← New search

2012 Honda CR-V

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2012 Honda CR-V do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 400.5.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

279 reports with mileage · 124 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.

  • Engine. Review the 89 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 68 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 48 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

27 crash reports4 fire reports19 injury reports

What owners actually said

403 reports
32,700 miles · Nov 26, 2013
Visibility

UPON LEAVING WORK, WIFE HEARD A WIND NOISE COMING FROM THE SUNROOF, AS IF IT WAS OPEN. UPON SLIDING BACK THE COVER (SLIGHTLY), SHE NOTICED THE GLASS WAS SHATTERED (WITH A BIG HOLE), AND BULGING OUTWARD OR TOWARD THE INTERIOR. SHE WAS NOT AROUND ANY OTHER VEHICLES SO IT IS UNLIKELY THE CAUSE WAS A BOUNCING ROCK OR PEBBLE. …

Read full complaint

UPON LEAVING WORK, WIFE HEARD A WIND NOISE COMING FROM THE SUNROOF, AS IF IT WAS OPEN. UPON SLIDING BACK THE COVER (SLIGHTLY), SHE NOTICED THE GLASS WAS SHATTERED (WITH A BIG HOLE), AND BULGING OUTWARD OR TOWARD THE INTERIOR. SHE WAS NOT AROUND ANY OTHER VEHICLES SO IT IS UNLIKELY THE CAUSE WAS A BOUNCING ROCK OR PEBBLE. UPON CALLING THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED, THEY REFERRED US TO A LOCAL AUTO GLASS SHOP. UPON CALLING HONDA OF AMERICA, THEY REFERRED US TO OUR INSURANCE COMPANY. BY THE WAY, THE CAR IS STILL UNDER FULL WARRANTY. WHAT CAN WE DO? IT SHOULD BE UNDER WARRANTY, SHOULDN'T IT? *TR

NHTSA ODI #10553923

7,737 miles · Nov 25, 2013
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2012 HONDA CRV. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO PROVIDE PROPER ILLUMINATION COVERAGE. THE DEALER ADJUSTED THE HEADLIGHTS SEVERAL TIMES HOWEVER THE FAILURE WAS NOT CORRECTED. THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS WOULD NOT PROVIDE COVERAGE OVERHEAD OR ON THE SIDES OF THE VEHICLE. THE HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHT WO…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2012 HONDA CRV. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED TO PROVIDE PROPER ILLUMINATION COVERAGE. THE DEALER ADJUSTED THE HEADLIGHTS SEVERAL TIMES HOWEVER THE FAILURE WAS NOT CORRECTED. THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS WOULD NOT PROVIDE COVERAGE OVERHEAD OR ON THE SIDES OF THE VEHICLE. THE HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHT WOULD ILLUMINATE MUCH HIGHER THAN NORMAL. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND ADVISED THAT THE HEADLIGHT FAILURE WAS NOT A MANUFACTURING DEFECT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT FURTHER REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 7,737 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE 24,000.

NHTSA ODI #10553687

1,200 miles · Nov 19, 2013
Visibility/wiper

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING 65 MPH, THE DRIVER'S SIDE WINDSHIELD WIPER BLADE PULLED RAIN INTO THE CONTACT'S FIELD OF VISION, DECREASING HER VISIBILITY OF THE ROADWAY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS ADVISED THAT THE ENTIRE DRIVER'S SIDE WINDSHIELD WIPER NEEDED …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING 65 MPH, THE DRIVER'S SIDE WINDSHIELD WIPER BLADE PULLED RAIN INTO THE CONTACT'S FIELD OF VISION, DECREASING HER VISIBILITY OF THE ROADWAY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS ADVISED THAT THE ENTIRE DRIVER'S SIDE WINDSHIELD WIPER NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE WINDSHIELD WIPER WAS REPLACED BUT DID NOT RECTIFY THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATELY FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 1,200 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 18,000.

