← New search

2015 Acura Rdx

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Rdx years

Owner complaints for the 2015 Acura Rdx are substantially higher than the model-year median of 36.5.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Rdx years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

Limited mileage data: 63 of 410 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.

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.

  • Exterior Lighting. Review the 338 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 33 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Visibility/wiper. Review the 20 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

7 crash reports0 fire reports3 injury reports

Exterior Lighting complaints

338 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Mar 3, 2023
Exterior Lighting

For at least 3 years starting in 2019 the headlights have been getting dimmer and dimmer. I had to use the high beams to see at night. Polishing the headlights did not help nor did changing the bulbs as it's the projector lens that has to be replaced.

NHTSA ODI #11510002

60,000 miles · Mar 1, 2023
Exterior Lighting

The contact owns a 2015 Acura RDX. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, the low beam headlights were significantly dim, preventing the contact from properly seeing the roadway ahead. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact stated that several passenger’s in the vehicle had inquired whether the low beam…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2015 Acura RDX. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, the low beam headlights were significantly dim, preventing the contact from properly seeing the roadway ahead. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact stated that several passenger’s in the vehicle had inquired whether the low beam headlights were on while the contact was driving. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where the bulbs were replaced several times; however, the failure persisted. The dealer informed the contact that it was a known failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure, but no assistance was provided. The failure mileage was approximately 60,000.

NHTSA ODI #11509677

Mileage unknown · Mar 1, 2023
Exterior Lighting

The original low beam bulbs (halogen) melted the cover making visibility abysmal. I’ve replaced the bulbs with a LED option, and still very low visibility. There is seemingly no difference between the headlights being on and being off.

NHTSA ODI #11509633

Mileage unknown · Feb 28, 2023
Exterior Lighting

Our 2015 Acura RDX started experiencing diminished lighting on low beam around 75000. We are currently at about 95000 and lighting is nearly nonexistent. In order to see the road at night, the lights must be on high beam. I discussed this issue with my local Acura service center and they advised that the only fix is to replac…

Read full complaint

Our 2015 Acura RDX started experiencing diminished lighting on low beam around 75000. We are currently at about 95000 and lighting is nearly nonexistent. In order to see the road at night, the lights must be on high beam. I discussed this issue with my local Acura service center and they advised that the only fix is to replace the entire headlamp at a cost of about $800 per light. Our car is available for inspection at any time. The photos show the Acura in my garage next to my Hyundai. The Acura is on the right and Hyundai on left. Both have lights on low beam. The second photo is just of the Acura.

NHTSA ODI #11509583

Mileage unknown · Feb 28, 2023
Exterior Lighting

The vehicles headlights are too dim to view the road and pedestrians when driving.

NHTSA ODI #11509532

Mileage unknown · Feb 28, 2023
Exterior Lighting

The issue is with the driving lights asembly since 2 years ago my driving lights are not providing enough light to drive the vehicle i am forced to have the high beams on. I have changed numerous bulbs to no avail. At this point i am driving and cannot see infrond of me. This is dangerous to my family and pedestrians that canno…

Read full complaint

The issue is with the driving lights asembly since 2 years ago my driving lights are not providing enough light to drive the vehicle i am forced to have the high beams on. I have changed numerous bulbs to no avail. At this point i am driving and cannot see infrond of me. This is dangerous to my family and pedestrians that cannot see my car or me see them.

NHTSA ODI #11509504

Mileage unknown · Feb 28, 2023
Exterior Lighting

The headlights grew very dim over the last couple years. I replaced the bulbs and it made no difference. Finally, this winter, they got so dim that I couldn't drive it at night, anymore. I took it to repair shop to see if something was wrong with electric system, and they found no problems, just little light coming from the he…

Read full complaint

The headlights grew very dim over the last couple years. I replaced the bulbs and it made no difference. Finally, this winter, they got so dim that I couldn't drive it at night, anymore. I took it to repair shop to see if something was wrong with electric system, and they found no problems, just little light coming from the headlights. I went on line and found lots of people having same problem with the 2013-2015 base model RDXs. My repair shop looked into ordering them but OEM lights were on backorder - vendor said they are in heavy demand because of dimming problems. The bulbs are fine, just the chroming/reflective surface inside headlight assembly oxidized and lost reflectivity. $2000 for dealer to replace. $1300 just for the assemblies! That's 10% of the car's value. It is obviously a manufacturing problem and the results in a very dangerous situation at night when the lights appear to be working but are giving off little light. I have talked to other RDX owners I have come across and they had or are having the same problem - and are faced with same $2000 bill for what is an acknowledged problem and should have been justification for a recall. Dangerous situation from know manufacturing defect. I read that the 2013's were recalled or being fixed for free with enough complaining but nothing for 2014&2015s. I called dealer and they said all that could be done was to replace the entire assemblies and Acura isn't covering the cost or even offering a discount. No warnings - but i thought it was just my eyes going bad, but people seeing my car approaching told me my low beams were very dim. Even after putting in the brightest bulbs I could buy - bought 2 replacement sets for no improvement.

