NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes complaints
29 reportsClear category filter11,396 miles · Aug 10, 2017
Seat BeltsService Brakes
SEVERAL TIMES THE SEAT BELT CHIME WOULDN'T STOP ALTHOUGH SEAT BELT CONNECTED. BRAKES SCREECHING WHEN TRYING TO COME TO A STOP. TOOK MORE EFFORT THAN SHOULD FOR BRAKES TO STOP THE CAR. THE FIRST TIME THIS HAPPENED, I HAD ONLY HAD THE CAR FOR TWO DAYS. THE SECOND TIME IT OCCURRED WAS RIGHT AFTER THE 5000 MILE MAINTENANCE SERVICE.…
Read full complaint
SEVERAL TIMES THE SEAT BELT CHIME WOULDN'T STOP ALTHOUGH SEAT BELT CONNECTED. BRAKES SCREECHING WHEN TRYING TO COME TO A STOP. TOOK MORE EFFORT THAN SHOULD FOR BRAKES TO STOP THE CAR. THE FIRST TIME THIS HAPPENED, I HAD ONLY HAD THE CAR FOR TWO DAYS. THE SECOND TIME IT OCCURRED WAS RIGHT AFTER THE 5000 MILE MAINTENANCE SERVICE. IT HAPPENED TWO TIMES AFTERWARDS AND ONE TIME TODAY. I WAS DRIVING ANY WHERE FROM 25 MPH TO 55 MPH. SO FAR I HAVE BEEN LUCKY BUT I AM BEGINNING TO BE AFRAID TO DRIVE MY CAR. THE LAST TIME THIS HAPPENS WAS TODAY.
NHTSA ODI #11014512
9,788 miles · May 3, 2017
Service Brakes
SEVERAL TIMES, I HAVE EXPERIENCED "BRAKE FAILURE" ALONG WITH A GRINDING NOISE. BRAKING SYSTEM MUST BE THE PROBLEM. HOWEVER, THE DEALERSHIP SAYS EVERYTHING IS WORKING PROPERLY. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE DEALERSHIP 2 TIMES SINCE I PURCHASED THE NEW CAR. THE FIRST INCIDENT WAS IN OCTOBER 2016 - WITH ONLY 1784 MILES. ON MAY 1, 2017; …
Read full complaint
SEVERAL TIMES, I HAVE EXPERIENCED "BRAKE FAILURE" ALONG WITH A GRINDING NOISE. BRAKING SYSTEM MUST BE THE PROBLEM. HOWEVER, THE DEALERSHIP SAYS EVERYTHING IS WORKING PROPERLY. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE DEALERSHIP 2 TIMES SINCE I PURCHASED THE NEW CAR. THE FIRST INCIDENT WAS IN OCTOBER 2016 - WITH ONLY 1784 MILES. ON MAY 1, 2017; I APPLIED MY BRAKES UPON APPROACHING A "STOP SIGN". UNFORTUNATELY, THE PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR( I COULD FEEL THE GRINDING IN THE BRAKE PEDAL)AND THERE WAS A DELAY IN MY CAR COMING TO A COMPLETE STOP. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP, AGAIN. ACCORDING TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEM. I DO NOT HAVE ANY WARNING WHEN THE BRAKES FAIL TO WORK. IT DOESN'T SEEM TO MATTER IF I AM TRAVELING AT A SLOW OR HIGHER RATE OF SPEED. PLEASE INVESTIGATE THIS PROBLEM. I AM VERY CONCERNED AND THE TOYOTA COMPANY DOESN'T SEEM TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ISSUE.
NHTSA ODI #10983372
13,628 miles · Apr 14, 2017
Service Brakes
UPON ENTERING MY CARPORT, WHILE APPLYING THE BRAKES, THE CAR SUDDENLY LURCHED FORWARD SEVERAL FEET, NEARLY COLLIDING WITH A CONCRETE WALL.MY CONCERN IS: WHEN WILL THIS OCCUR IN STREET TRAFFIC AND CAUSE A FATALITY?
