← 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

Structure complaints

35 reports
Clear category filter
600 miles · Nov 6, 2015
EngineStructureUnknown Or Other

BOUGHT THIS VEHICHLE MONTH AGO. AROUND 1000 MILES ON ODOMETER NOW. VEHICHLE HAVE TERRIBLE VIBRATION WHEN STOP IN DRIVE GEAR AT STOP LIGHTS OR IN SLOW TRAFFIC. VIBRATION ARE STRONG AND MADE ME NAUXIOUS IN SLOW TRAFFIC ONE DAY. I TOOK CAR TO DEALER BUT THEY NOT ACCEPTING IT AS A PROBLEM BUT SAYING ITS A CHARACTRISTIC OF THIS VEHIC…

Read full complaint

BOUGHT THIS VEHICHLE MONTH AGO. AROUND 1000 MILES ON ODOMETER NOW. VEHICHLE HAVE TERRIBLE VIBRATION WHEN STOP IN DRIVE GEAR AT STOP LIGHTS OR IN SLOW TRAFFIC. VIBRATION ARE STRONG AND MADE ME NAUXIOUS IN SLOW TRAFFIC ONE DAY. I TOOK CAR TO DEALER BUT THEY NOT ACCEPTING IT AS A PROBLEM BUT SAYING ITS A CHARACTRISTIC OF THIS VEHICHLE. THEY UPDATED THE ECM SOFTWARE BUT PROBLEM STILL THERE. I AM AFRAID THIS CAN GET WORSE AND RESULT INTO MAJOR COMPONENT FAILURE OR SAFETY HAZARD. HONDA SHOULD FIND THE FIX OR STOP SELLING

NHTSA ODI #10788952

600 miles · Nov 4, 2015
EngineSteeringStructure

I BOUGHT A BRAND NEW 2015 HONDA CR-V EX FWD A MONTH AGO. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS LITTLE OVER 600 MILES, I STARTED FEELING A SEVERE VIBRATION INTERMITTENTLY AT IDLE IN DRIVE MODE WHEN I STOP AT STOP SIGNS. THE FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY INCREASED NOW WHEN IT IS ABOUT 1000 MILES. JUST TO CHECK ITS SEVERITY I PLACED AN EMPTY PLASTIC BAG O…

Read full complaint

I BOUGHT A BRAND NEW 2015 HONDA CR-V EX FWD A MONTH AGO. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS LITTLE OVER 600 MILES, I STARTED FEELING A SEVERE VIBRATION INTERMITTENTLY AT IDLE IN DRIVE MODE WHEN I STOP AT STOP SIGNS. THE FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY INCREASED NOW WHEN IT IS ABOUT 1000 MILES. JUST TO CHECK ITS SEVERITY I PLACED AN EMPTY PLASTIC BAG ON THE PASSENGER SEAT AND I COULD HERE THE NOISE MADE BY THE BAG DUE TO VIBRATION. IT WAS AS IF LIKE MASSAGING ON MY BACK AND BACK OF HEAD. WHEN I REPORTED IT TO SERVICE DEPARTMENT, THEY CHECKED AND TOLD ME THAT ITS A KNOW ISSUE WITH ALL 2015 MODELS AND NO FIX HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED. I CALLED AMERICAN HONDA ALSO AS PER THEIR SUGGESTION AND THEY ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED THIS ISSUE BUT SAID NO FIX IS AVAILABLE. I'M WONDERING IF THERE IS ANY BODY THAT ACTUALLY REGULATES AUTO MAKERS TO NOT SELL VEHICLES HAVING ISSUES. IF THERE IS A KNOW ISSUE LIKE THIS HOW CAN THEY KEEP SELLING THE VEHICLES WITH ISSUES AND HOW DOES HONDA SALES PEOPLE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS ISSUE? ITS ALMOST END OF 2015 AND WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO DEVELOP A FIX?

