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
4 miles · Sep 1, 2015
Unknown Or Other
THERE HAS BEEN NO INCIDENT OR ACCIDENT AS A RESULT OF THIS DEFECT. I BOUGHT A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA 8/29/15. AFTER DRIVING THE CAR FOR 3 DAYS I NOTICE THAT THE WINDSHIELD APPEARS TO HAVE A DEFECT IN THE GLASS. THE GLASS APPEARS TO HAVE VARYING DEGREES OF THICKNESS AS IT SLIGHTLY DISTORTS THE IMAGE YOU SEE THROUGH THE WINDSHIELD…
Read full complaint
THERE HAS BEEN NO INCIDENT OR ACCIDENT AS A RESULT OF THIS DEFECT. I BOUGHT A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA 8/29/15. AFTER DRIVING THE CAR FOR 3 DAYS I NOTICE THAT THE WINDSHIELD APPEARS TO HAVE A DEFECT IN THE GLASS. THE GLASS APPEARS TO HAVE VARYING DEGREES OF THICKNESS AS IT SLIGHTLY DISTORTS THE IMAGE YOU SEE THROUGH THE WINDSHIELD. THERE IS A WAVE APPEARANCE WHEN LOOKING THROUGH THE GLASS. THIS IS VERY DISTRACTING WHILE DRIVING AND ALSO CAUSES YOUR EYES TO STRAIN WHILE KEEPING YOUR EYES ON THE ROAD AND THEREFORE IS CAUSING MIGRAINES.
NHTSA ODI #10760652
8,625 miles · Aug 30, 2015
EngineService BrakesUnknown Or OtherCrash
STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT WITH FOOT ON THE BRAKES. OUT OF NOWHERE THE CAR ACCELERATED FORWARD EXTREMELY FAST. FORCED TO HIT AN CAR IN FRONT OF ME WITHIN A CAR OR TWO, DISTANCE WISE. AFTER THE INCIDENT THE RPM GAUGE FLUCTUATES FROM LOW TO HIGH. IN ADDITION, ONCE GAS PEDAL IS PRESSED CAR SLOWS DOWN AND ECO ACTIVATES, THEN AFTER ABOUT…
Read full complaint
STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT WITH FOOT ON THE BRAKES. OUT OF NOWHERE THE CAR ACCELERATED FORWARD EXTREMELY FAST. FORCED TO HIT AN CAR IN FRONT OF ME WITHIN A CAR OR TWO, DISTANCE WISE. AFTER THE INCIDENT THE RPM GAUGE FLUCTUATES FROM LOW TO HIGH. IN ADDITION, ONCE GAS PEDAL IS PRESSED CAR SLOWS DOWN AND ECO ACTIVATES, THEN AFTER ABOUT 5 SECONDS CAR ACCELERATOR EXTREMELY FAST.
NHTSA ODI #10760217
Mileage unknown · Aug 17, 2015
Unknown Or Other
I LIFTED UP THE REAR SEAT IN ORDER TO INSTALL SEAT COVERS. THE BAR THAT IS BOLTED TO THE FLOOR (INTERIOR) AND ATTACHES TO THE REAR SEATS WAS RUSTED, AND EACH HINGE (ON BOTH LEFT AND RIGHT SIDES) WAS RUSTED AS WELL. CAR WAS PURCHASED IN JUNE OF 2015 AND IS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA.
