PRIMERO ME PEGARON EN LA PUERTA ISQUIERDA Y DESPUES LE CAYO UN ARBOL ADELANTE Y ATRAS MI NOMBRE ES [XXX] MI NUMERO ES [XXX]. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
2015 Toyota Corolla
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2015 Toyota Corolla do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 129.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Corolla 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
133 reports with mileage · 86 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.
- Air Bags. Review the 56 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 32 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 30 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
219 reportsDRAIN HOSE IN AIR CONDITIONING WAS CLOGGED CAUSING WATER TO ACCUMULATE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE CAR AND SOAKED ALL THE CARPET. THIS IS A RELATIVELY NEW CAR AND THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED. OTHER UNKNOWN DAMAGE MAY BE DONE TO THE CAR AS A RESULT OF WATER LEAKAGE (AIR BAGS, ELECTRICAL WIRING) WHICH COULD POSE A SAFETY HAZARD.
I WANT TO REPORT THAT I FOUND A LOOSE BOLT POKING OUT OF THE DRAIN HOLE ON THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR OF OUR 2015 TOYTOTA COROLLA. IT WAS ORIENTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT ONLY THE THREADED END WAS POKING OUT THE HOLE AND HELD INSIDE THE DOOR BY THE BOLT HEAD. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND AS A COURTESY THEY REMOVED THE DOOR PANEL AND DET…
Read full complaint
I WANT TO REPORT THAT I FOUND A LOOSE BOLT POKING OUT OF THE DRAIN HOLE ON THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR OF OUR 2015 TOYTOTA COROLLA. IT WAS ORIENTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT ONLY THE THREADED END WAS POKING OUT THE HOLE AND HELD INSIDE THE DOOR BY THE BOLT HEAD. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND AS A COURTESY THEY REMOVED THE DOOR PANEL AND DETERMINED IT HAD COME FROM ONE OF THE WINDOW PARTS (REGULATOR OR MOTOR). THEY REINSTALLED AND TIGHTENED THE BOLT. I READ ON THE INTERNET THIS WAS A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH PREVIOUS TOYOTAS AND CREATED SAFETY CONCERNS. THIS MAY BE A CONTINUED PROBLEM WITH TOYOTAS. IT WAS OBVIOUSLY A VERY SMALL CHANCE THAT THE BOLT ACTUALLY LANDED IN A FASHION TO PARTIALLY STICK OUT OF THE DRAIN HOLE SO I WAS ABLE TO SPOT THIS, SO I CAN'T HELP BUT WONDER IF OTHER WINDOW BOLTS IN THE CAR HAVE, OR WILL, COME LOOSE AND FALL INTO THE INTERIOR OF THE DOORS WITHOUT DETECTION. THIS MAY ALSO BE THE CASE WITH MANY OTHER COROLLAS SOLD. BOLTS THAT BECOME LOOSE AND FALL OFF OF WINDOW PARTS COULD LEAD TO INADVERTENT AND DANGEROUS FAILURE OF WINDOWS ON THE ROAD. I SUGGEST YOU INVESTIGATE THIS POTENTIAL SAFETY ISSUE.
TAKATA INFLATORS
I FILED A SIMILAR COMPLAINT IN JANUARY 2017 UNDER COMPLAINT 10947803 AND NOW REALIZE THE DIPSTICK/DIPSTICK TUBE DEFECT ON THESE CARS CAN ALSO BE CATEGORIZED UNDER "OTHER". ------- THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE ENGINE OIL DIPSTICK AND/OR DIPSTICK TUBE ON THE 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA WHICH USES 0W-20 OIL. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO OBTAIN AN …
Read full complaint
I FILED A SIMILAR COMPLAINT IN JANUARY 2017 UNDER COMPLAINT 10947803 AND NOW REALIZE THE DIPSTICK/DIPSTICK TUBE DEFECT ON THESE CARS CAN ALSO BE CATEGORIZED UNDER "OTHER". ------- THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE ENGINE OIL DIPSTICK AND/OR DIPSTICK TUBE ON THE 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA WHICH USES 0W-20 OIL. