IllustrationI WAS DRIVING AND MY POWER STEERING LOCKED UP AND WOULD NOT LET ME USE THE STEERING WHEEL. I TURNED OFF THE CAR AND THE LIGHT WENT OFF AND THE POWER STEERING RETURNED FOR A COUPLE MINUTES ONLY TO TURN OFF AND NOT ALLOW THE STEERING WHEEL TO WORK ANY LONGER
2013 Honda Civic
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2013 Honda Civic do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 183.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Civic 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
980–25K
3525–50K
2850–75K
2075–100K
9100–150K
3150K+
193 reports with mileage · 126 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 114 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 39 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 38 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
29 crash reports1 fire reports24 injury reports
Steering complaints
38 reportsI PURCHASED A USED 2013 CIVIC SEDAN FROM A PRIVATE SELLER ON MARCH 23RD 2018. THE DAY I BOUGHT IT, AS I WAS PULLING OUT OF THE PARKING LOT OF THE CREDIT UNION WHERE I MET THE SELLER THE POWER STEERING FAILED. A YELLOW WARNING LIGHT THAT LOOKS LIKE A STEERING WHEEL WITH AN EXCLAMATION POINT CAME ON ON THE DASH, AND IT WAS VERY DI…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A USED 2013 CIVIC SEDAN FROM A PRIVATE SELLER ON MARCH 23RD 2018. THE DAY I BOUGHT IT, AS I WAS PULLING OUT OF THE PARKING LOT OF THE CREDIT UNION WHERE I MET THE SELLER THE POWER STEERING FAILED. A YELLOW WARNING LIGHT THAT LOOKS LIKE A STEERING WHEEL WITH AN EXCLAMATION POINT CAME ON ON THE DASH, AND IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO STEER THE VEHICLE. I PUT IT IN PARK, HIT THE HAZARDS AND TURNED THE VEHICLE OFF FOR FEAR OF HITTING SOMEONE. I CONTACTED THE SELLERS AND THEY CAME BACK. WE DISCUSSED HAVING IT TOWED TO THE SHOP, AND THE PREVIOUS OWNER GOT IN IT, TO RE-PARK IT SOMEWHERE MORE OUT OF THE WAY WHILE WE WAITED FOR AAA. AT THIS TIME, THE CAR STARTED UP FINE, NO WARNING LIGHT WAS PRESENT AND HE WAS ABLE TO SAFELY DRIVE IT INTO A PARKING SPOT. HE SUGGESTED THAT HE JUST DRIVE IT TO THE SHOP, AND I RIDE OVER THERE WITH HIS WIFE. SO WE DID, AND THEY HOOKED IT UP TO THE COMPUTER AT THE SHOP, AND INFORMED ME THAT IT DIDN'T THROW ANY CODES, AND THAT "THE COMPUTER DOESN'T LIE" THEY TOLD ME THAT SINCE IT DROVE OVER THERE FINE, TO JUST TAKE IT HOME, AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. SO I DID, AND I DROVE IT AROUND FOR A COUPLE WEEKS UNTIL ON THE 5TH OF APRIL, AGAIN PULLING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE IT HAPPENED AGAIN, YELLOW STEERING WHEEL LIGHT AND ALL. EXCEPT THIS TIME THE BRAKES FAILED TOO. NOT ONLY COULD I NOT STEER, I COULD NOT STOP. I ENDED UP DRAGGING THE FRONT END OVER A FLOWERBED WITH A CURB, AND RIPPING OFF THE BUMPER. THE CAR WAS UNDER WARRANTY AND IS NOW AT A HONDA DEALERSHIP AWAITING REPAIRS PENDING PROCESSING OF WARRANTY PAPERWORK. THANKFULLY NOBODY WAS HURT IN EITHER OF THESE INCIDENTS, BUT IT COULD'VE EASILY BEEN DIFFERENT. THESE POWER STEERING FAILURES ARE KNOW TO, AND WERE INVESTIGATED BY THE NHTSA IN 2013. NO RECALL WAS ISSUED. I KNOW THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO OTHER PEOPLE. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE AND A RECALL SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED.
