← New search

2012 Honda Civic

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Civic years

Owner complaints for the 2012 Honda Civic are substantially higher than the model-year median of 183.5.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

321 reports with mileage · 133 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Air Bags. Review the 149 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Steering. Review the 74 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 59 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

55 crash reports5 fire reports28 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

59 reports
Clear category filter
36,866 miles · Feb 16, 2015
Electrical SystemExterior LightingFire

WHILE CAR WAS PARKED AND IDLING, I NOTICED FLAMES COMING FROM BACKSEAT CEILING LIGHT. PLASTIC AND FLAMES DRIPPED ONTO THE UPHOLSTERY CATCHING IT ON FIRE AS WELL AS THE CEILING AREA. I WAS ABLE TO EXTINGUISH THE FLAMES WITH A SNOW BRUSH. I IMMEDIATELY CALLED THE HONDA DEALERSHIP IN TOWN AND AM WAITING FOR A TOW TRUCK TO TAKE I…

Read full complaint

WHILE CAR WAS PARKED AND IDLING, I NOTICED FLAMES COMING FROM BACKSEAT CEILING LIGHT. PLASTIC AND FLAMES DRIPPED ONTO THE UPHOLSTERY CATCHING IT ON FIRE AS WELL AS THE CEILING AREA. I WAS ABLE TO EXTINGUISH THE FLAMES WITH A SNOW BRUSH. I IMMEDIATELY CALLED THE HONDA DEALERSHIP IN TOWN AND AM WAITING FOR A TOW TRUCK TO TAKE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP SO THEY CAN DIAGNOSE THE ISSUE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10683683

24,000 miles · Feb 9, 2015
Electrical System

THE TPMS SYSTEM FAILS DESPITE THE FACT THE ALL THE TIRES ARE PROPERLY INFLATED. THIS ILLUMINATES 2 WARNING LIGHTS PLUS ACTIVATE THE INFORMATION CENTER DISPLAY. TWO OF THE SENSORS HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY THE DEALER UNDER WARRANTY BUT THE PROBLEM KEEP OCCURRING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10682096

40,000 miles · Feb 1, 2015
Air BagsElectrical System

I HAVE HAD SEVERAL ISSUES WITH MY AIRBAG STATING THERE IS AN AIRBAG ERROR IN MY CAR. I TOOK IT TO HONDA AND THEY CONFIRMED THAT IN THEIR COMPUTER IT SHOWS THAT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG BUT THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT. THEY TOLD ME IN ORDER TO CHECK IT THEY WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE CAR APART AND I WILL HAVE TO …

Read full complaint

I HAVE HAD SEVERAL ISSUES WITH MY AIRBAG STATING THERE IS AN AIRBAG ERROR IN MY CAR. I TOOK IT TO HONDA AND THEY CONFIRMED THAT IN THEIR COMPUTER IT SHOWS THAT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG BUT THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT. THEY TOLD ME IN ORDER TO CHECK IT THEY WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE CAR APART AND I WILL HAVE TO PAY $300 UP FRONT JUST TO CHECK IT. THEY ALSO STATED THAT IT ISN'T COVERED IN THE WARRANTY EVEN THOUGH MY CAR HAS NEVER BEEN IN A CAR ACCIDENT AND IT IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE. I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET IT FIXED BECAUSE I CANNOT AFFORD FOR THEM TO EVEN JUST LOOK AT MY CAR. WHAT IS THE POINT OF HAVING A 6 YR WARRANTY COVERAGE IF HONDA DOESN'T WANT TO COVER ANYTHING! OVER THE SUMMER I HAD A DRAINAGE LEAK THAT WAS COMING FROM THE ELECTRICAL FUSE IN MY CAR, GUESS WHAT HONDA DID NOT CARE!... THESE DAYS I THINK A BICYCLE WOULD BE THE SAFEST THING... LOL... SUFFICE IT TO SAY LIFE IS EXPENSIVE AND I DON'T THINK WE WILL BE GETTING A BREAK. THANKS HONDA FOR ONLY CARING ABOUT YOUR SALES & MONEY AND NOT CARING ABOUT YOUR CUSTOMERS SAFETY! LIVES! FAMILIES! WIVES! HUSBANDS! & CHILDREN! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10680317