NHTSA ODI #10552905

21,025 miles · Nov 16, 2013
Visibility

SUN VISOR WILL NOT STAY UP. REPLACED ONCE AND ONLY WORKED FOR ONE DAY. HONDA DEALERSHIP ORDERED A SECOND ONE AND WE WERE TOLD THAT IT WOULD NOT WORK EITHER, THAT IT WAS AN AMERICAN HONDA ISSUE. WE WERE TOLD THAT IT WAS NO USE TO REPLACE IT THAT IT WOULD JUST HAPPEN AGAIN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10552530

6 miles · Nov 4, 2013
Exterior Lighting

I HAVE HAD THE HEADLIGHTS ADJUSTED 3 TIMES. THERE IS INSUFFICIENT LIGHT TO DRIVE BY AT NIGHT. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE ON THE ROAD IN THIS VEHICLE AFTER DARK. THE DEALER SAID IT IS THE NATURE OF THE NEW REFLECTIVE LIGHTS WHICH DO NOT SHINE OUT. HE SAID THERE IS NOTHING ELSE THEY CAN DO TO FIX THEM. I REPORTED THE ISSUE TO HONDA AM…

Read full complaint

I HAVE HAD THE HEADLIGHTS ADJUSTED 3 TIMES. THERE IS INSUFFICIENT LIGHT TO DRIVE BY AT NIGHT. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE ON THE ROAD IN THIS VEHICLE AFTER DARK. THE DEALER SAID IT IS THE NATURE OF THE NEW REFLECTIVE LIGHTS WHICH DO NOT SHINE OUT. HE SAID THERE IS NOTHING ELSE THEY CAN DO TO FIX THEM. I REPORTED THE ISSUE TO HONDA AMERICA AND THEY SAY THEY WILL DO NOTHING UNLESS THE LIGHTS ARE DEFECTIVE. APPARENTLY NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE AT NIGHT IS NOT A DEFECT. I HAVE TO DRIVE WITH THEM ON HIGH BEAMS TO BE ABLE TO SEE AT ALL AND IF I SWITCH TO LOW BEAM UPON MEETING ANOTHER VEHICLE I HAVE TO COME TO A DEAD STOP AS I CANNOT SEE WHERE I AM IN THE ROAD. THERE IS NO BEAM WHICH IS DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF YOUR DRIVE PATH. LOW BEAM WITH FOG LIGHTS OR HIGH BEAM; NEITHER IS SUFFICIENT LIGHT TO DRIVE BY. I LIVE IN A RURAL AREA WITH NO STREET LIGHTS AND LOTS OF DEER. I NEED THE HEADLIGHTS REPLACED ON THIS VEHICLE TO BE A SAFE DRIVER. I HAVE SEEN OTHER COMPLAINTS ON THE INTERNET AND AM ASKING THE NHSA TO FORCE HONDA TO RECALL THESE VEHICLES TO HAVE THE LIGHTS REPLACED WITH A DIFFERENT TYPE OF LIGHTING. I BARELY FEEL ABLE TO DRIVE ON FAMILIAR ROADS THERE IS NO WAY I CAN TAKE THIS VEHICLE TO AN UNKNOWN AREA AT NIGHT. PLEASE RECOGNIZE THIS ISSUE AS A SAFETY HAZARD. I AM NOT INTERESTED IN A LAW SUIT. I JUST WANT TO BE SAFE IN MY 2012 HONDA CRV. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10550800