ABS, TRACTION CONTROL LIGHT, & POWER STEERING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED AT THE SAME TIME AND CAN NOT BE RESET. THE VEHICLE'S TRACTION CONTROL AND ABS SYSTEMS ARE NOT ENGAGED WHEN THESE LIGHTS ARE PRESENT, THUS CAUSING A SAFETY HAZARD. THESE LIGHTS FIRST APPEARED WHILE BACKING OUT OF DRIVEWAY ON DRY/SUNNY DAY. THESE LIGHTS HAVE REMAINED…
Read full complaint
ABS, TRACTION CONTROL LIGHT, & POWER STEERING LIGHTS ILLUMINATED AT THE SAME TIME AND CAN NOT BE RESET. THE VEHICLE'S TRACTION CONTROL AND ABS SYSTEMS ARE NOT ENGAGED WHEN THESE LIGHTS ARE PRESENT, THUS CAUSING A SAFETY HAZARD. THESE LIGHTS FIRST APPEARED WHILE BACKING OUT OF DRIVEWAY ON DRY/SUNNY DAY. THESE LIGHTS HAVE REMAINED ON SINCE, AND WILL NOT GO OFF EVEN AFTER ECU RESET.
I WAS MAKING A LEFT HAND U-TURN IN THE CITY ON MAIN STREET WHEN IN THE MIDDLE OF MY TURN MY DASH LIGHTS TURNED OFF MY BRAKES WOULDN'T WORK AND I LOST POWER STEERING AND ACCELERATION. IT FELT LIKE THE CAR TURNED OFF. LUCKY THERE WAS NOBODY COMING THE OTHER WAY BECAUSE I WAS STOPPED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD AND COULD NOT ACCELERA…
Read full complaint
I WAS MAKING A LEFT HAND U-TURN IN THE CITY ON MAIN STREET WHEN IN THE MIDDLE OF MY TURN MY DASH LIGHTS TURNED OFF MY BRAKES WOULDN'T WORK AND I LOST POWER STEERING AND ACCELERATION. IT FELT LIKE THE CAR TURNED OFF. LUCKY THERE WAS NOBODY COMING THE OTHER WAY BECAUSE I WAS STOPPED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD AND COULD NOT ACCELERATE. ONCE I WAS AT A COMPLETE STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF ONCOMING TRAFFIC THE DASH LIGHTS TURNED BACK ON AND I WAS ABLE TO ACCELERATE. HOWEVER WHEN I WAS TRYING TO PARK TO CHECK THE CAR, ANY SLIGHT MOVEMENT OF THE STEERING WHEEL WOULD MAKE MY HEADLIGHTS ALMOST TURN OFF BECAUSE IT WAS LIKE IT WAS DRAWING A LOT OF EXTRA POWER FOR SOME REASON TO TURN THE STEERING WHEEL. I THEN PARKED FOR ABOUT 20 MINUTES AND TURNED THE CAR BACK ON WITH NO PROBLEM. I WENT TO A PARKING LOT TO SEE IF I COULD RE-CREATE WHAT HAPPENED BUT I COULD NOT. I WENT HOME AND READ A BUNCH OF COMPLAINTS WITH THIS SAME PROBLEM WITH NOBODY HAVING A SOLUTION. SO I HAVE NOT TAKEN MY CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE I WILL GET THE SAME ANSWER. WHICH IS WE DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG AND WE CANNOT RE-CREATE THE SITUATION.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE STARTING THE VEHICLE, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED AND THE POWER STEERING WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS INVALID. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 83,000.
