← New search

2015 Honda CR-V

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2015 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

491 reports with mileage · 179 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 243 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 148 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 83 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

38 crash reports4 fire reports18 injury reports

Forward Collision Avoidance complaints

9 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Aug 25, 2026
Forward Collision AvoidanceService BrakesCrash

On XXX, I had an accident where I rear-ended a vehicle stopped at an intersection, when I simultaneously pressed my brake and accelerator pedal due to a hazardous brake pedal/accelerator pedal positioning. Only one week prior I had described/argued the exact accident scenario with the service mgr of First Texas Honda Svc Ctr ([X…

Read full complaint

On XXX, I had an accident where I rear-ended a vehicle stopped at an intersection, when I simultaneously pressed my brake and accelerator pedal due to a hazardous brake pedal/accelerator pedal positioning. Only one week prior I had described/argued the exact accident scenario with the service mgr of First Texas Honda Svc Ctr ([XXX]) after taking my CR-V in for brake evaluation/servicing. He said nothing’s wrong with my brake pedal. I’ve owned my car for 10 yrs and have experienced these situations numerous (<20+X) times, as one of two scenarios: In a slow stop and an emergency stop, WHERE THE BRAKE PEDAL DOES NOT STOP AT A REASONABLE DISTANCE ABOVE THE LEVEL OF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. The 1st scenario involves slow braking at low speeds (<25mph) where I’m simply slowing/flowing with traffic, as was the case with the accident I’m reporting. Here, I’m using a simple toe-heel pivot to move from accelerator to cover the brake. With a steady slow pressure, the brake pedal sinks to the level of the accelerator without fully stopping the vehicle. At that point, the brake pedal sinks below the accelerator pedal, resulting in my foot pressing both the brake and accelerator simultaneously, causing my CR-V to surge forward. Of course, I can’t physically see how low the brake pedal has dipped, and I’m relying solely on the car’s response (movement) when suddenly the accelerator engages. While I take full responsibility, I believe the brake pedal is more the problem than me/my foot. In the Emergency braking episodes, the scenario begins with a quick response braking requiring steady braking pressure (not fast/abrupt); then traffic stops abruptly, requiring a hard, urgent braking to stop completely—but the already depressed brake pedal sinks to the floorboard rather than delivering a hard deceleration before the pedal bottoms out. It’s a panic moment that triggers an emergency evasive maneuver into to an adjacent lane. The CR-V’s brake pedal creates dangerous incidents. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATIO

NHTSA ODI #11759504

Mileage unknown · Feb 27, 2026
Forward Collision AvoidanceLane Departure

Windshield camera and all its functions does not work. The following systems do not work. LKAS ACC CMBS LDW I drive 3 hours to work and back and not having these safety features is dangerous for me because my foot and ankle hurts to keep a consistent speed, and when I am drowsy the LKAS helps me stay in my lane. All of these wa…

Read full complaint

Windshield camera and all its functions does not work. The following systems do not work. LKAS ACC CMBS LDW I drive 3 hours to work and back and not having these safety features is dangerous for me because my foot and ankle hurts to keep a consistent speed, and when I am drowsy the LKAS helps me stay in my lane. All of these warning lights are on my dash. I bought this vehicle in 2018 and the lights have been on since 2024. I am just now learning that I could report this.

NHTSA ODI #11720914

Mileage unknown · Aug 16, 2025
Forward Collision AvoidanceService Brakes

On 8/14, As I was pulling away from a gas pump and into a parking space (going 5 mph or less), the automatic braking system alarms went off, and the brakes applied, causing the car to seize up completely. My foot was already on the brake and I was at least 5 feet away from the barrier at the end of the parking spot. In additi…

Read full complaint

On 8/14, As I was pulling away from a gas pump and into a parking space (going 5 mph or less), the automatic braking system alarms went off, and the brakes applied, causing the car to seize up completely. My foot was already on the brake and I was at least 5 feet away from the barrier at the end of the parking spot. In addition to this experience, the emergency braking alarms tend to go off in unexpected/unneeded situations, such as when I'm coasting to a red light with my foot already on the brake. And it does NOT go off in other situations where I would expect it, such as when a car stops short in front of me. These situations happen approximately once every two months or so. The automatic/emergency braking is unreliable, unpredictable and when it engages unnecessarily, could be dangerous.

NHTSA ODI #11681041

Mileage unknown · Nov 19, 2024
EngineForward Collision Avoidance

On [XXX], my 2015 Honda CRV completely stopped at a traffic light on [XXX] . All warning lights came on. At the time, the vehicle had 60,000 miles. I was towed to Bill Page Honda in Annandale, Va. They could not determined the cause of the engine failure. I was then towed to Ourisman Honda of Tysons Corner where I purchased…

Read full complaint

On [XXX], my 2015 Honda CRV completely stopped at a traffic light on [XXX] . All warning lights came on. At the time, the vehicle had 60,000 miles. I was towed to Bill Page Honda in Annandale, Va. They could not determined the cause of the engine failure. I was then towed to Ourisman Honda of Tysons Corner where I purchased the vehicle. (Reference attached invoice dated 08/08/03) No reason could be given for the complete shut down of the engine. Note that all required maintenance work had been completed on this vehicle as scheduled. A used motor was installed. I'm filing the complaint in light of the current probe by the NHTSA on this Honda vehicle even though the year of my vehicle is not included in the probe. I've spoken with an NHTSA representative on 11/18/24 (Call Ref.# 1586954) who referred me to the Federal Trade Commission asking that I make reference to my call to the NHTSA. I left a voicemail on 11/18/24 with the Federal Trade Commission at (202)366-2222. I'm waiting for a call back. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ODI #11626213

