NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Power Train complaints
68 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Dec 22, 2025
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
I own a 2014 Honda CR-V. Since around November 2022 I have repeatedly experienced an intermittent “bounce” or shudder when accelerating, especially around 20–25 mph and sometimes at higher speeds (around 45 mph and above). The vehicle feels like it briefly loses power or slips before catching again, and the check-engine light ha…
Read full complaint
I own a 2014 Honda CR-V. Since around November 2022 I have repeatedly experienced an intermittent “bounce” or shudder when accelerating, especially around 20–25 mph and sometimes at higher speeds (around 45 mph and above). The vehicle feels like it briefly loses power or slips before catching again, and the check-engine light has come on and off during this period. I took the vehicle to Stockton Honda (CA) multiple times and consistently reported this bounce/shudder on take-off. Each time, the focus was on brakes, rotors, tires, or other maintenance items. I was never told there might be an engine or timing-chain issue or that the vehicle could be unsafe to drive. The bounce/shudder never went away. I have also been involved in multiple low-speed collisions while taking off from a stop in the past few years, and I am concerned that this hesitation/loss of power may have contributed. In late 2025, Honda of Elk Grove performed a full diagnostic, retrieved a P031 code, and told me the most likely cause is a timing-chain problem. I was advised that the vehicle is not recommended to be driven until the timing chain is replaced because the engine could be severely damaged or fail while driving. The technician refused to take the car on the freeway due to safety concerns. I am submitting this complaint so NHTSA is aware that a possible timing-chain defect or failure in 2014 Honda CR-V vehicles can present as a bounce/shudder at low speeds during acceleration, with potential loss of power and increased risk of rear-end collisions, and that this condition may be missed or misdiagnosed by dealers for an extended period.
NHTSA ODI #11706439
Mileage unknown · May 26, 2024
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
Purchased our 2014 CR-V [XXX], used one owner, 55301 mileage. Very little driving the next three years due to the pandemic. Summer of 2023 we were driving from Buffalo to [XXX] , first 30 miles, severe hesitation, amber lights on, until reaching 70mph. Hesitation stopped but lights stayed on. By August the TPMS indicator, malfu…
Read full complaint
Purchased our 2014 CR-V [XXX], used one owner, 55301 mileage. Very little driving the next three years due to the pandemic. Summer of 2023 we were driving from Buffalo to [XXX] , first 30 miles, severe hesitation, amber lights on, until reaching 70mph. Hesitation stopped but lights stayed on. By August the TPMS indicator, malfunction indicator lamp and other lights came on, again. We reset according to the manual, but this was just the beginning of this process happening over and over again. During dealer testing Code PO 341 came up. Had it tested at another place before taking it to West Herr Honda and was told needed Timing chain replacement with VTC. This was done at a cost of $2232.06 with car mileage of 63159. We were sad and disappointed. Research shows that Honda is very much aware of over 500 plus recorded problems with the 2014 CR-V not to mention unreported problems. The model should be recalled before lives are lost. Car still hesitates but evidently due to a different problem. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA ODI #11590814
Mileage unknown · Feb 28, 2024
Power Train
There is a known issue with 2014 Honda CRV torque converters. My car has always had a funky shift which Honda told me it was just the new CVT transmission. Then back in August my mother drive my car and said that was not correct. I took it to Honda and they said it was the torque converter. It is causing my vehicle to become und…
Read full complaint
There is a known issue with 2014 Honda CRV torque converters. My car has always had a funky shift which Honda told me it was just the new CVT transmission. Then back in August my mother drive my car and said that was not correct. I took it to Honda and they said it was the torque converter. It is causing my vehicle to become undrivable with out feeling safe. It judders, shakes and doesn't shift properly. I contacted Honda and they acknowledge that it is a known issue with their CVT transmission. They currently have 1200 orders for torque converters on back order that shows you how much of an issue that this is.
NHTSA ODI #11574467
Mileage unknown · Dec 21, 2023
EnginePower Train
For over a year now, my Honda CRV 2014 has been producing a rattling noise from the engine on every cold startup. This happens regardless of the temperature outside. When I initially heard it, it was sporadic, again, on cold startup - so the rattling didn't occur every time. Over time though, it will occur every morning, or a…
Read full complaint
For over a year now, my Honda CRV 2014 has been producing a rattling noise from the engine on every cold startup. This happens regardless of the temperature outside. When I initially heard it, it was sporadic, again, on cold startup - so the rattling didn't occur every time. Over time though, it will occur every morning, or after the car has been sittinwith the engine off for at least a few hours. I asked a mechanic to look at it after a few months after I had first heard it, because it continued to happen, even periodically. As it only happened on cold startup, I could not reproduce it for the mechanic - he could not find any obvious issue. After a few more months, I recorded the issue on video (and audio). The same mechanic said it may be the VTC actuator. I had another mechanic look at the same video, and he said it was almost certainly the VTC actuator. He said Honda had recalled the vehicle because of the VTC actuator issue and sent me a link to a webpage with the information. It turns out it was only a technical bulletin rather than a recall. I called a Honda dealership and provided them information about the issue. They asked for my VIN and told me there was no recall after searching my VIN. After some discussion with them, wherein I referenced the technical bulletin and inquired if Honda would provide a replacement for the known issue, the representative said since it wasn't recalled, they could only diagnose and repair at full cost. After I continued to press the issue, she asked if I wanted the telephone number for Honda corporate, so I could send them my complaint. I have no yet taken my car in for repair, as the cost will be very expensive. I don't understand why Honda has not recalled the vehicles over this issue, given the fact that it is an issue they have admitted to, and it apparently is a potentially dangerous and life-threatening issue.
