← 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 · Sep 30, 2024
Exterior Lighting

Headlights are dim making driving unsafe after sunset. Even after replacing the bulb with OEM bulbs the headlight housing the fixture remains very dim forcing the driver to use high beams at after sunset.

NHTSA ODI #11617200

Mileage unknown · Sep 21, 2024
Exterior Lighting

We purchased the vehicle used showing 102,445 Miles on 5/24/24 and did not drive it at night until a few days ago. At that time we noticed the low bean projector headlights were bearly visible. Upon further research we found that this is a common safety defect on virtually all RDX models from 2006 on using Halogen Projector ligh…

Read full complaint

We purchased the vehicle used showing 102,445 Miles on 5/24/24 and did not drive it at night until a few days ago. At that time we noticed the low bean projector headlights were bearly visible. Upon further research we found that this is a common safety defect on virtually all RDX models from 2006 on using Halogen Projector lighting & relates to bad reflector design. Upon contacting Acura / Honda by phone, they said at first there was no recall & the defective reflector did not exist on my vehicle. Two thing amaze me. One he obviously lied and two, this defect is well know, broadly exists on not just Honda products but other manufacturers as well and the NHTSA has not addressed it. I ordered new light assemblies that I will install myself, but there are countless retrofit methods highlighted on You Tube for something that should have created a massive recall campaign by the NHTSA BTW ! If an owner has the lights relaced by a dealer, the cost runs about $2300 ! I have owned and maintained over 60 vehicles, foreign & domestic in my 80 years. The last time I had some this this aggregious was structural suspension corrosion on a 1970 Fiat that could have killed me. I was part of the campaign that lead to a buyback.

NHTSA ODI #11615754

Mileage unknown · Sep 18, 2024
Exterior Lighting

In 2020 my RDX headlights seemed to be losing it's ability to illuminate the roadway. It continued to become worse until today, it has become so dim that it does not provide the illumination required to be street legal. No matter what I did, replacing the headlamp bulbs to polishing the oxidation from the lens, the illuminatio…

Read full complaint

In 2020 my RDX headlights seemed to be losing it's ability to illuminate the roadway. It continued to become worse until today, it has become so dim that it does not provide the illumination required to be street legal. No matter what I did, replacing the headlamp bulbs to polishing the oxidation from the lens, the illumination become better. I finally was told by a Acura dealership that the problem is with the silver reflective surface behind the bulb becoming oxidized and pealing off. The only way to solve the problem is to replace both headlamps. The cost is close to $1000. This failure in safety equipment less than 5 years after manufacture should be investigated.

NHTSA ODI #11615297

Mileage unknown · Sep 14, 2024
Exterior Lighting

My 2015 Acura RDX headlights are so dim that I can barely see the road ahead of me. Also, when using the low beams only, cars are flashing at me thinking I don't have my headlights on. I always use the "auto" setting on the headlight control pendant. Then I'm forced to drive with my brights on which causes other cars to flash th…

Read full complaint

My 2015 Acura RDX headlights are so dim that I can barely see the road ahead of me. Also, when using the low beams only, cars are flashing at me thinking I don't have my headlights on. I always use the "auto" setting on the headlight control pendant. Then I'm forced to drive with my brights on which causes other cars to flash their brights at me and may be presenting a safety issue for them to see with my brights glaring. I called the dealer and they quoted >$2000 to replace them. I understand there was a recall for faulty headlight reflective film for select vehicles made in 2014-2015 but for some reason my VIN does not qualify for the recall. I believe they were mistaken when they indicated they resolved the problem as my vehicle has the same problem the recall intended to resolve.

NHTSA ODI #11614605

Mileage unknown · Sep 10, 2024
Visibility/wiper

My regular headlights are so dim. When driving at night I have to use my high beams or I cannot see the road. Acura has admitted that there is a problem for the 2015 RDX but has not issued a recall. The original halogen headlight bulbs have damaged the reflective casing that the bulb reflects from. I have tried to improve the b…

Read full complaint

My regular headlights are so dim. When driving at night I have to use my high beams or I cannot see the road. Acura has admitted that there is a problem for the 2015 RDX but has not issued a recall. The original halogen headlight bulbs have damaged the reflective casing that the bulb reflects from. I have tried to improve the beam by replacing the bulbs but nothing works. It is a HUGE safety concern and a flaw in the Acura 2015 RDX headlight assemblies over time.