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO OBTAIN AN ACCURATE READING ON THE ENGINE OIL LEVEL AND I HAVE NEVER ENCOUNTERED THIS ON ANY OTHER VEHICLE. THE OIL TENDS TO FORM A LONG "TAIL" UP THE DIPSTICK MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO DISCERN WHERE THE ACTUAL LEVEL IS. ATTEMPTING TO OBTAIN A READING WITH MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS YIELDS DIFFERENT POSSIBLE OIL LEVELS AND THE LEVELS ARE DIFFERENT ON EACH SIDE OF THE DIPSTICK. I WOULD NOTE THAT THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN REPORTED ON NUMEROUS FORUMS ON THE INTERNET INCLUDING FORUMS DEDICATED TO TOYOTA ENTHUSIASTS AS WELL AS GENERAL CAR FORUMS AND ENGINE OIL FORUMS. THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN REPORTED NOT ONLY FOR THE COROLLA BUT ALSO FOR OTHER TOYOTA MODELS. SOME OWNERS HAVE RESORTED TO MODIFYING THE DIPSTICK WHICH SHOULD NOT BE NECESSARY. THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE. NOT BEING ABLE TO OBTAIN AN ACCURATE READING OF ENGINE OIL LEVEL PUTS THE ENGINE AT RISK OF DAMAGE AND EVEN SERIOUS AND SUDDEN FAILURE IF THE OIL IS OVER OR UNDER FILLED. ENGINE DAMAGE AND PERSONAL INJURY OR DEATH CAN OBVIOUSLY OCCUR IF ENGINE FAILURE OCCURS WHILE IN OPERATION ON ROADS. TOYOTA SHOULD TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION ON THIS ISSUE, INVESTIGATE IT, AND PROVIDE A FIX AVAILABLE AT DEALERSHIPS AND ANNOUNCE THAT FIX TO OWNERS. IT IS UNCLEAR WHETHER IT IS A PROBLEM WITH THE ACTUAL DIPSTICK DESIGN, THE TUBE THAT THE DIPSTICK GOES INTO, OR OTHER, BUT A FIX IS DEFINITELY IN ORDER. I URGE NHTSA TO INVESTIGATE THIS ISSUE.
MY SON WAS IN AN ACCIDENT AND HIT A TREE. THE CAR WAS TOTALED AND THE AIR BAGS NEVER DEPLOYED AS A RESULT HE HIT THE WINDSHIELD WITH HIS HEAD AND NEEDED STITCHES
I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL NOTICES OF AN AIRBAG RECALL IN MY VEHICLE. THE NOTICES INSTRUCT ME TO TAKE THE CAR TO A DEALERSHIP FOR REPAIR IMMEDIATELY. IF I'M UNABLE TO TAKE TO A DEALERSHIP, I'M TO HAVE SOMEONE ELSE PERFORM THE REPAIR AND THEN TOYOTA WILL REIMBURSE ME. THE DEALERSHIP IN COSTA RICA, WHERE MY CAR IS LOCATED, WILL NOT P…
Read full complaint
I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL NOTICES OF AN AIRBAG RECALL IN MY VEHICLE. THE NOTICES INSTRUCT ME TO TAKE THE CAR TO A DEALERSHIP FOR REPAIR IMMEDIATELY. IF I'M UNABLE TO TAKE TO A DEALERSHIP, I'M TO HAVE SOMEONE ELSE PERFORM THE REPAIR AND THEN TOYOTA WILL REIMBURSE ME. THE DEALERSHIP IN COSTA RICA, WHERE MY CAR IS LOCATED, WILL NOT PERFORM THE REPAIR. I HAVE CONTACTED TOYOTA AND AM UNABLE TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE OR HOW TO GET REIMBURSED ONCE THE REPAIR IS COMPLETE. THE LAST COMMUNICATION I HAD WITH TOYOTA, A REPRESENTATIVE TOLD ME HE WAS WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM JAPAN AND THAT HE WOULD ONLY EMAIL ME IF HE HEARD AND THEY GAVE HIM RELEVANT INFORMATION. SURELY SOMEONE AT THE TOYOTA COMPANY MUST KNOW THE REPAIR NEEDED. IN THE MEANTIME, I KEEP RECEIVING NOTICES FROM TOYOTA ABOUT HOW UNSAFE MY CAR IS AND TO GET IT FIXED IMMEDIATELY. I'M TRYING!!!
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 36 MPH, THE DRIVER LOST CONTROL OF THE STEERING AND THE VEHICLE ROLLED OVER MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE CRASHING INTO A WOODED AREA. DURING THE INCIDENT, THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE WAS SEVERELY DAMAGED, BUT THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED A CON…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 36 MPH, THE DRIVER LOST CONTROL OF THE STEERING AND THE VEHICLE ROLLED OVER MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE CRASHING INTO A WOODED AREA. DURING THE INCIDENT, THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE WAS SEVERELY DAMAGED, BUT THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED A CONCUSSION, AND AN INJURED BACK AND RIBS. MEDICAL ATTENTION WAS RECEIVED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND TOWED. THE MANUFACTURER AND LOCAL DEALER WERE NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 24,000.
