← 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

Unknown Or Other complaints

108 reports
Clear category filter
71,000 miles · Nov 29, 2017
EngineUnknown Or Other

AT COLD START-UP, THE ENGINE RATTLES LOUDLY FOR ABOUT 2 SECONDS. THIS ONLY OCCURS ON THE FIRST START OF THE DAY. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE DOT HONDA SERVICE BULLETIN SB-10041669-6712 HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE OCTOBER 6,2012 AND THEREFOR ONLY COVERS HONDA CR-V'S UP UNTIL 2012. THIS ISSUE IS EASILY FOUND ON HONDA FORUMS SUCH AS H…

Read full complaint

AT COLD START-UP, THE ENGINE RATTLES LOUDLY FOR ABOUT 2 SECONDS. THIS ONLY OCCURS ON THE FIRST START OF THE DAY. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE DOT HONDA SERVICE BULLETIN SB-10041669-6712 HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE OCTOBER 6,2012 AND THEREFOR ONLY COVERS HONDA CR-V'S UP UNTIL 2012. THIS ISSUE IS EASILY FOUND ON HONDA FORUMS SUCH AS HONDAPROBLEMS.COM AND MULTIPLE TIMES HERE: HTTPS://HONDA-TECH.COM/FORUMS/HONDA-ELEMENT-CR-V-156/2014-CR-V-GRINDING-NOISE-START-UP-3228595/ 5 YEARS FOR A SERVICE BULLETIN UPDATE IS SIMPLY IRRESPONSIBLE PROBLEM MANAGEMENT ON HONDA'S BEHALF. THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE IS READILY AVAILABLE FROM MANY CR-V OWNERS ON FORUMS, NOT TO MENTION THE LARGE AMOUNT OF COMPLAINTS DIRECTLY ON THE NHTSA WEBSITE. CORRECT THIS ISSUE AND TAKE ACTION.

NHTSA ODI #11051257

10,000 miles · Nov 13, 2017
Unknown Or Other

TIRE PRESSURE MONITORING CONSTANTLY GOES ON WHEN TIRES ARE GOOD.

NHTSA ODI #11045854

Mileage unknown · Sep 7, 2017
Unknown Or OtherWheels

TIRE PRESSURE WARNING LIGHT COMES ON WHEN PRESSURE IS FINE AND/OR COMES BACK ON AFTER RECALIBRATION AND CORRECT PRESSURE IN TIRES IN CONFIRMED. HAS DONE THIS FOR 3 YEARS, INTERMITTENTLY. HONDA WON'T DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY CAN'T REPLICATE IT.

NHTSA ODI #11022156

Mileage unknown · Sep 7, 2017
EngineUnknown Or Other

CAR HAS A LOUD RATTLE OR GRINDING SOUND ON A COLD STARTUP. LAST A COUPLE OF SECONDS THEN GOES AWAY. HAS DONE THIS FOR 3 YEARS, SINCE I GOT IT.

NHTSA ODI #11022148

Mileage unknown · Sep 7, 2017
StructureUnknown Or Other

AIR IS GETTING INTO THE PASSENGER SIDE PROBABLY THROUGH DEFECTIVE WINDOW SEAL. MAY BE DOOR GLASS SEPARATION FROM REGULATOR. HAS BEEN THIS WAY FOR THREE YEARS. HONDA WON'T DEAL WITH IT.

NHTSA ODI #11022146

Mileage unknown · Sep 7, 2017
Power TrainUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed Control

CAR HESITATES AND THEN MAY SURGE ON ACCELERATION, ESPECIALLY FROM FULL STOP, ROLLING STOP, OR LOW SPEED, AS IN HIGHWAY MERGING. I SUSPECT THE TRANSMISSION. IT IS INTERMITTENT, AT LEAST SEVERAL TIMES/WEEK FROM 2014-2017. HONDA WON'T ADDRESS IT BECAUSE THEY SAY THEY CAN'T REPLICATE IT.

