← New search

2016 Nissan Altima

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Altima years

Owner complaints for the 2016 Nissan Altima are substantially higher than the model-year median of 231.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

295 reports with mileage · 258 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.

  • Power Train. Review the 235 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 86 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 70 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

28 crash reports3 fire reports17 injury reports

Service Brakes complaints

11 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Nov 27, 2023
Air BagsService Brakes

My airs bags lights on it won’t go off The contact is hoping for a recall relating to this issue or defect.

NHTSA ODI #11556940

Mileage unknown · Mar 4, 2023
EnginePower TrainService Brakes

Transmission problem.

NHTSA ODI #11510152

Mileage unknown · May 14, 2022
Air BagsService BrakesStructureCrashInjury

As we were getting the highway the breaks had failed and then we some were able to get off the highway but the steering wheel cruise control decided it was gonna work by itself it was a very accident. And not only that my identity has been affected so bad because of the situation with mission and the dealership that I’m unable t…

Read full complaint

As we were getting the highway the breaks had failed and then we some were able to get off the highway but the steering wheel cruise control decided it was gonna work by itself it was a very accident. And not only that my identity has been affected so bad because of the situation with mission and the dealership that I’m unable to use my name for anything anymore my credits ruined and now they want 18 grand for me to pay off the vehicle that’s they purposely made the car look like a rebuild so it was no longer covered I guess because the person set up the insurance with Geico and actually some how have me insurance in my father dl number and later on start changing stuff removing the insurance forging documents My name is [XXX] Email is [XXX] INFORMATION Redacted PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).

NHTSA ODI #11464601

Mileage unknown · Sep 4, 2021
Power TrainService BrakesVehicle Speed ControlCrash

Upon arriving to my grandson's daycare, I applied by brake and put my car in park and suddenly my car accelerated at a fast speed. My car moved forward across an area that the children are usually playing in, but because it was raining they were inside. Thank God! I can't even imagine what would have happened. My car finally…

Read full complaint

Upon arriving to my grandson's daycare, I applied by brake and put my car in park and suddenly my car accelerated at a fast speed. My car moved forward across an area that the children are usually playing in, but because it was raining they were inside. Thank God! I can't even imagine what would have happened. My car finally stopped because I was trying to avoid the daycare's shed, but hit the corner of the shed and this stopped the car. The air bag did not deploy as well. I am thankful to be alive and unharmed, but most thankful that no one else was harmed. My husband took photos of the brake marks on the pavement and grass and of the vehicle after collision with the shed and showing it was in park.

NHTSA ODI #11431703

40,028 miles · Nov 25, 2020
Service Brakes

REAR BRAKES REQUIRED REPLACEMENT AT 40,000 MILE. CAR IS MOSTLY HIGHWAY MILES. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE OWNED A VEHICLE WERE I HAD TO CHANGE THE BRAKES BEFORE THE TIRES AND THE REAR BRAKES WORE DOWN FASTER THAN THE FRONT BRAKES. I REPLACED ALL FOUR BRAKES BECAUSE THE FRONTS WOULD REQUIRE A BRAKE CHANGE WITHIN THE NEXT 500 …

Read full complaint

REAR BRAKES REQUIRED REPLACEMENT AT 40,000 MILE. CAR IS MOSTLY HIGHWAY MILES. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE OWNED A VEHICLE WERE I HAD TO CHANGE THE BRAKES BEFORE THE TIRES AND THE REAR BRAKES WORE DOWN FASTER THAN THE FRONT BRAKES. I REPLACED ALL FOUR BRAKES BECAUSE THE FRONTS WOULD REQUIRE A BRAKE CHANGE WITHIN THE NEXT 500 TO 10000 MILES

NHTSA ODI #11376272

Mileage unknown · Aug 4, 2020
Service BrakesSteering

I HAVE HAD THE VEHICLE BRAKES INSPECTED AT MULTIPLE PLACES. THE BRAKES AND ROTORS ARE NEW HOWEVER THERE ARE GRINDING ISSUES AND HARD TO STOP WHILE STATION OR IN MOTION ON HIGHWAYS, STREETS, OR TURNING. THERE IS A SUSPENSION WEIRD NOISE WHEN TURNING THE WHEEL BEARING WHICH NISSAN STATED IT THERE COMMON SOUNDS. I HAVE HAD THE BRAK…

Read full complaint

I HAVE HAD THE VEHICLE BRAKES INSPECTED AT MULTIPLE PLACES. THE BRAKES AND ROTORS ARE NEW HOWEVER THERE ARE GRINDING ISSUES AND HARD TO STOP WHILE STATION OR IN MOTION ON HIGHWAYS, STREETS, OR TURNING. THERE IS A SUSPENSION WEIRD NOISE WHEN TURNING THE WHEEL BEARING WHICH NISSAN STATED IT THERE COMMON SOUNDS. I HAVE HAD THE BRAKES AND ROTORS CHANGED YEARLY BUT IS STILL HAVING ISSUES STOPPING.

