Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
590–25K
3125–50K
2350–75K
675–100K
14100–150K
0150K+
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.
60 crash reports1 fire reports42 injury reports
What owners actually said
219 reports
Mileage unknown · Nov 9, 2015
Exterior Lighting
EVERYDAY I SEE AT LEAST 5 PEOPLE IN 2014-2016 COROLLA MODELS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD WITH THEIR DRLS ON BUT NO OTHER LIGHTS. THIS OCCURS BECAUSE THE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH LED HEADLIGHTS USE THEIR REGULAR BEAM AS THE DRL AND PEOPLE ASSUME THEY HAVE AUTOMATIC HEADLIGHTS. HOWEVER THIS IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AS THERE ARE NO TAILLIGH…
Read full complaint
EVERYDAY I SEE AT LEAST 5 PEOPLE IN 2014-2016 COROLLA MODELS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD WITH THEIR DRLS ON BUT NO OTHER LIGHTS. THIS OCCURS BECAUSE THE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH LED HEADLIGHTS USE THEIR REGULAR BEAM AS THE DRL AND PEOPLE ASSUME THEY HAVE AUTOMATIC HEADLIGHTS. HOWEVER THIS IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AS THERE ARE NO TAILLIGHTS ON. I HAVE SEEN SO MANY PEOPLE DRIVING IN THE PITCH BLACK WITH NO TAILLIGHTS. PLEASE ISSUE MANDATORY RECALL TO REFIT VEHICLES WITH WARNING THAT HEADLIGHTS AREN'T AUTOMATIC IN OFF POSITION EVEN WITH DRL ON OR ADD LIGHT SENSOR THAT CAN DETECT DARKNESS AND AUTOMATICALLY ACTIVATES TAILLIGHTS. THIS SHOULD ALSO APPLY TO RAINY CONDITIONS AS HARDLY ANY TOYOTA DRIVERS KNOW THAT MOST STATES REQUIRE HEADLIGHTS ON IN RAIN.
ON THE FREEWAY DRIVING AND EIGHTEEN WHEELER CAME OVER ON MY CAR AND HIT AND DRAGGED MY UNTIL MY DETACHED FROM THE TRUCK SPIN AROUND AND THE BACK OF MY CAR SLAMMED INTO THE MEDIAN WALL. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY....UPDATED 10/29/15*BF
NHTSA ODI #10782267
4 miles · Oct 7, 2015
Visibility/wiper
I PURCHASED A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA IN AUGUST 2015. AFTER DRIVING THE CAR FOR ABOUT THREE DAYS I NOTICED A VERY STRONG WAVE EFFECT WAS PRESENT IN THE WINDSHIELD THAT SPANNED THE LENGTH OF THE GLASS FROM TOP TO BOTTOM AND A SERIES OF WAVES WITH VARYING WIDTH SPANNED THE ENTIRE WINDSHIELD. IT APPEARED AS THOUGH THE THICKNESS OF TH…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA IN AUGUST 2015. AFTER DRIVING THE CAR FOR ABOUT THREE DAYS I NOTICED A VERY STRONG WAVE EFFECT WAS PRESENT IN THE WINDSHIELD THAT SPANNED THE LENGTH OF THE GLASS FROM TOP TO BOTTOM AND A SERIES OF WAVES WITH VARYING WIDTH SPANNED THE ENTIRE WINDSHIELD. IT APPEARED AS THOUGH THE THICKNESS OF THE GLASS VARIED. DRIVING THE CAR CAUSED MIGRAINE HEADACHES AND IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO CONCENTRATE OF THE ROAD BECAUSE OF THE DISTORTION PRESENT ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE. THE EFFECT IS SIMILAR TO LOOKING THROUGH EYEGLASSES THAT ARE THE WRONG PRESCRIPTION, OR USING READER GLASSES THAT ARE TOO STRONG. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP WHO DID SEE THE DEFECT AND WORKED WITH ME TO REPLACE IT. UPON PICKING THE CAR UP I FOUND THE REPLACEMENT WINDSHIELD HAD THE SAME DEFECT BUT IN A DIFFERENT SPOT. THE DEFECT THIS TIME WAS IN THE CENTER OF THE GLASS MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO LOOK INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC WHEN TRYING TO MAKE A TURN. THE CAR WAS AGAIN RETURNED TO THE DEALER WHO CONFIRMED THE PRESENCE OF THE DEFECT AND AGREED TO YET AGAIN REPLACE THE WINDSHIELD. THE THIRD REPLACEMENT WINDSHIELD IS NOW ON THE CAR AND ALTHOUGH THE EFFECT IS NOT AS STRONG AS THE FIRST TWO THE THIRD WINDSHIELD ALSO HAS NOTICEABLE WAVES GOING THROUGH THE DRIVERS SIDE AND A VERY OBVIOUS RIPPLING EFFECT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE WINDSHIELD. THERE APPEARS TO BE A DEFECT IN EVERY WINDSHIELD THAT IS COMING FROM THE MANUFACTURER FACTORY, THESE HAVE ALL BEEN OEM WINDSHIELDS. IT CAUSES HEADACHES, IS A DISTRACTION WHEN DRIVING DUE TO OBJECTS CHANGING SHAPE WHILE DRIVING, AND I AM CONCERNED THAT IT IS ALSO A SAFETY ISSUE IF THE LAMINATE AND GLASS HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY TEMPERED AND BONDED TOGETHER, THEREFORE MAKING THE WINDSHIELD WEAKER IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH. I BELIEVE THE ASASHI GLASS COMPANY IS EXPORTING DEFECTIVE WINDSHIELDS TO BE PLACED ON COROLLAS.