NHTSA ODI #11022145

48,000 miles · Aug 21, 2017
Unknown Or Other

WITHIN THE LAST 5 TO 6 MONTHS, MY VEHICLE KEEPS CUTTING OFF. I WOULD NEED TO GET SOMEONE TO JUMP ME. THE BATTERY WAS CHECKED AND THE STARTER AND ALTERNATOR. A NEW STATER WAS PUT IN ON LAST FRIDAY AND SUNDAY IT DID THE EXACT SAME THING. I NEEDED A JUMP BUT IT WOULD ONLY JUMP AFTER SITTING FOR AN HOUR OR SO. MY VEHICLE IS NOW IN…

Read full complaint

WITHIN THE LAST 5 TO 6 MONTHS, MY VEHICLE KEEPS CUTTING OFF. I WOULD NEED TO GET SOMEONE TO JUMP ME. THE BATTERY WAS CHECKED AND THE STARTER AND ALTERNATOR. A NEW STATER WAS PUT IN ON LAST FRIDAY AND SUNDAY IT DID THE EXACT SAME THING. I NEEDED A JUMP BUT IT WOULD ONLY JUMP AFTER SITTING FOR AN HOUR OR SO. MY VEHICLE IS NOW IN THE SHOP AGAIN DUE TO THE SAME ISSUES. I'M A WIDOW AND I DONT KNOW MUCH ABOUT CARS BUT I KNOW THIS PROBLEM SHOULDN'T BE HAPPENING SO FREQUENTLY.

NHTSA ODI #11016489

Mileage unknown · Aug 14, 2017
EngineUnknown Or Other

THIS PRESENT DAY MY CAR MAKES A SREAMING NOISE LIKE BELT IS BAD THEY CHANGED THE BELT THE ALTERNATOR AND SOMETHING ELSE AND THEY CAN NOT FIND THE PROBLEM. I ASKED FOR A 2017 WHEN I CAME IN TO BUY A VEHICLE THE DEALER INSISTED ON ME GETTING THIS 2014 WHEN I ASKED MULTIPUL TIMES FOR A 2017 HE SAID THIS IS A GOOD DEAL. THE FIRST DA…

Read full complaint

THIS PRESENT DAY MY CAR MAKES A SREAMING NOISE LIKE BELT IS BAD THEY CHANGED THE BELT THE ALTERNATOR AND SOMETHING ELSE AND THEY CAN NOT FIND THE PROBLEM. I ASKED FOR A 2017 WHEN I CAME IN TO BUY A VEHICLE THE DEALER INSISTED ON ME GETTING THIS 2014 WHEN I ASKED MULTIPUL TIMES FOR A 2017 HE SAID THIS IS A GOOD DEAL. THE FIRST DAY I GOT IT 6/16/2017 THE VIBARTION WAS BAD I HAD TO BRING IT BACK 6/17/2107 THEY HAD IT 4 DAYS. I PICKED IT UP AND ON THE SAME DAY THE LIGHTS WERE DIMMING. SAT MOORNING I REPORTED THE ISSUE. 3PM I GOT IN THE VEHICLE TO CHANGE MY SHIFT AT WORK IT WOULD NOT START. THE MAN WHO CAME TO TOW IT COULD NOT START IT ON ARIVIAL. MON 6/22/2017 I CAME IN AND DEMANDED A NEW CAR LIKE I REQUESTED WHEN I CAME IN BECAUSE THIS VEHICLE WAS HAVING TO MANY PROBLEMS FOR ME TO BE PAYING $25,643. THE DEALER WANTED TO GIVE ME 1,000 LESS THAN I PAID FOR IT AND CHARGE ME $32,300 FOR A HONDA CRV LX 4WD THATS MARKED 27,285 ONLINE. I REFUSED TO PAY THAT AND FELT LIKE I AM BEING CHEATED. HE SAID THE PROBLEM COULD BE MINOR LET THEM FIX IT. I AM PAYING $25,643 FOR THIS CAR AND ITS BEEN IN THE SHOP 3XS WITHIN 2 MONTHS. THEY WANT ME TO KEEP THIS CAR AND I KEEP REQUESTING A 2017 BECAUSE THATS WHAT I CAME IN FOR AND THE DEALER SAT BACK IN HIS CHAIR AND KEAP TELLING ME THE 2014 HONDA EXL IS A GOOD DEAL AND DID NOT SHOW ME THE 2017 HE WANTED ME TO GET THE 2014 HONDA CRV EXL WHEN I WANTED A 2017 LX SPECIAL ADITION 4WD. I ADMIT IT IS A NICE VEHICLE BUT IT HAS TOO MANY PROBLEMS AND I WANT MY MONEY BACK AND GET THE 2017 LX CRV I REQUESTED AND I WANT A DIFFERENT DEAL THATS NOT GOING TO CHEAT ME OUT OF MY MONEY. SOUTH HILLS WAS HONEST THEY WAS GIVING ME 2017 FOR 400 AMONTH AT $27,285 WHEN MY CREDIT CAME UP AND AT THE TIME IT DID IT WAS FAIR