NHTSA ODI #11343352

78,000 miles · Oct 11, 2019
Air BagsElectronic Stability Control (esc)Service BrakesCrashInjury

WITHIN I MONTH PRIOR TO MY ACCIDENT I HAD TIRE PROBLEMS. I REPLACED THE 4 TIRES.APPROX. 3 PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT I HAD FUEL AND ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS. THE PARTS WERE REPLACED. APPROX. 1 WEEK PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT I HAD FRONT BRAKES REPLACED .ESURANCE HAS MY VEHICLE POLICY # [XXX]CLAIM#[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO T…

Read full complaint

WITHIN I MONTH PRIOR TO MY ACCIDENT I HAD TIRE PROBLEMS. I REPLACED THE 4 TIRES.APPROX. 3 PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT I HAD FUEL AND ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS. THE PARTS WERE REPLACED. APPROX. 1 WEEK PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT I HAD FRONT BRAKES REPLACED .ESURANCE HAS MY VEHICLE POLICY # [XXX]CLAIM#[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #11267826

61,000 miles · Jun 10, 2019
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service BrakesVehicle Speed Control

AS MY FAMILY AND I WERE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY THE VEHICLE STARTED TO DROP SPEED FROM 70 MILES TO ABOUT 10 MILES PER HOUR. AS I TRIED TO SPEED UP BY ACCELERATING, THE SPEED WOULD NOT GO HIGHER AND WOULD JUST CONTINUE TO DROP. THE VEHICLES BEHIND ME WERE ABLE TO SEE I WAS HAVING DIFFICULTY AND WOULD SLOW DOWN WHEN THEY GOT CLOSE …

Read full complaint

AS MY FAMILY AND I WERE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY THE VEHICLE STARTED TO DROP SPEED FROM 70 MILES TO ABOUT 10 MILES PER HOUR. AS I TRIED TO SPEED UP BY ACCELERATING, THE SPEED WOULD NOT GO HIGHER AND WOULD JUST CONTINUE TO DROP. THE VEHICLES BEHIND ME WERE ABLE TO SEE I WAS HAVING DIFFICULTY AND WOULD SLOW DOWN WHEN THEY GOT CLOSE AND GO AROUND ME, SO I AM GLAD NO ACCIDENTS HAPPENED SINCE WE WERE DRIVING IN HEAVY TRAFFIC IN HIGH SPEED WHEN THIS STARTED TO OCCUR. WE DROVE LIKE THIS FOR ABOUT 45 MINUTES SINCE WE WERE DRIVING BACK HOME FROM OUT OF TOWN. AT SOME POINTS IT FELT AS THE VEHICLE WAS ABOUT TO TURN OFF WHILE WERE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY. IT WOULD JERK WHILE DRIVING AND SPEED UP ON IT'S OWN AS WELL AT TIMES. WHEN I GOT OFF THE HIGHWAY AND CAME TO A RED LIGHT THE CAR SAID IT WAS GOING 60 MILES PER AND I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 5 MILES PER HOUR. IT WOULD NOT BREAK AS I STEPPED ON THE BREAK, TAKING IT A WHILE TO RESPOND. WHEN THE LIGHT TURNED GREEN THE CAR WAS NOT MOVING AFTER I ACCELERATED, AND AFTER A WHILE START TO MOVE SLOWLY AND GAIN SPEED VERY SLOWLY. AN ERROR ALSO APPEARED BUT I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT DISPLAYED.

NHTSA ODI #11218890

Mileage unknown · Jul 20, 2018
Air BagsService BrakesStructure

MY REAR DOOR WILL NOT LOCK AND WHEN YOU LOWER THE IT OPENS THE DOOR I HAVE 47,000 MI ON MY CAR AND ALL MY ROTOR HAVE TO BE REPLACED. I AM CONCERNED THAT THE CURRENT AIR BAG RECALL DID NOT INCLUDE MY CAR.