148,000 miles · Feb 27, 2024
Forward Collision AvoidanceCrashInjury

The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at 70 MPH with the cruise control activated, she noticed traffic stopped ahead and depressed the brake pedal to stop the vehicle. The vehicle was able to stop immediately; however, when the contact released the brake pedal, the vehicle inadvertently accele…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at 70 MPH with the cruise control activated, she noticed traffic stopped ahead and depressed the brake pedal to stop the vehicle. The vehicle was able to stop immediately; however, when the contact released the brake pedal, the vehicle inadvertently accelerated and crashed into another vehicle. No warning light was illuminated. The front driver's side air bag deployed. The failure recurred when the contact released the brake pedal while the engine was revving. The contact depressed the brake pedal and shifted the transmission into park (P). The vehicle was then turned off. The contact's hands were burned as a result of the air bag deployment, but she did not receive medical attention. A police report was filed. The vehicle was towed to a tow yard but was not yet deemed totaled by the insurance company. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 148,000.

NHTSA ODI #11574179

Mileage unknown · Nov 25, 2023
Forward Collision Avoidance

While traveling from Mississippi to New Orleans, my AEB system randomly engaged several times without any reason.

NHTSA ODI #11556783

Mileage unknown · Nov 10, 2023
Forward Collision AvoidanceLane Departure

ADAS sporadically works. It constantly turns off and on. Have taken it to dealer, codes are cleared, camera is cleaned, and am told that should fix the problem. Within 5 blocks of leaving dealership, the problem comes back. The next solution according to them is replace the camera for $1800. This is a safety issue. The safet…

Read full complaint

ADAS sporadically works. It constantly turns off and on. Have taken it to dealer, codes are cleared, camera is cleaned, and am told that should fix the problem. Within 5 blocks of leaving dealership, the problem comes back. The next solution according to them is replace the camera for $1800. This is a safety issue. The safety features are unreliable. I have also researched online and there are many Honda owners reporting this same problem

NHTSA ODI #11554585

Mileage unknown · Jun 15, 2023
Forward Collision AvoidanceLane Departure

My 2015 CRV suddenly had all the crash warning/adaptive cruise control/lane keep assist lights flashing…very alarming…so we brought it to White Rock Honda for to find out what was happening?
 They diagnosed our Multi-purpose camera is faulty. $2193 to repair…plus $197.12 yesterday to diagnose!
 We have done nothing to cause thi…

Read full complaint

My 2015 CRV suddenly had all the crash warning/adaptive cruise control/lane keep assist lights flashing…very alarming…so we brought it to White Rock Honda for to find out what was happening?
 They diagnosed our Multi-purpose camera is faulty. $2193 to repair…plus $197.12 yesterday to diagnose!
 We have done nothing to cause this substantial/expensive repair. We are shocked as we are long-time Honda owners, (3 Hondas in the past 20 years) and have never experienced anything like this.
 Now we are in danger all of our safety features no longer functioning.
 This this is a huge hardship for us at this time as I just began a gradual return to work this week after an illness. I need to safely rely on this car every day for my long commute from Surrey to Richmond.
 So as mentioned, this is a hardship that we had no part in causing – and we feel is entirely unfair. We have contacted Honda Customer Relations. We have forwarded the diagnostic receipt, the situation is now in mediation. -Yes, available for NHTSA inspection.

NHTSA ODI #11527120

Mileage unknown · Jul 14, 2022
Forward Collision AvoidanceLane Departure

Check CMBS,brake System Light& brake assist lights are on when going through construction area.Happens in construction area a number of times. Dealers have to reset at no cost. The last time on July 6,2022 I was charged $94.56 to reset! Walser Honda invoice 387637.

NHTSA ODI #11473976

Official recalls

3

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.

17V305000 · Engine

May 4, 2017

Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2015-2016 Honda CR-V vehicles that recently received a replacement engine. The replacement engine may have been built with the wrong pistons, potentially affecting the engine's performance.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The reduced performance may result in an engine stall, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the engines and replace the incorrect components, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began June 20, 2017. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's number for this recall is KF6.

15V121000 · Engine And Engine Cooling:engine

Mar 2, 2015

American Honda Motor Co. (Honda) is recalling certain model year 2014 Accord L4 vehicles manufactured July 29, 2014, to July 31, 2014, 2015 Accord L4 vehicles manufactured August 14, 2014, to January 30, 2015, and 2015 CR-V vehicles manufactured September 9, 2014, to February 6, 2015. The affected vehicles may have been assembled with improperly torqued connecting rod bolts, which can cause the engine to lose power or leak oil.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Loss of engine power may result in a vehicle stall, increasing the risk of a crash. If the engine leaks oil in the proximity of hot engine or exhaust components, there is an increased risk of a fire.

Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the engine short block, free of charge. The recall began on March 27, 2015. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's number for this recall is JP2 (for Accord models) and JP3 (for CR-V models).

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