← New search

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 →

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.

22 crash reports0 fire reports11 injury reports

Suspension complaints

16 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Sep 15, 2026
StructureSuspensionVehicle Speed Control

1. Left rear lower control arm 2. Where the lower control arm attaches to the body rusted thru and failed 3. It has been inspected by me the owner and it’s obvious the bracket is gone 4. I see no reason to tow the vehicle to be inspected adding cost to this problem 5. No warnings just lower control arm dropped when bracket c…

Read full complaint

1. Left rear lower control arm 2. Where the lower control arm attaches to the body rusted thru and failed 3. It has been inspected by me the owner and it’s obvious the bracket is gone 4. I see no reason to tow the vehicle to be inspected adding cost to this problem 5. No warnings just lower control arm dropped when bracket collapsed causing tire to drop I see recalls for other year Honda crv Just not 2013. Please let me know why? Thank you,

NHTSA ODI #11764356

Mileage unknown · Sep 17, 2025
EnginePower TrainSuspension

Service Bulletin 16-012 was issued for 2013 CRV for the VTC actuator. This is obviously an issue that Honda is aware of but is refusing to fix. I’ve had to replace this part twice at the same interval of time. The first replacement was covered under my warranty however now that I am out of warranty this repair costs almost 3,000…

Read full complaint

Service Bulletin 16-012 was issued for 2013 CRV for the VTC actuator. This is obviously an issue that Honda is aware of but is refusing to fix. I’ve had to replace this part twice at the same interval of time. The first replacement was covered under my warranty however now that I am out of warranty this repair costs almost 3,000$. I contacted American Honda who refuses to provide good will even though they are aware this is a known issue. I was advised that if this wasn’t repaired it would be a safety issue. I believe this should be covered on Hondas dime especially if this has to replaced multiple times at no fault of the customer.

NHTSA ODI #11687794

158,000 miles · Apr 12, 2023
StructureSuspension

The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while driving approximately 50 MPH, the vehicle drove over a bump in the road and the steering wheel became unstable. The vehicle was driven to the local service center who diagnosed that the rear driver’s side lower control arm on the front suspension mount had separated fr…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while driving approximately 50 MPH, the vehicle drove over a bump in the road and the steering wheel became unstable. The vehicle was driven to the local service center who diagnosed that the rear driver’s side lower control arm on the front suspension mount had separated from the unibody frame due to corrosion. The contact was informed that the entire unibody frame needed to be replaced to repair the control arm. The vehicle was not yet repaired. The local dealer and manufacturer were notified of the failure, but no assistance was provided. The failure mileage was 158,000. The contact stated that they will no longer need this complaint. They contacted the dealership and they agreed to buy the vehicle and make the situation a fair settlement.

NHTSA ODI #11516735

Mileage unknown · Nov 15, 2022
Suspension

Front wheel bearings wore out at approximately 50,000 miles. Steering became difficult and the bearings produced a lot of noise. Both front wheels affected. Dealer replaced bearings and no problems since.

NHTSA ODI #11493636

66,000 miles · Apr 5, 2022
Suspension

The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while driving approximately 30 MPH, the vehicle started shaking and shuddering. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact drove to a local mechanic where the vehicle was diagnosed and the contact was informed that the rear axles needed to be replaced. The vehicle…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while driving approximately 30 MPH, the vehicle started shaking and shuddering. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact drove to a local mechanic where the vehicle was diagnosed and the contact was informed that the rear axles needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 66,000.

NHTSA ODI #11459669

65,000 miles · Nov 24, 2021
EngineSuspension

The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving 25-35 MPH, the vehicle started shuddering inadvertently. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact was able to continue to drive the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure had been reoccurring while driving. The dealer and the manufacture…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving 25-35 MPH, the vehicle started shuddering inadvertently. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact was able to continue to drive the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure had been reoccurring while driving. The dealer and the manufacturer were not notified of the failure. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 65,000.

