← New search

2014 Honda Civic

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2014 Honda Civic do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 183.5.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

175 reports with mileage · 116 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.

  • Power Train. Review the 98 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 57 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. 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.

30 crash reports4 fire reports19 injury reports

What owners actually said

291 reports
135,000 miles · Dec 18, 2025
Power Train

The contact owns a 2014 Honda Civic. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the accelerator pedal was depressed; however, the vehicle failed to accelerate as intended. In addition, the contact stated that the vehicle stalled. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was towed to the dealer, where i…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2014 Honda Civic. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the accelerator pedal was depressed; however, the vehicle failed to accelerate as intended. In addition, the contact stated that the vehicle stalled. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was towed to the dealer, where it was diagnosed with transmission failure. The contact was informed that the transmission needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure, and a case was filed. The failure mileage was approximately 135,000.

NHTSA ODI #11705893

Mileage unknown · Dec 13, 2025
Electrical SystemPower TrainService Brakes

My car is BROKEN DOWN COMPLETELY. I take care of it extremely well! The transmission went. Out of no where. This needs to be apart of the recall for Transmission Software may Result in Pulley Damage. I’ve had to get the brakes and rotors completely replaced twice in a year and they need to be done AGAIN already. That’s not norma…

Read full complaint

My car is BROKEN DOWN COMPLETELY. I take care of it extremely well! The transmission went. Out of no where. This needs to be apart of the recall for Transmission Software may Result in Pulley Damage. I’ve had to get the brakes and rotors completely replaced twice in a year and they need to be done AGAIN already. That’s not normal, for brakes to wear that fast. The electric seats do not work and there’s an issue electrically that the trunk keeps popping open I had to unplug it. The battery randomly kept draining over night for a period of a month, then started working regularly again. I want this car to be included in the recalls and I want assistance about my vehicle

NHTSA ODI #11704866

197,000 miles · Oct 30, 2025
EnginePower Train

The contact owns a 2014 Honda Civic. The contact stated that while driving 40 MPH, the vehicle made an abnormal clunking sound and lost motive power. The contact stated that the vehicle felt like the transmission was in neutral(N), and the front wheels were locked. The check engine warning light was illuminated, and the message …

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2014 Honda Civic. The contact stated that while driving 40 MPH, the vehicle made an abnormal clunking sound and lost motive power. The contact stated that the vehicle felt like the transmission was in neutral(N), and the front wheels were locked. The check engine warning light was illuminated, and the message "Check Transmission" was displayed. The contact was able to pull over to the side of the road. The vehicle was undrivable and was towed to an independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed that the pulley shaft and the drive belt were damaged. The mechanic determined that the transmission needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact related the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V574000 (Power Train). The manufacturer was notified of the failure and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline for assistance. The failure mileage was approximately 197,000.

NHTSA ODI #11696651

Mileage unknown · Oct 20, 2025
Unknown Or Other

Drive shaft front axel is rusted and broke in the middle, not by joint. I see there are recalls for this model, but not under my vin number. The way it broke is not how it would normally break. Which is giving me concern it is a faulty product from being built or if it was replaced due to a previous recall

NHTSA ODI #11694452

Mileage unknown · Aug 7, 2025
Fuel/propulsion System

Out of nowhere today started my car to go to work and it’s leaking fuel from the fuel pump area, only when it is running, pouring out fuel, I seen that some 2014 Honda Civic’s have a recall for fuel pump manufactured between January 2014 through November 2014 and mine was manufactured in February 2014 and I have this fuel pump l…

Read full complaint

Out of nowhere today started my car to go to work and it’s leaking fuel from the fuel pump area, only when it is running, pouring out fuel, I seen that some 2014 Honda Civic’s have a recall for fuel pump manufactured between January 2014 through November 2014 and mine was manufactured in February 2014 and I have this fuel pump leak issue, no recalls come up when I enter my VIN, but this has to be one of them, would only make sense.

NHTSA ODI #11678963

Mileage unknown · Jul 6, 2025
Tires

Continental P 195/65 R 15. 89 H. The tire blew and the side wall on the outside on the passenger side front. It looks shredded on the side- not a normal blown tire look. We were in the right lane on a 3 lane highway so we were able to get off as soon as it blew. Our safety was at risk because we had to change tire on the side of…

Read full complaint

Continental P 195/65 R 15. 89 H. The tire blew and the side wall on the outside on the passenger side front. It looks shredded on the side- not a normal blown tire look. We were in the right lane on a 3 lane highway so we were able to get off as soon as it blew. Our safety was at risk because we had to change tire on the side of a busy 3 lane highway and it was late on a sunday night so nothing was open to replace and had to drive 70 miles back home on a donut. It could've caused an accident. No known issues/warnings/messages/etc. I will never buy another Continental again.