NHTSA ODI #11015031

36,000 miles · Jul 26, 2017
Unknown Or Other

ON THE MORNING OF JULY 25TH, 2017, I OBSERVED A PROBLEM WITH THE REAR WINDOW IN MY 2014 HONDA CRV . UNLOCKING AND OPENING THE DRIVER'S DOOR TO PUT SOMETHING IN AND THEN CLOSING THE DOOR, I HEARD A LOUD CRUNCHING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF THE CAR. THE DRIVER'S DOOR WAS OPENED AGAIN AND I GOT INTO THE CAR AND SHUT THE DOOR. AG…

Read full complaint

ON THE MORNING OF JULY 25TH, 2017, I OBSERVED A PROBLEM WITH THE REAR WINDOW IN MY 2014 HONDA CRV . UNLOCKING AND OPENING THE DRIVER'S DOOR TO PUT SOMETHING IN AND THEN CLOSING THE DOOR, I HEARD A LOUD CRUNCHING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF THE CAR. THE DRIVER'S DOOR WAS OPENED AGAIN AND I GOT INTO THE CAR AND SHUT THE DOOR. AGAIN THE SAME CRUNCHING NOISE WAS HEARD. LOOKING IN THE REAR-VIEW MIRROR, I OBSERVED THE REAR WINDOW HAD SHATTERED INTO A "MILLION" PIECES. THE NOISE THAT WAS HEARD WAS THE PIECES OF GLASS DROPPING OUT OF THE WINDOW. IN ADDITION TO THE GLASS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WINDOW THAT WAS DROPPING OUT, I OBSERVED THE EDGES AROUND THE GLASS WERE ALSO MISSING (HAD FALLEN OUT). I AM THE ONLY DRIVER OF THE CAR AND DO NOT REMEMBER ANYTHING HITTING THE WINDOW FROM THE OUTSIDE OR INSIDE. ALL THE DOORS HAD BEEN LOCKED SO IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ATTEMPTED BURGLARY. IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE GLASS SHATTERED AND IMPLODED DUE TO DEFECTIVE GLASS MANUFACTURING AND/OR INSTALLATION. THE TEMPERATURES IN OUR AREA CAN REACH 100 DURING THE DAY AND DOWN TO 65 DURING THE NIGHT.

NHTSA ODI #11010664

35,675 miles · Jul 17, 2017
Unknown Or Other

I HAVE OWNED 2014 CR-V FOR 3 & HALF YEARS SINCE IT WAS NEW. THE INDIRECT TPMS WARNING SYSTEM HAS NEVER BEEN CORRECT, IT ALWAYS GIVES FALSE READINGS. WHEN I PICKED UP A NAIL IN ONE TIRE, THE WARNING LIGHT NEVER CAME ON EVEN THOUGH THE TIRE PRESSURE DROPPED BY OVER 50%. WHEN THE WARNING LIGHT DOES COME ON, I CHECK ALL TIRES AND TH…

Read full complaint

I HAVE OWNED 2014 CR-V FOR 3 & HALF YEARS SINCE IT WAS NEW. THE INDIRECT TPMS WARNING SYSTEM HAS NEVER BEEN CORRECT, IT ALWAYS GIVES FALSE READINGS. WHEN I PICKED UP A NAIL IN ONE TIRE, THE WARNING LIGHT NEVER CAME ON EVEN THOUGH THE TIRE PRESSURE DROPPED BY OVER 50%. WHEN THE WARNING LIGHT DOES COME ON, I CHECK ALL TIRES AND THEY ARE ALL FINE - EVERY TIME. AFTER MULTIPLE FRUSTRATING TRIPS TO DEALER, THE BEST THEY COULD DO WAS A SOFTWARE UPDATE. NOW INSTEAD OF FALSE WARNINGS 3 -4 TIMES A MONTH, NOW I GET FALSE WARNINGS 3 - 4 TIMES A YEAR. BUT THE WARNINGS ARE ALWAYS FALSE! LIKE THE LITTLE BOY THAT KEEPS CRYING WOLF, THIS SYSTEM IS COUNTER PRODUCTIVE IN THAT OWNERS WILL BEGIN TO IGNORE THE WARNING SYSTEM ALTOGETHER.

NHTSA ODI #11006053

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