IllustrationAIR COOLER FILTER (ADAPTER) - LEAK. COMMON DEFECT IN ALL WRANGLER VEHICLES. DANGER TO ENGINE DAMAGE.
2015 Jeep Wrangler
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2015 Jeep Wrangler do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 265.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Wrangler years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
770–25K
6725–50K
3950–75K
2075–100K
23100–150K
1150K+
227 reports with mileage · 244 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 128 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes. Review the 115 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 80 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
15 crash reports27 fire reports11 injury reports
What owners actually said
471 reportsIMMEDIATELY AFTER COMPLETING WORK FROM THE AIR BAG RECALL MY VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE ON ITS OWN. I WOULD HOLD A STEADY THROTTLE AND IT WOULD ALL OF A SUDDEN SPEED UP. IT WOULD LAST FOR A FEW TO SEVERAL SECONDS AND SLOW DOWN TO A POINT LESS THAN THE STEADY THROTTLE. WHEN I WOULD USE CRUISE CONTROL THE VEHICLE WOULD VARY IN …
Read full complaint
IMMEDIATELY AFTER COMPLETING WORK FROM THE AIR BAG RECALL MY VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE ON ITS OWN. I WOULD HOLD A STEADY THROTTLE AND IT WOULD ALL OF A SUDDEN SPEED UP. IT WOULD LAST FOR A FEW TO SEVERAL SECONDS AND SLOW DOWN TO A POINT LESS THAN THE STEADY THROTTLE. WHEN I WOULD USE CRUISE CONTROL THE VEHICLE WOULD VARY IN SPEED BY FIVE TO SEVEN MILES PER HOUR. THIS WAS DEFINITELY A CHANGE FROM THE WAY IT OPERATED PRIOR TO THE RECALL. I USED INJECTOR CLEANER THROUGH SEVERAL TANKS, BUT THE PROBLEM PERSISTED. THE CONDITION WAS LIMITED TO DEPRESSING THE ACCELERATOR, BUT HAS WORSENED TO THE POINT OF REVVING THE ENGINE WITH THE CLUTCH DEPRESSED AND NO PRESSURE ON THE ACCELERATOR. I HAD TO CUT THE ENGINE OFF DUE TO THIS UNCONTROLLABLE REV. I CONTACTED THE DEALERSHIP TO INQUIRY OF ANY SUCH ISSUES FOLLOWING THE AIR BAG RECALL, BUT BEFORE I COULD COMPLETE MY QUESTION, I WAS TOLD, "NO." MAYBE, THIS ISSUE IS COINCIDENCE, BUT IT IS TRULY A SAFETY CONCERN. I HAVE SEARCHED THE NET FOR SIMILAR INCIDENTS, AND IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE VERY PREVALENT. THE VEHICLE CURRENTLY HAS JUST OVER 68K MILES, AND ZERO INCIDENTS/PROBLEMS PRIOR TO THE AIRBAG RECALL. I BELIEVE THE STEERING WHEEL IS REMOVED WHEN THE AIRBAG ISSUE IS CORRECTED, AND FOR THIS REASON I QUESTION IF THE ISSUES ARE UNINTENTIONALLY RELATED. *TR
WHILE SLOWING TO A STOP FROM VERY LOW SPEED, ON A PAVED CITY STREET, THE BRAKES FAILED. PEDAL WAS ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR, AND SEEMED AS IF THE JEEP ACCELERATED SLIGHTLY, AND THE ABS WAS POSSIBLY ACTIVATING AND RELEASING? CAUSING MINOR DAMAGE TRAFFIC COLLISION WITH STOPPED CAR IN FRONT OF ME. I AM A RETIRED TRAFFIC ACCIDENT I…
Read full complaint
WHILE SLOWING TO A STOP FROM VERY LOW SPEED, ON A PAVED CITY STREET, THE BRAKES FAILED. PEDAL WAS ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR, AND SEEMED AS IF THE JEEP ACCELERATED SLIGHTLY, AND THE ABS WAS POSSIBLY ACTIVATING AND RELEASING? CAUSING MINOR DAMAGE TRAFFIC COLLISION WITH STOPPED CAR IN FRONT OF ME. I AM A RETIRED TRAFFIC ACCIDENT INVESTIGATOR, AND WAS NOT DISTRACTED, I COULD NOT RECREATE THE SAME MALFUNCTION AFTER THE COLLISION. *TR
PURCHASED NEW JEEP SAHARA IN 2015 FROM THE DEALER. AS OF THE POSTING OF THIS COMPLAINT, THE CAR HAS ONLY 20,000 MILES. ONLY TODAY, I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER BECAUSE OF PULSATING EFFECT ON THE STIRRING WHEEL WHENEVER TURNING CORNERS (LEFT AND RIGHT) AS IF THE STIRRING WHEEL HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE WHEELS. THE DEALER IN…
Read full complaint
PURCHASED NEW JEEP SAHARA IN 2015 FROM THE DEALER. AS OF THE POSTING OF THIS COMPLAINT, THE CAR HAS ONLY 20,000 MILES. ONLY TODAY, I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER BECAUSE OF PULSATING EFFECT ON THE STIRRING WHEEL WHENEVER TURNING CORNERS (LEFT AND RIGHT) AS IF THE STIRRING WHEEL HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE WHEELS. THE DEALER INDICATED THAT IT WOULD COST ABOUT $6000 TO REPLACE VARIOUS COMPONENTS TO ADDRESS THE STIRRING WHEEL ISSUE AND FURTHER DISCLOSED THAT UNDERNEATH OF THIS CAR INCLUDING THE FRAME WAS RUSTED SO BAD THAT IT WAS NOT WORTH REPAIRING AND UNSAFE TO DRIVE. AT A PURCHASE PRICE OF $35,000 AND WITH ONLY 4.5 YEARS OF ONLY 20,000 MILES OF DRIVING, JEEP IS RIPPING OFF CONSUMERS.
