← 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

Vehicle Speed Control complaints

20 reports
Clear category filter
158,000 miles · Nov 4, 2019
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING HOME ON I-80 AND WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION, THE VEHICLE STOPPED ACCELERATING. I WOULD PUSH ON THE GAS AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. RPMS WOULD GO TO 4000. THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SLOW. I COULD HAVE GOT INTO AN ACCIDENT BUT PULLED OFF ONTO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY. THE CAR WAS RUNNING BUT WOULD NOT…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING HOME ON I-80 AND WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION, THE VEHICLE STOPPED ACCELERATING. I WOULD PUSH ON THE GAS AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. RPMS WOULD GO TO 4000. THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SLOW. I COULD HAVE GOT INTO AN ACCIDENT BUT PULLED OFF ONTO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY. THE CAR WAS RUNNING BUT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. I CALLED MY INSURANCE COMPANY TO TOW THE VEHICLE. THE AUTO SHOP WHO ASSESSED THE CAR SAID THE TRANSMISSION WENT OUT. THERE IS ONLY 158,000 MILES ON THE CAR AND THE TRANSMISSION SHOULD JUST STOP WORKING. THE SHOP SAID IT WOULD BE $5100 TO REPLACE.

NHTSA ODI #11278148

37,570 miles · May 30, 2019
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control

THE CAR SLOWED DOWN WHILE DRIVING ON CITY STREETS, AND THEN STOPPED COMPLETELY. ALSO WHEN I STOPPED OR WAS SLOWING DOWN, MADE A TURN OR BRAKING THE SAME THING OCCURRED. THIS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES ON INDIVIDUAL DAYS. I PUT ON MY FLASHING HAZARD LIGHTS TO PREVENT BEING HIT FROM BEHIND ON BUSY STREETS. I HAVE READ ABOUT HIS HAPPEN…

Read full complaint

THE CAR SLOWED DOWN WHILE DRIVING ON CITY STREETS, AND THEN STOPPED COMPLETELY. ALSO WHEN I STOPPED OR WAS SLOWING DOWN, MADE A TURN OR BRAKING THE SAME THING OCCURRED. THIS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES ON INDIVIDUAL DAYS. I PUT ON MY FLASHING HAZARD LIGHTS TO PREVENT BEING HIT FROM BEHIND ON BUSY STREETS. I HAVE READ ABOUT HIS HAPPENING TO SEVERAL OTHER DRIVERS WHEN I WAS RESEARCHING IT ONLINE. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE DRIVING HIS CAR, IT'S LIKE RUSSIAN ROULETTE. I AM HAVING IT CHECKED OUT TOMORROW AT A HONDA DEALER.IT MAY TAKE A WHILE FOR DIAGNOSIS OF THE CAUSE. I WAS SURPRISED THAT THIS WAS NOT LISTED AS A RECALLED VEHICLE. SINCE HIS HAS HAPPENED ON DIFFERENT DATES I WILL JUST LIST THE LATEST DATE BELOW.

NHTSA ODI #11210823

60,796 miles · May 21, 2019
Vehicle Speed Control

SPEEDOMETER STICKING READING OVER 60 WHEN GOING LESS THAN 40. WHEN STOPPED IT READ AT 23 JUST DO NOT CALIBRATE CORRECTLY. SERVICE DEPARTMENT HAD TO RE-WRITE THE THE TCM SOFTWARE.. NO ONE COULD EXPLAIN WHY THIS HAPPEN! IT IS STILL NOT ACCURATE & YES IT IS A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN

NHTSA ODI #11208899

30,000 miles · Jul 7, 2018
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

I WAS SLOWLY TURNING MY VEHICLE INTO A PARKING SPACE IN THE PARKING LOT OF A RESTAURANT. THE CAR WAS FACING THE BUILDING WITH A SIDEWALK BETWEEN THE CAR AND THE BUILDING. THE VEHICLE UNEXPECTEDLY AND UNCONTROLLABLY ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN.PRESSING ON THE BRAKE DID NOT SLOW IT DOWN AT ALL. THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD, JUMPING THE…

