← 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

What owners actually said

382 reports
1,420 miles · Sep 17, 2014
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

WHEN COASTING AT 10 TO 12 MPH, I PRESS LIGHTLY ON ACCELERATOR TO MOVE FORWARD, THERE IS NO REACTION. THE RPM DOES NOT CHANGE, THE CAR CONTINUES AT THE SAME SPEED. I MUST ROCK THE ACCELERATOR HARD TO GET THE CAR TO PICK UP SPEED AND THE CAR WILL LURCH FORWARD IF I GIVE IT TOO MUCH GAS. THIS IS NOT A ONE TIME INCIDENT. IT STARTE…

Read full complaint

WHEN COASTING AT 10 TO 12 MPH, I PRESS LIGHTLY ON ACCELERATOR TO MOVE FORWARD, THERE IS NO REACTION. THE RPM DOES NOT CHANGE, THE CAR CONTINUES AT THE SAME SPEED. I MUST ROCK THE ACCELERATOR HARD TO GET THE CAR TO PICK UP SPEED AND THE CAR WILL LURCH FORWARD IF I GIVE IT TOO MUCH GAS. THIS IS NOT A ONE TIME INCIDENT. IT STARTED AT ABOUT1,400 MILES AND IS PROGRESSIVELY WORSE AT 7,000 MILES. HONDA'S EXPLANATION IS THAT THE TRANSMISSION IS AT A POINT OF WAITING FOR THE COMPUTER TO EITHER DOWN OR UP SHIFT. YET THERE IS NO RPM CHANGE. THIS PROBLEM COULD CREATE AN ACCIDENT. . *TR

NHTSA ODI #10633851

2,500 miles · Sep 12, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control

I BOUGHT THE CAR FROM TONY HONDA BRAND NEW, FROM THE TIME I STARTED DRIVING THE CAR, THE SPEED CONTROL WOULD STALL. IF I WAS DRIVING FOR EXAMPLE AT 60 MPH ONCE I GET TO A HILL, THE SPEED CONTROL WOULD STALL, GO 50 AND PICK UP AGAIN. STALLING IS A DANGEROUS SITUATION IN HIGH TRAFFIC AND HIGH SPEED. I POINTED OUT TO THE DEALER…

Read full complaint

I BOUGHT THE CAR FROM TONY HONDA BRAND NEW, FROM THE TIME I STARTED DRIVING THE CAR, THE SPEED CONTROL WOULD STALL. IF I WAS DRIVING FOR EXAMPLE AT 60 MPH ONCE I GET TO A HILL, THE SPEED CONTROL WOULD STALL, GO 50 AND PICK UP AGAIN. STALLING IS A DANGEROUS SITUATION IN HIGH TRAFFIC AND HIGH SPEED. I POINTED OUT TO THE DEALER THAT THIS WAS A DANGEROUS SITUATION, HE STATED THERE WAS NOTHING HE COULD DO; IT WAS NORMAL FOR HONDA CRV-EX TO STALL. I DISAGREED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10632638

64,000 miles · Aug 28, 2014
Exterior Lighting

I PURCHASED MY 2013 HONDA CR-V NEW ON FEBRUARY 8, 2013. TODAY THE RIGHT SIDE HEADLIGHT WENT OUT. BECAUSE OF A HISTORY OF PROBLEMS WITH HEADLIGHTS ON PREVIOUSLY OWNED CR-VS, I AM NOT LOOKING FORWARD TO WHAT'S AHEAD WITH THE HEADLIGHTS ON THIS CAR. I HAVE OWNED A NEW 1997 CRV, AND A NEW 2006 CRV. IN BOTH PREVIOUS VEHICLES, WHI…