NHTSA ODI #10972365
11,000 miles · Mar 3, 2017
Service BrakesUnknown Or OtherCrash
THIS IS A NEW VEHICLE THERE HAS BEEN MANY TIMES THE BRAKES DELAY BEFORE STOPPING. THIS TIME THE CAR ACCIDENT. I HAD ENOUGH TIME TO BRAKE 4 THE CAR TO DTOP BUT THE BRAKE SCREECH AND WOULD NOT STOP UNTILL COLLISION. IN NOVEMBER THE VEHICLE BROKE DOWN ON THE HIGHWAY, TOYOTA SAID THE VEHICLE SPARK NEEDED CHANGING.
NHTSA ODI #10958342
6,700 miles · Jan 27, 2017
Service BrakesSteeringCrash
I WAS DRIVING OUT OF A PARKING LOT AT 10-15MPH. A CAR WAS WAITING TO TURN AT A STOP SIGN 200 FEET AHEAD. THE ROAD HAD MILD SNOW AND ICE AND WAS ON A 20 DEGREE SLOPE, SO I STEPPED GENTLY ON THE BRAKE. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE CAR. I STEPPED OFF THE BRAKE AND STEPPED DOWN A LITTLE HARDER. THERE WAS MILD RESPONSE. I CONTINUED…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING OUT OF A PARKING LOT AT 10-15MPH. A CAR WAS WAITING TO TURN AT A STOP SIGN 200 FEET AHEAD. THE ROAD HAD MILD SNOW AND ICE AND WAS ON A 20 DEGREE SLOPE, SO I STEPPED GENTLY ON THE BRAKE. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE CAR. I STEPPED OFF THE BRAKE AND STEPPED DOWN A LITTLE HARDER. THERE WAS MILD RESPONSE. I CONTINUED PUSHING ON THE BRAKE, AND WAS ABLE TO PUSH ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE FLOOR. THE CAR DID NOT STOP. 50 FEET BEFORE COLLISION, I ATTEMPTED TURNING THE WHEEL TO GET OUT OF THE WAY, BUT THE CAR ONLY SHIFTED 3 FEET BEFORE I COLLIDED WITH THE FRONT CAR. 50 MINUTES AFTER THE INCIDENT, I WAS DRIVING THE SAME CAR HOME AT 25MPH. THE CITY STREET WAS FLAT AND STRAIGHT, AND THERE WAS MILD SNOW AND ICE. A CAR WAS TURNING RIGHT AT AN INTERSECTION 250 FT AHEAD. I WAS WORRIED THIS TIME, AND PRESSED ON THE BRAKE EARLIER AT MODERATE PRESSURE (PEDAL HALF DOWN). IN THE PAST, THAT TYPE OF PRESSURE COULD DECREASE THE CAR FROM 35 TO 10MPH IN 100FT. THIS TIME, THE CAR ONLY DECREASED FROM 25 TO 15MPH IN 245FT. I WAS LUCKY THE DRIVER AHEAD TURNED, BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SECOND COLLISION IN ONE DAY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10948077
20,000 miles · Nov 15, 2016
Fuel/propulsion SystemService Brakes
BRAKE PEDAL FEELS SPONGY OR SOFT ALL THE TIME. HAVE HAD VEHICLE TO DEALER 3 TIMES FOR STUCK FUEL DOOR (WON'T OPEN). EVERY TIME NOTHING FOUND WRONG. TECH LUBED AND TRIED ADJUSTING FUEL DOOR TO NO AVAIL. STUCK FUEL DOOR DOESN'T HAPPEN ALL THE TIME THOUGH. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE ESPECIALLY FOR WOMEN WHO ARE TRYING TO FUEL UP WHEN O…
Read full complaint
BRAKE PEDAL FEELS SPONGY OR SOFT ALL THE TIME. HAVE HAD VEHICLE TO DEALER 3 TIMES FOR STUCK FUEL DOOR (WON'T OPEN). EVERY TIME NOTHING FOUND WRONG. TECH LUBED AND TRIED ADJUSTING FUEL DOOR TO NO AVAIL. STUCK FUEL DOOR DOESN'T HAPPEN ALL THE TIME THOUGH. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE ESPECIALLY FOR WOMEN WHO ARE TRYING TO FUEL UP WHEN ON EMPTY. FUEL DOOR STICKS WHILE STATIONARY. BRAKES FEEL SPONGY WHEN APPLYING BRAKES WHILE IN MOTION OR SITTING STILL. DEALER LOOKED AT BRAKES AND SAID THEY ARE FINE. HAVE READ SEVERAL COMPLAINTS ON THESE COROLLA'S HAVING BRAKE FAILURE! WHAT'S NEXT??? A CRASH IN THE MAKING!!! WILL NOT BUY TOYO AGAIN.