15,000 miles · Oct 8, 2013
Service BrakesSteering

WHILE DRIVING MY CAR FROM MARYLAND TO NEW YORK IN EXTREMELY RAINY CONDITIONS ON THE I95, THE SUV STEERING WHEEL LOCKED AFTER A LOUD NOISE. I THOUGHT I HAD A FLAT TIRE, BUT THIS WAS NOT THE CASE. THE BRAKES PEDAL ALSO DID NOT MOVE. THE CAR BUCKLED AND ROCKED FROM SIDE TO SIDE. (NO WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON--WHY DIDN'T IT?) THIS SIT…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING MY CAR FROM MARYLAND TO NEW YORK IN EXTREMELY RAINY CONDITIONS ON THE I95, THE SUV STEERING WHEEL LOCKED AFTER A LOUD NOISE. I THOUGHT I HAD A FLAT TIRE, BUT THIS WAS NOT THE CASE. THE BRAKES PEDAL ALSO DID NOT MOVE. THE CAR BUCKLED AND ROCKED FROM SIDE TO SIDE. (NO WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON--WHY DIDN'T IT?) THIS SITUATION COULD HAVE BEEN DEADLY IF OTHER VEHICLES AROUND ME WERE NOT ALERT. I READ THROUGH THE COMMENTS AND REALIZE I AM NOT THE ONLY PERSON THIS HAS HAPPENED TO. IS HONDA WAITING FOR SOMEONE TO DIE. I TOLD MY FAMILY TO SUE THEM IF IT HAPPENS TO ME. I HAVE STARTED DRIVING WITH MY IPAD VIDEO CAMERA ON. THIS IS MY BLACK BOX TO PROVE THAT THE HONDA CRV 2012 IS FAULTY. SINCE THIS HAS HAPPENED, THE GAS AND BRAKE PEDALS VIBRATE WHEN DRIVING AFTER 2-3HRS. I TOOK THE CAR INTO HONDA, LONG ISLAND, NY. THEY CHECKED THE BRAKES AND SAID IT IS FINE. BUT, THE CAR DOES NOT DRIVE SMOOTH ON THE ROAD. YOU CAN FEEL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE STEERING WHEEL WHILE DRIVING. HONDA NEEDS TO FIX THIS UNSAFE PROBLEM OF THE STEERING AND BRAKES LOCKING WHILE THE CAR IS IN MOTION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10547320

20,000 miles · Sep 30, 2013
EngineFire

WHILE DRIVING, I SMELLED SOME BURNING, AND SAW WHITE SMOKES, SO PULLED OVER, AND TURNED OFF THE ENGINE, GOT OUT OF THE CAR. AFTER 30 SECONDS OR (POSSIBLY A FEW MINS), IT CAUGHT FIRE (ENGINE UNDER THE HOOD), AND PEOPLE AROUND US TRIED TO PUT OUT THE FIRE USING THEIR OWN FIRE EXTINGUISHER TO NO AVAIL. FIRE TRUCK ARRIVED WITHIN M…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING, I SMELLED SOME BURNING, AND SAW WHITE SMOKES, SO PULLED OVER, AND TURNED OFF THE ENGINE, GOT OUT OF THE CAR. AFTER 30 SECONDS OR (POSSIBLY A FEW MINS), IT CAUGHT FIRE (ENGINE UNDER THE HOOD), AND PEOPLE AROUND US TRIED TO PUT OUT THE FIRE USING THEIR OWN FIRE EXTINGUISHER TO NO AVAIL. FIRE TRUCK ARRIVED WITHIN MINUTES , AND WAS ABLE TO PUT OUT FIRE. AT THIS TIME, INSURANCE DOES NOT SEEM REALLY INTERESTED IN FINDING OUT THE ROOT CAUSE. HONDA DEALER SAYS THEY ARE OUT OF THE MIX SINCE THEY DID NOT SERVICE THE VEHICLE. HONDA AMERICA IS SAYING THAT THEY WILL NOT LOOK INTO THIS AND SIMPLY WAIT FOR THE OUTCOME FROM INSURANCE INVESTIGATION. HONDA HAS A HISTORY OF RECALLS (CR-V) ASSOCIATED WITH FIRE HAZARDS SPECIFICALLY FROM 2002-2006, AND 2012 CR-V COULD BE DEFECTIVE AS WELL, BUT THEIR RESPONSES OVER THIS ACCIDENT IS SIMPLY OUTRAGEOUS. SO I'M FILING A COMPLAINT AGAINST NHTSA, HOPING THAT SOMEONE IN THE AGENCY CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THIS, AND GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS FIRE INCIDENCE, AND HOPEFULLY, THIS CAN PREVENT "FATAL" DISASTERS IN THE FUTURE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10546273

