← New search

2015 Honda Civic

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Civic years

Owner complaints for the 2015 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

200 reports with mileage · 180 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 176 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 58 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine. Review the 31 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

37 crash reports2 fire reports18 injury reports

Service Brakes complaints

14 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · May 12, 2026
Air BagsService BrakesCrash

The ABS system failed and the car crashed and when the ABS system failed the airbag light came on but airbags did not deploy in significant front end collision

NHTSA ODI #11737262

Mileage unknown · Sep 9, 2025
Service BrakesSuspensionWheels

The salespeople are very unprofessional and don’t take the wellbeing and safety of their customers or the surrounding public seriously. My husband and I went to Stark to test drive a couple of their cars. The first car that we test drove the Honda Civic should have been properly repaired first before ever being placed on the lot…

Read full complaint

The salespeople are very unprofessional and don’t take the wellbeing and safety of their customers or the surrounding public seriously. My husband and I went to Stark to test drive a couple of their cars. The first car that we test drove the Honda Civic should have been properly repaired first before ever being placed on the lot. To even get the parking brake lowered, my husband had to disassemble the plastic manifold, second the car was lowered to the point where it scraped the road whenever we were turning on an incline, finally there was some mechanical issue with the gear shift where we weren’t able to reverse. When we got back from the test drive the salesperson explained to us that they knew of this issue and that there’s a trick to it. This trick wasn’t mentioned to us at the start of the test drive, nor did the salesperson go with us to explain it to us on the road. This is very dangerous, what if there was an emergency and we needed to reverse. Not knowing this trick not only puts our lives in danger but also all the other drivers in the area. I’m not a car person, but even I know that a car should be able to go forwards and backwards.

NHTSA ODI #11685958

Mileage unknown · Jul 16, 2025
Electrical SystemService BrakesSteering

On on my dashboard due to a faulty malfunction in my ABS module that can only be done at Honda dealership and has to be removed only by Honda and sent off for Honda to rebuild and then sent back for them only to replace Seems ridiculous to pay $3000 for this when it's all over the Internet that this is an issue this is a compute…

Read full complaint

On on my dashboard due to a faulty malfunction in my ABS module that can only be done at Honda dealership and has to be removed only by Honda and sent off for Honda to rebuild and then sent back for them only to replace Seems ridiculous to pay $3000 for this when it's all over the Internet that this is an issue this is a computer issue this is ridiculous that this isn't there is no recall for this for this for this Honda issue it's all over Youtube this is the number one issue that's going around

NHTSA ODI #11674140

74,000 miles · Oct 17, 2024
EnginePower TrainService Brakes

The contact owns a 2015 Honda Civic. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the accelerator pedal and brake pedal felt stiff and the vehicle had jolted while depressing the brake pedal before losing automotive power. The check engine, brake, transmission, and several other warning lights illuminated. In a…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2015 Honda Civic. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the accelerator pedal and brake pedal felt stiff and the vehicle had jolted while depressing the brake pedal before losing automotive power. The check engine, brake, transmission, and several other warning lights illuminated. In addition, the contact stated that after accelerating from a stop, the vehicle had jolted a day prior. The contact stated that an AAA service representative attempted to jump-start the vehicle however, the vehicle would lose automotive power once disconnected. The vehicle was towed to a local independent mechanic where it was diagnosed with codes: P1440 and P0AE1. The contact was advised by the independent mechanic that the failure was related to Service Bulletin: 20-030. The local dealer was contacted however advised that contact that the VIN was not included in the Service Bulletin. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline for assistance. The failure mileage was approximately 74,000.

NHTSA ODI #11620449

Mileage unknown · May 7, 2024
Electrical SystemService Brakes

All light appeared on the dashboard and we took the vehicle in for inspection. We learned that the VSA Modulator had failed and was a safety risk as it controlled the brakes. This needs to be recalled as the soldering was not done correctly when originally manufactured and this particular part has failed on a high percentage of …

Read full complaint

All light appeared on the dashboard and we took the vehicle in for inspection. We learned that the VSA Modulator had failed and was a safety risk as it controlled the brakes. This needs to be recalled as the soldering was not done correctly when originally manufactured and this particular part has failed on a high percentage of the hondas that come equipped with the modulator. Please look into recalling this as many drivers have experienced their brakes locking up while driving due to this modulator failing.

NHTSA ODI #11587412

Mileage unknown · Jun 14, 2022
Air BagsService BrakesUnknown Or OtherCrash

ABS BRAKE SYSTEM FAILURE AND UNABLE TO STEER VEHICHLE CAUSING ACCIDENT. FRONT PASSENGER SIDE AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY FOR FRONT PASSENGER. If THE PASSENGER DID NOT MOVE HIS HEAD WHEN HE DID AND DRIVER THEY BOTH LIKELY WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED IN THE ACCIDENT. WHEN THIS VEHICHLE WAS PURCHASED AT THE CARMAX DEALERSHIP LESS THAN 60 D…

Read full complaint

ABS BRAKE SYSTEM FAILURE AND UNABLE TO STEER VEHICHLE CAUSING ACCIDENT. FRONT PASSENGER SIDE AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY FOR FRONT PASSENGER. If THE PASSENGER DID NOT MOVE HIS HEAD WHEN HE DID AND DRIVER THEY BOTH LIKELY WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED IN THE ACCIDENT. WHEN THIS VEHICHLE WAS PURCHASED AT THE CARMAX DEALERSHIP LESS THAN 60 DAYS AGO, IT WAS ASSURED OF NO ISSUES, HOWEVER IT DID HAVE LOW TIRE PRESSURE WARNINGS AND THEY PUT AIR IN TIRES AT THE TIME OF TEST DRIVE, I HAVE READ SOME PEOPLE HAVE HAD LOW TIRE WARNING / ABS ISSUES PRIOR TO ABS FAILURES AND WISH THIS TO BE INVESTIGATED. THIS IS SUSPICIOUS.