NHTSA ODI #10788424

5,000 miles · Oct 30, 2015
Power TrainStructureUnknown Or Other

VIBRATION FELT AT 20-25 MPH AND AT HIGHER SPEEDS THROUGH THE STEERING WHEEL AND BY SOUND WITH THE VIBRATION BECOMING STRONGER AS THE MILEAGE INCREASES. DISCUSSIONS WITH THE HONDA DEALERSHIP CONCERNING A REFUND HAVE NOT BEEN FRUITFUL. I AM CONCERNED THAT THE PROBLEM MAY RESULT IN A CRASH; BUT HONDA IS VERY SLOW TO RESOLVE THE I…

Read full complaint

VIBRATION FELT AT 20-25 MPH AND AT HIGHER SPEEDS THROUGH THE STEERING WHEEL AND BY SOUND WITH THE VIBRATION BECOMING STRONGER AS THE MILEAGE INCREASES. DISCUSSIONS WITH THE HONDA DEALERSHIP CONCERNING A REFUND HAVE NOT BEEN FRUITFUL. I AM CONCERNED THAT THE PROBLEM MAY RESULT IN A CRASH; BUT HONDA IS VERY SLOW TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE.

NHTSA ODI #10787261

Mileage unknown · Oct 30, 2015
Structure

UNUSUAL VIBRATION WHEN CAR STOPS AT RED LIGHT. IT IS SO DISTURBING THAT I FEEL NOT COMFORTABLE IN THE DRIVING SEAT. I AM STARTING TO HAVE NAUSEA AND MY BACK ACHES (PART TIED WITH THE SEAT, BECAUSE VIBRATION) IF I DRIVE IN TRAFFIC FOR A LONG TIME. I HAVE PURCHASED A BRAND NEW CAR AND I WAS NEVER TOLD BY THE DEALER OF THIS PROBL…

Read full complaint

UNUSUAL VIBRATION WHEN CAR STOPS AT RED LIGHT. IT IS SO DISTURBING THAT I FEEL NOT COMFORTABLE IN THE DRIVING SEAT. I AM STARTING TO HAVE NAUSEA AND MY BACK ACHES (PART TIED WITH THE SEAT, BECAUSE VIBRATION) IF I DRIVE IN TRAFFIC FOR A LONG TIME. I HAVE PURCHASED A BRAND NEW CAR AND I WAS NEVER TOLD BY THE DEALER OF THIS PROBLEM WHICH IS A KNOWN ONE AND I FOUND IT LATER WHEN I STARTED GOOGLING. THIS IS A CASE OF BREACH OF TRUST TAKING ADVANTAGE OF BUYERS IGNORANCE AND IS AGAINST THE FAIR SELLING PRACTICE. I CALLED UP HONDA ON THE VERY 1ST WEEK, MOST LIKELY ON THE 3RD DAY AND LODGED MY GRIEVANCE (CASE NO[XXX]). I HAD SPENT CLOSE TO $30000 ON THE CAR AND I DO NOT WANT TO DRIVE THIS [XXX]. I BELIEVE I HAVE BEEN DECEIVED BOTH BY HONDA AND THE HONDA DEALER. ITS BEEN 4 MONTHS NOW I AM DRIVING AND STILL HONDA DOES NOT HAVE A FIX. IT IS EFFECTING MY HEALTH... HONDA SAYS IT DOES NOT HAVE ANY SAFETY HAZARD IN THE WEBSITE, BUT IT DOES HAS HEALTH HAZARDS WHICH HONDA CANNOT DENY. MY COMPLAINT IS GENUINE AND THE DEALER HAS ENDORSED IT AS WELL LATER SHAMELESSLY IMMEDIATELY IN THE VERY FIRST WEEK AFTER THE SELL WAS COMPLETED. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10787221

650 miles · Oct 28, 2015
EngineSeatsStructure

I BOUGHT A BRAND NEW CR-V EX-L BASED ON EXCELLENT REVIEWS FROM CONSUMER REPORTS AND EDMUNDS. I EXPECTED THE CAR TO BE PERFECT. HOWEVER, HONDA SOLD ME THE DEFECTED CAR WITHOUT ANY NOTICE EVEN THIS DEFECT WAS KNOWN FOR MONTHS. THE ISSUE IS A VIBRATION DURING IDLE. FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN I STOP ON THE TRAFFIC LIGHT, THE PASSENGER SEA…