VEHICLE SOLD WITH A DEFECTIVE DRIVER SIDE WINDOW. TOOK OUR 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA INTO A SHOP TO GET THE WINDOWS TINTED, THE VENDOR THAT TINTED THE WINDOWS STATED THE VEHICLE WINDOWS SHOULD NOT BE ROLLED DOWN FOR 5 DAYS TO ALLOW THE WINDOW TINT TO DRY. WE FOLLOWED THE INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE VENDOR (TINT MY RIDE) - 1330 S PARKER RD, …
Read full complaint
VEHICLE SOLD WITH A DEFECTIVE DRIVER SIDE WINDOW. TOOK OUR 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA INTO A SHOP TO GET THE WINDOWS TINTED, THE VENDOR THAT TINTED THE WINDOWS STATED THE VEHICLE WINDOWS SHOULD NOT BE ROLLED DOWN FOR 5 DAYS TO ALLOW THE WINDOW TINT TO DRY. WE FOLLOWED THE INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE VENDOR (TINT MY RIDE) - 1330 S PARKER RD, DENVER, CO 80231 - (720) 808-8286. WE BEGIN ROLLING THE WINDOWS DOWN AFTER 5 DAYS AS INSTRUCTED A FEW WEEKS WENT BY AND I NOTICED A GAP BETWEEN THE TINT AND THE CAR DOOR. I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO THE VENDOR TINT MY RIDE TO HAVE THEM CORRECT THE WINDOW TINT ISSUE AND THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO SOLD MY THE WINDOW TINT (VERONICA) MENTIONED THAT IT WAS NOT A WINDOW TINT ISSUE AND THAT IT WAS A CAR WINDOW ISSUE WITH THE WINDOW SLIDING AND BEING OFF TRACK. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE IF CAR MANUFACTURERS ARE ABLE TO SELL BRAND NEW VEHICLES WITH WINDOWS THAT ARE DEFECTIVE AND OFF TRACK. THIS VEHICLE WAS BOUGHT BRAND NEW AND HAS NEVER BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT AND WE HAVE ALWAYS TAKEN THE VEHICLE IN TO GET IT MAINTENANCE ACCORDING TO THE DEALERSHIPS RECOMMENDATIONS. HOW CAN A DEALERSHIP SELL A BRAND NEW VEHICLE TO A CUSTOMER THAT HAS A DEFECTIVE DRIVER SIDE WINDOW? THIS NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED AS A SAFETY ISSUE AS I AM CONCERNED THERE MAY BE OTHER SAFETY CONCERNS WITH THIS VEHICLE.
TAMARA RECALL I HAVE A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA LE I HAVE SEARCHED ALL OVER THE WEB AND FIND ALL ASPECTS OF THIS VEHICLE AND COMPLAINTS ARE THE SAME THAT THIS VEHICLE HAS FAULTY WIRING ON THE PCM THIS CODE KEEP POPPING UP WHEN I CONNECT MY COMPUTER TO IT P2757 WHICH IS P2757 MEANS A PROBLEM WITH THE TORQUE CONVERTER CLUTCH PRESSURE C…
Read full complaint
TAMARA RECALL I HAVE A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA LE I HAVE SEARCHED ALL OVER THE WEB AND FIND ALL ASPECTS OF THIS VEHICLE AND COMPLAINTS ARE THE SAME THAT THIS VEHICLE HAS FAULTY WIRING ON THE PCM THIS CODE KEEP POPPING UP WHEN I CONNECT MY COMPUTER TO IT P2757 WHICH IS P2757 MEANS A PROBLEM WITH THE TORQUE CONVERTER CLUTCH PRESSURE CONTROL SOLENOID DUE TO A BAD TORQUE CONVERTER OR SOLENOID OR ELECTRICAL ISSUES. THE CAR IS ONLY TWO YEARS OLD IT SHOULD NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM THIS CAR ONLY HAS 6,100 MILES AND I HAVE HAD THIS CAR FOR ALL MOST A YEAR ALSO THE THE TRAC OFF LIGHT IS ALSO ON WHICH MEANS THAT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE ABS SYSTEM ALSO SHOULD BE NO REASON FOR THIS CAR TO HAVE THAT PROBLEM THIS CAR IS TO NEW
Official recalls
120V024000 · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
Jan 17, 2020
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2011-2019 Corolla, 2011-2013 Matrix, 2012-2018 Avalon, and 2013-2018 Avalon Hybrid vehicles. During certain crashes, the air bag electronic control unit (ECU) may malfunction, possibly disabling the deployment of the air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash, air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners that do not deploy as intended may increase the risk of injury.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the ECU and install a noise filter between the air bag control module and its wire harness, as necessary, free of charge. Owners were notified of the safety risk beginning March 2, 2020. A second letter notifying owners of the remedy repair will be mailed between March 16, 2020 and June 27, 2020. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are 20TB03, 20TA03 and 20TA05.
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
2EA21002 · 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.
Illustration