← 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

What owners actually said

410 reports
Mileage unknown · Nov 12, 2024
Exterior Lighting

Headlights have been too dim to see at night for many years - I was pulled over by a police office because of this. I want to sell my vehicle but cannot in my right mind do this until there has been a recall to fix the situation that will not cost me a ton of money.

NHTSA ODI #11624736

Mileage unknown · Nov 7, 2024
Exterior Lighting

The front headlights on this car are dangerously dim. We have replaced bulbs, cleaned lenses, but the lights eventually dim. Night driving is treacherous because we have to use high beams constantly which don't light the road immediately in front of the car. The dimming has been going on for the past 5-7 years, and it is a desig…

Read full complaint

The front headlights on this car are dangerously dim. We have replaced bulbs, cleaned lenses, but the lights eventually dim. Night driving is treacherous because we have to use high beams constantly which don't light the road immediately in front of the car. The dimming has been going on for the past 5-7 years, and it is a design flaw of this car. Acura is not offering any sort of recall/replacement for the housing to fix this issue. We are getting estimates of $2000+ from local repair shops to replace the housings. This is a safety issue that Acura should address for all affected models and I would urge the NHTSA to investigate.

NHTSA ODI #11623942

Mileage unknown · Nov 6, 2024
Fuel/propulsion System

My car is experiencing intermittent starting issues due to low fuel pressure from my fuel pump. I am able to start my car by cycling it into accessory mode and letting it set and pressure up before finally starting it. If I didn’t do this, I could eventually have issues with my starter. My mechanic informed me of a recall for Ac…

Read full complaint

My car is experiencing intermittent starting issues due to low fuel pressure from my fuel pump. I am able to start my car by cycling it into accessory mode and letting it set and pressure up before finally starting it. If I didn’t do this, I could eventually have issues with my starter. My mechanic informed me of a recall for Acura RDX models 2017-2019, my car is a 2015 BUT with the exact same fuel pump! Acura won’t release the sell of said pump because it is “currently under a recall”. The recall needs to be expanded to include earlier models of this car. I currently have a warranty on my vehicle so I’d like the repair to be done but I can’t even purchase the pump from Acura at this time because of the recall. Make it make sense?!

NHTSA ODI #11623906

Mileage unknown · Nov 5, 2024
Exterior Lighting

What component or system failed or malfunctioned, and is it available for inspection upon request? The low-beam headlight system has failed due to severe, progressive dimming that has rendered it nearly unusable at night. This component poses a clear safety hazard and is available for immediate inspection upon request. How was …

Read full complaint

What component or system failed or malfunctioned, and is it available for inspection upon request? The low-beam headlight system has failed due to severe, progressive dimming that has rendered it nearly unusable at night. This component poses a clear safety hazard and is available for immediate inspection upon request. How was your safety or the safety of others put at risk? The dim headlights make nighttime driving extremely hazardous, forcing me to rely on high beams, which in turn creates visibility risks for other drivers. Reduced visibility has endangered my safety and the safety of others, particularly on unlit or busy roads where clear vision is essential. Has the problem been reproduced or confirmed by a dealer or independent service center? Yes, the issue has been confirmed by the Acura dealership on two separate occasions. Each time, they recommended a $2,000 repair due to the need to replace the entire headlight assemblies, as the dimming is related to a reflective film issue that cannot be fixed by merely replacing the bulb. This problem is persistent and has been professionally diagnosed. Has the vehicle or component been inspected by the manufacturer, police, insurance representatives, or others? Yes, the vehicle has been inspected by both the Acura dealership and a third-party service provider, Midas. The issue has been clearly documented by both parties, and the recommended solution has been consistent: full replacement of both headlight assemblies due to the reflective film defect. Were there any warning lamps, messages, or other symptoms of the problem prior to the failure, and when did they first appear? There were no warning lamps or error messages to indicate the dimming issue. However, I began noticing the brightness gradually worsening over the past few years, forcing me to rely on high beams at night. This problem is ongoing, with no alternative solution other than the costly full assembly replacement recommended by Acura.

NHTSA ODI #11623730

Mileage unknown · Nov 4, 2024
Exterior Lighting

The Low Beam Lights are extremely Dim, Had to drive with Hight Beam ON all the time, which would make it dangerous for the on comers, During rain or fog, high beam should not be used and Low beam is of no help at all, its a prevalent with 2015 RDX base model at least, Apparently Honda does not want to care about that.