NHTSA ODI #10749233
22,700 miles · Aug 8, 2015
StructureInjury
I RENTED THIS CAR (TOYOTA COROLLA 2015) AND WAS UNFAMILIAR WITH ALL THE DETAILS. MY PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE WITH MANY CARS OVER THE YEARS NEVER BROUGHT ME AN AWARENESS THAT THE TRUNK LID COULD POTENTIALLY DAMAGE MY HEAD, NECK, OR BACK IN A SEVERE AND POSSIBLY LONG LASTING WAY. I NATURALLY OPENED THE TRUNK LID, BENT IN TO PULL OUT…
Read full complaint
I RENTED THIS CAR (TOYOTA COROLLA 2015) AND WAS UNFAMILIAR WITH ALL THE DETAILS. MY PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE WITH MANY CARS OVER THE YEARS NEVER BROUGHT ME AN AWARENESS THAT THE TRUNK LID COULD POTENTIALLY DAMAGE MY HEAD, NECK, OR BACK IN A SEVERE AND POSSIBLY LONG LASTING WAY. I NATURALLY OPENED THE TRUNK LID, BENT IN TO PULL OUT MY BAG, AND WHAM! THE LID SLAMS DOWN ON ME.ONE OF THE MOST DAMAGING PARTS IS THE LATCH WHICH PROTRUDES PAST THE TRUNK'S EDGE AND FORMS A TRIANGLE SHAPE. THIS IS WHAT CONCENTRATED THE BLOW DIRECTLY INTO MY SPINE. I HAVE SEEN COMPLAINTS OF THIS SAME PROBLEM, "TRUNK LID WONT STAY IN UPRIGHT POSITION" DATING BACK TO 2009. WHY HAS THIS NOT BEEN FIXED YEARS AGO BEFORE IT WAS ABLE TO INJURE ME? AND HOW MANY UNSUSPECTING PEOPLE WILL CONTINUE TO BE INJURED IN THE FUTURE? THIS IS WHY I AM TAKING THE TIME TO EXPRESS MY ANGER, FRUSTRATION, AND DISGUST. PLEASE I AM CALLING THIS OUT, DO SOMETHING! TOYOTA DESERVES A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT!
NHTSA ODI #10747185
300 miles · Aug 7, 2015
Visibility/wiper
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT BOTH THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE VIEW MIRRORS EXHIBITED A GLARE FROM THE DASHBOARD WHICH DISTORTED THE VISIBILITY. THE REFLECTION WAS PERMANENT AND OCCURRED EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NO SUNLIGHT. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FUNCTIONED AS DESIGNED. THE MANUF…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT BOTH THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE VIEW MIRRORS EXHIBITED A GLARE FROM THE DASHBOARD WHICH DISTORTED THE VISIBILITY. THE REFLECTION WAS PERMANENT AND OCCURRED EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NO SUNLIGHT. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FUNCTIONED AS DESIGNED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 300.
FILING A COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF OUR INSURED/POLICYHOLDER. SHE WAS BACKING OUT OF DRIVEWAY IN REVERSE AND FOOT APPLIED ON BRAKE, AT THIS TIME THE ACCELERATOR BEGAN SURGING AND THE VEHICLE WHILE IN REVERSE AND BRAKE BEING PRESSED WENT UP IN SPEED TO POSSIBLY 35 MILES PER HOUR AND ACROSS THE STREET, HIT CURB AND JUMPED CURB, AND TH…
Read full complaint
FILING A COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF OUR INSURED/POLICYHOLDER. SHE WAS BACKING OUT OF DRIVEWAY IN REVERSE AND FOOT APPLIED ON BRAKE, AT THIS TIME THE ACCELERATOR BEGAN SURGING AND THE VEHICLE WHILE IN REVERSE AND BRAKE BEING PRESSED WENT UP IN SPEED TO POSSIBLY 35 MILES PER HOUR AND ACROSS THE STREET, HIT CURB AND JUMPED CURB, AND THE REAR END ULTIMATELY STRUCK A TREE AND CAME TO A REST IN THE OPPOSING HOME'S YARD. RESEARCH ONLINE SUCH AS THE LATIMES.COM SHOWS THAT THIS YEAR/MAKE/MODEL HAS HAD NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS OF ACCELERATOR SURGING OCCURRING WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN DRIVE OR REVERSE.
NHTSA ODI #10734509
200 miles · Jun 25, 2015
Equipment Adaptive/mobility
I OWN A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA S PREMIUM. IT HAS THE RADIO SYSTEM WITH BLUE TOOTH AND GPS. THE PROBLEM IS THAT WHILE I AM LISTENING TO THE RADIO AND THE GPS COMES ON GIVING DIRECTIONS, THE RADIO DOES NOT FADE SO THE RADIO AND THE GPS ARE TALKING OVER EACH OTHER AND I CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE GPS. BECAUSE OF THE CONFUSION OF BOTH VOICE…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA S PREMIUM. IT HAS THE RADIO SYSTEM WITH BLUE TOOTH AND GPS. THE PROBLEM IS THAT WHILE I AM LISTENING TO THE RADIO AND THE GPS COMES ON GIVING DIRECTIONS, THE RADIO DOES NOT FADE SO THE RADIO AND THE GPS ARE TALKING OVER EACH OTHER AND I CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE GPS. BECAUSE OF THE CONFUSION OF BOTH VOICES I HAVE MADE THE WRONG TURN WHICH HAS ALMOST LED TO ACCIDENTS. 1-800 TOYOTA CLAIMS THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM BUT, EVEN MY DEALERSHIP SERVICE DEPARTMENT AGREES THERE IS. THERE HAVE BEEN MANY COMPLAINTS ON THIS BUT, NOTHING IS REALLY BEING DONE.
