2024 Nissan Pathfinder

Premature wear on my rear brakes. Front brakes when checked were at a level 7 out of 10 while the rear brakes at 24,000 miles were down to a 1 per one company and a 3 per Alpine Nissan. I was told it is recommended I do not drive the vehicle without getting the brakes replaced and the problem was due to my driving and all brakes wear different. If that were the case my front brakes would have gone first or been close to the same measurement. It was deemed unsafe to drive after 24,000 miles. I have 2 small children and at this point do not feel like this is a safe vehicle for me and my family to continue driving nor do I feel I need to take on the financial responsibility of replacing my rear brakes every 1-2 years due to a vehicle malfunction. If I had to slam on my brakes at any point my vehicle would skid which made me realize the significance of this issue and safety driving on the road. The only warning sign I had was a squeaking sound for about a week and I took it in immediately and found my break pads were down to a 1 measurement.

I lease a 2024 Nissan Pathfinder Platinum with approximately 19,000 miles. During a recent inspection at a Nissan dealership, I was informed that the rear brake pads were worn down to approximately 1.5 mm and required immediate replacement. At the same inspection, the front brake pads still measured approximately 6.5 mm. The vehicle has been driven under normal conditions and has not been used for towing or other unusually demanding braking conditions. I am concerned about the extremely premature and disproportionate wear of the rear brakes. At approximately 19,000 miles, the rear pads are nearly completely worn while the front pads still have substantial material remaining. The Nissan dealer recommended replacement of the rear brake pads and rotors but did not cover the repair under warranty or provide goodwill assistance because brake pads are considered wear items. I believe the unusually rapid rear brake wear may indicate an issue with the rear braking system rather than normal brake-pad wear. Premature rear brake wear could create a safety concern if owners are unaware that their rear pads are becoming severely worn at relatively low mileage. I am submitting this complaint so NHTSA can document the issue and determine whether similar premature rear brake wear is occurring in other 2024 Nissan Pathfinders.

I am submitting this complaint regarding a safety concern involving my 2024 Nissan Pathfinder, which has approximately 19,000 miles on the vehicle. The rear brake pads were found to be excessively worn and required replacement at only 19,000 miles. I consider this premature brake-pad wear to be a significant safety concern given the relatively low mileage and age of the vehicle. The braking system is a critical safety component, and I would not expect the rear brake pads on a relatively new 2024 vehicle with only 19,000 miles to require replacement due to excessive wear. Premature or abnormal brake-pad wear could potentially reduce braking performance, increase stopping distances, cause uneven braking, damage other brake components, or create an unsafe condition if the driver is unaware of the extent of the wear. I am concerned that this may not be an isolated maintenance issue but could potentially indicate a defect or problem with the vehicle's braking system, including the rear brake components, brake calipers, electronic parking brake system, or another component that may be causing abnormal or accelerated brake-pad wear. I am requesting that this complaint be documented and investigated to determine whether other 2024 Nissan Pathfinder owners have experienced similar premature rear brake-pad wear and whether there is a defect or safety-related issue affecting the rear braking system. Vehicle: 2024 Nissan Pathfinder Mileage: Approximately 19,000 miles Safety Component: Rear braking system/rear brake pads Issue: Premature/excessive rear brake-pad wear requiring replacement at approximately 19,000 miles. I believe this issue warrants investigation because brake-system reliability is directly related to vehicle safety, and premature wear at such low mileage is concerning for a relatively new vehicle.

The alternator gave out, and yes it was confirmed by concord Nissan, I have 4 kids in the car this was dangerous as to the car stopped on the freeway in a merging lane therefore the car kept shaking as we were waiting for help, we missed our flight to the airport. We could have gotten hit by a moving vehicle mean while we were waiting for the police to arrive. There were no warning signals prior to the incident

I have had to replace my rear brake pads and machine rotors at 15k and 28k miles. I’ve never had to replace my front brakes- the issue is not my driving. I was told not to use my lane assist b/c it wears brakes and have t ever used. In addition the seatbelt warning dings while driving with no person nor anything on the seat. I have to pull off the freeway, turn the car off and restart it to stop the dinging.

The defect involves the outside side mirrors and the reverse-tilt function. When the vehicle is shifted into Reverse, a mirror normally tilts downward as designed. However, after shifting back into Drive or Park, the mirror intermittently fails to return to its previously stored driving position. Sometimes it returns correctly, sometimes it returns only partway, and sometimes it does not return at all. When the failure occurs, the mirror remains pointed downward and significantly reduces rearward and adjacent-lane visibility until I manually readjust it. This creates a safety risk because the mirror may appear to have returned to its normal position when it has not, leaving the driver with impaired visibility after completing a reverse maneuver. The problem is intermittent and has been reported to and evaluated by Nissan dealerships. The vehicle and mirror system remain available for inspection upon request. There are no warning lamps or dashboard messages associated with the failure. The primary symptom is the mirror’s failure to consistently return to its stored driving position. Because of the inconsistent operation, I have disabled the reverse-tilt feature to prevent the mirror from unexpectedly remaining in an unsafe downward position. However, disabling the feature eliminates the additional downward visibility Nissan designed it to provide while reversing. This is not a satisfactory resolution. I am forced to choose between the risk of impaired rearward visibility after reversing and the loss of the enhanced visibility intended to assist during reverse maneuvers. The system does not operate as designed and creates an avoidable visibility and safety concern.

There are 2 antifreeze lines going to the back of the vehicle, they are to cool the 3rd row seats using air conditioning. Both lines were incorrectly designed so they have a repetitive failure rate of 100%. Both lines failed in March of 2025 and were replaced by Serra Nissan of Traverse City, MI. Both lines failed again and were confirmed by the dealer yesterday on 7-1-26. The first failure occurred at 8,401 miles. The second failure at 16,742. Anti freeze is spraying on the brakes of the rear passenger area, a major safety issue. Nissan does not want to spend the money to redesign the failed part design so they reinstall the same failed antifreeze lines with every repair. There is a 5 MONTH WAIT for new parts to arrive due to the massive quantity of failures. No warning lights appear during these repetitive failures. The failures are visible, you can see the antifreeze leaks all around the rear brake. And the air conditioning stops functioning in the car. Serra Nissan is very upset that Nissan Inc. is refusing to correct the failed design of the part. So the failures will occur forever.