NHTSA ODI #10780610
4,900 miles · Oct 2, 2015
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE LOST POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT MOVE AND THE ENGINE SEIZED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED OR DUPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE AP…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE LOST POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT MOVE AND THE ENGINE SEIZED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED OR DUPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 4,900. UPDATED 1/21/16 *SS *TR
NHTSA ODI #10779291
Mileage unknown · Sep 27, 2015
Exterior LightingInjury
THE HEADLIGHTS IN THE TOYOTA COROLLA ARE BLINDINGLY BRIGHT. THE TOYOTA COROLLA LIGHTS ARE UPON THE WORSE OFFENDERS OF HEADLIGHTS THAT ARE SO BRIGHT THEY ARE CAUSING TEMPORARY BLINDNESS. I HAVE NOTICED FOR MONTHS THIS MODEL HAS HEADLIGHTS THAT ARE TOO BRIGHT, BUT I AM WRITING TODAY BECAUSE OF A RECENT EXPERIENCE WHERE I TEMPORARI…
Read full complaint
THE HEADLIGHTS IN THE TOYOTA COROLLA ARE BLINDINGLY BRIGHT. THE TOYOTA COROLLA LIGHTS ARE UPON THE WORSE OFFENDERS OF HEADLIGHTS THAT ARE SO BRIGHT THEY ARE CAUSING TEMPORARY BLINDNESS. I HAVE NOTICED FOR MONTHS THIS MODEL HAS HEADLIGHTS THAT ARE TOO BRIGHT, BUT I AM WRITING TODAY BECAUSE OF A RECENT EXPERIENCE WHERE I TEMPORARILY LOST THE ABILITY TO SEE AT NIGHT DUE TO A COROLLA. TOYOTA NOW IS ADVERTISING THEIR BRIGHT HEADLIGHTS TO SELL VEHICLES. THE PURSUIT OF BRIGHT HEADLIGHTS IN COROLLA SHOULD TO BE PUT INTO CHECK BY FEDERAL REGULATORS BEFORE THEY CAUSE ACCIDENTS AND LEAD TO INJURIES OR DEATHS.
NHTSA ODI #10777933
1,700 miles · Sep 22, 2015
Steering
ELECTRIC POWER STEERING IS EXTREMELY OVER BOOSTED. I HAVE TO STRUGGLE TO MAINTAIN A STRAIGHT LINE AT SPEEDS EXCESS OF 50 MPH AS ANY INPUT RESULTS IN EXTREME ANGLE. DIFFICULT TO DRIVER AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, EVEN WITH CRUISE CONTROL. PLEASE FIX THIS!
NHTSA ODI #10767335
10,000 miles · Sep 18, 2015
Unknown Or Other
FAILED TRANSMISSION AT 10000 MILES. I WAS GETTING OFF THE FREEWAY WHEN I NOTICED THE CAR WAS MAKING A STRANGE NOISE. WHEN I STOP AT THE LIGHT ON THE OFF-RAMP, THE BRAKES LOCKED AND THE CAR SLID. WHEN I ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE AGAIN, THE CAR PUT ITSELF IN NEUTRAL AND STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LANE. THE CAR WOULDN'T GO BACK INTO D…
Read full complaint
FAILED TRANSMISSION AT 10000 MILES. I WAS GETTING OFF THE FREEWAY WHEN I NOTICED THE CAR WAS MAKING A STRANGE NOISE. WHEN I STOP AT THE LIGHT ON THE OFF-RAMP, THE BRAKES LOCKED AND THE CAR SLID. WHEN I ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE AGAIN, THE CAR PUT ITSELF IN NEUTRAL AND STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LANE. THE CAR WOULDN'T GO BACK INTO DRIVE AND I NEEDED TO BE TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP. THE DEALERSHIP INFORMED ME THAT MY TRANSMISSION HAD FAILED AND WAS TO BE REPLACED.