NHTSA ODI #11112625

31,000 miles · Feb 26, 2018
Air BagsService BrakesCrash

I WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT WHERE I WAS DRIVING MY 2016 NISSAN ALTIMA WHEN I REAR ENDED THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME THAT WAS STATIONARY AT THE TRAFFIC LIGHT. I WAS TRAVELING APPROX 30MPH, BUT WHEN I TRIED TO SLOW DOWN BY GENTLY APPLYING MY BRAKES BUT MY NISSAN ALTIMA CAR DID NOT SLOW DOWN AT ALL. I THEN SLAMMED THE BRAKES DOWN FIRM…

Read full complaint

I WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT WHERE I WAS DRIVING MY 2016 NISSAN ALTIMA WHEN I REAR ENDED THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME THAT WAS STATIONARY AT THE TRAFFIC LIGHT. I WAS TRAVELING APPROX 30MPH, BUT WHEN I TRIED TO SLOW DOWN BY GENTLY APPLYING MY BRAKES BUT MY NISSAN ALTIMA CAR DID NOT SLOW DOWN AT ALL. I THEN SLAMMED THE BRAKES DOWN FIRMLY, STILL NOTHING, THE ABS DID NOT ENGAGE AT ALL. I SWERVED TO MY RIGHT TO TRY AND AVOID HITTING THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME HEAD ON. I CAUGHT IT'S RIGHT HAND BACK FENDER, BOTH FRONT AIR BAGS DEPLOYED, THE IMPACT OF HITTING THE MERCEDES STOPPED MY CAR- BOTH AIRBAGS INFLATED. MY 90LB, 18 YEAROLD SON WAS SITTING IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. I BROUGHT IT UP TO NISSAN ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS WAS ON AND OFF WHEN MY SON SAT IN THE FRONT SEAT. ON THE FIRST OCCASION NISSAN JUST RESET THE PASSENGER AIRBAG SENSOR. IT DID NOT SOLVE THE ISSUE, THE SECOND COMPLAINT, NISSAN SAID IT WOULD ONLY GO OFF IF MY SON WEIGHED OVER 110LBS. IN THIS ACCIDENT THE AIR BAG DID GO OFF, CONSIDERING THIS CAR WAS GOING TO BE THE CAR HE DROVE- HE HAS HIS PERMIT RIGHT NOW, SO IF THE DRIVER WEIGHS LESS THAN 110LBS IT WOULD NOT DEPLOY. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. SECONDLY, I BELIEVE THE NISSAN ALTIMA BRAKES FAILED IN THE ACCIDENT. WHEN THE TOW TRUCK DRIVER PICKED UP THE CAR ON ITS FLATBED, HE SAID THAT IT APPEARED THERE WAS SOMETHING FUNKY WITH THE FOOT BRAKE, IT WAS ROCK HARD WHEN COMPRESSED. THE ABS COMPLETELY FAILED, I NEVER FELT IT ENGAGE AFTER PUSHING FIRMLY HARD ON THE BRAKES. THERE WERE NO SKID MARKS ON THE ROAD. I NOTED THE ROAD WHERE THE ACCIDENT OCCURRED HAD TWO TYPES OF FLUID ON IT, ONE OILY ONE LIKE COOLANT. THE CAR WAS RECENTLY SERVICED, BY NISSAN VAN NUYS, THEY REPLACED THE TRANSMISSION. THE CAR DROVE INCREDIBLY WELL FOR A WEEK, BUT THE LAST FEW DAYS I NOTED THE SLUGGISHNESS AGAIN RETURNED. MY TIRES AND BRAKES WHICH WERE ALL FINE. THEY DID REPLACE THE BRAKE FLUID.

NHTSA ODI #11075001

Official recalls

4

20V315000 · Latches/locks/linkages:hood:latch

May 28, 2020

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain model year 2013-2018 Nissan Altima vehicles. If the primary hood latch is inadvertently released, there is an increased likelihood that the secondary hood latch may corrode over time.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Corrosion to the secondary latch may cause it to bind and remain in the unlatched position when the hood is closed. If the primary latch is inadvertently released again and the secondary latch is not engaged, the hood could unexpectedly open while driving, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will install a stronger release spring in the hood release lever, a warning label near the secondary hood latch, and an Owner’s Manual addendum card with instructions on how to lubricate and maintain the secondary hood latch mechanism, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed June 30, 2021. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669. Note: Recall 16V-029 remains open for any unremedied 2013-2015 Altimas and this recall applies to all vehicles covered by 16V-029 even if those repairs have already been performed.