THERE'S A LEAK COMING FROM THE OIL FILTER HOUSING UNIT AND D IT'S CAUSING A VERY NOTICEABLE TICKING FROM MOTOR AT ALL TIMES.
AIR BAG WARNING LIGHT CAME ON IN MOTION. HAD TO REPLACE CLOCKSPRING AGAIN. PREVIOUSLY REPLACED UNDER 2016 RECALL. SINCE NO CURRENT RECALL, I HAD TO PAY FOR NEW CLOCKSPRING AND LABOR MYSELF, TOTALING $593.67.*DT
I WAS STOPPED IN A TURN LANE WAITING FOR THE TRAFFIC LIGHT TO CHANGE WHEN I WAS IMPACTED BY ANOTHER DRIVER AT APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH. THE DRIVE DROVE DIRECTLY INTO THE FRONT OF MY JEEP AS IF SHE WAS AIMING FOR IT. DESPITE MY FOOT BEING ON THE BRAKE MY JEEP WAS PUSHED IN REVERSE AT LEAST 50 FT DUE TO THE FORCEFUL IMPACT. NEITHER…
Read full complaint
I WAS STOPPED IN A TURN LANE WAITING FOR THE TRAFFIC LIGHT TO CHANGE WHEN I WAS IMPACTED BY ANOTHER DRIVER AT APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH. THE DRIVE DROVE DIRECTLY INTO THE FRONT OF MY JEEP AS IF SHE WAS AIMING FOR IT. DESPITE MY FOOT BEING ON THE BRAKE MY JEEP WAS PUSHED IN REVERSE AT LEAST 50 FT DUE TO THE FORCEFUL IMPACT. NEITHER VEHICLES WERE DRIVABLE DUE TO THE FRONTEND DAMAGE. THANKFULLY, I WAS WEARING MY SEATBELT BECAUSE MY AIRS DIDN'T NOT DEPLOY AS EXPECTED IN A FRONTEND COLLISION.
AFTER HITTING A BUMP IN THE ROAD MY JEEP SHOOK VIOLENTLY. I STOPPED THE JEEP TO SEE IF SOMETHING BROKE. WHEN I STARTED DRIVING AGAIN EVERYTHING WAS FINE. I HAD IT CHECKED OUT AT JEEP BUT NOTHING WAS FOUND. AFTER MONTHS OF EVERYTHING BEING FINE I NOTICED A SHAKE IN THE STEERING WHEEL. TIRES WERE CHECKED AND FINE. NO ONE COULD E…
Read full complaint
AFTER HITTING A BUMP IN THE ROAD MY JEEP SHOOK VIOLENTLY. I STOPPED THE JEEP TO SEE IF SOMETHING BROKE. WHEN I STARTED DRIVING AGAIN EVERYTHING WAS FINE. I HAD IT CHECKED OUT AT JEEP BUT NOTHING WAS FOUND. AFTER MONTHS OF EVERYTHING BEING FINE I NOTICED A SHAKE IN THE STEERING WHEEL. TIRES WERE CHECKED AND FINE. NO ONE COULD EXPLAIN WHY THERE WAS VIBRATION AT SPEEDS AROUND 55 MPH. THIS HAPPENED A FEW TIMES AND THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE. A YEAR LATER I HIT A SMALL BUMP IN A CONSTRUCTION AREA ON THE HIGHWAY, THE SAME VIOLENT SHAKING HAPPENED. I WAS IN A CONSTRUCTION ZONE NEXT TO A DIESEL TRUCK WITH CONCERT BARRIER ON BOTH SIDES.I HAD A HARD TIME KEEPING CONTROL OF MY JEEP. THE DEATH WOBBLE IS A VERY DANGEROUS PROBLEM. IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT JEEP HAS COME UP WITH A BAND-AID FIX. WELL AFTER TAKING MY JEEP TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT WITH ONLY 40,000 MILES ON MY JEEP(MY JEEP NOW OUT OF WARRANTY, I HAD AN EXTENDED WARRANTY) AND IT COST ME OVER 3,055.45 FOR THEM TO FIX THE DEATH WOBBLE. I DO HAVE AN INVOICE FOR THE CHARGES IT IS NOT ON ME AT THIS TIME.