Read full complaint

I BOUGHT A BRAND NEW CR-V EX-L BASED ON EXCELLENT REVIEWS FROM CONSUMER REPORTS AND EDMUNDS. I EXPECTED THE CAR TO BE PERFECT. HOWEVER, HONDA SOLD ME THE DEFECTED CAR WITHOUT ANY NOTICE EVEN THIS DEFECT WAS KNOWN FOR MONTHS. THE ISSUE IS A VIBRATION DURING IDLE. FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN I STOP ON THE TRAFFIC LIGHT, THE PASSENGER SEAT STARTS TO SHAKE. IF I RELEASE BREAKS VIBRATIONS WILL GO AWAY. IT IS NOT NORMAL. I NOTICED THIS PROBLEM 2 MONTHS AFTER THE PURCHASE (OR 600-700 MILES). THEN I WENT TO THE DEALER AND HE TOLD ME THAT HONDA'S ENGINEERS WERE "WORKING ON IT", NO SOLUTION WAS FOUND YET AND I HAD TO WAIT FOR A FURTHER NOTICE. VISIBLE VIBRATIONS MEAN THAT THERE IS MECHANICAL RESONANCE IN THE CAR. AN EXAMPLE OF DESTRUCTION DUE TO MECHANICAL RESONANCE WOULD BE A COLLAPSE OF TACOMA NARROWS BRIDGE. THUS, MY SAFETY CONCERN IS THAT THE CAR CAN BE DAMAGED STRUCTURALLY. FOR EXAMPLE, FEW BOLTS MAY COME LOOSE AND THE CAR MAY DISINTEGRATE DURING THE DRIVE. THE PROBLEM COULD BE THAT A NEWLY INTRODUCED CVT TRANSMISSION IN HONDA CR-V 2015 DOESN'T GO ALONG WITH THE ENGINE AND THEY PRODUCE EXCESSIVE VIBRATIONS THAT SPREAD THRU A CAR FRAME TO THE SEAT. PROBABLY, THE CAR WASN'T TESTED PROPERLY DURING DESIGN PROCESS. THUS, HONDA ENGINEERS OVERLOOKED THIS PROBLEM. I HAVE A VIDEO FILE OF VIBRATIONS BUT IT'S TOO BIG FOR UPLOAD. ANYWAY, YOU CAN SEE THIS ISSUE HERE: HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=SR-YQAJRRB8

NHTSA ODI #10786879

100 miles · Sep 2, 2015
StructureUnknown Or Other

ON MAY 2ND, 2015, WE PURCHASED A 2015 HONDA CR-V. AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE A WATER STAIN WAS NOTICED ON THE PASSENGER SIDE B PILLAR ROOF. PART OF THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT INCLUDED REMOVING THE STAIN THAT SEEMED TO BE FROM A PARTIALLY OPENED SUNROOF DURING SHIPPING. THE STAIN WAS REMOVED BY THE DEALERSHIP AND CHECKED BY THE DEALE…

