← New search

2017 Toyota Corolla

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2017 Toyota Corolla do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 129.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

107 reports with mileage · 71 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 54 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes. Review the 25 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

44 crash reports1 fire reports29 injury reports

What owners actually said

178 reports
46 miles · May 12, 2017
Unknown Or Other

PURCHASED CAR ON 04/30/17 AND SIX DAYS LATER, GOT A MALFUNCTION WARNING MESSAGE FOR THE FRONT CAMERA DURING CAR START UP. CAMERA IS PART OF THE NEW STANDARD SAFETY SENSE PACKAGE. DEALER WAS UNABLE TO CORRECT ISSUE AND ORDERED A NEW CAMERA. INDICATED THEY HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY PREVIOUS KNOWN ISSUES WITH THE CAMERA. DEALER TOOK LO…

Read full complaint

PURCHASED CAR ON 04/30/17 AND SIX DAYS LATER, GOT A MALFUNCTION WARNING MESSAGE FOR THE FRONT CAMERA DURING CAR START UP. CAMERA IS PART OF THE NEW STANDARD SAFETY SENSE PACKAGE. DEALER WAS UNABLE TO CORRECT ISSUE AND ORDERED A NEW CAMERA. INDICATED THEY HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY PREVIOUS KNOWN ISSUES WITH THE CAMERA. DEALER TOOK LONGER THAN USUAL SINCE THEY HAVE NEVER REPLACED A CAMERA BEFORE AND HAD NO CLUE HOW TO RECALIBRATE.

NHTSA ODI #10985143

8,821 miles · May 4, 2017
Electrical SystemService BrakesCrash

WHILE COMING TO A STOP AT A STOPLIGHT, A CAR COME OUT IF NO WHERE. I TRIED TO SLAM ON THE BRAKE TO COME TO A STOP FASTER BUT THE BREAKING SYSTEM DID NOT REACT TO THE PEDAL BEING PRESSED DOWN. I WAS MET WITH A STIFF PEDAL AND I COULD FEEL THE BRAKES PUSHING BACK WHICH CAUSED ME TO HIT ANOTHER CAR THAT HAD ALREADY ENTERED INTO AN …

Read full complaint

WHILE COMING TO A STOP AT A STOPLIGHT, A CAR COME OUT IF NO WHERE. I TRIED TO SLAM ON THE BRAKE TO COME TO A STOP FASTER BUT THE BREAKING SYSTEM DID NOT REACT TO THE PEDAL BEING PRESSED DOWN. I WAS MET WITH A STIFF PEDAL AND I COULD FEEL THE BRAKES PUSHING BACK WHICH CAUSED ME TO HIT ANOTHER CAR THAT HAD ALREADY ENTERED INTO AN INTERSECTION.

NHTSA ODI #10983616

4,400 miles · Mar 24, 2017
Power TrainService BrakesVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

ON 3/22/17 I WAS DRIVING AN ENTERPRISE RENTAL CAR INTO AN APARTMENT COMPLEX AND PULLED IN FRONT OF THE LEASING OFFICE TO PARK. WHILE STEPPING ON THE BRAKE PEDAL THE CAR DID NOT STOP AND IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED CAUSING THE CAR TO CRASH INTO THE PILLARS OF THE LEASING OFFICE WITH FORCE. AIRBAGS DEPLOYED AND MY PASSENGER AND I HAD…

Read full complaint

ON 3/22/17 I WAS DRIVING AN ENTERPRISE RENTAL CAR INTO AN APARTMENT COMPLEX AND PULLED IN FRONT OF THE LEASING OFFICE TO PARK. WHILE STEPPING ON THE BRAKE PEDAL THE CAR DID NOT STOP AND IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED CAUSING THE CAR TO CRASH INTO THE PILLARS OF THE LEASING OFFICE WITH FORCE. AIRBAGS DEPLOYED AND MY PASSENGER AND I HAD TO CRAWL OUT OF THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR TO ESCAPE THE VEHICLE. WE ARE LUCKY TO BE ALIVE AND ESCAPE WITH MINOR INJURIES. THERE ARE DRAG SKID MARKS ON THE GROUND FROM THE REAR WHEELS. UPON COLLISION THE ENGINE SHUT OFF EVEN THOUGH THE KEY WAS IN THE RUN POSITION..

