← 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

What owners actually said

380 reports
Mileage unknown · Sep 21, 2022
Power Train

Under 78,000 miles just out of warranty, bought certified used in 2016. Car randomly started shaking/jerking when slowly accelerating. I thought I had a flat tire. Tires were fine and shaking went away as I went up to higher speeds. Progressively got worse throughout the day, more shaking and jerking and then wasn’t shifting at …

Read full complaint

Under 78,000 miles just out of warranty, bought certified used in 2016. Car randomly started shaking/jerking when slowly accelerating. I thought I had a flat tire. Tires were fine and shaking went away as I went up to higher speeds. Progressively got worse throughout the day, more shaking and jerking and then wasn’t shifting at higher speeds. Check emission and transmission warnings popped up. I immediately took to a small shop who said they didn’t have the tech to properly diagnose the transmission issue. They took it for a test drive after clearing the computer and transmission went capoot. Towed to Honda and they said transmission bad, lots of broken metal inside. $7200 before tax for a fix. They’ve offered me $2000 to help cover cost but still outrageous. My VIN wasn’t part of the recall. Car isn’t even paid off, this is insanity. Honda is supposed to be reliable.

NHTSA ODI #11485736

Mileage unknown · Sep 12, 2022
Electrical System

Car key remotes both failed within the 7 years. They had to replace the SOP Fuse Box and Imobi Unit. The parts should not have failed within this time. The remote would open the trunk when the open and close feature was lightly touched and created a safety issue for the driver to secure the car and the alarm feature was not w…

Read full complaint

Car key remotes both failed within the 7 years. They had to replace the SOP Fuse Box and Imobi Unit. The parts should not have failed within this time. The remote would open the trunk when the open and close feature was lightly touched and created a safety issue for the driver to secure the car and the alarm feature was not working. It was very costly to repair. With the cooperation of the car dealership, they reduced the cost to about $1300. This occured in August 2022.

NHTSA ODI #11484052

Mileage unknown · Aug 24, 2022
Structure

Paint chipping off of vehicle around rear windshield.

NHTSA ODI #11481003

Mileage unknown · Aug 22, 2022
Power Train

With no warning, the transmission went out on the Civic. It left my son stranded on the side of a busy road. The car still ran, but would not engage in drive or reverse. I had to have it towed and they have concluded the transmission is shot. The mechanic stated the 2015 model is known for this, but mine is not in the recall…

Read full complaint

With no warning, the transmission went out on the Civic. It left my son stranded on the side of a busy road. The car still ran, but would not engage in drive or reverse. I had to have it towed and they have concluded the transmission is shot. The mechanic stated the 2015 model is known for this, but mine is not in the recall. This should really be looked into, $7000 out of my pocket when there is a known defect really bothers me.

NHTSA ODI #11480573

Mileage unknown · Aug 14, 2022
Power Train

Software glitch fried the transmission on the spot. Without warning all warning lights came on (engine, brake, power steering, tpms, etc.) then the car immediately lost all power. It would start and run fine, but no power to the wheels and the warning lights all stayed on. This left me stranded on the highway for hours in the…

Read full complaint

Software glitch fried the transmission on the spot. Without warning all warning lights came on (engine, brake, power steering, tpms, etc.) then the car immediately lost all power. It would start and run fine, but no power to the wheels and the warning lights all stayed on. This left me stranded on the highway for hours in the middle of the night. Towed to honda dealership who first misdiagnosed issue then concluded the transmission was shot. It is clear to me and others that had this same issue, that the software has a glitch that increases hydraulic fluid in the transmission case tenfold, leading to immediate failure. All maintenance had been meticulously maintained. Honda charged me 9000 dollars for a new transmission. How do you hold the customer responsible for a software issue? A class action suit is needed. I was the biggest honda fanboy out there...not anymore. It had 118000 miles at time of incident.

NHTSA ODI #11479230

Mileage unknown · Aug 10, 2022
Power Train

The transmission failed; however, no code or warning appeared to indicate there was a problem. The only indication that there was an issue, we’re problems with acceleration. This was meant to be our newer reliable family vehicle for which we drive our two year old son in. Had the car broken down the wrong place and wrong time it…

Read full complaint

The transmission failed; however, no code or warning appeared to indicate there was a problem. The only indication that there was an issue, we’re problems with acceleration. This was meant to be our newer reliable family vehicle for which we drive our two year old son in. Had the car broken down the wrong place and wrong time it could put our son and others in danger. Some sort of code should have appeared to indicate there was an issue before the transmission failed prematurely. The car had just a little over 100,000 miles when the transmission failed. The car was evaluated at a Honda service shop in Annapolis MD (west street). They determine the transmission failed and needed to be replaced. I suspect that 2015 Honda civics have transmission problems and defects. Although our VIN number is not associated with the 2014-2015 Honda Civic recalls, those recalls were transmission related issues. I don’t know that it is a coincidence, I suspect this year, make and model produced defective transmissions. The most concerning part is that no code nor check engine light appeared to warn us of the transmission issue. The car is currently in an transmission auto shop (glen Burnie, MD) waiting for a used transmission to be installed. It may take two to three weeks for the repairs.

NHTSA ODI #11478699

Mileage unknown · Jul 25, 2022
Steering

Hard to steer to the left and car pulls to the right if you let go of steering wheel. Yes it has been reproduced & confirmed by the local dealer, & i was told this case usually happen when car was involved in accident but my car has never had any accident, there is no warning light, i thought it has something to do with alignme…

Read full complaint

Hard to steer to the left and car pulls to the right if you let go of steering wheel. Yes it has been reproduced & confirmed by the local dealer, & i was told this case usually happen when car was involved in accident but my car has never had any accident, there is no warning light, i thought it has something to do with alignment, i had it aligned early this year and i was told to have the power steering rack be check.

NHTSA ODI #11475625

Mileage unknown · Jul 1, 2022
Power Train

My transmission failed because the transmission fill plug came off at some point during my commute. I had no idea the cap had come off until my transmission stopped shifting properly which is very scary when you are on the highway and are trying to reach safe highway speeds. The next morning, I pulled out of my parking space and…

Read full complaint

My transmission failed because the transmission fill plug came off at some point during my commute. I had no idea the cap had come off until my transmission stopped shifting properly which is very scary when you are on the highway and are trying to reach safe highway speeds. The next morning, I pulled out of my parking space and was able to pull through my apartment gates without any indications of issues shifting until I stopped at my stop sign. Upon acceleration, my car only had enough acceleration to put me right in the middle of the road. Thankfully it was an early Saturday morning or that would have been even more dangerous. I put it in on the S level to have more control of my low gear and I was barely able to get back to my apartment and could not go more than 5 mph. This was very scary because I knew nobody around that could help me. Imagine if this was late at night or in a more dangerous part of town. No service engine light has ever came on. I get the proper and routine oil changes and also rotate my tires. I bought the car in 2018 as a certified preowned Honda with 33k miles and now it has 95k.The technician at HONDA informed me he has frequently seen this issue with CVT transmission from Honda as the fill plug likely comes off due to the internal forces from the transmission when driving. The technician also informed me that there was no way I could know that the fill plug came off until the complications I had started. A complaint about the $7000 dollar repair to Honda corporate has been filed (I have a warranty for powertrain, but was denied because the fill plug is conveniently not covered by the warranty.) Overall, I am scared that even when this is fixed, that it will happen again. This issue is already happening to others and it has the potential to cause injury. This issue has been inspected by Honda and my insurance. There is no damage that has been identified by either party to have caused this issue other than fill plug being dislodged.

NHTSA ODI #11472057

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

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