Petitioners cited examples of complaints indicating that the subject vehicles were experiencing rapid loss of engine oil due to oil drain plug back outs, resulting in loss of motive power and/or catastrophic engine damage. Additional complaints were provided which alleged that the oil drain pans lack sufficient structural integrity and are susceptible to cracking. The petition itself can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI number 11481745. On September 12, 2022, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Defect Petition (DP22-003) to evaluate the Petitioners’ request. The Petitioners have provided additional complaints within four supplemental letters dated January 31, 2023, March 21, 2023, May 23, 2023, and August 4, 2023. ODI’s evaluation included the review and analysis of the complaints and supporting information submitted by the Petitioners, as well as additional complaints submitted directly to NHTSA which referenced either the oil drain plug or a crack in the oil pan. After reviewing the available data, ODI has not identified evidence that would support opening a defect investigation into the oil drain pan assemblies of the subject vehicles. Based on a review of the available information, a loss of motive power resulting from an oil drain plug back out has not occurred between the initial sale of a vehicle and the completion of its first oil change. If during an oil change service, a technician fails to remove the existing drain plug gasket before installing a new gasket, it is likely that a proper seal between the drain plug and the oil pan will not be made. An improper seal between the drain plug and oil pan could lead to the backing out on the drain plug, resulting in the sudden loss of oil while driving. Additionally, the provided examples of oil pan cracks were localized to the immediate vicinity of the oil drain plug and/or appeared to be the result of direct-contact with a tool during servicing. There is no information to support that a vehicle-based defect exists relating to the oil pan assembly, and instead the documented incidents are related to the failure to follow the proper maintenance procedures during oil change service. In October 2023, Hyundai published a Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) that provided detailed instructions for oil change service on its gasoline powered vehicles, specifically highlighting the need to remove and replace the existing drain plug gasket prior to reinstalling the drain plug. After a thorough review of the material submitted by the petitioner, the information already in NHTSA's possession, and the potential risks to motor vehicle safety implicated by the petitioners' allegations, NHTSA does not believe that a formal investigation is warranted. Therefore, the petition is denied. A Federal Register Notice (FRN) further detailing NHTSA’s reasons for denial of the petition will be published. The reference numbers for the complaints to NHTSA cited by the petitioner can be found in the petition submission documents in the public file for DP22-003. To review those complaints and the additional complaints ODI added to its evaluation which are cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

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.