Read full complaint

I PURCHASED MY 2013 HONDA CR-V NEW ON FEBRUARY 8, 2013. TODAY THE RIGHT SIDE HEADLIGHT WENT OUT. BECAUSE OF A HISTORY OF PROBLEMS WITH HEADLIGHTS ON PREVIOUSLY OWNED CR-VS, I AM NOT LOOKING FORWARD TO WHAT'S AHEAD WITH THE HEADLIGHTS ON THIS CAR. I HAVE OWNED A NEW 1997 CRV, AND A NEW 2006 CRV. IN BOTH PREVIOUS VEHICLES, WHICH WERE PURCHASED NEW AND TRADED WITH OVER 250K MILES ON EACH, I HAD RECURRING PROBLEMS WITH HEADLIGHTS CONSTANTLY GOING OUT, OFTEN ONE WITHIN DAYS OF THE OTHER, AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE 2006 CRV, EVERY 3 TO 4 MONTHS. I WENT TO SEVERAL HONDA DEALERSHIPS ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS AND WAS ALWAYS TOLD THAT THERE WAS RECALL OR PERSISTENT PROBLEM. I COMMUTE 120 MILES ROUNDTRIP DAILY FOR WORK, AND I WORK IN A RURAL AREA, COVERING 6 VERY RURAL COUNTIES. SOMETIMES MY HEADLIGHT WOULD GO OUT WHILE I WAS DRIVING ON DARK, 2 LANE RURAL HIGHWAYS. IN THE 2006 VEHICLE, MY HEADLIGHTS WERE GOING OUT SO FREQUENTLY THAT I STARTED BUYING 2 BULBS AT A TIME SO THAT I ALWAYS HAD A BACK UP BULB. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD THAT HONDA HAS APPARENTLY AVOIDED FIXING OVER THE YEARS. I AM AWARE OF THE OWNER BLOGS FOR CRV-S WHERE MANY HONDA CRV OWNERS HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THIS. I HAVE PUT FAMILY MEMBERS ON NOTICE THAT IF I AM INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT IN MY CAR AT NIGHT AND CANNOT SPEAK FOR MYSELF, THEY SHOULD PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO WHETHER MY HEADLIGHTS WERE FUNCTIONING PROPERLY. IN ADDITION, ON THIS 2013 CRV, NEITHER THE LOW BEAM NOR THE HIGH BEAM HEAD LIGHTS SEEM BRIGHT ENOUGH AT NIGHT. ALTHOUGH I LOVE THE CR-V OTHERWISE, BECAUSE OF THIS PERSISTENT PROBLEM WITH THE HEADLIGHTS THAT I BELIEVE HONDA IS AWARE OF AND HAS CHOSEN NOT TO REPAIR, THIS WILL VERY LIKELY BE THE LAST HONDA THAT I PURCHASE. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD, AND I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED IF THERE IS EVENTUALLY A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST HONDA BECAUSE OF THIS PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10629260

5,000 miles · Aug 1, 2014
Suspension

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS AN ABNORMAL NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER BUT WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 5,000.

NHTSA ODI #10618275

21,000 miles · Aug 1, 2014
EngineFuel System, GasolinePower Train

BRAN NEW HONDA CRV PURCHASE MAYBE 13MILES21K MILES LATER AND AFTER A SCHEDULED OIL CHANGE,THE VEHICLE WAS IDLING ROUGHER THAN NORMAL(I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE IN THE VEHICLE, FROM BRAN NEW TILL 21K MILES) THEN WE STARTED LOOSING POWER ON THE TAKEOFF.1 DAY LATER AFTER REACHING 25MPH THE VEHICLE FELT AS THOUGH WE LOST ALL POWER AND TH…