NHTSA ODI #11623490

Mileage unknown · Nov 1, 2024
Exterior Lighting

I’ve owned this car since it was new-have had almost all service work performed by local Acura dealership (Gary Force Acura). Some weeks ago, I noticed I was having difficulty seeing in front of my car when driving at night. I replaced a headlight bulb but it did not help at all. The only way I could see to drive at night was wi…

Read full complaint

I’ve owned this car since it was new-have had almost all service work performed by local Acura dealership (Gary Force Acura). Some weeks ago, I noticed I was having difficulty seeing in front of my car when driving at night. I replaced a headlight bulb but it did not help at all. The only way I could see to drive at night was with my bright lights on. I contacted a local Acura repair shop and they indicated there is a manufacturing problem with the 2015 Acura RDX-the reflective material in the low beam headlights delaminates and reflect la minimal light forward, meaning there is very little light to illuminate what is in front of me at night. This meant my only two options to operate my car at night were to risk being unable to see what was in front of me since there was minimal lights going forward on low beams, or to drive with my high beams on at night blinding oncoming traffic. Neither option is acceptable. This known manufacturing defect is not being corrected if the vehicle is outside of its warranty. I contacted my Acura dealer and spoke with Casey in the service department who told me they weren’t offering any assistance and that it would cost me approximately $3,000 to fix this known manufacturing defect. I instead went to the local Acura repair shop where I had to spend slightly more than $1,800 so my car would be operable at night-there were no other alternatives. This is a known problem with Acura headlights-there is a recall for this issue with a similar model in this model year. See: [XXX] There are also numerous posts on various car sites and Reddit with this known problem. I should not have had to pay to fix this-Acura should have made these repairs because they know it’s a manufacturing defect they’re failing to correct. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ODI #11623117

Mileage unknown · Oct 24, 2024
Exterior Lighting

The headlights have gone very dim do to the reflective coating degrading in the headlight housing. This makes the vehicle unsafe to drive at night.

NHTSA ODI #11621852

Mileage unknown · Oct 10, 2024
Exterior Lighting

The headlights on my 2015 Acura RDX have degraded so much that it is difficult to get proper visibility at night, and therefore, dangerous to drive at dark. The safety of myself and my passengers, as well as other drivers on the road, is at risk. New bulbs were installed within the last year, so it certainly isn't a bulb issue…

Read full complaint

The headlights on my 2015 Acura RDX have degraded so much that it is difficult to get proper visibility at night, and therefore, dangerous to drive at dark. The safety of myself and my passengers, as well as other drivers on the road, is at risk. New bulbs were installed within the last year, so it certainly isn't a bulb issue. The dealer has confirmed the issue of the housing/reflection degrading, but there is no safety recall for this issue.

NHTSA ODI #11619120

Mileage unknown · Oct 4, 2024
Exterior Lighting

The low beam headlights are so dim and weak it is unsafe to drive. I have read where Acura rdx years 2012-2015 have a lot of reports of this problem. I understand Honda has recalled another style of Acura in same time years but not acknowledged this. I have used brand name headlight restoration kit and paid to replace the hea…

Read full complaint

The low beam headlights are so dim and weak it is unsafe to drive. I have read where Acura rdx years 2012-2015 have a lot of reports of this problem. I understand Honda has recalled another style of Acura in same time years but not acknowledged this. I have used brand name headlight restoration kit and paid to replace the headlight bulbs(low beam) but there is no improvment This is very unsafe and Honda needs to replace/repair the headlights.

NHTSA ODI #11618121

Mileage unknown · Oct 2, 2024
Exterior Lighting

I purchased my 2015 Acura RDX in October of 202o. At about 90K miles, two years later, the Low-Beam headlights started getting dimmer and it is now 4 years into owning the vehicle and literally impossible to see at night. It is not the lens clouding over, nor is it the bulbs which have been replaced a couple times now. Looking o…

Read full complaint

I purchased my 2015 Acura RDX in October of 202o. At about 90K miles, two years later, the Low-Beam headlights started getting dimmer and it is now 4 years into owning the vehicle and literally impossible to see at night. It is not the lens clouding over, nor is it the bulbs which have been replaced a couple times now. Looking online I see that there is a problem with the reflective coating on the inside of the headlight assembly, as it deteriorates it makes the headlights dim at night. This needs to be recalled by ACURA and is definitely a safety hazard! I've already almost been in two accidents because of this. Leaving high beams on at night is the only option which poses another hazard to oncoming traffic.

NHTSA ODI #11617671

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.