NHTSA ODI #11441578

Mileage unknown · Oct 31, 2021
Power TrainSuspensionUnknown Or Other

Transmission shakes or quivers around 25-30 mph. At speed above 35mph right rear suspension (axle) shakes, quivers. I was checking For a recall because of all the complaints of same issues on honda owners website. The car is becoming unsafe to drive. This is the first effort I have made to research problem. The Honda website in…

Read full complaint

Transmission shakes or quivers around 25-30 mph. At speed above 35mph right rear suspension (axle) shakes, quivers. I was checking For a recall because of all the complaints of same issues on honda owners website. The car is becoming unsafe to drive. This is the first effort I have made to research problem. The Honda website indicated a 2013 crv Recall but not for my vin number.

NHTSA ODI #11438822

70,000 miles · Oct 9, 2019
Suspension

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. WHILE DRIVING 20 TO 30 MPH, THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE SHOOK DURING ACCELERATION. AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC REPLACED THE AXLE ON THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE, BUT THE FAILURE CONTINUED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO PRIORITY HONDA (621 N BATTLEFIELD BLVD, CHESAPEAKE, VA 23320, (757) 213-6600) TO BE…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. WHILE DRIVING 20 TO 30 MPH, THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE SHOOK DURING ACCELERATION. AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC REPLACED THE AXLE ON THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE, BUT THE FAILURE CONTINUED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO PRIORITY HONDA (621 N BATTLEFIELD BLVD, CHESAPEAKE, VA 23320, (757) 213-6600) TO BE DIAGNOSED, BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. THE DEALER SPECULATED THAT THE AXLE COULD BE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 70,000.

NHTSA ODI #11267285

140,000 miles · Jan 26, 2019
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Power TrainSuspension

ENGINE RATTLES AT EARLY MORNING START UP , HONDA AWARE OF VTC ACTUATOR DEFAULT AND NEEDS TO OPEN A RECALL CASES TO ALL CRV MADE BETWEEN 2012-2014. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE CAM SHAFTS, AND DRIVE BELT. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE CONTROL ARMS AND TIRES. ALL MT DASH LIGHTS HAVE COME ON WHILE I WAS DRIVING. THE CAR SHAKES AND IS SCAR…

Read full complaint

ENGINE RATTLES AT EARLY MORNING START UP , HONDA AWARE OF VTC ACTUATOR DEFAULT AND NEEDS TO OPEN A RECALL CASES TO ALL CRV MADE BETWEEN 2012-2014. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE CAM SHAFTS, AND DRIVE BELT. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE CONTROL ARMS AND TIRES. ALL MT DASH LIGHTS HAVE COME ON WHILE I WAS DRIVING. THE CAR SHAKES AND IS SCARY TO DRIVE. THIS CAR HAS SAFETY ISSUES WITH THE CONTROL ARMS IN THE SUSPENSION AND ACCELERATION ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN REPORTED BY CONSUMERS. WHEN DOES SOMEONE DECIDE THAT THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE. WHEN A CAR HAS TIRE, ACCELERATION, OR ISSUES WITH TRANSMISSION THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE. HONDA SHOULD DO SOMETHING TO SHOW THEY CARE ABOUT THE CONSUMER SAFETY. THERE ARE MANY ISSUES WITH THE HONDA CR-V PLEASE ADDRESS THE SERIOUS ONES.

NHTSA ODI #11172311

24,000 miles · Aug 10, 2016
Suspension

THIS VEHICLE HAS 24,000 MILES AND THE REAR STRUTS FAILED. BECAUSE OF THE STRUTS FAILURE THE VEHICLE BOUNCES AND DOES NOT RIDE NORMALLY.

NHTSA ODI #10894837

Official recalls

2

23V858000 · 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

2

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

EA19001 · Electrical Overstress

Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect.  During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications.  The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU.  In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment.  FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle.  Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW.  These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes.  An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time.   In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU.  This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners.  Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation.  The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage.  There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation.  The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU.  If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC.  Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC.  All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled.  In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024.  With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Go deeper into Honda CR-V problems