Read full complaint

BRAN NEW HONDA CRV PURCHASE MAYBE 13MILES21K MILES LATER AND AFTER A SCHEDULED OIL CHANGE,THE VEHICLE WAS IDLING ROUGHER THAN NORMAL(I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE IN THE VEHICLE, FROM BRAN NEW TILL 21K MILES) THEN WE STARTED LOOSING POWER ON THE TAKEOFF.1 DAY LATER AFTER REACHING 25MPH THE VEHICLE FELT AS THOUGH WE LOST ALL POWER AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON AND WENT OFF AS QUICK.CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND TOLD THEM EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED AND ALL THEY SAID(IS THE LIGHT STILL ON, WE NEED A LIGHT TO PULL A CODE TO DIAGNOSE IT)TOOK IT IN THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY FOR A LOOKTHEY COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING DUE TO NO LIGHT AND NO MALFUNCTION AT THAT TIME.DAYS LATER THE WIFE TAKING THE DAUGHTER TO SCHOOL PROCEEDED TO MERGE ONTO INTERSTATE DRIVING ABOUT 55MPH.NOT EVEN A MILE ONTO THE INTERSTATE THE VEHICLE SLOWED DOWN LIKE LOSS OF POWER AND SHUT OFF, IN THE MIDDLE OF 2LANE 70MPHA DIESELS SWERVED JUST IN TIME TO MISS SMASHING THE CRV FROM BEHINDWIFE WAS SO SCARED AND MY DAUGHTER WAS SHAKINGTHE WIFE LET IT ROLL OFF THE INTERSTATE ONTO THE SHOULDER AS MUCH AS THE VEHICLE WOULD ALLOW POSSIBLE.TOWED THE VEHICLE INTO DEALERSHIP WITH LIGHT ONTHEY PULLED A CODE THAT TOLD THEM (3RD CYLINDER MISFIRE) THE DEALERSHIP CHANGED THE SPARKPLUG FOR THE 3RD CYLINDER AND WE PICKED IT UPA FEW WEEKS LATER THE VEHICLE DID THE SAME EXACT THING TO AT ONLY FEET FURTHER THAN LAST TIME TRAFFIC NEARLY PILING UP AND COLLIDING WITH ONE ANOTHER TO MISS THE CRV. WIFE AND DAUGHTER SCARED OUT OF THEIR MINDS AND SHAKING UP BAD.TOWED IT INTO DEALERSHIP AND THEY PULLED THE EXACT CODE THE DEALERSHIP CHANGED THE 3RD COIL AND FLASHED THE COMPUTER AND CALLED HONDA TO ASK IF THE RESULTS NEEDED ANY FURTHER FIX. THE MANAGER OF THE DEALERSHIP TOLD ME HONDA SAID" IT IS WITHIN THE RUNNING LIMITS" AND WE PICKED UP THE CRVTILL THIS DAY THE NEW21K MILE HONDA CRV CONTINUES TO SHUTTER,LOSE AC FAN POWER AND DIVE POWER WITH NO CODE TO DATE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10618243

1,420 miles · Jul 25, 2014
EnginePower Train

COASTING AT 10 MPH AND NO PRESSURE ON ACCELERATOR, WHEN I GIVE THE CAR MODERATE GAS THE ENGINE DOES NOT RESPOND UNLESS I ROCK THE ACCELERATOR OR ACCELERATE HARD. I NOW HAVE 6526 MILES ON THE CAR AND A SECOND TRIP TO THE DEALER AND THE PROBLEM IS MORE PRONOUNCED. THE HONDA DEALERS STATEMENT IS THAT THE TRANSMISSION IS WAITING…

Read full complaint

COASTING AT 10 MPH AND NO PRESSURE ON ACCELERATOR, WHEN I GIVE THE CAR MODERATE GAS THE ENGINE DOES NOT RESPOND UNLESS I ROCK THE ACCELERATOR OR ACCELERATE HARD. I NOW HAVE 6526 MILES ON THE CAR AND A SECOND TRIP TO THE DEALER AND THE PROBLEM IS MORE PRONOUNCED. THE HONDA DEALERS STATEMENT IS THAT THE TRANSMISSION IS WAITING FOR THE COMPUTER TO TELL IT TO DOWNSHIFT OR STAY IN PRESENT GEAR AND ACCELERATE AND NOTHING CAN BE DONE TO ELIMINATE THE PROBLEM. IT DOES NOT SHOW UP AS A CODE. THIS COULD BE A PROBLEM FOR NEW OR LESS EXPERIENCED DRIVERS AND CONCEIVABLY CAUSE A DRIVER TO BE REAR ENDER OR HIT A CAR FROM BEHIND... *TR

NHTSA ODI #10616232

112 miles · Jul 3, 2014
Air Bags

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 15 MPH WHEN THE PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THERE WAS NO ONE OCCUPYING THE PASSENGER SEAT DURING THE FAILURE. THE DEALER RESET THE CODES ON THREE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, BUT THE FAILURE CONTINUED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAI…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 15 MPH WHEN THE PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THERE WAS NO ONE OCCUPYING THE PASSENGER SEAT DURING THE FAILURE. THE DEALER RESET THE CODES ON THREE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, BUT THE FAILURE CONTINUED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 112.

