I was driving then I shut off like I shut the car off and restart it while I was driving then my electric power steering symbol keeps coming on.
2013 Honda CR-V
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2013 Honda CR-V do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 400.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all CR-V 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
259 reports with mileage · 123 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 97 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 95 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 38 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Steering complaints
15 reportsMy 2013 Honda CRV completely broke down in late August 2025, as I was backing out of my driveway. Our lives were at risk. This could have happened in traffic, causing a terrible collision. My local Honda dealership found the chain guides broken and the timing off, and recommended replacement of several parts (timing chain, guide…
Read full complaint
My 2013 Honda CRV completely broke down in late August 2025, as I was backing out of my driveway. Our lives were at risk. This could have happened in traffic, causing a terrible collision. My local Honda dealership found the chain guides broken and the timing off, and recommended replacement of several parts (timing chain, guides, tensioner, exhaust cam, rockers, and ... VTC actuator). Initially, they thought the cause was a lack of proper maintenance, specifically, infrequent or improper oil changes. I knew we had taken proper care of our car, so I began investigating. The check engine light was on for at least 2 years (as well as the rattling at start-up), and I had not gotten clarity on it until recently, after consulting with multiple professionals. Finally, a Jiffy Lube tech said it was due to the VTC actuator. I then brought my car to the Honda dealership in July 2025 for an oil change and to discuss the check engine light and VTC actuator issue. At that time, they did not alert me to the VTC actuator defect or the potential for complete engine failure. As I continued my investigation, I found a Honda Service Bulletin starting in 2016 (when my car was still under its three-year warranty) and updated in 2017 (when my car was still under its five-year Power Train warranty) describing the VTC actuator as defective. Had American Honda issued a recall at that time, instead of an SB, and had notified me of this defective part, my warranties in those years would have covered the replacement costs of my VTC actuator and related engine parts. And also been significantly less expensive. Flash forward to this fall 2025: as I continued my investigation, I discovered multiple class-action lawsuits against American Honda for this exact issue—a known defective VTC actuator. It turns out they conducted an internal study in 2011 that found the VTC actuator was defective. Now the dealership believes my car's failure was caused by a defective VTC actuator.
While driving the steering wheel will lock up and become unable to be turned. It feels as the power steering goes out. The issue is intermittent and happens during a turn. The problem has been discovered at 0-35 mph and sometimes requires turning the vehicle off and restarting. Often the steering wheel will force itself to a ste…
Read full complaint
While driving the steering wheel will lock up and become unable to be turned. It feels as the power steering goes out. The issue is intermittent and happens during a turn. The problem has been discovered at 0-35 mph and sometimes requires turning the vehicle off and restarting. Often the steering wheel will force itself to a steering wheel "lock" position beyond what the wheel is being mechanically turned to. Vehicle has no outstanding recalls and has had regular service.
The car needs a major alignment out of nowhere, swereves to the right. Also problems with the transmission.
ONE COLD WINTER MORNING, MY ENGINE LIGHT, POWER TRAIN AND STEERING WHEEL WARNING SIGNS ALL TURNED ON. I HAD CHECKED MY OIL AND IT WAS STILL 40% FULL. I STARTED NOTICING THAT THE CAR WAS MOVING SLOW NOT MORE THAN 20MPH. ALSO THE GAS GALLON INDICATOR WENT FROM 36MPG TO 20MPG. IT IS BURNING WAY MORE GAS THAN IT WAS. I STARTED RESEA…
Read full complaint
ONE COLD WINTER MORNING, MY ENGINE LIGHT, POWER TRAIN AND STEERING WHEEL WARNING SIGNS ALL TURNED ON. I HAD CHECKED MY OIL AND IT WAS STILL 40% FULL. I STARTED NOTICING THAT THE CAR WAS MOVING SLOW NOT MORE THAN 20MPH. ALSO THE GAS GALLON INDICATOR WENT FROM 36MPG TO 20MPG. IT IS BURNING WAY MORE GAS THAN IT WAS. I STARTED RESEARCHING AND FOUND OUT THAT OTHER CONSUMERS HAD THE SAME PROBLEM. I'M WRITING THIS BECAUSE I WANT OTHER PEOPLE TO KNOW THAT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THEIR HONDA CR-V MODEL. I KNOW IT IS NOT SAFE FOR ME TO BE DRIVING THE CAR AROUND ESPECIALLY IN THE HIGHWAY. THE CAR MOVES SLOWER THAN IT USUALLY DOES. IT WOULDN'T BE SAFE FOR ME TO BE DRIVING IT AT ALL TILL WE GET THE PROBLEM RESOLVED.
