Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
2130–25K
9325–50K
5550–75K
2175–100K
8100–150K
6150K+
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
What owners actually said
587 reports
Mileage unknown · Feb 3, 2025
Unknown Or Other
On December 23, 2024, I purchased a 2014 Honda CRV. A few days later I noticed that the heating system was not working properly. I called the dealership and told them about the problem. They gave me an appointment with the service department to have the heating system looked at. The diagnosis was that it had a bad heater core.…
Read full complaint
On December 23, 2024, I purchased a 2014 Honda CRV. A few days later I noticed that the heating system was not working properly. I called the dealership and told them about the problem. They gave me an appointment with the service department to have the heating system looked at. The diagnosis was that it had a bad heater core. The service attendant told me that it was a common problem with the 2014 Honda CRVs and also Honda sent out service bulletin (Service bulletin #14063)about the problem. I stated it had only 49,000 miles on this vehicle. How can this be with Honda building reliable cars. They advised me that all it needed was a flushing of the heater core and that it was going to be at my expense and that there would be no absolute guarantee that it would solve the problem. If it did not work, the next step would be to replace the heater core, again at my expense ($1400.00) The flushing did not work at which the heater core was replaced. I don’t understand why this problem was not addressed by the Honda Company. If Honda doesn’t do a recall, at least stand by the Honda name and reimburse the owner for the defective part. Again, 49,000 miles.
NHTSA ODI #11640450
Mileage unknown · Jan 31, 2025
Electrical System
The tailgate door doesn’t open normally sometime I have to push the button more than 10 times then it open but most of the time it doesn’t open.I use this car as a spare or for emergency only so I just wait for Honda to recall, hopefully I don’t want to spend a lot of money to fix because the warranty has expired (41 months but…
Read full complaint
The tailgate door doesn’t open normally sometime I have to push the button more than 10 times then it open but most of the time it doesn’t open.I use this car as a spare or for emergency only so I just wait for Honda to recall, hopefully I don’t want to spend a lot of money to fix because the warranty has expired (41 months but only 25000 miles)but now I use this car every day
NHTSA ODI #11639950
Mileage unknown · Jan 27, 2025
Structure
My tailgate does not open in cold weather. It was been serviced by Honda several times. They said they fixed it and it still does not work so I cannot use my trunk at all in the winter. I have a disability and need to use my trunk for groceries and medical equipment. Now Honda says it is out of warranty and wants to charge me fo…
Read full complaint
My tailgate does not open in cold weather. It was been serviced by Honda several times. They said they fixed it and it still does not work so I cannot use my trunk at all in the winter. I have a disability and need to use my trunk for groceries and medical equipment. Now Honda says it is out of warranty and wants to charge me for something they never actually fixed (Garden State Honda). Please recall and permanently fix this, many people have the same issue.
NHTSA ODI #11638870
Mileage unknown · Nov 18, 2024
Unknown Or Other
Sudden Unintended Acceleration Vehicle has approx 60,700 miles and never a mechanical issue, been extremely reliable. Today [XXX] went shopping in Burlington ,MA (from Watertown, MA) no issues from 7:15AM departure to about 9:05 AM at friend house (XXX).. While parking on part of sidewalk, went into reverse. Then switched to "…
Read full complaint
Sudden Unintended Acceleration Vehicle has approx 60,700 miles and never a mechanical issue, been extremely reliable. Today [XXX] went shopping in Burlington ,MA (from Watertown, MA) no issues from 7:15AM departure to about 9:05 AM at friend house (XXX).. While parking on part of sidewalk, went into reverse. Then switched to "drive" to position vehicle and suddenly had obvious event of sudden unintended acceleration. Put in neutral and hit brake, as I am always on alert for issue based on past events. . Happened one more time a minute later and foot was not on accelerator but on brake as I switched between reverse and Drive. Made a point with wife in passenger seat to assure not on accelerator. Last time issue occurred was on [XXX] and recorded event even to Honda. On 6/13/24 someone called "Walter" called from Honda regarding my recording issues with Honda (5 incidences). As we were going on vacation I told him that he should call me back after 7/17/24 and he said OK, no problem. I never got a call back. Left vehicle with son-in-law who is master mechanic and he checked it while I was away. Cleaned Throttle body and other parts. Seemed to correct it and no problem at all until [XXX]. Am always prepared for a rare repeat event when coming to a stop or at a stop, hand on transmission shift and foot on brake. Problem is that it occurs rarely and no way a dealer or maybe even a Honda rep will pin down the cause as it's not repeatable. Will have son-in-law recheck it before wasting time with dealer or Honda again , neither of who will never find a cause or repeat it while they hold my vehicle. . Note: There are two prior reports from me to NHTSA INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA ODI #11625868
38,000 miles · Oct 16, 2024
Engine
The contact owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while starting the vehicle there was an abnormal sound that was coming from the front of the vehicle. The vehicle was not taken to a dealer or independent mechanic to be diagnosed. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileag…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while starting the vehicle there was an abnormal sound that was coming from the front of the vehicle. The vehicle was not taken to a dealer or independent mechanic to be diagnosed. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 38,000.
NHTSA ODI #11620142
52,032 miles · Sep 18, 2024
Engine
The contact owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated when the vehicle was started, there was a loud rattling sound coming from the vehicle. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or the dealer. The vehicle was scheduled for an upcoming diagnostic test. The contact stated that the failure had been …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2014 Honda CR-V. The contact stated when the vehicle was started, there was a loud rattling sound coming from the vehicle. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or the dealer. The vehicle was scheduled for an upcoming diagnostic test. The contact stated that the failure had been occurring intermittently since 2014, however in 2020 the failure occurred, and the variable timing actuator (VTC)was replaced. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and a case was filed. The failure mileage was approximately 52,032.
NHTSA ODI #11615283
Mileage unknown · Aug 13, 2024
Engine
Engine code p1009 VTC valve replacement no know place will replace due to zero tolerant engine and timing not in tune due too much damage by the pistons and valves
NHTSA ODI #11608379
Mileage unknown · Jul 30, 2024
Seats
Passenger seat has several spots where it has burned through. Unable to heat seat because of this.
NHTSA ODI #11605326
Mileage unknown · Jul 15, 2024
Engine
Rattles and shakes between 25 and 40 mph, bad actuator will cause timing failure. It only has 71,000 miles. Honda is well aware of this defect in this vehicle. When will they be held accountable to fix this issue? At 33k I was definitely taken for a ride! No engine warning light either!
NHTSA ODI #11602310
Mileage unknown · Jul 3, 2024
Unknown Or Other
Hi, I am [XXX] - owning Honda CRV 2014 model - the vehicle was purchased in Buffalo NY and used in Buffalo from 2014 till 2022 September. Currently I live in Georgia state and when I went for service at local dealer, they shown me most of the places under the vehicle was rusted and not sure how much time it will run. I know Hon…
Read full complaint
Hi, I am [XXX] - owning Honda CRV 2014 model - the vehicle was purchased in Buffalo NY and used in Buffalo from 2014 till 2022 September. Currently I live in Georgia state and when I went for service at local dealer, they shown me most of the places under the vehicle was rusted and not sure how much time it will run. I know Honda has recalled many Honda crvs which ran on coldest places but I am not able to find a recall for this 2014 year to fix that rust problem. Could you please help with get that fixed. Thanks, [XXX] . INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
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.