← 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

Unknown Or Other complaints

48 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Jun 24, 2026
EnginePower TrainUnknown Or Other

While our 2013 Honda CR‑V was still drivable, we began experiencing a brief but loud rattle or grinding noise at cold start, especially after the vehicle had been sitting. Several years ago the dealer replaced the Variable Timing Control (VTC) actuator because of this cold‑start rattle. After a period without noise, the cold‑sta…

Read full complaint

While our 2013 Honda CR‑V was still drivable, we began experiencing a brief but loud rattle or grinding noise at cold start, especially after the vehicle had been sitting. Several years ago the dealer replaced the Variable Timing Control (VTC) actuator because of this cold‑start rattle. After a period without noise, the cold‑start rattle returned and became frequent, along with concerns about abnormal oil consumption. We reported these symptoms repeatedly during routine service visits. In March 2026, the CR‑V was brought to the Honda dealer for a routine oil change. The vehicle arrived running normally. After the service, the dealer advised that the vehicle would no longer start and was undriveable. Their diagnosis was a failed VTC actuator, a stretched/jumped timing chain, and internal engine damage requiring timing‑system repair, cylinder head/valve work, and possibly pistons and rings due to oil‑consumption‑related wear. The failure occurred without any warning lights or messages immediately prior to the event. The only prior symptom was the recurring cold‑start rattle that had been present for years and was previously addressed once by replacing the VTC actuator. The dealer has confirmed the failure and provided written estimates; the vehicle remains disabled. This pattern—cold‑start rattle, VTC actuator failure, timing‑chain stretch/jump, and internal engine damage—appears consistent with a known defect in the VTC actuator/timing system on this generation of Honda CR‑V. If the timing‑chain failure had occurred at highway speed rather than while the vehicle was at the dealer, it could have caused sudden loss of power and increased the risk of a crash.

NHTSA ODI #11746350

Mileage unknown · Aug 25, 2025
Unknown Or Other

Prolonged starter cycle with engine rattling noise

NHTSA ODI #11682815

Mileage unknown · Feb 26, 2025
Unknown Or Other

Driving on hwy at 55. Heard very loud pop and then shattered sunroof blew off. Was NOT near an overpass. No debris from passing vehicles. Dash cam shows this.

NHTSA ODI #11644974

Mileage unknown · Sep 13, 2024
StructureUnknown Or Other

Severe frame rot on driver’s side of vehicle just forward of rear wheel. Rear control arm bolt support location has rusted away. Discovered August 5, 2024 when up on lift for a tire rotation. Garage advised vehicle unsafe to drive. Vehicle has 96,374 miles and is out of warranty. However, Honda issued a recall on 2007-2011 CRVs…

Read full complaint

Severe frame rot on driver’s side of vehicle just forward of rear wheel. Rear control arm bolt support location has rusted away. Discovered August 5, 2024 when up on lift for a tire rotation. Garage advised vehicle unsafe to drive. Vehicle has 96,374 miles and is out of warranty. However, Honda issued a recall on 2007-2011 CRVs for same situation where vehicles were repaired or bought back. Vehicle has been inspected by 2 private garages, a Honda dealer, and a Honda collision center to assess repair options. We have been told not to drive the vehicle. I understand the warranty has expired however a failure could result in loss of control and a repair quote from a Honda collision center is $5,871.63. If the vehicle were in an accident insurance company would total it, per Arbella. Instead, we are left to spend more than 2/3 of its trade in value to repair it. It seems that the CRV frame issue was not limited to the 2007-2011 model years, and I believe we should receive consideration from Honda to repair or buy back the for a vehicle. It would appear more CRVs should be inspected for unsafe frame rot, and Honda should be held accountable for a design that does not let road salt and moisture drain.

NHTSA ODI #11614475

Mileage unknown · Sep 8, 2024
Unknown Or Other

After getting my car service at the dealer, I notice my horn didn't Chirp and my lights didn't flash when I locked my doors. Upon investigating this, I noticed my hood was ajar. It was down to what I would call the safety latch. When I fully closed the hood, everything worked fine. I realized then that I had just driven 20 miles…

Read full complaint

After getting my car service at the dealer, I notice my horn didn't Chirp and my lights didn't flash when I locked my doors. Upon investigating this, I noticed my hood was ajar. It was down to what I would call the safety latch. When I fully closed the hood, everything worked fine. I realized then that I had just driven 20 miles at 70 MPH. If the hood had flown up at that speed it would have been catastrophic. I checked to see if there was a warning light to warn that the hood is ajar but there is not. There are warning lights that a door is ajar and the rear hatch is ajar but not the Hood. Since my horn chirp and my light flash didn't work, apparently the car knows the hood is ajar but there is not warning light. I think there should be. thank you [XXX] [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ODI #11613354

Mileage unknown · Feb 11, 2023
Unknown Or OtherCrash

On February 5, I was parking my vehicle in a parking lot space. The vehicle lurched forward and hit another parked car causing $925 in damages to that car. I put it into Park and then Reverse and it lurched backwards. I did not have any control over the car. I took it to the North Shore Honda dealer in Glen Head, NY and they wer…

Read full complaint

On February 5, I was parking my vehicle in a parking lot space. The vehicle lurched forward and hit another parked car causing $925 in damages to that car. I put it into Park and then Reverse and it lurched backwards. I did not have any control over the car. I took it to the North Shore Honda dealer in Glen Head, NY and they were unable to find anything wrong but I know there is a problem and I am very nervous driving the car. There were no warning lamps before or after the incident. I have read on the internet of other people experiencing uncontrolled acceleration of their vehicle.

NHTSA ODI #11506769

Mileage unknown · Jul 3, 2022
Unknown Or Other

For the past few months my car vibrates whenever i decrease in speed or change to lower gears. The whole car vibrates. I have brought it to the dealer recently and they advised of faulty transmission after i paid for diagnostic /inspection. There has also been several incidents where the car has been stuck in park. It even happe…

Read full complaint

For the past few months my car vibrates whenever i decrease in speed or change to lower gears. The whole car vibrates. I have brought it to the dealer recently and they advised of faulty transmission after i paid for diagnostic /inspection. There has also been several incidents where the car has been stuck in park. It even happened when i placed the car in park while at a stoplight.

NHTSA ODI #11472190

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

Mileage unknown · Oct 27, 2021
Power TrainUnknown Or Other

It’s vibrating while accelerating at low speeds between 20mph till 40mph the shaking is horrible when i went to honda they told me i have to change the fluid but not grantee to fix thus problem

NHTSA ODI #11438440

Mileage unknown · Oct 27, 2021
Unknown Or Other

When I slowed down when approaching a stop sign the engine revved up high. I was able to stop by braking but eventually had to turn off the engine and luckily when restarting it ran normally.

NHTSA ODI #11438305

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