TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PART FOR THE RECALL REPAIR WAS NOT YET AVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THE MANUFACTURER HAD EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. PREMIER TOYOTA OF AMHERST LOCATED AT 47190…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PART FOR THE RECALL REPAIR WAS NOT YET AVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THE MANUFACTURER HAD EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. PREMIER TOYOTA OF AMHERST LOCATED AT 47190 COOPER FOSTER PARK RD, AMHERST, OH 44001, 440-985-6100) WAS CONTACTED AND IT WAS CONFIRMED PART WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. VIN TOOL CONFIRMS PARTS NOT AVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #11301094
60,000 miles · Jan 21, 2020
Air BagsCrashInjury
HELLO, ON SEPTEMBER 4TH 2019 I WAS INVOLVED IN A THREE CAR ACCIDENT, ME BEING IN THE MIDDLE. MY AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY AND THIS EVENING I JUST SAW A NEW ARTICLE ABOUT MANY TOYOTA COROLLAS BEING EFFECTED. LOW AND BEHOLD MY VEHICLE WAS ONE OF THE RECALL CARS. THERE IS NO WAS TO FIX THE CAR NOW I HAD TO GET A NEW ONE WHICH IS AGAI…
Read full complaint
HELLO, ON SEPTEMBER 4TH 2019 I WAS INVOLVED IN A THREE CAR ACCIDENT, ME BEING IN THE MIDDLE. MY AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY AND THIS EVENING I JUST SAW A NEW ARTICLE ABOUT MANY TOYOTA COROLLAS BEING EFFECTED. LOW AND BEHOLD MY VEHICLE WAS ONE OF THE RECALL CARS. THERE IS NO WAS TO FIX THE CAR NOW I HAD TO GET A NEW ONE WHICH IS AGAIN ON THE LIST. I HAVE CHECKED BOTH VIN'S. I WAS INJURED IN THAT CRASH AND THAT AIR BAG COULD HAVE HELPED MY HEAD NOT GOING THE WAY IT DID. I'M EXTREMELY UPSET WITH THE FACT THIS WAS NOT BROUGHT FORWARD SOONER. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK WITH SOMEONE.
NHTSA ODI #11300983
40 miles · Jan 15, 2020
Air BagsCrashInjury
I REAR-ENDED SOMEONE AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH AND NONE OF MY AIRBAGS DEPLOYED
NHTSA ODI #11299613
47,606 miles · Dec 7, 2019
Air BagsCrashInjury
DID NOT DEPLOY IN A HIGH SPEED ROLLOVER FWY ACCIDENT THAT OCCURRED ON 10/23/18
NHTSA ODI #11287614
19,000 miles · Sep 20, 2019
Air BagsCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS IDLING AT A STOP SIGN, ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED AND DEEMED TOTALED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS IDLING AT A STOP SIGN, ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED AND DEEMED TOTALED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DETERMINED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 19,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #11256866
40,000 miles · Sep 19, 2019
Air BagsCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 34 MPH, ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE QUARTER PANEL CAUSING DAMAGE TO ENGINE COMPARTMENT AND REAR PASSENGER DOOR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT ALL AIR BAGS DEPLOYED RELEASING AN EXTREME AMOUNT OF TOXIC DUST INTO THE VEHICLE. THE DRIVER SIDE FOOT AIR BA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 34 MPH, ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE QUARTER PANEL CAUSING DAMAGE TO ENGINE COMPARTMENT AND REAR PASSENGER DOOR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT ALL AIR BAGS DEPLOYED RELEASING AN EXTREME AMOUNT OF TOXIC DUST INTO THE VEHICLE. THE DRIVER SIDE FOOT AIR BAG DEPLOYED FRACTURING HER RIGHT HEEL SEVERAL PLACES AS WELL AS BURNS ON BOTH WRISTS THAT NEEDED MEDICAL ATTENTION. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO HER DRIVER SIDE DOOR CAUSING QUESTIONS AS TO WHY THE DRIVER'S SIDE KNEE AIR BAG DEPLOYED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL TOW LOT WHERE IT WAS CONSIDERED A TOTAL LOSS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER OR INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING OR REPAIRS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000. *PM *DL
