Transmission fill plug popped out. From blogs I read about the car it is a common thing for the plug to pop out if the vent is clogged or from high pressure build up in transmission.
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 →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Civic years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
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.
What owners actually said
380 reports1.8l engine Fill plug on auto transmission is blowing out! Cause: something to do with and engineering mistake on Honda's side. I'm not sure what is causing this which quickly leads to transmission failure to shortly follow the trans fill plugs blowing back out. From my research everyone on the internet is all saying the same …
Read full complaint
1.8l engine Fill plug on auto transmission is blowing out! Cause: something to do with and engineering mistake on Honda's side. I'm not sure what is causing this which quickly leads to transmission failure to shortly follow the trans fill plugs blowing back out. From my research everyone on the internet is all saying the same thing is happening to their cars! This car was bought recently from a dealership with 40681 miles.
It took 4 tries before my car would start. I went to auto zone to have the battery & alternator & starter tested. Battery was dead so I had it replaced. A week later, it took 4 tries before my car would start. I took it to auto zone for testing again. Alternator was bad so I got it replaced. A week later it took 3 tries before m…
Read full complaint
It took 4 tries before my car would start. I went to auto zone to have the battery & alternator & starter tested. Battery was dead so I had it replaced. A week later, it took 4 tries before my car would start. I took it to auto zone for testing again. Alternator was bad so I got it replaced. A week later it took 3 tries before my car would start. I went to auto zone for testing again. Alternator was bad so I had a shop replace it again. A couple days later my car wouldn't start. I was stranded & needed to get to work. The mechanic that replaced the alternators for me came to my rescue. He tested & looked up the problem. He thought the sensor on the black terminal of the battery was bad. I ordered 1 & got it replaced. My car wouldn't start the next day after work & I was stranded again. The mechanic told me to unplug the black sensor so that my car would start & I could get home safely. The next day I took it to the shop & more tests were run. Finally he told me that I need to go to a dealership & tell them I need a TSB firmware update & that there was nothing he could do for me. Honda needs to be held accountable for this.
The CVT belt broke on my 2015 Honda Civic. I see on that there was a recall for other 2015 Honda civics with the same issue. There are countless forums online with other people like me who have 2015 civics that were not covered under the CVT recall. It’s my understanding that there have been at least 40 other complaints from the…
Read full complaint
The CVT belt broke on my 2015 Honda Civic. I see on that there was a recall for other 2015 Honda civics with the same issue. There are countless forums online with other people like me who have 2015 civics that were not covered under the CVT recall. It’s my understanding that there have been at least 40 other complaints from the thousands of other civic owners like myself who were not covered yet experiencing the same issue. Hopefully my report is enough to tip the scales. I am now being quoted $7,200 to fix a problem that has been shown to be unsafe in other civics of the same year. Thank you.
Transmission keeps popping out my fill plug and transmission fluid squirts out I’ve read online that these transmissions eventually mess themselves up
When I cold start my car it’s making this horrible metal cutting blade kind of sound sometimes, That goes away 5 seconds after cold starting the problem is the vtc actuator, many dealers took a look to not only mine but also my friends 2014 civic si, they said it was the vtc actuator and that they nor anyone else will fix the …
Read full complaint
When I cold start my car it’s making this horrible metal cutting blade kind of sound sometimes, That goes away 5 seconds after cold starting the problem is the vtc actuator, many dealers took a look to not only mine but also my friends 2014 civic si, they said it was the vtc actuator and that they nor anyone else will fix the issue. This has also happened to handfuls of others.
on 10/4 i was driving my 2015 honda civic se . It began to drive as though i had a flat tire. i got out to check and i did not have a flat tire. So i continued to drive to try and get my car out of the road. It began shaking/vibrating really bad. And then the car engine turned off. SO i cut my car back on and went to put it in d…
Read full complaint
on 10/4 i was driving my 2015 honda civic se . It began to drive as though i had a flat tire. i got out to check and i did not have a flat tire. So i continued to drive to try and get my car out of the road. It began shaking/vibrating really bad. And then the car engine turned off. SO i cut my car back on and went to put it in drive and it would no longer go into gear. It just completely stopped working. i did not have any dash board lights/warning lights come on. I have not had any issues with my car regarding transmission up until 10/4/2021. I have also seen where there is a recall on Honda's with this issue. But my VIN was not on the recall list. It seems there have been several complaints regarding this issue. And several other VIN numbers were not listed. This is QUOTE anywhere from $5800 - $7000 fix from what I've been told. There seems to be an ongoing issue with the Transmissions for this Year/Model car. Who has that kind of money to fork and pay. It seems there should be more research into this and figure out what is going on. Is there anything I can do regarding this issue???
My 2015 Honda Civic has 69070 miles on it. My car will straight out just stop in the middle of the road. The breaks and gas will stop engaging. This has been happening since late March of 2021, and continues to happen at least once a week.There’s still power as the outside lights, radio, dash lights are all still on and function…
Read full complaint
My 2015 Honda Civic has 69070 miles on it. My car will straight out just stop in the middle of the road. The breaks and gas will stop engaging. This has been happening since late March of 2021, and continues to happen at least once a week.There’s still power as the outside lights, radio, dash lights are all still on and functioning. I took the car to a Honda dealership and they said it was the REC VSA modulator. So I have had to replace the REC VSA modulator. The car ran beautifully for a whole week, then it started again. I took it to another auto shop and had them diagnose the car and they changed the MAP sensor, and the main engine bay fuse. I’ve had the alternator and started checked and they’re both fine. The 9th gen honda civics have electrical and computer issues and Honda should be held responsible because they’re a safety issue. I am so afraid of what could happen I only take my car to work and home. Something needs to be done about these issues.
This is the 2nd Honda Civic Si that i bought first one was a 2013 and the one i have now is a 2015, I've researched this continuing problem and have found that many other Civic Si's are having this issue as well, when releasing clutch in first gear there's a grinding or clutch spring or clutch fly wheel noise that sounds like it…
Read full complaint
This is the 2nd Honda Civic Si that i bought first one was a 2013 and the one i have now is a 2015, I've researched this continuing problem and have found that many other Civic Si's are having this issue as well, when releasing clutch in first gear there's a grinding or clutch spring or clutch fly wheel noise that sounds like it's grinding or making a vibrational noise now when i first heard the issue in my 2013 i didn't put much thought into it, after hearing it more n more i took it into Honda and they told me they couldn't hear the noise so i let it go after a few years i bought a 2015 Civic Si and now this Si is making the same noise in the clutch area when releasing the clutch out of 1st gear, i don't know how in a 2 year difference that the clutch would be making the same noise, this needs to be taken care of it can't be that it's a driver error since many other drivers of this type of vehicle are also complaining of hearing this issue, i would like an investigation started on this to see if the manual transmission that's being used is faulty. I would also like to have my car checked out free of charge to see what the issue is with the transmission.
Intermittent warning light for problem with air bag. The light comes on and can stay on for a while, then it will go out and stay off for a while. I don't know if there is a problem with the air bag or with the light.
Official recalls
115V574000 · 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
2EA21002 · 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.
Illustration