For the second time in 6 months, my car has malfunctioned at a stop light. Both times, the vehicle was unresponsive when I tried to go from fully stopped at a red light. In both instances, the (red) oil light and the battery light came on at the same time/after (meaning they weren’t on before) and the brake locked up. Pressing t…
Read full complaint
For the second time in 6 months, my car has malfunctioned at a stop light. Both times, the vehicle was unresponsive when I tried to go from fully stopped at a red light. In both instances, the (red) oil light and the battery light came on at the same time/after (meaning they weren’t on before) and the brake locked up. Pressing the gas pedal did nothing. Turning the car off completely and restarting cleared the issue in both cases, but I’m worried that it could happen again. Today when it happened, a vehicle behind me behaved aggressively toward me (even though I put my hazard lights on when I realized the problem), and brake checked me once I was moving again. The first time it happened, I took my car to a Honda dealership and they weren’t able to find anything wrong with the car. There were no codes that gave them any info about the issue and they weren’t able to replicate it. At that time, they did recommend a transmission fluid exchange, which I got. The car drove somewhat better (it had been jerky before) after the service, but the improvement was temporary as the jerkiness has returned. While this problem has only presented itself at stoplights l’m terrified of what might happen on a highway or in a situation where the people around me are even more aggressive than the man I encountered today.
NHTSA ODI #11518317
Mileage unknown · Apr 4, 2023
Unknown Or Other
Transmission shuddering and then snapped coming to sudden stop.
NHTSA ODI #11515432
Mileage unknown · Apr 2, 2023
Power TrainUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed ControlCrash
Failure of transmission control module Description fits exact diagnosis in recall. Check transmission light on at 45,000 miles. Andy Mohr wants money to inspect it. I an more than willing to if they will inspect it for free but it is not drivable. If they would come pick it up I would be happy to let them drive it all they wan…
Read full complaint
Failure of transmission control module Description fits exact diagnosis in recall. Check transmission light on at 45,000 miles. Andy Mohr wants money to inspect it. I an more than willing to if they will inspect it for free but it is not drivable. If they would come pick it up I would be happy to let them drive it all they want. The problem came with no warning on the Highway. car wouldn’t no longer switch to second gear. Purchased at Andy Mohr Honda in Bloomington at 17,000 miles off lease from some someone who barely drove it. Certified Preowned by Honda. Paid in full, feel ripped off. Yes, available for inspection on request No warning: transmission complete failure 2015 Silver Honda Civic Has been discussed with mechanics at Curry Buick in.Bloomington as well as our Winslow marathon which has great mechanics, they told me to contact you. The issue according to the NTHSB is the “TCM” or transmission control module. resulting in cars wheels locking up, or spinning out of control and not changing gears (this is what happened to me and repeated itself when I waited a week and tried driving around my neighborhood ) the issue is supposed to result in transmission and Powertrain failure, making engine wanting to redline very easily. I’m lucky I didn’t burn my engine up. I didn’t purchase a car in 2018 at 17,000 miles and expect the transmission to fall out at 45,000 miles. That’s unacceptable and I was never notified, and Andy mohr purports that my vehicle was either serviced or software changed resulting in no issue, however a transmission dying at 45,000 mi on a Honda Civic is not right and I suspect Honda notified the previous lessee and they did not service the car or had it improperly serviced. Otherwise I see no reason to have a car fall apart at 45,000 miles. I drive like grandma.
NHTSA ODI #11514998
Mileage unknown · Mar 16, 2023
Unknown Or Other
The car just stopped moving. The engine still ran I just couldn’t move forward or reverse.
NHTSA ODI #11512256
Mileage unknown · Jan 5, 2023
Unknown Or Other
The car was operating fine until made a turn and the car stopped moving entirely, it would not accelerate, and the wheels would not turn. Shifting gears produced no results, and the car was completely stuck. The transmission cap on top of the CVT transmission was off, but had never been removed by me or another service provider.…
Read full complaint
The car was operating fine until made a turn and the car stopped moving entirely, it would not accelerate, and the wheels would not turn. Shifting gears produced no results, and the car was completely stuck. The transmission cap on top of the CVT transmission was off, but had never been removed by me or another service provider. The safety of myself and others was put at risk because I was abruptly stopped by the issue in the middle of the road, unable to move, and received no prior warning that there were any issues with the vehicle. Multiple service centers have been unable to get the car moving again, and the issue persists. They are saying the transmission needs to be entirely replaced. It has been expected by both an independent auto shop and a transmission specialist. I received no warning of any issues with the car on the dashboard at any point.
NHTSA ODI #11500285
Mileage unknown · Dec 29, 2022
Unknown Or Other
Transmission went out at 150,000 miles.
NHTSA ODI #11499454
Mileage unknown · Jun 19, 2022
Power TrainUnknown Or Other
The transmission fill plug comes out and the transmission fluid then gets all over under the hood. This is the second time this has happened as the first time I brought it to the Honda dealership, they said its nothing to worry about and happens as they put a new cap in and cleaned it up. This can not be ok as it has only been a…
Read full complaint
The transmission fill plug comes out and the transmission fluid then gets all over under the hood. This is the second time this has happened as the first time I brought it to the Honda dealership, they said its nothing to worry about and happens as they put a new cap in and cleaned it up. This can not be ok as it has only been about a year an only 15,000 to 20,000 sence the first occurrence. I can feal a difference when operating the vehicle as it shifts weird and drags the car excessively, there is no warning. My loved ones operate this vehicle and I do not want to see any accidents happen as I have heard of them happening to the same year, make, and model 2015 Honda Civic EX. I would love for an inspection.
NHTSA ODI #11469990
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 · May 13, 2022
Unknown Or Other
The car's paint is coming off almost everyday. I didn't do anything wrong, but it is coming off.
NHTSA ODI #11464522
Mileage unknown · Apr 26, 2022
Unknown Or Other
Paint is flaking off from roof by back window for no reason. No rust. Appears defect when paint was applied to vehicle.
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.