NHTSA ODI #10968425

550 miles · Mar 1, 2017
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

WHILE USING CRUISE CONTROL ON FAIRLY LEVEL ROADWAY, (RURAL ROAD) AT A SPEED OF 45 MPH, THE RPM WERE ABOUT 1500, BUT INCREASED SUDDENLY TO ABOUT 4500 RPM. AFTER AWHILE THE RPM WOULD DROP BACK DOWN TO NORMAL FOR THE SPEED SITUATION. THIS OCCURS ALSO AT HIGHWAY SPEED OF 60 MPH IN OUR AREA. THIS OCCURRENCE HAS HAPPENED MANY TIMES…

Read full complaint

WHILE USING CRUISE CONTROL ON FAIRLY LEVEL ROADWAY, (RURAL ROAD) AT A SPEED OF 45 MPH, THE RPM WERE ABOUT 1500, BUT INCREASED SUDDENLY TO ABOUT 4500 RPM. AFTER AWHILE THE RPM WOULD DROP BACK DOWN TO NORMAL FOR THE SPEED SITUATION. THIS OCCURS ALSO AT HIGHWAY SPEED OF 60 MPH IN OUR AREA. THIS OCCURRENCE HAS HAPPENED MANY TIMES. HAVE RETURNED TO DEALER TWICE NOW. PROBLEM WAS OBSERVED BY SERVICE MANAGER AND LOCAL TOYOTA REP WHO WAS IN TOWN FOR LOCAL AUTO SHOW. CAR WAS ANALYZED AND DATA SEND TO ENGINEER IN CALIFORNIA WHO LATER SAID CAR IS BEHAVING NORMAL. I FOUND THAT HARD TO BELIEVE AS BOTH LOANER CARS (2017 COROLLA) DID NOT BEHAVE IN THIS DANGEROUS FASHION. I FEEL THIS QUICK BRUSH OFF BY THE ENGINEER (TANAKA) WHO IS ONLY OBSERVING DATA AND NOT HAVING TO DRIVE THIS CAR IS WRONG. I FEEL THE COMPUTER SHOULD BE ADJUSTED FOR THE CVT TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM. WIFE DOES NOT FEEL SAFE DRIVING THIS VEHICLE. WE HAVE TAKEN 3 VIDEOS TO DOCUMENT THIS EVENT.

NHTSA ODI #10957833

800 miles · Feb 14, 2017
Electrical SystemForward Collision Avoidance

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE CRASH AVOIDANCE SENSOR MALFUNCTIONED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SENSOR DID NOT APPLY THE BRAKES OR DETECT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TOO CLOSE TO ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE DEALER REPAIRED THE VEHICLE, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE DEALER REFRESHED THE SENSOR SOFTWARE I…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE CRASH AVOIDANCE SENSOR MALFUNCTIONED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SENSOR DID NOT APPLY THE BRAKES OR DETECT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TOO CLOSE TO ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE DEALER REPAIRED THE VEHICLE, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE DEALER REFRESHED THE SENSOR SOFTWARE IN THE VEHICLE, BUT THIS DID NOT CORRECT THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 800.

NHTSA ODI #10954600

155 miles · Jan 4, 2017
Steering

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE AT APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, THE STEERING WAS UNCONTROLLABLE AND IT FELT LIKE THE WIND WAS BLOWING THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE VEERED TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT AND WAS DIFFICULT TO STEER STRAIGHT AHEAD. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE AT APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, THE STEERING WAS UNCONTROLLABLE AND IT FELT LIKE THE WIND WAS BLOWING THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE VEERED TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT AND WAS DIFFICULT TO STEER STRAIGHT AHEAD. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN HOME. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED, BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 155.