18V915000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch; Structure:emergency:escape/egress/exit

Dec 19, 2018

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Altima vehicles, previously remedied under recall number 17V-040. The door latch-lock cable may not have been routed properly in the rear door when the remedy was applied. As a result, the cable may interfere with the window regulator causing the rear passenger door to unlatch and inadvertently open without warning when the window is lowered.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the rear passenger door opens while the vehicle is moving, the rear passengers have an increased risk of injury.

Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will secure the latch-lock cables in the correct position using the new remedy procedure, free of charge. The recall began February 5, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7669.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Structure:emergency:escape/egress/exit

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Altima vehicles, previously remedied under recall number 17V-040. The door latch-lock cable may not have been routed properly in the rear door when the remedy was applied. As a result, the cable may interfere with the window regulator causing the rear passenger door to unlatch and inadvertently open without warning when the window is lowered.

Consequence: If the rear passenger door opens while the vehicle is moving, the rear passengers have an increased risk of injury.

Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will secure the latch-lock cables in the correct position using the new remedy procedure, free of charge. The recall began February 5, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7669.

Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Altima vehicles, previously remedied under recall number 17V-040. The door latch-lock cable may not have been routed properly in the rear door when the remedy was applied. As a result, the cable may interfere with the window regulator causing the rear passenger door to unlatch and inadvertently open without warning when the window is lowered.

Consequence: If the rear passenger door opens while the vehicle is moving, the rear passengers have an increased risk of injury.

Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will secure the latch-lock cables in the correct position using the new remedy procedure, free of charge. The recall began February 5, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7669.

17V040000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch

Jan 18, 2017

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Altima vehicles. The rear door latch/lock cable on the vehicles may have been improperly routed. As a result, lowering a rear window may inadvertently cause that door to unlatch and open.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the rear passenger doors inadvertently open while the vehicle is in motion, it may increase the risk of injury to the rear passengers.

Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will correct the rear door latch/lock cable routing, free of charge. The recall began on February 16, 2017. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7261.

16V244000 · Air Bags:sensor:occupant Classification

Apr 26, 2016

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain model year 2016-2017 Nissan Maxima, 2013-2016 Nissan Altima, NV200, LEAF, Sentra, and Pathfinder, 2014-2016 Nissan NV200 Taxi, Infiniti QX60, QX60 Hybrid, and Q50 Hybrid, 2014-2017 Nissan Rogue and Infiniti Q50, 2015-2016 Nissan Murano, Murano Hybrid, and Chevrolet City Express, 2014-2015 Nissan Pathfinder Hybrid, and 2013 Infiniti JX35 vehicles. In these vehicles, the front seat passenger Occupant Classification System (OCS) may incorrectly classify an adult passenger as a child or classify the seat as empty despite it being occupied. As a result, the passenger frontal air bag may be turned off and not deploy in the event of a crash.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the passenger frontal air bag does not deploy as intended in the event of a crash, the passenger is at an increased risk of injury.

Remedy: Nissan will notify their owners. Chevrolet City Express owners will be notified by General Motors. Dealers will reprogram the Air Bag Control Unit (ACU) and OCS Electronic Control Unit (ECU) in Altima, Maxima, Murano, Rogue, and Sentra vehicles, and replace the OCS ECU in LEAF, NV200, NV200 Taxi, Pathfinder, Infiniti Q50, JX35, and QX60 and Chevrolet City Express vehicles, free of charge. Interim notices were sent to owners on May 31, 2016. Owners will receive a second notice when remedy parts become available. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669, Infiniti customer service at 1-888-833-3216 or Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020.

