← New search

2014 Honda CR-V

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2014 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

396 reports with mileage · 191 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 190 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 77 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 68 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

36 crash reports7 fire reports22 injury reports

Exterior Lighting complaints

21 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Oct 16, 2015
Exterior LightingSeatsSteering

THE DESIGN IS DETRIMENTAL TO A SHORT PERSON'S (62 INCH & UNDER) SAFETY. THE STARRING DOES NOT GO DOWN FAR ENOUGH FOR THE DRIVER TO SEE THE ROAD. ALSO THE DRIVER SEAT IS TILTED AWAY FROM STARRING WHEEL. THE HEADLIGHT BEAM ENDS BEFORE THE DRIVER CAN SEE THE ROAD. I COMPLAINED BUT THEY DID NOT TAKE ANY ACTION TO EVEN CHECK. IF THE…

Read full complaint

THE DESIGN IS DETRIMENTAL TO A SHORT PERSON'S (62 INCH & UNDER) SAFETY. THE STARRING DOES NOT GO DOWN FAR ENOUGH FOR THE DRIVER TO SEE THE ROAD. ALSO THE DRIVER SEAT IS TILTED AWAY FROM STARRING WHEEL. THE HEADLIGHT BEAM ENDS BEFORE THE DRIVER CAN SEE THE ROAD. I COMPLAINED BUT THEY DID NOT TAKE ANY ACTION TO EVEN CHECK. IF THE STARRING WHEEL CAN BE PUSHED FURTHER DOWN AND THE LENGTH OF THE HEADLIGHT BEAM COULD BE EXTENDED FURTHER THE DRIVER WOULD NOT SEE A DARK ROAD AHEAD OF HIM/HER. IT IS A CRASH WAITING TO HAPPEN. PLEASE REVIEW THIS . I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. HONDA, AS USUAL, DOES NOT ADMIT AND FIX THE SAFETY ISSUES BROUGHT TO THEM.

NHTSA ODI #10783047

570 miles · May 21, 2015
EngineExterior LightingWheels

I WILL ALWAYS READ THIS SIGHT BEFORE BUYING ANOTHER CAR. I HAVE HAD CRV 2014 18 MONTHS AND BEGAN PROBLEMS AFTER 2 WEEKS. TPMS LIGHT KEEPS COMING ON EVERY FEW WEEKS. LOW BEAM LIGHTS ARE BAD AND HIGH BEAMS ARE RIDICULOUSLY TOO FAR AHEAD AND CAN'T SEE RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU. THE HEAD REST LEANS SO FAR FORWARD ITS UNCOMFORTABLE A…

Read full complaint

I WILL ALWAYS READ THIS SIGHT BEFORE BUYING ANOTHER CAR. I HAVE HAD CRV 2014 18 MONTHS AND BEGAN PROBLEMS AFTER 2 WEEKS. TPMS LIGHT KEEPS COMING ON EVERY FEW WEEKS. LOW BEAM LIGHTS ARE BAD AND HIGH BEAMS ARE RIDICULOUSLY TOO FAR AHEAD AND CAN'T SEE RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU. THE HEAD REST LEANS SO FAR FORWARD ITS UNCOMFORTABLE AND AWKWARD. MY ENGINE MAKES A TERRIBLE GRINDING SOUND WHEN STARTING THE CAR. AFTER READING ALL THE OTHER COMPLAINTS, I CONSIDER MYSELF FORTUNATE I HAVEN'T HAD ACCELERATION UPON APPLYING THE BRAKES OR NO THROTTLE WHEN TRYING TO ACCELERATE. I WILL BE CAUTIOUS OF THOSE PROBLEMS NOW SINCE I'VE HAD SO MANY OF THE OTHERS LISTED HERE.