STEERING LOCKED WHILE DRIVING MY 2013 HONDA CRV. MY CAR IS KEPT IN EXCELLENT CONDITION AND ON 07-28-19 DRIVING DOWN MY STREET AND POWER STEERING WENT OUT. ALSO DRIVERS WINDOW STOPPED GOING UP AND DOWN. THEN STARTED AGAIN. DROVE FEW MORE FEET AND STEERING WENT OUT AGAIN. CAR WAS DRIVING DOWN A CITY STREET ON A STRAIT STREE…
Read full complaint
STEERING LOCKED WHILE DRIVING MY 2013 HONDA CRV. MY CAR IS KEPT IN EXCELLENT CONDITION AND ON 07-28-19 DRIVING DOWN MY STREET AND POWER STEERING WENT OUT. ALSO DRIVERS WINDOW STOPPED GOING UP AND DOWN. THEN STARTED AGAIN. DROVE FEW MORE FEET AND STEERING WENT OUT AGAIN. CAR WAS DRIVING DOWN A CITY STREET ON A STRAIT STREET NO TURNING. CAR HAD BE BE TOWED TO SERVICE.
WHEN SPEEDS OF 65+ MPH ARE REACHED THE 2013 HONDA CR-V STEERING WHEEL VIBRATES AND SHAKES VIOLENTLY WHILE TRAVELING AT HIGH SPEEDS ON THE HIGHWAY. THIS MAKES THE RIDE VERY SCARY AND SEEM UNCONTROLLABLE AT TIMES. AS I HAVE READ ON MANY FORUMS, THIS IS A VERY COMMON OCCURRENCE WITH THESE VEHICLES. THE DEALERSHIP SERVICE DEPARTMENT…
Read full complaint
WHEN SPEEDS OF 65+ MPH ARE REACHED THE 2013 HONDA CR-V STEERING WHEEL VIBRATES AND SHAKES VIOLENTLY WHILE TRAVELING AT HIGH SPEEDS ON THE HIGHWAY. THIS MAKES THE RIDE VERY SCARY AND SEEM UNCONTROLLABLE AT TIMES. AS I HAVE READ ON MANY FORUMS, THIS IS A VERY COMMON OCCURRENCE WITH THESE VEHICLES. THE DEALERSHIP SERVICE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT HAD AN ANSWER TO WHY THIS IS HAPPENING AND TOLD ME "THAT THIS IS A COMMON THING WITH CR-V'S". HONDA EVEN PUT OUT A VIDEO BASICALLY STATING THAT THEY FIXED THIS PROBLEM WITH THEIR NEW LINE OF CR V'S IN 2017. I BELIEVE IT'S AN UNBALANCED DRIVE SHAFT, DUE TO FACT THAT THE TIRES HAVE BEEN BALANCED 3 TIMES, 2 ALIGNMENTS IN A 3 MONTH PERIOD AND A FRIEND OF MINE HAD THE SAME ISSUE AND THAT'S WHAT FIXED HIS ALONG WITH OTHER PEOPLE ON HONDA FORUMS STATING THE SAME ISSUES A STATED ABOVE AND REPAIR METHODS. I HOPE SOMEONE CAN GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THESE VERY COMMON ISSUES.
THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN HAPPENING SINCE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED NEW. THE CAR CONTINUALLY CHEWS UP TIRES ON THE REAR END OF THE CAR. FOR EXAMPLE, WE PURCHASED A BRAND NEW SET OF TIRES IN JULY OF 2017, AND ALREADY THEY ARE CUPPED/CHOPPED. I HAD THE CAR INTO OUR LOCAL ALIGNMENT SHOP AS WE ARE PREPARING FOR A TRIP, AND LESS THAN 10,000…
Read full complaint
THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN HAPPENING SINCE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED NEW. THE CAR CONTINUALLY CHEWS UP TIRES ON THE REAR END OF THE CAR. FOR EXAMPLE, WE PURCHASED A BRAND NEW SET OF TIRES IN JULY OF 2017, AND ALREADY THEY ARE CUPPED/CHOPPED. I HAD THE CAR INTO OUR LOCAL ALIGNMENT SHOP AS WE ARE PREPARING FOR A TRIP, AND LESS THAN 10,000 MILES LATER ARE SO OUT OF BALANCE THAT THEY ARE SHOWING SIGNS AND MAKING NOISE TO THE POINT OF I QUESTIONED WHAT WAS HAPPENING. I SUGGESTED THAT THEY DO A FOUR WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND WAS TOLD THAT THE CAMBER IS WAY OUT OF ADJUSTMENT AND THAT I NEEDED A CAMBER BOLT KIT. THE CAR ONLY HAS 84,000 MILES AND HAS BEEN WELL CARED FOR AND NO ACCIDENTS. HERE IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE. THE CAR COMES STOCK WITH REAR CONTROL ARMS THAT ARE NON ADJUSTABLE. THERE IS NO WAY TO CONTROL CAMBER ON THE REAR WHEELS. THERE ARE ADJUSTABLE ONES THAT CAN BE PURCHASED, BUT THAT COSTS CONSUMERS A TON OF MONEY. $500 OR SO TOTAL THAT IS NOT COVERED BY ANY WARRANTY. THE OBVIOUS DANGER IS EXCESSIVE WEAR ON TIRES THAT POTENTIALLY COULD CAUSE BAD STEERING, BRAKING, AND/OR CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. AS FAR AS MY EXPERIENCE, I HAVE HAD TO BE EXTREMELY VIGILANT ABOUT MAKING SURE MY TIRES ARE NOT IN BAD SHAPE 100% OF THE TIME. THE DEALER HAS BASICALLY WALKED AWAY FROM IT, IN SPITE OF THE FACT I PURCHASED AN EXTENDED WARRANTY WHICH IS STILL IN EFFECT. I MY OPINION, THE HONDA CORPORATION SHOULD HAVE A RECALL THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE ISSUE BY REPLACING THE STOCK NONADJUSTABLE CONTROL ARM WITH AN ADJUSTABLE ONE. THIS COULD SAVE THEM A TON OF ISSUES DOWN THE ROAD AND MAKE THEIR CARS MUCH SAFER.