NHTSA ODI #10939712

841 miles · Jan 3, 2017
Electrical System

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS STOPPED, THE INSTRUMENT PANEL ILLUMINATED AND THE POWER SEIZED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 841. THE CONSUMER STATED THE ERROR MESSAGES READ CH…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2017 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS STOPPED, THE INSTRUMENT PANEL ILLUMINATED AND THE POWER SEIZED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 841. THE CONSUMER STATED THE ERROR MESSAGES READ CHARGING SYSTEM MALFUNCTION AND OIL PRESSURE LOW, ALONG WITH A MESSAGE THAT READ CONSULT OWNERS MANUAL AND TO TAKE THE VEHICLE IN FOR SERVICE. UPDATED 03/13/17.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10939228

Mileage unknown · Jan 2, 2017
Vehicle Speed Control

WHEN THE CRUISE CONTROL IS ENGAGED AND THE VEHICLE IS ON A DECLINE THE CRUISE CONTROL DOES NOT MAINTAIN THE SET SPEED. DEPENDING ON THE SEVERITY OF THE DECLINE THE SPEED WILL INCREASE FROM 5 TO 15 MPH. WHEN USING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND MAINTAINING THE EXACT SAME PRESSURE THE VEHICLE ONLY INCREASES SPEED MINIMALLY (2 TO 3 MPH)…

Read full complaint

WHEN THE CRUISE CONTROL IS ENGAGED AND THE VEHICLE IS ON A DECLINE THE CRUISE CONTROL DOES NOT MAINTAIN THE SET SPEED. DEPENDING ON THE SEVERITY OF THE DECLINE THE SPEED WILL INCREASE FROM 5 TO 15 MPH. WHEN USING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND MAINTAINING THE EXACT SAME PRESSURE THE VEHICLE ONLY INCREASES SPEED MINIMALLY (2 TO 3 MPH) ON THE DECLINE. WHEN IN CRUISE CONTROL THE SPEED INCREASE IS VERY DRASTIC. THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP HAS STATED THAT THIS IS A NORMAL OCCURRENCE AND THAT THEY HAVE TESTED SEVERAL SAME MODEL AND YEAR TOYOTA VEHICLES AND ALL HAVE THE SAME SPEEDING TENDENCIES SO THIS IS NORMAL. THE DEALERSHIP STATED THAT THE FIX IS TO ENGAGE THE MANUAL TRANSMISSION MODE TO USE THE ENGINE COMPRESSION TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN. I HAVE FOLLOWED THERE ADVICE AND THIS DOES NOT RECTIFY THE PROBLEM. THE CRUISE CONTROL IN ALL VEHICLES I HAVE OWNED IS USED TO MAINTAIN A CONSISTENT SPEED NO MATTER THE TERRAIN BEING TRAVERSED. THIS ISSUE HAS OCCURRED EVERY TIME WE HAVE ENGAGED THE CRUISE CONTROL ON THE VEHICLE WHILE DRIVING ON A HIGHWAY THAT HAS A DECLINE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10939047

Official recalls

3

20V024000 · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module

Jan 17, 2020

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2011-2019 Corolla, 2011-2013 Matrix, 2012-2018 Avalon, and 2013-2018 Avalon Hybrid vehicles. During certain crashes, the air bag electronic control unit (ECU) may malfunction, possibly disabling the deployment of the air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash, air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners that do not deploy as intended may increase the risk of injury.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the ECU and install a noise filter between the air bag control module and its wire harness, as necessary, free of charge. Owners were notified of the safety risk beginning March 2, 2020. A second letter notifying owners of the remedy repair will be mailed between March 16, 2020 and June 27, 2020. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are 20TB03, 20TA03 and 20TA05.

19V503000 · Equipment:other:labels

Jun 28, 2019

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.

17V295000 · Tires:temporary/emergency Spare Tire

May 2, 2017

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.

Go deeper into Toyota Corolla problems