32,000 miles · Jan 12, 2015
Air BagsElectrical System

EVER SINCE I BOUGHT THE HONDA CIVIC 2012, I'VE HAD PROBLEMS. THE FIRST PROBLEM IS THE AIR BAGS TURNING ON AND OFF. APPARENTLY, THE AIR BAGS TURN OFF IF A CHILD/SOMEONE IS UNDER 100 POUNDS. HOWEVER, ALL MY PREVIOUS EX'S WERE AROUND 110 POUNDS, SO THE AIRBAGS TURN OFF OR ON. I WOULD HATE TO HAVE ONE OF MY GIRLFRIENDS DIE BECAUSE O…

Read full complaint

EVER SINCE I BOUGHT THE HONDA CIVIC 2012, I'VE HAD PROBLEMS. THE FIRST PROBLEM IS THE AIR BAGS TURNING ON AND OFF. APPARENTLY, THE AIR BAGS TURN OFF IF A CHILD/SOMEONE IS UNDER 100 POUNDS. HOWEVER, ALL MY PREVIOUS EX'S WERE AROUND 110 POUNDS, SO THE AIRBAGS TURN OFF OR ON. I WOULD HATE TO HAVE ONE OF MY GIRLFRIENDS DIE BECAUSE OF A CRASH WHERE THE AIRBAG DID NOT GO OFF. SECOND PROBLEM: THE CAR WILL NOT START MULTIPLE OF TIMES! I HAD MY BATTERY CHECKED MULTIPLE TIMES AND IT IS NOT THE ALTERNATOR, EITHER! APPARENTLY THE STEERING WHEEL PROBLEM OR THE SECURITY SYSTEM DRAINS THE BATTERY. I HAD TO BUY A RECHARGEABLE BATTERY AND JUMPER CABLES WHICH I CARRY IN MY TRUNK BECAUSE I AM TIRED OF CALLING MY INSURANCE COMPANY OR SECURITY AT THAT LOCATION TO JUMP START MY CAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10671748

53,000 miles · Dec 30, 2014
Electrical SystemEngineStructureCrashFire

I WAS DRIVING A 2012 HONDA CIVIC WHEN THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME SLAMMED ON THEIR BRAKES AND CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP DUE TO SOMETHING IN THE ROAD. I SLAMMED ON MY BRAKES AND TRIED TO AVOID THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME BY SWERVING TO THE RIGHT. THE DRIVER SIDE OF THE FRONT OF MY CAR HIT THE BACK OF THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME. MY CAR WAS COMPLE…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING A 2012 HONDA CIVIC WHEN THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME SLAMMED ON THEIR BRAKES AND CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP DUE TO SOMETHING IN THE ROAD. I SLAMMED ON MY BRAKES AND TRIED TO AVOID THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME BY SWERVING TO THE RIGHT. THE DRIVER SIDE OF THE FRONT OF MY CAR HIT THE BACK OF THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME. MY CAR WAS COMPLETELY SMASHED IN THE FRONT. AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. AFTER I CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP, MY CAR LIT ON FIRE. THE CAR WAS BURNED AND COMPLETELY DESTROYED. *JS

NHTSA ODI #10669091

25,000 miles · Nov 21, 2014
Electrical System

ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS UPON TURNING THE KEY TO START THE ENGINE THERE IS NO IGNITION. I TURN THE KEY OFF AND TRY IT AGAIN AND THE SECOND TIME THE ENGINE STARTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10660054

96,000 miles · Oct 21, 2014
Electrical System

WHEN I GO OUT TO START MY VEHICLE IT WILL NOT TURN OVER. I HAVE HAD THE BATTERY TESTED, ALTERNATOR, HARNESS BUT HAVE BEEN ASSURED THAT THESE TEST OUT POSITIVE. I WENT ONLINE AND READ THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH 2012 HONDA CIVICS ARE HAVING THE SAME EXPERIENCE AND GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS AS I WITH NO RELIEF. SOME DESCRIBE SITUA…

Read full complaint

WHEN I GO OUT TO START MY VEHICLE IT WILL NOT TURN OVER. I HAVE HAD THE BATTERY TESTED, ALTERNATOR, HARNESS BUT HAVE BEEN ASSURED THAT THESE TEST OUT POSITIVE. I WENT ONLINE AND READ THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH 2012 HONDA CIVICS ARE HAVING THE SAME EXPERIENCE AND GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS AS I WITH NO RELIEF. SOME DESCRIBE SITUATIONS THAT ARE MORE FRIGHTENING THAN MINE SUCH AS DRIVING ALONG AND ALL THE PANEL LIGHTS COME ON AND THEN DIE AND THE CAR QUITS.