100 miles · Sep 29, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control

I BOUGHT A NEW CRV IN SEPTEMBER 2012. THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE BEEN HAVING IS THAT AT CERTAIN TIMES, USUALLY AT SLOWER SPEEDS WHEN I STEP ON THE GAS THERE IS A 2-3 SECOND DELAY BEFORE THE CAR ACCELERATES. DURING THIS HESITATIONS PERIOD THE ENGINE DOES NOT REV AND THE CAR JUST COASTS. THIS HAS HAPPENED 15 TIMES THE PAST YEAR. …

Read full complaint

I BOUGHT A NEW CRV IN SEPTEMBER 2012. THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE BEEN HAVING IS THAT AT CERTAIN TIMES, USUALLY AT SLOWER SPEEDS WHEN I STEP ON THE GAS THERE IS A 2-3 SECOND DELAY BEFORE THE CAR ACCELERATES. DURING THIS HESITATIONS PERIOD THE ENGINE DOES NOT REV AND THE CAR JUST COASTS. THIS HAS HAPPENED 15 TIMES THE PAST YEAR. THIS CREATES A MAJOR CONCERN WHEN I'M TRYING TO MERGE INTO TRAFFIC OR PULL OUT FROM AN INTERSECTION. NOTE, MY FOOT WAS NOT ON THE BRAKE AND I'VE HAD THE ECON SWITCH IN BOTH ON AND OFF MODE AND THE PROBLEM STILL OCCURS. I TOOK MY CAR TO THE DEALER IN FEBRUARY 2013 AT WHICH TIME IT HAD 3,500 MILES ON THE ODOMETER. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. IN SEPTEMBER 2013 I HAD WORK DONE ON AN ACCORD I OWN AND I SHOWED THE SERVICE ADVISOR COPIES OF 6 REPORTS THRU SAFERCAR.GOV. THE ADVISOR DID NOT HAVE ANY RESPONSE. I NOW HAVE 8,000 MILES ON MY CRV. I RECENTLY REPORTED THE PROBLEM TO HONDA CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY SAID THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY SIMILAR PROBLEMS REPORTED. IN MY OPINION THEY ARE WRONG AS THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING CAUSING THIS. AT LEAST I HAVE IT ON FILE WITH HONDA. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10546085

5,718 miles · Aug 20, 2013
Electrical System

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE BATTERY WAS JUMP-STARTED AND THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO START THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION WHERE A NEW BATTERY AND SOFTWARE WAS INSTALLED. THE FAILURE RECURRED AND THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED OR D…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE BATTERY WAS JUMP-STARTED AND THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO START THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION WHERE A NEW BATTERY AND SOFTWARE WAS INSTALLED. THE FAILURE RECURRED AND THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED OR DIAGNOSED FOR THE MOST RECENT FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 5,718.

NHTSA ODI #10536287

7,057 miles · Aug 1, 2013
Latches/locks/linkagesStructure

THIS IS ABOUT NHTSA RECALL 12V-338, AND TO REPORT HONDA'S FAILURE TO REMEDY A DEFECT WITHIN 60 DAYS OF FIRST CONTACT WITH THE DEALER (HONDA OF ANNAPOLIS, 1720 WEST STREET, ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401). WE BROUGHT OUR 2102 HONDA CR-V TO HONDA OF ANNAPOLIS ON MARCH 22, 2013 FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF DRIVER'S AND PASSENGER'S DOOR LATCHE…