NHTSA ODI #11509490

Mileage unknown · Feb 28, 2023
Exterior LightingVisibility/wiper

I have had to replace both the driver side and passenger side headlight assemblies in this vehicle. This a defect with Acura RDX and should be recalled. The Acura dealership confirmed the headlights were dimmer than the daytime running lights and would not pass inspection. I replaced the left headlight in 2018 and the right one …

Read full complaint

I have had to replace both the driver side and passenger side headlight assemblies in this vehicle. This a defect with Acura RDX and should be recalled. The Acura dealership confirmed the headlights were dimmer than the daytime running lights and would not pass inspection. I replaced the left headlight in 2018 and the right one in 2022. Even after costly replacement, the lighting is still very dim and unsafe for night driving.

NHTSA ODI #11509486

Mileage unknown · Feb 25, 2023
Exterior Lighting

The low beam headlights on both sides are too dim to drive on at night. I’ve had blubs replaced to the highest quality bulbs, but the issue is with the reflective coating on the headlight assembly. This was confirmed by the dealership. If a saftey inspector ever saw my car at night they’d never pass it. I have been pulled over b…

Read full complaint

The low beam headlights on both sides are too dim to drive on at night. I’ve had blubs replaced to the highest quality bulbs, but the issue is with the reflective coating on the headlight assembly. This was confirmed by the dealership. If a saftey inspector ever saw my car at night they’d never pass it. I have been pulled over by a cop telling me my lights are not on, but they were ( he let me go, I do not have documentation). The dealer recommended complete replacement of both light assemblies. Dim lighting first appeared around 50k but has gotten progressively worse. The dealer report and quote attached was at 76k. Their determination and quote for new lights is on page 6. My concern is that even with full assemblies replacement, the replacements will result in bad light. Other posts only show where people have replaced the assemblies only to find the same bad lighting. I have no problem spending the money if I knew it would fix the issue. The assemblies themselves seem built or designed defective. I’m at a loss for what to do.

NHTSA ODI #11509138

Mileage unknown · Feb 25, 2023
Exterior LightingUnknown Or OtherVisibility/wiper

It is extremely difficult to see at night without having to use my bright lights. The low beams are useless and poses as a hazard to the driver and the driver of the approaching vehicles. I have replaced my headlights and I have purchased fog lights as an attempt to fix the problem but it still did not fix the problem. These …

Read full complaint

It is extremely difficult to see at night without having to use my bright lights. The low beams are useless and poses as a hazard to the driver and the driver of the approaching vehicles. I have replaced my headlights and I have purchased fog lights as an attempt to fix the problem but it still did not fix the problem. These additional costs were well over $500. I am requesting that Acura correct this problem before I or someone else gets hurt. [XXX], Owner, Phone number [XXX]. INFORMATION Redacted PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).

NHTSA ODI #11509056

Official recalls

3

19V500000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Jun 27, 2019

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2013 Acura ILX, 2015 RDX, 2005-2010 and 2012 RL, 2009-2014 TL, 2010 and 2012 ZDX, 2007-2011 CR-V, 2011-2013 and 2015 CR-Z, 2009-2013 Fit, 2013 Fit EV, 2010-2011 and 2013 Insight and 2007-2014 Ridgeline vehicles. These vehicles are equipped with driver frontal air bag inflators assembled as a recall remedy part or replacement service part, that may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the driver frontal air bag inflator, free of charge. The recall began August 12, 2019. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are S5B and W59.

19V182000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Mar 6, 2019

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling specific 2003 Acura 3.2CL, 2013-2016 ILX, 2013-2014 ILX Hybrid, 2003-2006 MDX, 2007-2016 RDX, 2002-2003 3.2TL, 2004-2006, and 2009-2014 TL, 2010-2013 ZDX and 2001-2007 and 2009 Honda Accord, 2001-2005 Civic, 2003-2005 Civic Hybrid, 2001-2005 Civic GX NGV, 2002-2007 and 2010-2011 CR-V, 2003-2011 Element, 2007 Fit, 2002-2004 Odyssey, 2003-2008 Pilot, and 2006-2014 Ridgeline vehicles. The affected vehicles received a replacement driver air bag inflator as part of a previous Takata inflator recall remedy or a replacement driver air bag module containing the same inflator type as a service part. Due to a manufacturing error, in the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the driver frontal air bag, these inflators may explode.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An explosion of an inflator within the driver frontal air bag module may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver, front seat passenger or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the driver's air bag inflator with an alternate inflator, free of charge. The recall began April 10, 2019. Honda owners may contact customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's number for this recall is O41. Acura owners may contact customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Acura's number for this recall is U40.

16V061000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Feb 3, 2016

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain model year 2007-2011 Honda CR-V, 2011-2015 CR-Z, 2010-2014 FCX, and Insight, 2009-2013 Fit, 2013-2014 Fit EV, 2007-2014 Ridgeline, 2013-2016 Acura ILX, 2013-2014 Acura ILX Hybrid, 2007-2016 RDX, 2005-2012 Acura RL, 2009-2014 Acura TL, and 2010-2013 Acura ZDX vehicles. The affected vehicles are equipped with a dual-stage driver frontal air bag that may be susceptible to moisture intrusion which, over time, could cause the inflator to rupture.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the inflator, free of charge. The recall began March 2017. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are JY0, JY1, and JY2.

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

1

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.