NHTSA ODI #10649020

1,800 miles · Sep 4, 2014
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion System

TURNED KEY TO START AND NOTHING HAPPENED; SOME WARNING LIGHTS WENT OFF, BUT NO SOUND FROM STARTER, SOLENOID OR OTHER ENGINE PARTS. RELEASED KEY AND TURNED KEY TO START AGAIN; ON SECOND TRY, ENGINE STARTED PROPERLY. SOMETIMES, I MAY TURN THE KEY TWICE WITH NOTHING HAPPENING AND ENGINE STARTS ON THIRD TRY. HAPPENS INTERMITTENTLY; …

Read full complaint

TURNED KEY TO START AND NOTHING HAPPENED; SOME WARNING LIGHTS WENT OFF, BUT NO SOUND FROM STARTER, SOLENOID OR OTHER ENGINE PARTS. RELEASED KEY AND TURNED KEY TO START AGAIN; ON SECOND TRY, ENGINE STARTED PROPERLY. SOMETIMES, I MAY TURN THE KEY TWICE WITH NOTHING HAPPENING AND ENGINE STARTS ON THIRD TRY. HAPPENS INTERMITTENTLY; CAN HAPPEN WHEN ENGINE IS COLD OR HOT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10630879

49,510 miles · Jan 24, 2014
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

ON 12/24/13 I RENTED A CAR FROM HERTZ AND RETURNED ON 12/30/13. DURING THAT ENTIRE TIME PERIOD THE CAR HAD NO WORKING TAILLIGHTS AND PARTIALLY FUNCTIONAL DASHBOARD AND CONSOLE LIGHTS. THE CAR WAS UNSAFE NOT ONLY FOR ME AND MY WIFE BUT ANY OTHER DRIVER ON THE ROADS AT THE TIME. THE CAR WAS ILLEGAL TO OPERATE IN PENNSYLVANIA, OHIO…

Read full complaint

ON 12/24/13 I RENTED A CAR FROM HERTZ AND RETURNED ON 12/30/13. DURING THAT ENTIRE TIME PERIOD THE CAR HAD NO WORKING TAILLIGHTS AND PARTIALLY FUNCTIONAL DASHBOARD AND CONSOLE LIGHTS. THE CAR WAS UNSAFE NOT ONLY FOR ME AND MY WIFE BUT ANY OTHER DRIVER ON THE ROADS AT THE TIME. THE CAR WAS ILLEGAL TO OPERATE IN PENNSYLVANIA, OHIO AND INDIANA AND I WAS PULLED OVER THREE TIMES BY VARIOUS POLICE DEPARTMENTS. I CONTACTED HERTZ AND THEIR RESPONSE WAS TO HAVE ME DRIVE IT TO THE INDIANAPOLIS AIRPORT. I SUGGESTED TO THE HERTZ REPRESENTATIVE THAT THIS WASN'T ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE THE CAR''S CONDITION MAKES IT ILLEGAL AND UNSAFE TO DRIVE. ULTIMATELY, WE WERE LEFT WITH A CAR THAT WAS UNSAFE AND ILLEGAL WHICH WE RELUCTANTLY DROVE TO THE INDIANAPOLIS AIRPORT AT THE TIME OF OUR DEPARTURE. UPON MY RETURN TO PHOENIX I'VE ATTEMPTED, AS INSTRUCTED BY HERTZ, TO CONTACT THEIR LOCATION IN THE PITTSBURGH TO SEEK A REFUND. AFTER 16 PHONE CALLS TO THAT NUMBER I'VE EITHER BEEN CUT OFF BY THE PHONE SYSTEM BECAUSE THE VOICEMAIL IS FULL, SELECTED OPTIONS THAT LEAD NOWHERE, OR REDIRECTED TO EMPLOYEES IN OTHER CITIES WHO TELL ME TO CALL THE LOCATION IN THE PITTSBURGH. THE STRATEGY APPEARS TO BE ONE OF CONTINUAL DELAY IN HOPES THAT CUSTOMERS WITH LEGITIMATE COMPLAINTS ULTIMATELY GIVE UP. THE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION WITH HERTZ ENSURES I'LL BE PROVIDED WITH A SAFE AND LEGAL VEHICLE AND CLEARLY THIS WAS NOT THE CASE. HERTZ HAS MADE NO ATTEMPT TO RESPONDED TO MY REQUEST AND THE ISSUE REMAINS UNRESOLVED. I HOPE THIS LETTER WILL PROMPT THE DOT AND NHTSA TO QUESTION HERTZ''S VEHICLE INSPECTION AND SAFETY PROTOCOLS, TO ENSURE THEY HAVE PRACTICES IN PLACE TO PROTECT THE CONSUMER AND TO QUICKLY AND FAIRLY RESOLVE ANY ISSUES. MY INTENT IS THAT THIS LETTER HELPS FUTURE CONSUMERS AVOID SITUATIONS SIMILAR TO THE ONE I'VE EXPERIENCED AND TO MAKE CERTAIN THEY'RE DRIVING SAFE, LEGAL AND RELIABLE VEHICLES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10561353