NHTSA ODI #10730294
190 miles · Jun 11, 2015
Air BagsStructureWheelsCrashInjury
I WAS DRIVING BRAND NEW VEHICLE ONLY 2 HOURS OLD . I WAS IN EXTREME RIGHT LANE WHEN TRACTOR TRAILER FROM MIDDLE LANE ATTEMPTED TO CHANGE LANES ,INTO MY LANE SEVERELY IMPACTING DRIVERS SIDE OF VEHICLE NO SIDE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED AND TRAFFIC IN FRONT OF ME CAME TO A SUDDEN UNEXPECTED SLOW DOWN AND I IMPACTED VEHICLE IN FRONT OF ME A…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING BRAND NEW VEHICLE ONLY 2 HOURS OLD . I WAS IN EXTREME RIGHT LANE WHEN TRACTOR TRAILER FROM MIDDLE LANE ATTEMPTED TO CHANGE LANES ,INTO MY LANE SEVERELY IMPACTING DRIVERS SIDE OF VEHICLE NO SIDE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED AND TRAFFIC IN FRONT OF ME CAME TO A SUDDEN UNEXPECTED SLOW DOWN AND I IMPACTED VEHICLE IN FRONT OF ME AND AGAIN NO AIR BAGS DEPLOYED ALSO WHEN TRACTOR TRAILER HIT ME I IMMEDIATELY HIT BRAKES AND BOTH FRONT TIRES EXPLODED. NO SAFETY ITEMS IN CAR DEPLOYED CAUSING ME TO HAVE MULTIPLE INJURIES
NHTSA ODI #10724853
Mileage unknown · May 13, 2015
Equipment
2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO NO KEY FOB CAME WITH THE VEHICLE ONLY AN ENTRY KEY. *SMD
NHTSA ODI #10714844
4,950 miles · May 5, 2015
Vehicle Speed Control
THE D DISAPPEARED FROM ODOMETER AND THE ECHO LIGHT STARTED FLASHING LOST ALL POWER TO CAR AS IT STALLED. WHEN THE D REAPPEARED THE POWER TO VEHICLE CAM BACK ON. BEEN DOING IT EVER SINCE. TOOK TO DEALERSHIP, BECAUSE THE COMPUTER COULD NOT LOCATE AN ISSUE NOTHING WAS DONE THEY TRIED SENDING ME ON MY WAY. THEY SAID THEY TEST DOVE …
Read full complaint
THE D DISAPPEARED FROM ODOMETER AND THE ECHO LIGHT STARTED FLASHING LOST ALL POWER TO CAR AS IT STALLED. WHEN THE D REAPPEARED THE POWER TO VEHICLE CAM BACK ON. BEEN DOING IT EVER SINCE. TOOK TO DEALERSHIP, BECAUSE THE COMPUTER COULD NOT LOCATE AN ISSUE NOTHING WAS DONE THEY TRIED SENDING ME ON MY WAY. THEY SAID THEY TEST DOVE IT BUT COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. I THEN INSISTED THAT ANOTHER TEST DRIVE WITH ME IN CAR. IT STARTED DOING IT RIGHT AWAY AT 35-40 MPH. TOOK CAR BACK IN SHOP FOUND OUT COMPUTER CONNECTED TO TRANSMISSION WAS SHORTING OUT. ONE MECH. SAID HE SEEN IT ONE TIME BEFORE. I THINK THAT INFO SHOULD HAVE BEEN PASSED AROUND TO REST ON MECH TO KNOW ABOUT. I'M STILL DRIVING THE CAR HAVING SAME ISSUE WAITING FOR A ME COMPUTER TO BE DELIVERED. THEY SHOULD HAVE KEPT THE CAR GAVE ME A LOANER. I COME 25 MILES ONE WAY TO WORK I'M TAKING CITY STREETS TO KEEP OF FREEWAY BECAUSE I CANNOT KEEP THE SPEED WITH TRAFFIC. *TR
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.