NHTSA ODI #11613824

Mileage unknown · Sep 7, 2024
Exterior Lighting

While overall pleased with vehicle, the low beams simply seem not visible enough to light the road properly. I believe this is a safety hazard and hearing how many other owners of the same make and model report this I believe the government to investigate this problem. Thank you.

NHTSA ODI #11613228

Mileage unknown · Aug 21, 2024
Exterior Lighting

The low beams on my 2015 Acura RDX are very dim and have gotten progressively worse over the last two years. Visibility at night is extremely poor and dangerous. I do not drive much at night, except locally. I did not think there was an issue with my car since the LED lights on newer cars are so very bright in comparison. I real…

Read full complaint

The low beams on my 2015 Acura RDX are very dim and have gotten progressively worse over the last two years. Visibility at night is extremely poor and dangerous. I do not drive much at night, except locally. I did not think there was an issue with my car since the LED lights on newer cars are so very bright in comparison. I realized it was major issue very recently (August 2024) when I could not see more than one car length in front of me on a major highway with construction zones. I could not tell if my low beams were on or not. My high beams functioned properly and that was the safest way for me to continue driving. There have been no previous warning messages. On June 19, 2024, I had other repair work performed at an Acura dealership and received a multi-point inspection report of which I received a green light status for my headlights. I am currently at over 103,000 miles. I estimate the issue began at around 90,000 miles. I have not reported this to the Acura dealer. However, my local mechanic confirmed the issue exists. After some investigation, I found that this is a common problem with this model car and year. The quoted cost to repair this issue from two different Acura dealerships is quite expensive, ranging from $2300 to $2500, to replace both headlight assemblies. This should not be my issue to pay for; it should be a recall at Acura's expense.

NHTSA ODI #11609985

Mileage unknown · Aug 16, 2024
StructureUnknown Or Other

The sunroof spontaneously shattered while driving the car. No other vehicles were around and no debris caused the sunroof to shatter. Glass blew in to oncoming traffic and into the car while it was being operated, which posed a risk to myself and other drivers. Upon further investigation, this is a know issue by Honda/Acura and…

Read full complaint

The sunroof spontaneously shattered while driving the car. No other vehicles were around and no debris caused the sunroof to shatter. Glass blew in to oncoming traffic and into the car while it was being operated, which posed a risk to myself and other drivers. Upon further investigation, this is a know issue by Honda/Acura and a class action lawsuit has been file, yet the company is unwilling to make repairs to effected cars. There were no warnings etc prior to the sunroof shattering. The car was taken directly to the dealership for repairs and photos are available.

NHTSA ODI #11608980

Mileage unknown · Aug 8, 2024
Exterior Lighting

My 21 year old daughter is driving a 2015 RDX we just purchased a few months ago. The headlights are terrible! They are so dim and it’s extremely dangerous. Acura should have a recall on this

NHTSA ODI #11607407

Mileage unknown · Aug 2, 2024
Exterior Lighting

The low beam headlights have gotten very dim over the 6 years I have owned the car, to the point that it is hazardous to drive at night due to very poor visibility. The Honda dealership found no issues and only replaced the bulbs, which did not fix the problem. There are numerous online reports of exactly the same issue with t…

Read full complaint

The low beam headlights have gotten very dim over the 6 years I have owned the car, to the point that it is hazardous to drive at night due to very poor visibility. The Honda dealership found no issues and only replaced the bulbs, which did not fix the problem. There are numerous online reports of exactly the same issue with the same model year of this vehicle. I don't understand why Acura does not acknowledge this issue with a recall, or why NHTSA does not consider this a well-documented and dangerous defect.

NHTSA ODI #11606136

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.