NHTSA ODI #10765157
980 miles · Sep 14, 2015
EngineVehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE PARKING AT APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN AND CAUSED THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO A METAL BARRIER. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED AND THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE APPR…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE PARKING AT APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN AND CAUSED THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO A METAL BARRIER. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED AND THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 980. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10763536
6,500 miles · Sep 14, 2015
SteeringCrash
MY TEENAGE LICENSED DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING DOWN RESLER, ON A FOUR LANE STREET, SHE WAS ON THE SECOND LANE TO THE RIGHT AND SHE MADE A SLIGHT RIGHT TURN FOLLOWING THE LANE, WHILE APPROACHING THE INTERSECTION WITH CLOUDVIEW AND RESLER THE STEERING WHEEL GOT STUCK. SHE DIDN'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THE FRONT WHEELS. THE STEERING WHEEL WAS…
Read full complaint
MY TEENAGE LICENSED DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING DOWN RESLER, ON A FOUR LANE STREET, SHE WAS ON THE SECOND LANE TO THE RIGHT AND SHE MADE A SLIGHT RIGHT TURN FOLLOWING THE LANE, WHILE APPROACHING THE INTERSECTION WITH CLOUDVIEW AND RESLER THE STEERING WHEEL GOT STUCK. SHE DIDN'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THE FRONT WHEELS. THE STEERING WHEEL WAS IF IT HAD A LOCK ON IT AND SHE STARTED TO VERGE TO HER RIGHT AND SHE PRESSED ON THE BREAKS, BUT SHE STILL MERGED TO THE RIGHT ENOUGH TO HIT THE CAR NEXT TO HER CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. NOBODY WAS HURT, BUT THE CAR WAS BADLY DAMAGED.
NHTSA ODI #10763430
55 miles · Sep 9, 2015
Exterior LightingUnknown Or OtherVisibility/wiper
WHEN DRIVING THE TOYOTA COROLLA S 2015 AT NIGHT AND ESPECIALLY WHEN GOING DOWNHILL, HALF OF THE WINDSHIELD IS DARK HORIZONTALLY FROM THE MIDDLE UP. SOME DRIVERS AND PASSENGERS MAY EXPERIENCE MORE DEPENDING ON THE HEIGHT OF THE PERSON DRIVING OR RIDING IN THE VEHICLE. THE WINDSHIELD APPEARS TO GO COMPLETELY DARK IN SOME CASES A…
Read full complaint
WHEN DRIVING THE TOYOTA COROLLA S 2015 AT NIGHT AND ESPECIALLY WHEN GOING DOWNHILL, HALF OF THE WINDSHIELD IS DARK HORIZONTALLY FROM THE MIDDLE UP. SOME DRIVERS AND PASSENGERS MAY EXPERIENCE MORE DEPENDING ON THE HEIGHT OF THE PERSON DRIVING OR RIDING IN THE VEHICLE. THE WINDSHIELD APPEARS TO GO COMPLETELY DARK IN SOME CASES AND IS VERY SCARY! THIS IS MY DADS CAR AND HE IS 67 YEARS OLD AND IS SCARED TO DRIVE AT NIGHT DUE TO THIS PROBLEM. I AM 36 YEARS OLD AND AT THE TIME I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST HIM COMPLAINING. HOWEVER, I DROVE THE CAR TONIGHT 9/9/2015 AND IT WAS SCARY TO GO DOWNHILL, AND THIS PROBLEM NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED VERY SOON BEFORE SOMEONE GETS BADLY HURT OR KILLED. IF YOU TURN THE HIGH BEAMS ON YOU DO NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM. THIS DOES NOT HELP WHEN YOU HAVE TO TURN BACK OFF THE HIGH BEAMS DUE TO ANOTHER CAR COMING TOWARDS YOU OF COURSE. ANOTHER PERSON DESCRIBED IT VERY WELL ON THIS SITE HTTPS://WWW-ODI.NHTSA.DOT.GOV/ HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WAS SENT IN BY CULLMAN, AL, USA AND HE OR SHE DESCRIBED IT BEST BELOW: "THE LOW-BEAM LIGHT DESIGN ON THE LENS COVER CUTS OFF THE TOP VIEW OF LIGHT AT NIGHT TIME. YOU SEE LIGHT FROM THE GROUND UP BUT ONLY HALFWAY UP. FROM THERE YOU ONLY SEE DARKNESS. IT LOOKS LIKE A HALF-LIT MOON BEAM FROM THE GROUND UP. YOU ONLY SEE THE BOTTOM HALF OF THE TREES IT IS LIKE A STRAIGHT LINE DRAWN BETWEEN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR VIEW IN FRONT OF THE CAR. WHITE ON THE BOTTOM HALF AND BLACK ON THE TOP HALF. I AM SCARED TO DEATH TO DRIVE MY CAR AROUND CURVES AND LULLS IN THE ROADS. YOUR NIGHT VISION IS EXTREMELY LIMITED. IT IS VERY STRAINING TO HAVE TO LOOK AHEAD AND AT THE SAME TIME YOU HAVE TO KEEP TWO DIFFERENT COLORS SEPARATED."
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
2
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.
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.