NHTSA ODI #10926072
21,619 miles · Nov 1, 2016
Air BagsService BrakesCrashInjury
THIS IS A REPORT OF BRAKE FAILURE THAT CAUSED A VEHICLE COLLISION WITH INJURIES. ON OCTOBER 29, 2016, I RENTED A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA FROM A BETTERWAY RENT-ACAR, INC. D/BA BUDGET RENT A CAR OF ATLANTA, AT 6509 ROSWELL RD, ATLANTA, GA 30328. THE TOYOTA HAD 21,619 MILES AT THE TIME OF THE RENTAL. AT APPROXIMATELY 12:30PM I WA…
Read full complaint
THIS IS A REPORT OF BRAKE FAILURE THAT CAUSED A VEHICLE COLLISION WITH INJURIES. ON OCTOBER 29, 2016, I RENTED A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA FROM A BETTERWAY RENT-ACAR, INC. D/BA BUDGET RENT A CAR OF ATLANTA, AT 6509 ROSWELL RD, ATLANTA, GA 30328. THE TOYOTA HAD 21,619 MILES AT THE TIME OF THE RENTAL. AT APPROXIMATELY 12:30PM I WAS DRIVING SOUTHEAST ON JIMMY CARTER BLVD IN NORCROSS GEORGIA. THE WEATHER WAS CLEAR AND SUNNY AND THE ROAD WAS DRY. UPON DEPARTING A TRAFFIC LIGHT, I ACCELERATED TO APPROXIMATELY 20 MPH IN MODERATE TRAFFIC TOWARDS VEHICLES WAITING AT THE INTERSECTION OF JIMMY CARTER BLVD AND ROCKBRIDGE SCHOOL ROAD ONE BLOCK AWAY. I BEGAN APPLYING THE BRAKES LONG BEFORE REACHING THE VEHICLES WAITING AT THE NEXT INTERSECTION, HOWEVER THE CAR'S BRAKE ACTION WAS MINIMAL. AS I COMPLETELY DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL, I HEARD A CLICKING SOUND SIMILAR TO THE ENGAGEMENT OF AN ANTI-LOCK BRAKING SYSTEM (ABS), HOWEVER THERE WAS NO SIGNIFICANT DECELERATION. WHEN I FULLY DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL, I DID NOT HEAR AN INCREASE IN ENGINE RPM, THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION DID NOT DOWNSHIFT, AND THE VEHICLE DID NOT ACCELERATE. AS A RESULT OF THE TOYOTA'S BRAKE FAILURE, I IMPACTED A STATIONARY VEHICLE AT THE INTERSECTION OF JIMMY CARTER BLVD AND ROCKBRIDGE SCHOOL ROAD. THE TOYOTA'S AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WERE NO SKIDMARKS AT THE SCENE OF THE ACCIDENT. I SUFFERED INJURIES AS WELL AS MULTIPLE OCCUPANTS IN THE OTHER VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10920597
46 miles · Oct 25, 2016
Service BrakesCrashInjury
ON JUNE 24TH 2016 I PURCHASED A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA S. I HAD 3 MINOR BRAKE FIALURES WITH GRINDING SOUNDS. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP ON THOSE 3 OCCASIONS.THE 4TH BRAKE FAILURE WAS A LOT WORSE AND I ENDED UP APPLYING THE E BRAKE AND SLIDE INTO COUNTY LINE DIVIDING PASCO & HERNANDO COUNTY FLORIDA. ENOUGH WAS ENOUGH I CALLED THE DEALE…