NHTSA ODI #10607971

9,671 miles · Jun 27, 2014
Service Brakes

VEHICLE WAS 14 MONTHS OLD AND WAS DRIVEN EVERY 1-2 DAYS. VEHICLE HAD TO BE TOWED TO DEALERSHIP AFTER A CALIPER "FROZE" TO THE RIGHT REAR ROTOR AFTER SITTING OVERNIGHT IN THE GARAGE. DEALER REPORTED THAT ALL FOUR ROTORS WERE HEAVILY OXIDIZED AND KEPT INSISTING THAT THE CAR MUST HAVE BEEN SITTING FOR MANY WEEKS OR MONTHS. DEALER C…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE WAS 14 MONTHS OLD AND WAS DRIVEN EVERY 1-2 DAYS. VEHICLE HAD TO BE TOWED TO DEALERSHIP AFTER A CALIPER "FROZE" TO THE RIGHT REAR ROTOR AFTER SITTING OVERNIGHT IN THE GARAGE. DEALER REPORTED THAT ALL FOUR ROTORS WERE HEAVILY OXIDIZED AND KEPT INSISTING THAT THE CAR MUST HAVE BEEN SITTING FOR MANY WEEKS OR MONTHS. DEALER CLAIMED THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BRAKE PADS AND ONLY RESURFACED THE ROTORS. DEALER REPEATEDLY MADE FALSE CLAIM ABOUT HONDA MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENT THAT THE ROTORS BE CLEANED EVERY YEAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10606582

5,000 miles · May 29, 2014
Suspension

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WOULD BE AN ABNORMAL NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR END OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER TWICE WHERE THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE REPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE F…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 HONDA CR-V. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WOULD BE AN ABNORMAL NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR END OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER TWICE WHERE THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE REPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 5,000.

NHTSA ODI #10594928

200 miles · May 17, 2014
Power Train

ON 4 DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, FROM BEING STOPPED AND MAKING A TURN OR PROCEEDING THROUGH A STOP SIGN, THE CAR HESITATED LONG ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT "I SHOULD BE MOVING BY NOW AND WHAT IS GOING ON", THEN THE CAR WOULD JERK FORWARD. (DIFFERENT DEGREES OF JERKING). FELT LIKE THE TRANSMISSION WAS SLIPPING. BOUGHT THE CAR IN 9-13. IT HA…

Read full complaint

ON 4 DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, FROM BEING STOPPED AND MAKING A TURN OR PROCEEDING THROUGH A STOP SIGN, THE CAR HESITATED LONG ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT "I SHOULD BE MOVING BY NOW AND WHAT IS GOING ON", THEN THE CAR WOULD JERK FORWARD. (DIFFERENT DEGREES OF JERKING). FELT LIKE THE TRANSMISSION WAS SLIPPING. BOUGHT THE CAR IN 9-13. IT HAPPENED 3 TIMES BEFORE THE FIRST OIL CHANGE 1-14. THOUGHT IT WAS ME BECAUSE I WAS REPLACING A 13 YEAR OLD ODYSSEY THAT HAD A BAD TRANSMISSION. INFORMED DEALERSHIP AT FIRST OIL CHANGE AND INSPECTION... WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS NORMAL WHEN DRIVING WITH THE ECON SYSTEM. WHICH TELLS ME THEY ARE COMPLETELY AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. AND THAT THERE WOULD BE NOTHING FOR THEM TO FIND UNLESS THE ENGINE LIGHT HAD COME ON. 4TH TIME WAS IN 5-14. ECON BUTTON WAS OFF AND I WAS TURNING LEFT INTO MY DRIVEWAY. CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND HONDA CORP. WAS TOLD THEY "UNDERSTOOD MY FRUSTRATION" AND WOULD DO WHAT COULD TO FIND OUT THE PROBLEM. DEALERSHIP DROVE THE CAR AND COULDN'T DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND SAID THE CAR IS RUNNING"AS WAS DESIGNED". THAT'S RIGHT...UNTIL IT DOESN'T. THERE ARE COUNTLESS COMPLAINTS ON THE INTERNET OVER MANY YEARS. WAS TOLD BY HONDA THEY DON'T CHECK THE INTERNET. EVEN IF THAT WERE TRUE, WHAT ABOUT THEIR DEALERSHIPS SERVICE CENTERS? IT IS NOT SAFE! MY OLDEST IS A NEW DRIVER. I THOUGHT I WAS BUYING A SAFE CAR. *JS

NHTSA ODI #10592095

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