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

NHTSA investigations

3

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

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

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

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

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

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

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

EA19002 · Rear Suspension Control Arm Failure

Opened Jul 29, 2019 · Closed Jun 16, 2025

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:rear

On July 29, 2019, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened EA19002 to investigate instances of alleged rear lower control arm failures in 2013-2018 Nissan Altima and 2016-2018 Nissan Maxima vehicles. At the time the investigation was opened ODI had 91 consumer complaints alleging rear lower control arm failures in the subject vehicles.ODI was concerned about these complaints because many of them alleged an increased steering effort or loss of vehicle control.At the time these complaints were received, ODI was also aware of a proactive service campaign addressing 2013 Nissan Altima in salt-belt states for a similar concern. Since opening the investigation, ODI has confirmed, based on consumer complaints, warranty data, and testing conducted by Nissan and ODI, that owners of the subject vehicles are experiencing a corroded bushing at one of three mounting points of the control arm to the rear subframe.ODI has also confirmed that drivers become aware of the problem because of sound and abnormal vibrations. In addition, the failure mileage is typically over 113,000 miles at the time of failure.In conjunction with Nissan and VRTC, ODI participated in testing to assess the potential safety consequence of a bushing failure.It was found the Vehicle Dynamic Control system allows the driver to maintain vehicle control in the event of a bushing failure.With between 7 to 13 years of field exposure, ODI is aware of only one low speed crash allegation describing minor contact with another vehicle’s trailer hitch. Nissan acknowledges that a crack can develop in affected control arms due to stress loading from normal use and that salts commonly used for roadway snow and ice treatment may result in corrosion that exacerbates the progression of the crack.Nissan implemented a design change in January of 2018 to improve the durability of the lower control arm.Affected vehicles have either been repaired with the countermeasure part under a customer satisfaction campaign or been provided a warranty extension from 3 years/36,000 miles to 10 year/unlimited mileage. Through testing and analysis of the information obtained to date, ODI has not identified a defect representing an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety involving corrosion of the subject rear lower control arm at this time.With a declining trend of reports and Nissan’s actions to implement a countermeasure and extended warranty coverage, further investigation of the issue does not appear to be warranted at this time.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov. A detailed discussion of the investigation and related complaint numbers can be viewed in the attached closing report.

PE18013 · Rear Suspension Control Arm Failure

Opened Dec 1, 2018 · Closed Aug 21, 2019

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:rear

PE18-013 was opened on December 1, 2018, with 4 complaints to ODI alleging incidents of the lower control arm fracturing at a connection point to the vehicle chassis due to corrosion. ODI has received an additional 87 complaints since the PE was opened. During PE18-013, Nissan indicated model years 2013-2018 shared a common rear lower control arm design. Nissan provided complaint and warranty data regarding 48 incidents of the subject failure. The majority of the complaints are from vehicles registered in salt belt states. There have been no crashes, injuries, or fatalities confirmed as of this date. Nissan advised that it has conducted testing to assess safety risk. Nissan states that due to low incident rate, high detectability, and low risk of adverse vehicle dynamics, it does not believe the subject lower control arm failure poses an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.This preliminary evaluation has been upgraded to Engineering Analysis (EA) 19-002. During the EA, ODI will continue to collect and analyze complaint and field data in its efforts to fully assess the scope and frequency of the alleged defect. More importantly, ODI will also seek additional information and data regarding the potential safety consequences of rear lower control arm failure, both from evidence collected from field failures and through more rigorous and comprehensive vehicle testing to be conducted by either Nissan and/or NHTSA.The ODI reports (VOQs) cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers: 11234334, 11234232, 11234189, 11233771, 11233234, 11232381, 11231589, 11230323, 11230184, 11229023, 11229003, 11228730, 11228651, 11228631, 11228625, 11223086, 11222602, 11222427, 11222303, 11221802, 11219943, 11217980, 11217542, 11217505, 11217290, 11210699, 11209647, 11208580, 11208274, 11207545, 11206310, 11205711, 11205461, 11203864, 11203005, 11195416, 11193545, 11193020, 11192269, 11192066, 11191270, 11191207, 11191185, 11191042, 11190360, 11190323, 11187334, 11187157, 11186747, 11186195, 11185664, 11185632, 11185589, 11183799, 11183295, 11183198, 11182705,11182528, 11182265, 11182137, 11182088, 11181373, 11181223, 11181155, 11181009, 11180126, 11176565, 11176261, 11176135, 11175821, 11172604, 11172200, 11172065, 11170019, 11169930, 11165194, 11163833, 11163489, 11162559, 11162195, 11161956, 11161497, 11161117, 11157323, 11157234, 11156772, 11141169, 11139516, 11129476, 11122829, 11114374.

Go deeper into Nissan Altima problems