Read full complaint

I WAS SLOWLY TURNING MY VEHICLE INTO A PARKING SPACE IN THE PARKING LOT OF A RESTAURANT. THE CAR WAS FACING THE BUILDING WITH A SIDEWALK BETWEEN THE CAR AND THE BUILDING. THE VEHICLE UNEXPECTEDLY AND UNCONTROLLABLY ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN.PRESSING ON THE BRAKE DID NOT SLOW IT DOWN AT ALL. THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD, JUMPING THE CURBED SIDEWALK AND STOPPED WHEN IT CRASHED INTO THE BRICK WALL OF THE BUILDING. I WAS ABLE TO STEER AWAY FROM THE LARGE WINDOW THAT WAS DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF ME. IT WAS NOON AND FORTUNATELY THERE WERE NO CUSTOMERS ON THE SIDEWALK. THE VEHICLE SUFFERED EXTENSIVE FRONT END DAMAGE COSTING $7773 IN REPAIRS. I WAS EVALUATED AT THE SCENE BY AMBULANCE CREW. I HAD AN ELEVATED BLOOD PRESSURE AND A SORE SHOULDER/NECK. THE DEALER'S STAFF AND THE REGIONAL MANAGER INSISTED THAT THIS WAS NOT A FAILURE OF THE VEHICLE, BUT HUMAN ERROR. I KNOW I WAS NOT PRESSING ON THE GAS. THE REGIONAL MANAGER ASKED ME TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE TO THE CRASH SITE TO DEMONSTRATE FOR HIM WHAT HAD HAPPENED AS IT WOULD MAKE IT MORE CLEAR TO HIM THAN READING ABOUT IT. I DECLINED THIS LUDICROUS REQUEST! A POLICE REPORT IS AVAILABLE AS WELL AS INSURANCE CLAIMS AND PHOTOGRAPHS.

NHTSA ODI #11110045

20,000 miles · Mar 26, 2018
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

3 INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED ACCELERATION - EACH TIME I WAS TURNING LEFT INTO A PARKING SPACE SLOWLY WHEN THE ENGINE REV'D AND THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD. THE 3RD INCIDENT ENDED WITH MY CAR SPEEDING THROUGH A PLATE GLASS WINDOW. THE DEALERSHIP ASSUMES THAT I HIT THE ACCELERATOR INSTEAD OF THE BRAKE. I DEFINITELY DID NOT. I APPLIED…

Read full complaint

3 INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED ACCELERATION - EACH TIME I WAS TURNING LEFT INTO A PARKING SPACE SLOWLY WHEN THE ENGINE REV'D AND THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD. THE 3RD INCIDENT ENDED WITH MY CAR SPEEDING THROUGH A PLATE GLASS WINDOW. THE DEALERSHIP ASSUMES THAT I HIT THE ACCELERATOR INSTEAD OF THE BRAKE. I DEFINITELY DID NOT. I APPLIED THE BRAKE AND WAS GLIDING INTO THE PARKING SPOT. WHEN THE CAR SPED UP. THE BRAKE FAILED TO STOP IT.

NHTSA ODI #11081212

2,200 miles · Oct 3, 2017
Vehicle Speed Control

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING AT UNKNOWN SPEEDS, THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS APPLIED; HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING THE EMERGENCY BRAKE WAS ENGAGED, BUT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. THE CONTACT TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE IN ORDER TO STOP IT FROM ACCELERATING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A L…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE DRIVING AT UNKNOWN SPEEDS, THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS APPLIED; HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING THE EMERGENCY BRAKE WAS ENGAGED, BUT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. THE CONTACT TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE IN ORDER TO STOP IT FROM ACCELERATING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL DEALER (HENDRICK HONDA POMPANO BEACH, 5381 N FEDERAL HWY, POMPANO BEACH, FL 33054), BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED AGAIN AND THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO HENDRICK HONDA AGAIN. THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE DUPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED; HOWEVER, THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONTACT TO DOCUMENT THE FAILURE WHEN IT RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE AND ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT A SPECIALIST WOULD INSPECT THE VEHICLE. THE VIN WAS UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 2,200.