Read full complaint

ON MAY 2ND, 2015, WE PURCHASED A 2015 HONDA CR-V. AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE A WATER STAIN WAS NOTICED ON THE PASSENGER SIDE B PILLAR ROOF. PART OF THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT INCLUDED REMOVING THE STAIN THAT SEEMED TO BE FROM A PARTIALLY OPENED SUNROOF DURING SHIPPING. THE STAIN WAS REMOVED BY THE DEALERSHIP AND CHECKED BY THE DEALERSHIP AND ALL APPEARED TO BE RESOLVED. A SHORT TIME LATER ANOTHER WATER STAIN DEVELOPED IN THE SAME AREA. AGAIN THE STAIN WAS REMOVED AND THE VEHICLE CHECKED. AFTER THE CR-V'S THIRD VISIT TO THE SHOP IT WAS DETERMINED THAT AN "INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF SEAL SEALER" WAS USED IN THE ASSEMBLY OF THE VEHICLE AT THE FACTORY. OUR HONDA HAD TO BE SENT TO AN OUTSIDE HONDA APPROVED BODY SHOP FOR REPAIRS. ON DISCOVERING THE EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM, WE NO LONGER HAD CONFIDENCE IN THE QUALITY OF OUR "NEW" VEHICLE. GIVEN THE FACT IT HAD SUSTAINED WATER DAMAGE MULTIPLE TIMES AND HAD TO BE TAKEN TO AN AUTO BODY SHOP TO BE PROPERLY REPAIRED WITH ONLY A FEW HUNDRED MILES. WE HAD CONCERNS ABOUT WATER BEING TRAPPED BETWEEN THE MULTIPLE LAYERS OF METAL ROOF PANELS. IN TURN THAT COULD LEAD TO RUST, WHICH COULD LEAD TO THE RELEASE OF THE SEAM SEALER THAT HELPS PROVIDE THE RIGIDITY NEEDED FOR ROLLOVER CRASHES. ALSO, THE CONCERN OF MOLD DEVELOPING IN THE ROOF AND CARPET. UPON HEARING OUR CONCERNS THE DEALERSHIP AGREED TO TRADE IN OUR WATER DAMAGED CR-V FOR A NEW ONE. WITH LESS THAN 100 MILES THIS CR-V ALSO DEVELOPED A ROOF LEAK. NOW THE DEALERSHIP AND BODY SHOP HAS HAD OUR CURRENT CR-V TWO WEEKS, TO FIX THE LEAKED CAUSED BY HONDA NOT USING ENOUGH SEALER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE ROOF PANELS AND RAIL STUDS.HONDA IS NOW USING OUR CR-V AS FIELD REPORT CASE STUDY TO SUBMIT TO HONDA ENGINEERS. WE WOULD LIKE HONDA TO ISSUE A RECALL OUT OF CONCERN FOR OTHER CR-V OWNERS. MANY OWNERS MAY BE UNAWARE OF MOLD DANGERS AND STRUCTURAL ROOF WEAKNESS.

NHTSA ODI #10761059

21 miles · Sep 2, 2015
StructureUnknown Or Other

ON MAY 2ND, 2015, WE PURCHASED A 2015 HONDA CR-V. AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE A WATER STAIN WAS NOTICED ON THE PASSENGER SIDE B PILLAR ROOF. PART OF THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT INCLUDED REMOVING THE STAIN THAT SEEMED TO BE FROM A PARTIALLY OPENED SUNROOF DURING SHIPPING. THE STAIN WAS REMOVED BY THE DEALERSHIP AND CHECKED BY THE DEALE…

Read full complaint

ON MAY 2ND, 2015, WE PURCHASED A 2015 HONDA CR-V. AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE A WATER STAIN WAS NOTICED ON THE PASSENGER SIDE B PILLAR ROOF. PART OF THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT INCLUDED REMOVING THE STAIN THAT SEEMED TO BE FROM A PARTIALLY OPENED SUNROOF DURING SHIPPING. THE STAIN WAS REMOVED BY THE DEALERSHIP AND CHECKED BY THE DEALERSHIP AND ALL APPEARED TO BE RESOLVED. A SHORT TIME LATER ANOTHER WATER STAIN DEVELOPED IN THE SAME AREA. AGAIN THE STAIN WAS REMOVED AND THE VEHICLE CHECKED. AFTER THE CR-V'S THIRD VISIT TO THE SHOP IT WAS DETERMINED THAT AN "INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF SEAL SEALER" WAS USED IN THE ASSEMBLY OF THE VEHICLE AT THE FACTORY. OUR HONDA HAD TO BE SENT TO AN OUTSIDE HONDA APPROVED BODY SHOP FOR REPAIRS. ON DISCOVERING THE EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM, WE NO LONGER HAD CONFIDENCE IN THE QUALITY OF OUR "NEW" VEHICLE. GIVEN THE FACT IT HAD SUSTAINED WATER DAMAGE MULTIPLE TIMES AND HAD TO BE TAKEN TO AN AUTO BODY SHOP TO BE PROPERLY REPAIRED WITH ONLY A FEW HUNDRED MILES. WE HAD CONCERNS ABOUT WATER BEING TRAPPED BETWEEN THE MULTIPLE LAYERS OF METAL ROOF PANELS. IN TURN THAT COULD LEAD TO RUST, WHICH COULD LEAD TO THE RELEASE OF THE SEAM SEALER THAT HELPS PROVIDE THE RIGIDITY NEEDED FOR ROLLOVER CRASHES. ALSO, THE CONCERN OF MOLD DEVELOPING IN THE ROOF AND CARPET. UPON HEARING OUR CONCERNS THE DEALERSHIP AGREED TO TRADE IN OUR WATER DAMAGED CR-V FOR A NEW ONE. WITH LESS THAN 100 MILES THIS CR-V ALSO DEVELOPED A ROOF LEAK. NOW THE DEALERSHIP AND BODY SHOP HAS HAD OUR CURRENT CR-V TWO WEEKS, TO FIX THE LEAKED CAUSED BY HONDA NOT USING ENOUGH SEALER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE ROOF PANELS AND RAIL STUDS.HONDA IS NOW USING OUR CR-V AS FIELD REPORT CASE STUDY TO SUBMIT TO HONDA ENGINEERS. WE WOULD LIKE HONDA TO ISSUE A RECALL OUT OF CONCERN FOR OTHER CR-V OWNERS. MANY OWNERS MAY BE UNAWARE OF MOLD DANGERS AND STRUCTURAL ROOF WEAKNESS.