TAKATA RECALL!!?! AIRBAG INDICATOR ISSUES STARTING AT 45 MI. CHECK AIRBAG WARNING IS NOW ON ALWAYS. IT'S TAKEN OVER MY LCD DISPLAY SCREEN COMPLETELY MAKING IT USELESS I.E. MAINTENANCE INFO, MILEAGE, HANDSFREE EQUIP. OPTIONS. EVERYTHING (ASIDE FROM BACK UP CAMERA, STILL FUNCTIONING WHILE IN REVERSE) AIRBAG WARNING LIGHT INDICA…
Read full complaint
TAKATA RECALL!!?! AIRBAG INDICATOR ISSUES STARTING AT 45 MI. CHECK AIRBAG WARNING IS NOW ON ALWAYS. IT'S TAKEN OVER MY LCD DISPLAY SCREEN COMPLETELY MAKING IT USELESS I.E. MAINTENANCE INFO, MILEAGE, HANDSFREE EQUIP. OPTIONS. EVERYTHING (ASIDE FROM BACK UP CAMERA, STILL FUNCTIONING WHILE IN REVERSE) AIRBAG WARNING LIGHT INDICATOR HAS DISABLE ALL COMPONENTS ON STEERING WHEEL I.E. HORN, CRUISE CONTROL, VOLUME ECT.. STILL NO RECALL? I'M SCARED FOR MY FAMILIES SAFETY! DO SOMETHING HONDA. SOMEONE NEEDS TO MAKE HONDA ADDRESS THESE ISSUES ASAP!
MY PREVIOUS COMPLAINT NUMBER CAN BE DISREGARDED: 10864804 THE PROBLEM IN THE 2013 CIVIC TURNED OUT TO BE THE WHEEL BEARING AND NOT THE TRANSMISSION AS I FIRST THOUGHT.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE KEY WAS IN THE ON POSITION, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO START AFTER ANOTHER ATTEMPT AND THE VEHICLE DROVE FORWARD INDEPENDENTLY. IN ADDITION, THE BRAKES FAILED TO RESPOND AND THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKED WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE KEY WAS IN THE ON POSITION, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE VEHICLE WAS ABLE TO START AFTER ANOTHER ATTEMPT AND THE VEHICLE DROVE FORWARD INDEPENDENTLY. IN ADDITION, THE BRAKES FAILED TO RESPOND AND THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKED WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE DROVE OVER THE SIDEWALK AND CRASHED INTO A BUILDING. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED AND THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 15,447.
I WAS DRIVING 5 MINUTES AWAY FROM MY HOME AROUND A 30 MILE AN HOUR GRADUAL BEND. I SUDDENLY HAD NO POWER STEERING LOSING CONTROL MOMENTARILY ,I SLOWED DOWN IMMEDIATELY TRYING TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE WHILE JUST MISSING GOING INTO THE WOODS AND ALMOST CREATING AN ACCIDENT BEHIND ME. THE CHECK POWER STEERING ASSEMBLY LIGH…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING 5 MINUTES AWAY FROM MY HOME AROUND A 30 MILE AN HOUR GRADUAL BEND. I SUDDENLY HAD NO POWER STEERING LOSING CONTROL MOMENTARILY ,I SLOWED DOWN IMMEDIATELY TRYING TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE WHILE JUST MISSING GOING INTO THE WOODS AND ALMOST CREATING AN ACCIDENT BEHIND ME. THE CHECK POWER STEERING ASSEMBLY LIGHTS WERE FLASHING ON THE INFORMATION BOARD .THIS IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND UNACCEPTABLE .MY WIFE AND DAUGHTER DRIVE THE CAR OFTEN AND I'M NOT TOO SURE THE OUTCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN AS GOOD AS MINE AND THIS TRULY SCARES ME.THIS IS MY 6TH HONDA ,I PURCHASE ALL MY CAR IS NEW, AND I'VE NEVER HAVE A PROBLEM LIKE THIS BEFORE!
TL-THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE REVERSINGAT APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED AND A LOUD ABNORMAL NOISE WAS EMITTED FROM THE VEHICLE. ADDITIONALLY, WHEN TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL THERE WAS AN ABNORMAL NOISE. THE FAILURE BECAME PROGRESSIVELY WORSE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR…
Read full complaint
TL-THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE REVERSINGAT APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED AND A LOUD ABNORMAL NOISE WAS EMITTED FROM THE VEHICLE. ADDITIONALLY, WHEN TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL THERE WAS AN ABNORMAL NOISE. THE FAILURE BECAME PROGRESSIVELY WORSE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 1,000. DJR ..UPDATED 08-25-14*BF THE CONSUMER STATED THE NOSIER HAD BECOME MORE DISRUPTIVE. UPDATED 09/2/2014 *JS
Official recalls
0No 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
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.