NHTSA ODI #11256663
2 miles · Mar 12, 2019
Air BagsElectrical SystemUnknown Or Other
WHILE DRIVING WARNING LIGHTS ON DASHBOARD LIT UP AND CAR SHUT DOWN.ACCORDING TO SCREEN ON DASH IT SHOWED MALFUNCTION OF AIRBAGS, ABS, LANE CHANGE WARNING, AMONG OTHER SYSTEM PARTS. ABLE TO RESTART CAR AND DRIVE IT TO DEALER. TOYOTA NOTIFIED ME THAT SQUIRRELS HAD EATEN THE MAIN WIRE HARNESS. NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. I DID SOME…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING WARNING LIGHTS ON DASHBOARD LIT UP AND CAR SHUT DOWN.ACCORDING TO SCREEN ON DASH IT SHOWED MALFUNCTION OF AIRBAGS, ABS, LANE CHANGE WARNING, AMONG OTHER SYSTEM PARTS. ABLE TO RESTART CAR AND DRIVE IT TO DEALER. TOYOTA NOTIFIED ME THAT SQUIRRELS HAD EATEN THE MAIN WIRE HARNESS. NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. I DID SOME RESEARCH AND FOUND OUT TOYOTA AND OTHER AUTO MANUFACTURERS USE SOY BASED WIRING AND WIRE COVERS WHICH DRAW ALL TYPES OF RODENTS TO THEM AND THEY DESTROY THE MAIN HARNESS ELECTRICAL PARTS TO MALFUNCTION. THIS CAN CAUSE DANGEROUS SITUATIONS WHILE DRIVING POSSIBLY CAUSING ACCIDENTS RESULTING IN INJURY OR DEATH. BRAKES MAY FAIL ,AIR BAGS MAY NOT DEPLOY ETC. TOYOTA KNOWS OF THE PROBLEM BUT REFUSES TO CORRECT IT. IT COST ME $5000.00 TO REPAIR AND I STILL DO NOT FEEL SAFE. I NOTIFIED TOYOTA CORP. OFFICE THEY TOOK MY COMPLAINT AND SAID NOTHING COULD BE DONE ABOUT IT. THEY DID GIVE ME A CASE #[XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TT
NHTSA ODI #11186148
10,000 miles · Nov 9, 2018
Air BagsStructureUnknown Or OtherCrashInjury
TAKATA RECALL IT WAS A REGULAR WEDNESDAY MORNING DRIVE TO MY OFFICE. I WAS IN HIGHWAY 101 N AND IN THE MOTION OF APPROX 30MPH DUE TO TRAFFIC. SUDDENLY AT AROUND 8AM, DUE TO THE TRAFFIC AHEAD I HAD TO BRAKE MY CAR. MY CAR WAS HALT AT A SAFE DISTANCE FROM THE CAR AHEAD OF ME WHEN I HEARD THE EMERGENCY BEEP OF MY CAR AND WHILE I …
Read full complaint
TAKATA RECALL IT WAS A REGULAR WEDNESDAY MORNING DRIVE TO MY OFFICE. I WAS IN HIGHWAY 101 N AND IN THE MOTION OF APPROX 30MPH DUE TO TRAFFIC. SUDDENLY AT AROUND 8AM, DUE TO THE TRAFFIC AHEAD I HAD TO BRAKE MY CAR. MY CAR WAS HALT AT A SAFE DISTANCE FROM THE CAR AHEAD OF ME WHEN I HEARD THE EMERGENCY BEEP OF MY CAR AND WHILE I WAS BEING CONFUSED AS TO WHY THE BEEP WENT OFF BECAUSE MY CAR WAS AT A SAFE DISTANCE OF THE CAR AHEAD OF ME, MY CAR WAS SEVERELY HIT FROM BEHIND.THE IMPACT WAS SO SEVERE TOWARDS THE TRUNK THAT MY CAR WAS DRAGGED FORWARD SUCH THAT THE FRONT OF MY CAR WENT ONTO HIT THE BACK OF THE CAR THAT WAS AT A SAFE DISTANCE FROM MY CAR.THIS WAS FOLLOWED BY SHIFT OF MY CAR FROM THE SECOND LANE WHERE THE IMPACT TOOK PLACE TO THE THIRD LANE OF THE HIGHWAY. MY CAR WAS TOTALED BECAUSE OF THIS ACCIDENT. DURING THIS ACCIDENTAL EVENT MY FRONT CAR AND BACK CAR BOTH AIR BAG DEPLOYED EXCEPT MY CAR AIR BAG DIDN'T GET DEPLOYED AND BECAUSE OF THIS I WENT THROUGH SERIOUS MULTIPLE INJURIES CAUSING SOME LONG TERM BODILY DAMAGES.