NHTSA ODI #10761055

100 miles · Jun 14, 2015
EnginePower TrainStructure

WHILE DRIVING OUR 2015 CRV A DAY AFTER OUR INITIAL PURCHASE IT BEGAN TO SHAKE VIOLENTLY AT IDLE. SO BAD THAT IN STOP AND GO TRAFFIC IT CAN CAUSE THE DRIVER AND PASSENGERS TO START TO FEEL SICK. HONDA HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THE ISSUE BUT SAYS THAT IT ISN'T A SAFETY CONCERN AND IT IS A CHARACTERISTIC OF THE VEHICLE. ADDITIONALLY THE C…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING OUR 2015 CRV A DAY AFTER OUR INITIAL PURCHASE IT BEGAN TO SHAKE VIOLENTLY AT IDLE. SO BAD THAT IN STOP AND GO TRAFFIC IT CAN CAUSE THE DRIVER AND PASSENGERS TO START TO FEEL SICK. HONDA HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THE ISSUE BUT SAYS THAT IT ISN'T A SAFETY CONCERN AND IT IS A CHARACTERISTIC OF THE VEHICLE. ADDITIONALLY THE CAR VIBRATES AND FEELS AS IF MIGHT DIE WHEN SLOWING DOWN AT A STOP LIGHT. THE SAME THING THAT A MANUAL MIGHT DO IF LEFT IN GEAR WHEN SLOWING TO A STOP. ADDITIONALLY THE SAME THING CAN OCCUR WHEN INITIALLY ACCELERATING. I FEEL THAT THESE ARE SAFETY ISSUES BECAUSE THEY ARE DISTRACTING TO THE DRIVER AND THE CRV COULD EVENTUALLY START STALLING OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INTERSECTION.

NHTSA ODI #10725137

141 miles · Jun 2, 2015
Power TrainSteeringStructure

2015 HONDA CR-V VIBRATES AT IDLE WHILE IN GEAR JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE'S. I HAVE ALSO NOTICED EXTREMELY LOUD ENGINE NOISE FOR A NEW CAR WHILE AT IDLE IN GEAR OR IN PARK AS WELL. NOISE AND VIBRATION BEGUN AT ABOUT 141 MILES.

NHTSA ODI #10723098

330 miles · May 21, 2015
EnginePower TrainStructure

MY HONDA CRV 2015 LX MODEL VIBRATES AT STOP, ALL SIGNAL LIGHTS AND BUMPER TO BUMPER TRAFFIC, ITS REALLY DISTRACTING THE DRIVE AND DRIVER. FILED A COMPLAINT WITH AMERICA HONDA, BUT NO USE. THEY DON'T HAVE FIX RIGHT NOW.

NHTSA ODI #10717766

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