21,000 miles · Dec 13, 2013
Electrical System

THREE TIMES OVER ONE YEAR, THE CAR BATTERY HAS DIED AND THE CAR WILL NOT START. OFTEN THIS HAS BEEN AFTER THE CAR HAS NOT BEEN DRIVEN FOR TWO DAYS. NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS HAVE APPEARED ONLINE OF THE SAME PROBLEM. HONDA SERVICE HAS SIMPLY REFUSED TO DO A DIAGNOSTIC BEYOND OFFERING A NEW BATTERY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10556014

Official recalls

3

12V548000 · Steering:column

Nov 21, 2012

Honda is recalling certain model year 2012 Civic passenger vehicles, manufactured from October 26, 2012, through October 30, 2012. These vehicles were assembled with the incorrect steering column assembly.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The steering column may not have proper energy absorbing characteristics, which could increase the risk of injury during a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect and replace the steering column, as necessary, free of charge. The safety recall began on December 10, 2012. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009.

12V256000 · Power Train:driveline:driveshaft

Jun 4, 2012

HONDA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2012 HONDA CIVIC VEHICLES. DURING ASSEMBLY, THE PROCESS REQUIRED TO SEAT THE DRIVER’S SIDE DRIVESHAFT AND SET THE RETAINING CLIP WAS NOT COMPLETED. AS A RESULT, THE DRIVESHAFT MAY SEPARATE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS, THE VEHICLE WILL HAVE A LOSS OF DRIVE POWER AND MAY ROLL AWAY IF THE PARKING BRAKE HAS NOT BEEN SET WHEN THE GEAR SELECTOR HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE “PARK” POSITION, INCREASING THE RISK OF CRASH OR PEDESTRIAN INJURY.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver's side driveshaft and install a new driveshaft as needed, free of charge. The safety recall began on June 21. 2012. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-800-999-1009.

11V288000 · Fuel System, Other:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings

May 18, 2011

HONDA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2012 CIVIC 2-DOOR AND 4-DOOR VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM APRIL 21, 2011, THROUGH MAY 2, 2011. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT AN O-RING, WHICH SEALS A CONNECTION IN THE FUEL FEED LINE, IS MISALIGNED. IF THE O-RING IS MISALIGNED, A SMALL FUEL LEAK MAY OCCUR.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE, IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FUEL FEED LINE ASSEMBLY FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT HONDA AT 1-800-999-1009.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

2

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

EA19001 · Electrical Overstress

Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect.  During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications.  The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU.  In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment.  FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle.  Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW.  These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes.  An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time.   In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU.  This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners.  Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation.  The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage.  There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation.  The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU.  If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC.  Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC.  All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled.  In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024.  With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Go deeper into Honda Civic problems