Read full complaint

THIS IS ABOUT NHTSA RECALL 12V-338, AND TO REPORT HONDA'S FAILURE TO REMEDY A DEFECT WITHIN 60 DAYS OF FIRST CONTACT WITH THE DEALER (HONDA OF ANNAPOLIS, 1720 WEST STREET, ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401). WE BROUGHT OUR 2102 HONDA CR-V TO HONDA OF ANNAPOLIS ON MARCH 22, 2013 FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF DRIVER'S AND PASSENGER'S DOOR LATCHES AND INNER HANDLES UNDER RECALL 12V-338. THE SERVICE ADVISOR STATED THAT NO PARTS WERE AVAILABLE, SO THE PARTS WOULD BE SPECIAL ORDERED AND WE WOULD BE CALLED WHEN THE PARTS WERE IN STOCK. WE NEVER RECEIVED ANY CALL. WE WENT TO HONDA OF ANNAPOLIS ON JUNE 27, 2013 FOR AN OIL CHANGE AND INQUIRED ABOUT THE RECALL PARTS, WHICH WERE THEN IN STOCK, AND THE RECALL WORK WAS PERFORMED. WHEN WE ASKED WHY WE HAD NOT BEEN CALLED ABOUT THE RECALL PARTS, NO ONE OFFERED ANY RATIONAL EXPLANATION, MUCH LESS ANY APOLOGY. LATER THAT DAY, WE WERE UNABLE TO LOCK THE CR-V, THE CAR ALARM WOULD GO OFF WHEN EITHER FRONT DOOR WAS OPENED, AND WE HAD TO TURN OFF THE ALARM BY PUTTING THE KEY IN THE IGNITION. WE RETURNED TO HONDA OF ANNAPOLIS THE FOLLOWING DAY TO HAVE THESE PROBLEMS FIXED. THUS, HONDA OF ANNAPOLIS MISSED YOUR 60 DAY REPAIR DEADLINE BY OVER 30 DAYS, AND THEN PERFORMED THE REPLACEMENT IN AN INCOMPETENT MANNER. IF WE HAD NOT GONE IN FOR THE OIL CHANGE, WE BELIEVE WE WOULD NEVER HAVE RECEIVED ANY CALL FROM THIS DEALER ABOUT COMPLETING THE RECALL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10533097

Official recalls

3

13V143000 · Power Train:automatic Transmission

Apr 15, 2013

Honda is recalling certain model year 2012-2013 CR-V, Odyssey, and model year 2013 Acura RDX vehicles. During sub-freezing temperatures, the brake-shift interlock blocking mechanism may become slow and allow the gear selector to be moved from the Park position without pressing the brake pedal. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 114, "Theft Protection and Rollaway Prevention."

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the gear selector is moved from the park position without pressing the brake pedal it can allow the vehicle to roll away, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners and instruct them to take their vehicle to a Honda or Acura dealer. The dealer will install an updated brake shift interlock blocking mechanism free of charge. The recall began on May 13, 2013. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009. Honda's campaign recall numbers are S96, S97, and S98.

12V501000 · Equipment:other:labels

Oct 16, 2012

Honda is recalling certain model year 2012 CR-V, equipped with the LX trim level and manufactured from August 30, 2012, to August 31, 2012. These vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of 49 CFR Part 567, "Certification." The incorrect values for Gross Vehicle Weight Rating, Gross Axle Weight Rating front and rear, tire size, and rim size were specified on the safety certification label.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A misprinted label could lead to improper vehicle loading. Improper loading could result in a tire failure, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will apply the corrective label free of charge. The safety recall began on November 14, 2012. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009.

12V338000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch

Jul 19, 2012

Honda is recalling certain model year 2012 Honda CR-V and model year 2013 Acura ILX vehicles. If the manual or power door lock is activated while an interior front door handle is being operated by an occupant, the cable connecting the interior door handle to the door latch mechanism may become loose and move out of position. There is a possibility that the cable can move far enough out of position to prevent the door from properly latching.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the door is not fully latched, the door may open while driving or in a crash, increasing the risk of personal injury to the vehicle occupants.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the front door latch assemblies in the affected vehicles, free of charge. Additionally, the interior front door handles in certain Honda CR-Vs will also be replaced, free of charge. The safety recall is expected to begin on, or about, August 16, 2012. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-800-999-1009.

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

3

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.

EQ12002 · Autoliv Air Bag Propellant Mixture

Opened Feb 14, 2012 · Closed May 8, 2012

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:side/window

The summary for this investigation, labeled EQ12-002 Autoliv Closing Resume, can be found attached separately to this resume.This EQ is closed.

Go deeper into Honda CR-V problems