NHTSA ODI #11031529

13,400 miles · Jan 28, 2016
Vehicle Speed Control

UNINTENDED ACCELERATION ON 01/27/2016 WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS ABOUT TO MAKE RIGHT TURN ON AN INTERSECTION WITH THE RIGHT TRAFFIC LIGHT ON. SUDDENLY IT ACCELERATED AT ABOUT 60MILES AND HOUR. ALL MY EFFORT TO STOP IT BY APPLYING THE BREAKS FAILED TEMPORARILY. THE ODOMETER READING ON THE CAR IS ABOUT 13,400 MILES. NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED…

Read full complaint

UNINTENDED ACCELERATION ON 01/27/2016 WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS ABOUT TO MAKE RIGHT TURN ON AN INTERSECTION WITH THE RIGHT TRAFFIC LIGHT ON. SUDDENLY IT ACCELERATED AT ABOUT 60MILES AND HOUR. ALL MY EFFORT TO STOP IT BY APPLYING THE BREAKS FAILED TEMPORARILY. THE ODOMETER READING ON THE CAR IS ABOUT 13,400 MILES. NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED. THE VEHICLE IS CURRENTLY PARKED AND NOT TO BE DRIVEN UNTIL HONDA CORPORATION TELLS ME WHAT TO DO. I HAVE NEVER HAD THIS EXPERIENCE WITH OTHER CARS I HAVE OWNED OR DRIVEN OVER THE PAST 22 YEARS.

NHTSA ODI #10822747

14,326 miles · Nov 27, 2015
SteeringVehicle Speed ControlCrash

TRYING TO STOP CAR BUT IT ACCELERATE AND WHEELS LOCK CAUSING AN ACCIDENT

NHTSA ODI #10807127

12 miles · Aug 21, 2015
SteeringUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed Control

WHILE TRAVELING AT SLOW SPEEDS IN CITY DRIVING, THE CAR TENDS TO LURCH FORWARD. CONCERNED ABOUT TAKATA AIRBAG- BEFORE I BOUGHT VEHICLE ASKED IF ONE WAS INSTALLED AND/ OR AIRBAG MANUFACTURER. COULD NOT GET AN ANSWER AND WAS TOLD TO BUY A 2015 "JUST TO BE SAFE". IN LIGHT OF THE 2015 VW TAKATA AIRBAG THAT JUST RUPTURED I WOUL…

Read full complaint

WHILE TRAVELING AT SLOW SPEEDS IN CITY DRIVING, THE CAR TENDS TO LURCH FORWARD. CONCERNED ABOUT TAKATA AIRBAG- BEFORE I BOUGHT VEHICLE ASKED IF ONE WAS INSTALLED AND/ OR AIRBAG MANUFACTURER. COULD NOT GET AN ANSWER AND WAS TOLD TO BUY A 2015 "JUST TO BE SAFE". IN LIGHT OF THE 2015 VW TAKATA AIRBAG THAT JUST RUPTURED I WOULD LIKE ADVICE ON WHAT TO DO AS I BOUGHT THE CAR . IT IS HARD TO BELIEVE THAT TAKATA WOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE PUTTING AIRBAGS IN WITHOUT KNOWING THE CAUSE.

NHTSA ODI #10750251

967 miles · Jan 18, 2015
Vehicle Speed Control

WITH THE MANUAL TRANSMISSION, WHEN GEARING DOWN, DEPRESSING THE CLUTCH DOES NOT DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL, SO WHEN YOU RELEASE THE CLUTCH, THE VEHICLE RESUMES THE ORIGINAL CRUISE SET SPEED WITHOUT PRESSING THE "RESUME" BUTTON ON THE STEERING WHEEL. WHEN WE TOOK THE VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALER, THEY TOLD US IT IS SUPPOSED TO W…

Read full complaint

WITH THE MANUAL TRANSMISSION, WHEN GEARING DOWN, DEPRESSING THE CLUTCH DOES NOT DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL, SO WHEN YOU RELEASE THE CLUTCH, THE VEHICLE RESUMES THE ORIGINAL CRUISE SET SPEED WITHOUT PRESSING THE "RESUME" BUTTON ON THE STEERING WHEEL. WHEN WE TOOK THE VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALER, THEY TOLD US IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK THAT WAY. I HAVE BEEN DRIVING MANUAL TRANSMISSION VEHICLES FOR 30 YEARS, AND IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT DEPRESSING EITHER THE CLUTCH OR BRAKE SHOULD DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10676276

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