KNOWN ISSUE WITH JEEP WRANGLERS SINCE 2012- OIL PRESSURE SENSOR BECOMES FAULTY PREMATURELY CAUSING THE ENGINE LIGHT TO TURN ON. IN RESULT, IN THE EVENT OF THE OIL SYSTEM FAILING, THE ENGINE WILL FAIL WITHOUT WARNING. THE PART IS PLACED IN A POOR LOCATION WITH THESE VEHICLES ENGINES.
RECALL WAS PREFORMED ON THIS VEHICLE APPROX 4 MOUNTS AGO... THE CLOCK SPRING HAS FAILED.
Official recalls
319V680000 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
Sep 26, 2019
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling certain 2011-2018 Jeep Wrangler right hand drive vehicles. The driver's seat belt buckle mounting strap may fracture and separate from the seat frame.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A separated or severed seat belt buckle strap will result in an inoperable seat belt, increasing the risk of injury in the event of a crash.
Remedy: FCA US will notify owners, and dealers will replace the driver's seat belt buckle, free of charge. Interim notices informing owners of the safety risk were mailed November 19, 2019. Owners will received a second letter and the recall began March 26, 2020. Owners may contact FCA customer service at 1-800-853-1403. FCA's number for this recall is VA6.
19V018000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
Jan 15, 2019
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling certain 2010 Dodge Ram 3500, Ram 4500/5500, 2010-2011 Dodge Dakota, 2010-2014 Dodge Challenger, 2010-2015 Dodge Challenger, Chrysler 300, and 2010-2016 Jeep Wrangler vehicles. Upon deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, excessive internal pressure may cause the inflator to explode.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag, the inflator could explode with metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants potentially resulting in serious injury or death.
Remedy: Owners are advised not to drive their vehicle until the recall repair is complete. Chrysler will notify owners, and dealers will replace the passenger frontal air bag inflator, free of charge. The recall began February 4, 2019. Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403. Chrysler's number for this recall is V01.
16V288000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
May 11, 2016
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling certain model year 2011-2016 Right Hand Drive Jeep Wrangler vehicles manufactured February 16, 2010, to May 2, 2016. The clockspring assembly may become contaminated with dust and cause the air bag circuit to fail.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Failure of the air bag circuit may prevent the driver's frontal air bag from deploying in the event of a crash, increasing the risk of injury.
Remedy: Chrysler will notify owners, and dealers will replace the clockspring, wheel back cover, and column shroud, free of charge. The recall began on August 11, 2016. Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403. Chrysler's number for this recall is S40.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
PE19008 · Seat Belt Buckle Bracket Failure
Opened Jul 29, 2019 · Closed Dec 12, 2019
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seat Belts:front:buckle Assembly
On July 17, 2019, NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 19-008 after receiving three Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) reports alleging the driver's side seat belt buckle separated from the seat frame, rendering the seat belt non-functional. The VOQs involved model year (MY) 2015 and 2016 Jeep Wrangler (JK platform) that were configured for right-hand drive (RHD) use. On August 8, 2019, ODI issued an information request (IR) letter to FCA.The scope of the IR included all JK Wrangler produced for sale in the U.S. (both left- and right-hand drive), and amongst other things, requested any reports or allegations of driver's seat belt bracket failures on these vehicles. In its review of FCA's response, ODI determined that approximately 1.7 million JK Wrangler were produced from MY 2007 to 2018, about 16,000 of which were configured for RHD. ODI notes that the RHD Wrangler are typically used for rural postal delivery which often experience a more severe duty cycle. Also RHD JK was was not produced in MY 2007.As explained in the IR response, FCA identified three distinct populations of JK Wrangler concerning the driver's seat belt bucket bracket; specifically the MY 2007-2018 LHD (~1.7M units), the MY 2008-2010 RHD (4,563 units), and the MY 2011-2018 RHD (11,463 units) populations.FCA provided details on the designs used in each of these populations, identifying specific differences deemed pertinent to the strength and durability of each unique bracket design. FCA further reviewed its analysis of the complaint and warranty data identified under the IR, and noting that it had not identified any allegations of bracket failures on the LHD population, and only one allegation on the MY 2008-2010 RHD vehicles. By comparison, FCA identified 24 allegations of bracket failure for the MY 2011-2018 RHD JK, including two reports duplicative of the VOQs. Neither the FCA nor the VOQ reports allege an injury or fatality due to bracket failure. Based on this analysis, FCA decided to conduct a safety recall for the MY 2011-2018 RHD JK population. On September 30, 2019, FCA submitted a Defect Information Report initiating NHTSA Safety Recall 19V-680 (FCA No. VA6). Under the recall action, FCA will replace the driver's seat belt bracket on MY 2011-2018 RHD Jeep JK Wrangler. The repair will be conducted free of charge.In view of FCA's recall action, and its explanations of the scope of that action, ODI is closing PE19-008. ODI will continue to monitor the non-recalled RHD, and the LHD JK Wrangler for evidence of seat belt bracket failure and will take further action if warranted.The three VOQ reports cited above can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers:11190251, 11218472, 11231639.
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.