NHTSA ODI #11150408
60,000 miles · Mar 10, 2018
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
MY CAR WAS STRUCK BY A CAR SPINNING OUT OF CONTROL MAINLY THE DRIVERS SIDE DOOR CENTER POST AND REAR DOOR. I THINK THE CAR IS TOTALED. THE PASSENGER REAR WHEEL IS BENT FROM THE IMPACT. NONE OF THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. THE POLICE OFFICERS THAT WORKED THE ACCIDENT WAS ASTONISHED. HE SAID THEY SHOULD HAVE DEPLOYED. MY CAR WAS MOVING …
Read full complaint
MY CAR WAS STRUCK BY A CAR SPINNING OUT OF CONTROL MAINLY THE DRIVERS SIDE DOOR CENTER POST AND REAR DOOR. I THINK THE CAR IS TOTALED. THE PASSENGER REAR WHEEL IS BENT FROM THE IMPACT. NONE OF THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. THE POLICE OFFICERS THAT WORKED THE ACCIDENT WAS ASTONISHED. HE SAID THEY SHOULD HAVE DEPLOYED. MY CAR WAS MOVING ABOUT 15MPH THE CAR THAT HIT MINE WAS SPINNING VERY FAST. THE ROADS WERE SLICK AND IT WAS RAINING. THE IMPACT WAS ABOUT 40 TO 60MPH AT LEAST.
NHTSA ODI #11078444
1,711 miles · Nov 19, 2017
Air BagsService BrakesStructureCrash
I WAS DRIVING HOME ON HAMILTON ROAD, IN COLUMBUS, OHIO, AT 535PM. I NOTICED THAT MY HEADLIGHTS WEREN'T ON, WHEN OTHER DRIVERS WERE TRYING TO WORN ME. I SET MY HEADLIGHTS ON AUTOMATIC WHEN I FIRST RECEIVED THE CAR. I FINALLY FOUND THE SWITCH TO TURN MY HEADLIGHTS ON MANUALLY. THEN MY CAR STARTED TO BRAKE 10-15 FEET FROM THE CA…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING HOME ON HAMILTON ROAD, IN COLUMBUS, OHIO, AT 535PM. I NOTICED THAT MY HEADLIGHTS WEREN'T ON, WHEN OTHER DRIVERS WERE TRYING TO WORN ME. I SET MY HEADLIGHTS ON AUTOMATIC WHEN I FIRST RECEIVED THE CAR. I FINALLY FOUND THE SWITCH TO TURN MY HEADLIGHTS ON MANUALLY. THEN MY CAR STARTED TO BRAKE 10-15 FEET FROM THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME, MY TIRES WERE SQUEALING. MY FOOT WAS NOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL IT WAS STILL ON THE ACCELERATOR. IT WAS TOO LATE I HIT THE SUV IN FRONT ME. MY AIR BAGS DIDN'T DEPLOY. THE ACCIDENT AVOIDANCE SYSTEM DIDN'T ACTIVATE UNTIL TO LATE. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE CAR RESPONDED AFTER THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH WAS MANUALLY TURNED ON INSTEAD OF BEING IN THE AUTO POSITION. IT WAS SUGGESTED AT A DEALERSHIP EARLIER THAT CYCLING THE NAVIGATION SYSTEM ON THE CAR COULD INADVERTENTLY DISARM IT. IF THAT WERE THE CASE AND IT WAS OFF ACCIDENTLY WHY DID THE CAR TRY TO BRAKE AT THE LAST SECOND ON ITS OWN BY TURNING ON THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH. THIS CAR WAS PURCHASED FOR THE DRIVER FOR THE VERY REASONS OF ITS SAFETY FEATURES UNFORTUNATELY THIS CAR COMPLETELY FAILED TO PROTECT THE DRIVER. THAT IS WHY I FEEL LIKE THIS SHOULD BE LOOKED AT IMMEDIATELY TO SEE IF THIS IS A MECHANICAL ISSUE, PROGRAM ISSUE, OR SIMPLY DRIVER ERROR, WHICH I DO NOT BELIEVE AT THIS POINT. I HAVE PHOTOS OF VEHICLE AND INTERIOR WHICH I AM UNABLE TO UPLOAD ON THIS SITE, THEY ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.
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.
Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain 2017-2019 Toyota Camry, Corolla, Rav4, Sienna, and Yaris iA vehicles equipped with factory-installed floor mats. The load carrying capacity modification label may be incorrect. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 110, "Tire Selection and Rims."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: An incorrect label may lead to unintentionally overloading the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: SET will notify owners and provide a corrected label for placement over the inaccurate label, free of charge. The recall began August 23, 2019. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. SET's number for this recall is SET19A.
Gulf States Toyota, Inc. (Gulf States) is recalling certain 2017 4Runner , 86, Avalon, Camry, Camry Hybrid, Corolla, Corolla iM, Highlander, Highlander Hybrid, Prius, Prius C, RAV4, RAV4 Hybrid, Sienna and Yaris vehicles. The spare tire air pressure was not adjusted to the proper pressure as stated on the Tire Pressure Label.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A spare tire that is not inflated to the proper value may not perform as intended, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Gulf States will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the spare tires, adjusting their pressure as necessary, free of charge. The recall began June 15, 2017. Owners may contact Gulf States customer service at 1-800-444-1074. Toyota's number for this recall is 17R2.
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.