NHTSA ODI #11561307
Mileage unknown · Oct 20, 2023
Power Train
Known Honda issue- tsb a15-086 Software update and trans fluid change in 2018 due to car juddering with light acceleration, did not fix problem. 10/20/23 car was road tested and concern was present. Needs new torque converter to fix original concern
NHTSA ODI #11550987
Mileage unknown · Aug 19, 2023
Power Train
Transmission shudders at speeds between 20-30 mph.
NHTSA ODI #11539558
Mileage unknown · Jun 22, 2023
Power Train
At around 70,000 miles vehicle started to shudder when accelerating lightly between 20-35MPH. The problem would occur intermittently. This has been getting steadily worse with age and milage. At present the vehicle has 85,000 miles and the shuddering occurs to some degree with each take-off from standing start between 20-40MPH. …
Read full complaint
At around 70,000 miles vehicle started to shudder when accelerating lightly between 20-35MPH. The problem would occur intermittently. This has been getting steadily worse with age and milage. At present the vehicle has 85,000 miles and the shuddering occurs to some degree with each take-off from standing start between 20-40MPH. I changed the transmission fluid with the OEM manufacturer's type, and the problem recurred after a few months. I have not received a recall notice from the manufacturer, or returned the car to the dealer for service.
NHTSA ODI #11528303
Mileage unknown · Jun 14, 2023
Power Train
Drive train is malfunctioning. Safety risk unknown. Vehicle subject to "juddering." Honda Technical Service Bulletin 10-086 dated May 25, 2017 (superseding HSB 15-086 dated August 18, 2016) Entitled "Vibration While Driving Under Light Acceleration" presumably issued to dealers. Dealers were advised to update A/T software "at t…
Read full complaint
Drive train is malfunctioning. Safety risk unknown. Vehicle subject to "juddering." Honda Technical Service Bulletin 10-086 dated May 25, 2017 (superseding HSB 15-086 dated August 18, 2016) Entitled "Vibration While Driving Under Light Acceleration" presumably issued to dealers. Dealers were advised to update A/T software "at the customer's request." Also, transmission fluid to be replaced. I have an appointment with Ide Honda on June 26, 2023 for an assessment of juddering problem. There is no indication in the service records that the A/T software update was ever performed. However, the subject vehicle was sold to the previous owner as a "Honda Certified Pre-Owned" automobile. No warning lamps are showing.
NHTSA ODI #11527070
Mileage unknown · Feb 8, 2023
EnginePower TrainService Brakes
There is a rattling noise coming from the engine area at extreme cold startups since I had the car at 24,000 miles on it. When having the car parked with the emergency brake on at an incline and after leaving it ther for a few days, after I press the release on the brake after starting the car, the emergency brake sticks and …
Read full complaint
There is a rattling noise coming from the engine area at extreme cold startups since I had the car at 24,000 miles on it. When having the car parked with the emergency brake on at an incline and after leaving it ther for a few days, after I press the release on the brake after starting the car, the emergency brake sticks and the car won't move forward when accelerating or backward when releasing the brakes or accelerating. I have to repeatedly press and release the emergency brake to allow the car to release the brake from the wheel for the car to move forward. There is repeatedly a build up of rust on the rear wheels when the car is exposed to humid and wet conditions due to some flaw in the design, and it causes the car the have a loud thumping noise when applying the breaks . I have had to get the rear brakes refinished or shaved down to smooth them out repeatedly.
NHTSA ODI #11506316
Mileage unknown · Jan 6, 2023
Power Train
The contact’s son owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while his son was driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle started shaking abnormally. There was no warning light illuminated. The dealer was notified of the failure and an appointment was scheduled. The vehicle was not diagnosed. The manufacturer was not noti…
Read full complaint
The contact’s son owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while his son was driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle started shaking abnormally. There was no warning light illuminated. The dealer was notified of the failure and an appointment was scheduled. The vehicle was not diagnosed. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was unavailable.
NHTSA ODI #11500424
Official recalls
1Dec 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
2EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
EA19001 · Electrical Overstress
Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect. During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW. The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications. The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU. In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment. FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle. Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW. These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes. An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time. In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU. This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners. Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW. The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation. The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage. There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation. The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU. If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC. Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC. All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled. In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024. With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.