THE VEHICLE INTERMITTENTLY BECAME VERY DIFFICULT TO STEER AT LOW SPEEDS AND THE STEERING INDICATOR LIGHT WOULD COME ON FOR SHORT PERIODS OF TIME. THIS NEARLY RESULTED IN ACCIDENTS ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. THE OWNER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALER, BUT THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT HE COULD NOT REPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE TECHNICIAN THEN A…
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE INTERMITTENTLY BECAME VERY DIFFICULT TO STEER AT LOW SPEEDS AND THE STEERING INDICATOR LIGHT WOULD COME ON FOR SHORT PERIODS OF TIME. THIS NEARLY RESULTED IN ACCIDENTS ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. THE OWNER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALER, BUT THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT HE COULD NOT REPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE TECHNICIAN THEN ADVISED THE OWNER TO CONTINUE DRIVING THE VEHICLE TO SEE IF THE PROBLEM WOULD RECUR. THE OWNER FOUND THIS ADVICE TO BE UNACCEPTABLE AND QUESTIONED WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN IF THE PROBLEM RECURRED. THE TECHNICIAN THEN ELEVATED THE ISSUE TO THE MANAGER, WHO WAS ABLE TO ISOLATE A TROUBLE CODE. THE OWNER WAS INFORMED THAT NO ONE AT THE DEALERSHIP KNEW WHAT THE TROUBLE CODE MEANT, AND THAT THE DEALER WOULD HAVE TO CONSULT WITH HONDA CORPORATE FOR GUIDANCE. THE OWNER WAS THEN INFORMED THAT HONDA CORPORATE RECOMMENDED THE REPLACEMENT OF THE POWER STEERING RACK. THIS REPAIR WAS PERFORMED AT SIGNIFICANT COST TO THE OWNER. NEITHER THE TROUBLESHOOTING PROCESS NOR THE ASSOCIATED TROUBLE CODE WERE RECORDED ON THE WORK DOCUMENTATION PRESENTED TO THE OWNER. THE VEHICLE STEERING FELT STIFF AFTERWARDS, THEN TWICE EXHIBITED A FAILURE MODE IN WHICH THE STEERING INDICATOR LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND THE STEERING SYSTEM APPEARED TO HIT A PREMATURE HARD STOP PART WAY INTO A LOW-SPEED TURN, FORCING THE VEHICLE WIDE. BOTH OF THESE INCIDENTS NEARLY RESULTED IN ACCIDENTS, BUT THE OWNER QUICKLY SPUN THE STEERING WHEEL TOWARDS CENTER, THEN BACK INTO THE DIRECTION OF THE TURN. THE PROCESS OF RE-CENTERING THE STEERING WHEEL APPEARED TO TEMPORARILY CLEAR THE PREMATURE HARD STOP, AND THE OWNER WAS ABLE TO COMPLETE THE TURN. THESE INCIDENTS OCCURRED DURING LOW-SPEED TURNS (ROUGHLY 10MPH) ON LOCAL STREETS AND PARKING LOTS IN THE AUSTIN AREA. REPAIR INVOICE FOR THE POWER STEERING RACK AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. THIS COMPLAINT WAS FILED BY A FAMILY REPRESENTATIVE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, THERE WAS A KNOCKING NOISE COMING FROM THE STEERING COLUMN AND THE STEERING WHEEL BECAME HOT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED NOR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 23,000.
Official recalls
223V858000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump
Dec 18, 2023
Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2013-2023 Honda Accord, Civic Coupe, Civic Sedan, Civic Hatchback, Civic Type R, CR-V, HR-V, Ridgeline, Odyssey, Acura ILX, MDX, MDX Hybrid, RDX, RLX, TLX, 2019-2022 Honda Insight, Passport, 2020 Honda CR-V Hybrid, 2018-2019 Honda Clarity PHEV, Fit, and 2015-2020 Honda Accord Hybrid, Pilot, Acura NSX vehicles. The fuel pump inside the fuel tank may fail.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Fuel pump failure can cause an engine stall while driving, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will replace the fuel pump module, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed September 6, 2024. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are KGC and KGD. This recall is an expansion of NHTSA recall numbers 21V-215 and 20V-314.
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.
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