NHTSA ODI #11671487

Mileage unknown · Jun 23, 2025
Electrical System

While driving at high speed on the freeway at 65mph, my Honda Civic Hybrid experienced a sudden and complete electrical failure of the hybrid battery control module (IPU/MCM). This happened without any warning lamps, messages, or prior symptoms. The hybrid system instantly shut down, causing a dramatic loss of power and forcing …

Read full complaint

While driving at high speed on the freeway at 65mph, my Honda Civic Hybrid experienced a sudden and complete electrical failure of the hybrid battery control module (IPU/MCM). This happened without any warning lamps, messages, or prior symptoms. The hybrid system instantly shut down, causing a dramatic loss of power and forcing me to pull off the road in high-speed traffic. This placed me and other drivers at serious risk of a high-speed collision due to the abrupt power loss and inability to accelerate. The failed component is still installed and available for inspection. The issue has since been diagnosed and confirmed by an independent hybrid specialist, who identified the malfunctioning IPU. I was told this exact failure is covered by Honda Service Bulletin 20-030, which extends the warranty for affected Civic Hybrids to 10 years or 150,000 miles, however, my VIN is not included, despite the failure being identical in nature. Honda has refused to provide any assistance, stating that only specific VINs are eligible, which I believe is misleading and unjust. This defect is clearly broader than the TSB acknowledges. The sudden failure of a critical propulsion system at high speed without warning is a major safety hazard and should not be limited by an arbitrarily narrow VIN list. I urge the NHTSA to investigate this issue and require Honda to expand the scope of TSB 20-030. This defect compromises driver safety and has caused me significant financial and emotional stress, not to mention the danger it poses to others on the road. This is not an isolated incident. Many other Honda Civic Hybrid owners have reported the exact same issue, sudden IPU failure, no warnings, dangerous loss of power, on public forums and complaint databases. The narrow VIN range in TSB 20-030 is artificially limited and fails to reflect the true scope of the defect.

NHTSA ODI #11668518

Mileage unknown · May 30, 2025
Power Train

In a Honda CVT when the filter becomes clogged, pressure will build and the fill cap will come off the transmission on its own to relieve the pressure. There is no warning indication system to tell you when it happens but it seems to be a persistent issue in their CVTs. after the cap blows off fluid will start leaking on the cas…

Read full complaint

In a Honda CVT when the filter becomes clogged, pressure will build and the fill cap will come off the transmission on its own to relieve the pressure. There is no warning indication system to tell you when it happens but it seems to be a persistent issue in their CVTs. after the cap blows off fluid will start leaking on the casing and dirt and other contaminates will make their way into the transmission. This poses a massive safety issue as it can cause the transmission to lock up. When going to use professional service websites such as pro-demand and all data Honda gives no information about this issue or even how to fix it.

NHTSA ODI #11663925

Mileage unknown · Feb 3, 2025
Air BagsElectrical SystemUnknown Or Other

About a year ago, the transmission failed costing us nearly $5000 to fix it. This incident happened approximately April of 2022, no warning signs at all. Now, the airbag deployed while merging onto the freeway without any impact which was the scariest thing. I’m very concerned there are other issues. There were no warning signs …

Read full complaint

About a year ago, the transmission failed costing us nearly $5000 to fix it. This incident happened approximately April of 2022, no warning signs at all. Now, the airbag deployed while merging onto the freeway without any impact which was the scariest thing. I’m very concerned there are other issues. There were no warning signs on both incidents.

NHTSA ODI #11640356

Mileage unknown · Jan 30, 2025
Power Train

See attached document for complaint.

NHTSA ODI #11639610

Official recalls

2

15V574000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission:control Module (tcm/pcm/tecm)

Sep 15, 2015

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain model year 2014-2015 Civic vehicles manufactured January 16, 2014, to November 6, 2014 and 2015 Fit vehicles manufactured March 12, 2014, to May 12, 2015. The software settings that control the transmission operation may result in damage to the transmission drive pulley shaft.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the transmission drive pulley shaft is damaged, it may break, and the vehicle may lose acceleration or the front wheels may lock up while driving, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will update the software for the transmission, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin October 30, 2015. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are JU2 (Civic) and JU3(Fit).

14V109000 · Tires:bead

Mar 10, 2014

American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (Honda) is recalling certain model year 2014 Honda Civic LX vehicles manufactured November 26, 2013, through January 21, 2014. In the affected vehicles, during mounting of the tires, the tire bead may have gotten pinched between the assembly equipment and the steel wheel rims, resulting in damage to the tire.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The tire damage could cause the tire to lose air, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect and replace any damaged tire, free of charge. The recall began on April 15, 2014. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009. Honda's number for this recall is JD8.

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