Read full complaint
ON JUNE 24TH 2016 I PURCHASED A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA S. I HAD 3 MINOR BRAKE FIALURES WITH GRINDING SOUNDS. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP ON THOSE 3 OCCASIONS.THE 4TH BRAKE FAILURE WAS A LOT WORSE AND I ENDED UP APPLYING THE E BRAKE AND SLIDE INTO COUNTY LINE DIVIDING PASCO & HERNANDO COUNTY FLORIDA. ENOUGH WAS ENOUGH I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND SAID " I NEED TO BRING MY CAR IN ASAP BECAUSE NOW I HAVE HAD FOUR BRAKE FAILURES AND THIS ONE COULD HAVE KILLED ME IF ANYONE HAD BEEN COMING. THIS WAS THE 21ST OF JULY, I HAD BROUGHT THE CAR IN FOR INSPECTION OF MY BRAKES. ALL THEY DID WAS TAKE IT FOR A TEST DRIVE, BROUGHT IT BACK AND SAID EVERYTHING WAS NORMAL. ON SEPTEMBER TENTH 2016 I GOT INTO THE RIGHT HAND TURN LANE, WHEN I APPLIED THE BRAKES NOTHING HAD HAPPENED. I CONTINUED TO APPLY MORE AND MORE PRESSURE AND STILL NO BRAKES. I WAS ABLE TO VEER ENOUGH TO THE RIGHT SO I DIDN'T IMPACT THE DRIVER SIDE DOOR HOWEVER THE LADY BEHIND THAT CAR WAS NOT AS LUCKY AND I IMPACTED HER FRONT LEFT PRETTY MUCH HEAD ON. I HAVE CALLED OVER AND OVER I HAVE SENT PICTURES OF MY CAR AND THE ROAD WHERE THERE WAS NOT EVEN 1 SKID MARK. I HAVE 9 BULGING DISC 4 HERNIATED DISCS. I AM LITERALLY BROKE FROM CAR RENTALS DR'S APPOINTMENTS AND MEDICATION THAT HAS BEEN VERY EXPENSIVE. EVERY TIME I CALL I AM INSTRUCTED I WILL RECEIVE A CALL FROM THEIR CLAIMS/LEGAL DEPARTMENT WITHIN 30 BUSINESS DAYS FROM WHEN THEY RETRIEVED THE DATA FROM THE CAR THAT ALMOST KILLED ME AND A POOR WOMAN WHO WAS TAKEN AWAY IN AN AMBULANCE. I LOOKED THROUGH THE DATA AND I AM NO ENGINEER AND I CAN EVEN SEE WHERE THE BRAKES FAILED. TO EVERYONE WHO READS THIS IF YOU SEE S NEWER TOYOTA BECAREFUL.
NHTSA ODI #10918688
29,000 miles · Oct 13, 2016
Service BrakesCrash
PULLED INTO PARKING LOT AND PREPARED TO PARK. STEPPED ON BRAKES, CAR DIDN'T STOP HIT BUILDING. I PUT IN REVERSE AND THEN DRIVE, SWERVING AWAY FROM BUILDING, BUT CAR KEPT GOING ALL WHILE FOOT WAS ON BRAKE. PULLED KEYS FROM THE IGNITION TO STOP THE CAR.
NHTSA ODI #10915963
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.