NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
454 reports37,500 miles · Mar 21, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, THE ENGINE RPM INCREASED EXCESSIVELY AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR A DIAGNOSTIC. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, THE ENGINE RPM INCREASED EXCESSIVELY AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR A DIAGNOSTIC. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 37,500.
NHTSA ODI #10573989
36,000 miles · Mar 20, 2014
Visibility
WHILE DRIVING DOWN 101S AT ABOUT 60MPH ON A CLEAR EVENING I HEARD A LOUD POP NOISE - THE NEXT DAY I REALIZED MY SUNROOF GLASS 'EXPLODED'. FORTUNATELY WHEN IT HAPPENED THE SUNSHADE WAS PULLED SHUT SO NO GLASS FELL INTO MY CAR. I DON'T KNOW WHAT CAUSED THE GLASS TO BREAK BUT I AM POSITIVE IT WASN'T A FLYING OBJECT THAT HIT IT. *T…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING DOWN 101S AT ABOUT 60MPH ON A CLEAR EVENING I HEARD A LOUD POP NOISE - THE NEXT DAY I REALIZED MY SUNROOF GLASS 'EXPLODED'. FORTUNATELY WHEN IT HAPPENED THE SUNSHADE WAS PULLED SHUT SO NO GLASS FELL INTO MY CAR. I DON'T KNOW WHAT CAUSED THE GLASS TO BREAK BUT I AM POSITIVE IT WASN'T A FLYING OBJECT THAT HIT IT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10573902
11,500 miles · Mar 17, 2014
Power Train
CAR WILL ROLL BACKWARDS WHILE IN DRIVE (AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION). I WAS IN MY DRIVEWAY THAT IS UPHILL. I LET OFF THE BRAKES AND THE CAR STARTED TO ROLL BACKWARDS. I CONDUCTED MORE TESTS AND FOUND IT DOES THIS REGARDLESS OF THE GRADE. I ALSO TESTED OUR 2 OTHER CARS AND NEITHER DID THIS. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAID IT …
Read full complaint
CAR WILL ROLL BACKWARDS WHILE IN DRIVE (AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION). I WAS IN MY DRIVEWAY THAT IS UPHILL. I LET OFF THE BRAKES AND THE CAR STARTED TO ROLL BACKWARDS. I CONDUCTED MORE TESTS AND FOUND IT DOES THIS REGARDLESS OF THE GRADE. I ALSO TESTED OUR 2 OTHER CARS AND NEITHER DID THIS. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAID IT IS NORMAL. I CALLED HONDA (FILE # N012014-03-1702499) AND THEY SAID IT IS NORMAL. I FEEL THAT THIS IS UNSAFE. I'M 41 YRS OLD HAVE BEEN DRIVING FOR 25 YRS, I HAVE NEVER BEEN IN AN AUTOMATIC CAR THAT WILL DRIFT BACKWARDS IN DRIVE. THIS IS DANGEROUS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT USED TO THIS AND NOT INFORMED THAT THE CARS WILL DO THIS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10572903
35,000 miles · Mar 17, 2014
Unknown Or Other
I WAS TRAVELING ON I-65 NORTH AT APPROX. 5:00 PM, THERE WAS NO TRAFFIC AROUND ME AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT. SUDDENLY THE DRIVER-SIDE GLASS EXPLODED. TO MY KNOWLEDGE NOTHING HIT IT, THE GLASS JUST SUDDENLY AND LITERALLY EXPLODED. GLASS FILLED THE CAR AS WELL AS HITTING ME. THERE ARE NO OTHER MARKS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE CA…
Read full complaint
I WAS TRAVELING ON I-65 NORTH AT APPROX. 5:00 PM, THERE WAS NO TRAFFIC AROUND ME AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT. SUDDENLY THE DRIVER-SIDE GLASS EXPLODED. TO MY KNOWLEDGE NOTHING HIT IT, THE GLASS JUST SUDDENLY AND LITERALLY EXPLODED. GLASS FILLED THE CAR AS WELL AS HITTING ME. THERE ARE NO OTHER MARKS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE CAR THAT WOULD EXPLAIN SOMETHING HITTING THE GLASS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10572736
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
15,200 miles · Dec 16, 2013
EngineService BrakesSuspension
I SEARCH ON THE INTERNET THAT A LOT OF 2012 CIVIC OWNERS EXPERIENCING THE SAME ANNOYING PROBLEMS LIKE CLUNKING NOISE ON THE SUSPENSION OR UNDER THE CAR, LOUD NOISE WHEN SHIFTING TO REVERSE LIKE AXLE SHAFT IS DISENGAGING, LOUD NOISE WHEN PUTTING PRESSURE ON THE BRAKE, CLUNKING OR POPPING NOISE WHEN TURNING LEFT OR RIGHT, ROLLING …
Read full complaint
I SEARCH ON THE INTERNET THAT A LOT OF 2012 CIVIC OWNERS EXPERIENCING THE SAME ANNOYING PROBLEMS LIKE CLUNKING NOISE ON THE SUSPENSION OR UNDER THE CAR, LOUD NOISE WHEN SHIFTING TO REVERSE LIKE AXLE SHAFT IS DISENGAGING, LOUD NOISE WHEN PUTTING PRESSURE ON THE BRAKE, CLUNKING OR POPPING NOISE WHEN TURNING LEFT OR RIGHT, ROLLING NOISE ON THE SEAT BELTS, CLUNKING LOUD NOISE WHEN ACCELERATING AND RELEASING GAS PEDAL, RATTLING NOISE IN THE MORNING WHILE WARMING UP THE ENGINE AND ALSO WHEN ACCELERATING. ATF LEAKING ON THE TRANSMISSION BECAUSE ONE OF THE BOLTS IS NOT TIGHTENED...ETC. I THINK THIS 2012 HONDA CIVIC MODELS SHOULD BE RECALL BY AMERICAN HONDA MOTORS. YOU CAN CHECK THE INTERNET HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING AND DEALER SAID IT WAS NORMAL!!!?????? IT IS VERY ANNOYING. I AM ONLY CONCERN ABOUT MY SAFETY AND THE SAFETY OF MY FAMILY. I HOPE THE US GOVERMENT SHOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. THANK YOU. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10556293