NHTSA ODI #11469102

Mileage unknown · Dec 9, 2020
Electrical SystemLatches/locks/linkagesService Brakes

COMPLAINT TO NHTSA REF. 2015 HONDA CIVIC-EX (VIN: [XXX]) PLEASE NOTE THAT OUR REFERENCED VEHICLE CONTAINS A DESIGN FLAW AND PRODUCT DEFECT. THE CAR WAS NOT STARTING DUE TO A MAJOR ELECTRICAL PROBLEM. THE TECHNICIANS AT A HONDA CERTIFIED DEALER DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM AS A PRODUCT DEFECT ASSOCIATED WITH THE RIGHT FRONT DO…

Read full complaint

COMPLAINT TO NHTSA REF. 2015 HONDA CIVIC-EX (VIN: [XXX]) PLEASE NOTE THAT OUR REFERENCED VEHICLE CONTAINS A DESIGN FLAW AND PRODUCT DEFECT. THE CAR WAS NOT STARTING DUE TO A MAJOR ELECTRICAL PROBLEM. THE TECHNICIANS AT A HONDA CERTIFIED DEALER DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM AS A PRODUCT DEFECT ASSOCIATED WITH THE RIGHT FRONT DOOR HANDLE TOUCH SENSOR. ACCORDING TO AN ADVISOR AT HONDA OF ESCONDIDO (CALIFORNIA), THE DOOR HANDLE SENSOR FAILURE CONSTITUTED BOTH A HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE MALFUNCTION. THE ADVISOR INDICATED THAT THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AND THAT HE HAS NOT SEEN THIS PHENOMENON OCCUR WITH RESPECT TO A HONDA CIVIC DURING HIS MANY YEARS AT HONDA OF ESCONDIDO. IT APPEARS THAT THE AMOUNT OF CURRENT (AMP) DRAW WAS THE MAIN CULPRIT IN DEPLETING THE BATTERY?S POWER CAPACITY AND DEGRADING IT TO A POINT THAT THE CAR WOULD NOT START AS A RESULT OF THE PRODUCT DEFECT. IT ALSO CAUSED THE VSA (I.E., THE VEHICLE STABILITY ASSIST) SYSTEM TO MALFUNCTION AND BEHAVE ERRATICALLY AS WELL. IN OUR ASSESSMENT, THIS SITUATION CONSTITUTES A PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATION AS THE SAFETY, WELL-BEING AND WELFARE OF EVERY OWNER IS AT RISK WHEN DRIVING THE SAME 2015 HONDA CIVIC MODEL. IN OUR JUDGMENT, A RECALL IS REQUIRED TO PREVENT SEVERE ACCIDENTS FROM HAPPENING AND TO PRECLUDE THIS HIGHLY RISKY AND DANGEROUS SAFETY SITUATION FROM RECURRING. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE NECESSARY CORRECTION ACTION. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #11378656

78,000 miles · Nov 15, 2019
Power TrainService BrakesWheelsCrashInjury

IT WAS RAINING, I WENT TO SLOW DOWN AND IT WAS AS IF THE FRONT WHEELS LOCKED UP, TCS BLINKING ON AND OFF, AND THE TIRES REMAINED PULLING AS IF POWER WAS STILL BEING SENT TO THE FRONT TWO, LOCKED UP, TIRES AND I HAD NO CONTROL AS THE CAR PULLED ME STRAIGHT FORWARD INTO THE SIDE OF ANOTHER VEHICLE RESULTING IN A COLLISION THAT HAD…

Read full complaint

IT WAS RAINING, I WENT TO SLOW DOWN AND IT WAS AS IF THE FRONT WHEELS LOCKED UP, TCS BLINKING ON AND OFF, AND THE TIRES REMAINED PULLING AS IF POWER WAS STILL BEING SENT TO THE FRONT TWO, LOCKED UP, TIRES AND I HAD NO CONTROL AS THE CAR PULLED ME STRAIGHT FORWARD INTO THE SIDE OF ANOTHER VEHICLE RESULTING IN A COLLISION THAT HAD ME HIT A STOPPED CAR SO HARD IT SPUN THE OTHER CAR AROUND AND TOTALED MY CAR. THIS ALL HAPPENED WITHIN 500 FEET OF WHERE I INITIALLY PULLED OUT ONTO THE ROAD I WAS TRAVELING ON WHEN THE CAR STARTED TO MALFUNCTION TO THE ROAD WHERE I ATTEMPTED TO TURN ONTO TO AVOID THE CRASH AND COULD NOT MANEUVER THE VEHICLE AT ALL.

NHTSA ODI #11280248

Mileage unknown · Aug 4, 2018
Service Brakes

THE EMERGENCY BRAKE ON THIS VEHICLE DOES NOT KEEP THE CAR FROM MOVING, THE VEHICLE CONTINUES TO MOVE AFTER YOU APPLY THE EMERGENCY BRAKE TO STOP THE CAR.

NHTSA ODI #11115738

46,000 miles · Jun 4, 2018
EnginePower TrainService Brakes

THE TRANSMISSION DRIVE PULLEY SHAFT IS DAMAGED, I WAS DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY AND THE CAR LOCKED UP AND BRAKED AND THE FRONT WHEELS LOCKED UP. THIS IS BAD LUCKILY I WAS ON A DESERTED FREEWAY AND NO ONE WAS BEHIND ME. THIS IS DANGEROUS.

NHTSA ODI #11099886

Official recalls

1

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).

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