NHTSA ODI #10717759

15 miles · Mar 25, 2015
Exterior Lighting

BOTH THE LOW AND HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHTS ON THIS BRAND NEW CAR ARE VERY DIM. THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE. THE DEALER WILL NOT FIX THE PROBLEM. THEY SUGGESTED I COULD PUT AFTERMARKET REPLACEMENTS ON AS HONDA DOES NOT HAVE BETTER HEADLIGHTS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10701799

100 miles · Mar 11, 2015
Exterior Lighting

THE HEADLIGHTS ARE SO DIM THAT MY FAMILY FEEL VERY UNSAFE DRIVING DURING NIGHT. WE ALMOST HIT DEER AND PEDESTRIANS. THE HEADLIGHTS ARE VERY UNSAFE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10693527

118 miles · Jan 14, 2015
Exterior Lighting

IT WAS THE FIRST TIME I DROVE MY BRAND NEW CR-V AT NIGHT AND THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS WERE SO LOW THAT I COULDN'T EVEN TELL THAT THEY WERE ON. IT MADE IT VERY DANGEROUS TO DRIVE ON SUBURBAN STREETS WHERE THERE ARE INADEQUATE STREET LIGHTING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10672509

1,200 miles · Nov 17, 2014
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 HONDA CR-V. WHILE TRAVELING VARIOUS SPEEDS IN THE EVENING HOURS, THE VISIBILITY WAS EXTREMELY LOW WITH THE USE OF THE LOW BEAM AND HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHTS. THE CONTACT REPORTED THE SAFETY CONCERN TO THE AUTHORIZED DEALER MORE THAN ONCE AND THEY PROVIDED NO REMEDY. THE CONTACT CHANGED THE BULB FOR THE LOW…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 HONDA CR-V. WHILE TRAVELING VARIOUS SPEEDS IN THE EVENING HOURS, THE VISIBILITY WAS EXTREMELY LOW WITH THE USE OF THE LOW BEAM AND HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHTS. THE CONTACT REPORTED THE SAFETY CONCERN TO THE AUTHORIZED DEALER MORE THAN ONCE AND THEY PROVIDED NO REMEDY. THE CONTACT CHANGED THE BULB FOR THE LOW BEAM, WHICH FAILED TO INCREASE VISIBILITY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 1,200.

NHTSA ODI #10655381

400 miles · Nov 14, 2014
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 HONDA CR-V. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE HEADLIGHTS WERE DIM AND RESTRICTED THE CONTACT'S VISIBILITY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 400.

NHTSA ODI #10655021

60 miles · Aug 4, 2014
Exterior Lighting

WANT TO REPORT THE SERIOUS AND DANGEROUS DEFICIENCY IN THE HEADLIGHTS ON OUR NEWLY PURCHASED '14 HONDA CRV. ON LOW BEAM, THE RANGE OF LIGHTING IS LIMITED TO DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE WITH A DEFINED CUT-OFF LINE. ON HIGH BEAM, IT IS DIFFICULT TO ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. WE HAVE TAKEN THE V…

Read full complaint

WANT TO REPORT THE SERIOUS AND DANGEROUS DEFICIENCY IN THE HEADLIGHTS ON OUR NEWLY PURCHASED '14 HONDA CRV. ON LOW BEAM, THE RANGE OF LIGHTING IS LIMITED TO DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE WITH A DEFINED CUT-OFF LINE. ON HIGH BEAM, IT IS DIFFICULT TO ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. WE HAVE TAKEN THE VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE PURCHASED AND REPORTED THIS WAS DANGEROUS AND WAS GOING TO CAUSE A SERIOUS ACCIDENT. THEY INDICATED THE HEADLIGHTS WERE FIXED AND THAT IT WAS A DESIGN ISSUE. THIS IS DANGEROUS AND IS GOING TO RESULT IN SERIOUS ACCIDENTS IF NOT RESOLVED SOON. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10618856

4,700 miles · Aug 2, 2014
Exterior Lighting

WITH GREATER EXPERIENCE WITH THE VEHICLE SINCE MY LAST REPORT, I AM WRITING TO REITERATE HOW EXTREMELY DEFICIENT THE HEADLIGHTS ON THIS VEHICLE ARE. IN UNLIT, RURAL AREAS, THE LOW BEAMS ARE INADEQUATE AND REQUIRE THE USE OF FOG LIGHTS ON ALL THE TIME FOR INCREASED ILLUMINATION. WHEN THE HIGH-BEAMS ARE ENGAGED (FOG-LIGHTS AUTOM…