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
19,000 miles · Nov 18, 2013
Air Bags
MY DAUGHTER HAS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. IT HAS NOT BEEN IN A CRASH, BUT THE DRIVERS AIR BAG IS SPLITTING OPEN JUST BELOW THE H IN THE COVER ON THE STEERING WHEEL. I HAVE BEEN IN THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY FOR OVER 37 YEARS. I REPAIRED THEM AND HAVE WORKED FOR AN INSURANCE COMPANY FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS. I HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS HAPPEN BEF…
Read full complaint
MY DAUGHTER HAS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. IT HAS NOT BEEN IN A CRASH, BUT THE DRIVERS AIR BAG IS SPLITTING OPEN JUST BELOW THE H IN THE COVER ON THE STEERING WHEEL. I HAVE BEEN IN THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY FOR OVER 37 YEARS. I REPAIRED THEM AND HAVE WORKED FOR AN INSURANCE COMPANY FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS. I HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS HAPPEN BEFORE, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THE SPLIT IS WHERE THE AIR BAG WOULD OPEN IF THERE WAS A DEPLOYMENT. SHE DID BUY THE CAR USED FROM ANOTHER LOCAL DEALER, BUT THERE IS NO INDICATION OF THIS CAR BEING IN A CRASH W/ AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. IT STARTED OUT SMALL AND HAS GROWN IN SIZE NOW. YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE AIR BAG. SHE DID TAKE THE CAR BACK TO THE DEALER WHERE SHE GETS IT SERVICE AND THEY CALLED AND TOLD HER THAT IT HAS BEEN CUT AND WILL NOT TAKE CARE OF IT. MY DAUGHTER IS 105 LBS AND NO WAY IS SHE GOING TO FORCE THIS TO SPLIT LIKE THIS SHE WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING TO DAMAGE THIS CAR WHICH IS WHAT THEY ARE INDICATING. SHE JUST BOUGHT IT THIS YEAR AS HER 2001 CAVALIER WAS HAVING TOO MANY PROBLEMS. THIS WAS HER FIRST ALMOST NEW CAR. THIS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE AND HONDA SHOULD TAKE CARE OF THIS UNDER WARRANTY BUT RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE DECLINED TO TAKE CARE OF IT THANK YOU FOR ANY HELP YOU CAN GIVE US. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10552814
36,500 miles · Nov 14, 2013
Electrical System
PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS AS I DID A WEB SEARCH AND THERE ARE NUMEROUS, NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS FOR THE SAME ISSUE. MY CONCERN IS MY WIFE DRIVES ALONE AND SHE HAS HAD TO BE JUMP STARTED BY STRANGERS SEVERAL TIMES. HERE IS THE ISSUE, WHICH AGAIN IS ALL OVER THE INTERNET. THE CAR BATTERY WILL DIE FOR NO APPARENT REASON. THE ANSWER HAS …
Read full complaint
PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS AS I DID A WEB SEARCH AND THERE ARE NUMEROUS, NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS FOR THE SAME ISSUE. MY CONCERN IS MY WIFE DRIVES ALONE AND SHE HAS HAD TO BE JUMP STARTED BY STRANGERS SEVERAL TIMES. HERE IS THE ISSUE, WHICH AGAIN IS ALL OVER THE INTERNET. THE CAR BATTERY WILL DIE FOR NO APPARENT REASON. THE ANSWER HAS BEEN TO GET A NEW BATTERY. HOWEVER, IT ONLY SOLVES THE PROBLEM FOR A SHORT WHILE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10552314
Mileage unknown · Nov 6, 2013
Air Bags
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THE PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG ERRONEOUSLY DEACTIVATED WHILE THE SEAT WAS OCCUPIED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. UPDATED 03/05/14*LJ THE DE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THE PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG ERRONEOUSLY DEACTIVATED WHILE THE SEAT WAS OCCUPIED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. UPDATED 03/05/14*LJ THE DEALER STATED IT WAS POSSIBLE THE PASSENGER WAS SITTING INCORRECTLY. UPDATED 03/11/14
NHTSA ODI #10551129
Official recalls
3Nov 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.
Jun 4, 2012
HONDA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2012 HONDA CIVIC VEHICLES. DURING ASSEMBLY, THE PROCESS REQUIRED TO SEAT THE DRIVERS 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.
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
2EA21002 · 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.