Electrical System. Review the 1 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Engine. Review the 1 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Exterior Lighting. Review the 1 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

0 crash reports0 fire reports0 injury reports

What owners actually said

5 reports

143,935 miles · May 21, 2025

Power Train

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2015 Honda Civic Hybrid. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle made an unusual sound and stalled. No warning lights were illuminated. The contact was unable to pull to the side of the road. The contact stated upon shifting to park(P), the vehicle continued to roll. The Contact engaged the parking brake. The contact stated that the vehicle failed to restart as intended. The contact stated several bystanders assisted in pushing the vehicle to the shoulder of the road. The vehicle was towed to an unknown dealer, where it was diagnosed that the front driver's side CV drive shaft was fractured and needed to be replaced. The contact was informed that the parts had been ordered. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 143,935.

NHTSA ODI #11662404

117,729 miles · Oct 8, 2024

Electrical SystemEngine

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2015 Honda Civic Hybrid. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, several undisclosed warning lights illuminated, and the vehicle started to lose motive power. The contact stated that the vehicle stalled after arriving at the dealer. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer, where it was diagnosed and determined that there was a bypass malfunction. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not contacted. The failure mileage was approximately 117,729.

NHTSA ODI #11618660

126,000 miles · Oct 25, 2022

Hybrid Propulsion System

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2015 Honda Civic Hybrid. The contact stated while driving 40 MPH, the vehicle stalled with unknown warning lights illuminated. The contact was able to pull over and jump start the vehicle and the vehicle restarted. The vehicle was taken to the dealer and the contact was informed that the motor power inverter needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was contacted and stated that the contact would receive a callback. The failure mileage was 126,000.

NHTSA ODI #11490827

65,000 miles · May 8, 2016

Exterior Lighting

Read full complaint

TIRE INFLATION LITE COMES, THE MANUAL STATES TO GET OUT THE CAR AND INSPECT THE TIRES FOR DEFLATION. THIS HAS COME ON SEVERAL TIMES EACH TIME THE TIRE INFLATION HAS FOUND TO BE GOOD. THE DEALER JUST RESTS. I GOT OUT ONCE ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND ALMOST WAS HIT BY A TRUCK. THE HIGHWAY PATROL SEEMS TO BE AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM. TIRES APPEARED TO BE GOOD BY TOUCH, NO TIRE FELT HOT THAN THE OTHER, IT WAS RESET (TIRE LITE) TIRES PRESSURE WERE WITHIN TWO PSI LATER DOWN THE ROAD. THIS IS A SAFETY CONCERN AS THE MANUAL STATES TO PULL OVER AND INSPECT THE TIRES AND PEOPLE ARE GOING TO KILLED BY A PASSING VEHICLE. THE TIRE PRESSURE LITE COMING ON IS A HAZARD.

NHTSA ODI #10863808

11,140 miles · Mar 5, 2016

Wheels

Read full complaint

9/25/15 PURCHASED BRAND NEW; ALREADY HAD 5 EPISODES OF ALERT PROBLEM IN TIRE PRESSURE: 10/29/15 (2,835 MILES) ALERT OF TIRE PRESSURE WHILE DRIVING AT FREEWAY & BROUGHT TO DEALER ON SAME DAY:11/20/15, THE LIGHTS WENT ON AGAIN WHILE DRIVING AT FREEWAY: BROUGHT CAR TO DEALER ON 11/21/15 4,536 MILES- ALERT OF TIRE PRESSURE AND BROUGHT TO DEALER; 12/28/15 (6,816)--MADE AN OIL CHANGE IN SAME DEALER AND ON 1/4/16 THE ALERT SIGNAL WAS ON AGAIN WHILE DRIVING ON FREEWAY AND WENT BACK TO DEALER ON 1/5--THEY DIDN'T CREATE A WORK ORDER BUT CHECKED THE CAR AND WAS ADVISED AND WAS SHOWN BY SERVICE ADVISOR HOW TO MANUALLY RESET THE ALERT SO IT GOES AWAY; CALLED 1800-9991009 ON 1/13/2016 @8:03 AM AND SPOKE WITH NIKKI AND WAS ADVISED TO BRING CAR BACK TO DEALER IF LIGHTS GO ON AGAIN; ON 2/29 THE LIGHTS WENT ON AGAIN WHILE I WAS ON FREEWAY AND THINKING IT WAS THE SAME PROBLEM, I IGNORED IT AND WENT ON DRIVING UNTIL A PASSENGER OF A MOTORIST SIGNALED TO ME THAT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH MY TIRE--IT WAS A FLAT TIRE. I EXITED FREEWAY AND PARKED IN A SAFE AREA & CALLED FOR ROADSIDE ASSIST. ON 3/1 (10888)CAR BROUGHT TO DEALER FOR A NEW TIRE. ON 3/4/16 WHILE DRIVING ON FREEWAY, THE LIGHT WAS BACK AGAIN AND BROUGHT CARE TO THE DEALER ON 3/5 (111509). DEALER RECALIBRATED THE SENSORS. ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS, I WAS TOLD BY VARIOUS SERVICE ADVISORS THAT THE TIRE PRESSURE SHOULD BE EXACTLY THE SAME, NOT MORE, NOT LESS. I GOT A GAUGE TO CHECK IT AND IN 3 OUT OF THE 5 EVENTS, MY GAUGE SHOWED THE CORRECT PRESSURE AND HAD OTHER PEOPLE VALIDATE IT

NHTSA ODI #10840073

Official recalls

No recalls in this snapshot.

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

DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds

Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System

NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.

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

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

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.