Read full complaint

WITH GREATER EXPERIENCE WITH THE VEHICLE SINCE MY LAST REPORT, I AM WRITING TO REITERATE HOW EXTREMELY DEFICIENT THE HEADLIGHTS ON THIS VEHICLE ARE. IN UNLIT, RURAL AREAS, THE LOW BEAMS ARE INADEQUATE AND REQUIRE THE USE OF FOG LIGHTS ON ALL THE TIME FOR INCREASED ILLUMINATION. WHEN THE HIGH-BEAMS ARE ENGAGED (FOG-LIGHTS AUTOMATICALLY GO OUT), NEAR-FIELD ILLUMINATION VIRTUALLY DISAPPEARS. I HAVE WRITTEN DIRECTLY TO THE CEO OF AMERICAN HONDA, AND INCLUDED PRINT-OUTS OF NUMEROUS REPORTS OF THIS CONCERN WHICH ARE WIDELY POSTED ON THE INTERNET. I SUBSEQUENTLY RECEIVED A PHONE CALL FROM A REGIONAL CUSTOMER SERVICE REP. INSTRUCTING ME TO TAKE THIS UP WITH A DEALER. I HAVE NOW DONE SO AND THE DEALER REPORTS THIS PERFORMANCE IS "NORMAL" FOR THIS CAR. I IMPLORE YOUR AGENCY TO UNDERTAKE AN INVESTIGATION SO THAT TRAGEDIES TO NOT HAVE TO OCCUR FIRST BEFORE ANY ACTION IS TAKEN BY THE COMPANY. IN THE MEANTIME, I FIND MYSELF ADJUSTING TRAVEL PLANS AND DRIVING TIMES FOR THE SAKE OF THE SAFETY OF MY FAMILY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10618312

350 miles · May 26, 2014
Exterior Lighting

GREETINGS - THIS IS TO REPORT MULTIPLE INCIDENTS / A PERMANENT CONDITION OF THE VEHICLE HEADLIGHTS BEING GROSSLY INADEQUATE. THE INCIDENT INDICATED HERE WAS FIRST OF MANY OCCURRENCE WHILE DRIVING ON RURAL ROADS, ESPECIALLY IN INCLEMENT WEATHER. MOST EGREGIOUS IS THAT WHEN THE HIGH BEAMS ARE ENGAGED , THERE IS A COMPLETE LOSS…

Read full complaint

GREETINGS - THIS IS TO REPORT MULTIPLE INCIDENTS / A PERMANENT CONDITION OF THE VEHICLE HEADLIGHTS BEING GROSSLY INADEQUATE. THE INCIDENT INDICATED HERE WAS FIRST OF MANY OCCURRENCE WHILE DRIVING ON RURAL ROADS, ESPECIALLY IN INCLEMENT WEATHER. MOST EGREGIOUS IS THAT WHEN THE HIGH BEAMS ARE ENGAGED , THERE IS A COMPLETE LOSS OF NEAR -FIELD LUMINANCE. THIS IS GREATLY EXACERBATED IN INCLEMENT WEATHER AND UNDOUBTEDLY A DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN IF IT HASN'T ALREADY. I HAVE DRIVEN ON THE SAME ROADS AND IN THE SAME OR WORSE CONDITIONS MANY TIMES WITH VEHICLES I HAVE PREVIOUSLY OWNED WITH FAR LESS PROBLEMATIC VISIBILITY. REGULAR LOW-BEAM ACTIVITY IS INADEQUATE AS WELL ON UNLIT OR LOW-LIT ROADS. ON MAY 26TH I WAS IN RURAL AREA THAT I HAVE BEEN DRIVING IN FOR 15 YEARS FOR THE FIRST TIME AFTER DARK IN THIS VEHICLE. THE LACK OF VISIBILITY WAS SHOCKING. THE FEAR OF A DEER OR OTHER ANIMAL CROSSING THE VEHICLE'S PATH UNSEEN WAS GO TREMENDOUS CONCERN. THIS IS A WIDELY REPORTED ISSUE ON INTERNET FORUMS AND A RECALL SHOULD BE DEMANDED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10594023

Official recalls

1

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.

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