I was hit on 5/29/26. I was going 40mph or so and a car turned left into the front and side of my vehicle. My airbags did not deploy and was wondering why? I got whiplash bad and hurt myself as well as slamming into steering wheel.
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 →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all CR-V years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
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.
Unknown Or Other complaints
144 reportsHorn randomly beeps. Horn cover is loose.
I was slowly driving into a parking spot, perhaps half way into the spot when the car suddenly accelerated forward, went over the cement wheel stops and hit a cement wall. It resulted in me suffering a fractured sternum. I am absolutely sure I did not press down hard on the accelerator to cause this. I recall being slightly j…
Read full complaint
I was slowly driving into a parking spot, perhaps half way into the spot when the car suddenly accelerated forward, went over the cement wheel stops and hit a cement wall. It resulted in me suffering a fractured sternum. I am absolutely sure I did not press down hard on the accelerator to cause this. I recall being slightly jerked back into my seat and then hitting the wall. I have no idea what system failed, but the car is available for inspection. I am unable to drive the car until repairs to the front end are done, which I am told will take a few weeks. Thus, the car has not been inspected by anyone as yet, but I most certainly want it thoroughly checked. It should be noted that the police report was taken in the emergency room while I was in pain and in total shock at what happened. That report was only my guess as to what might have happened.
Case #16014967 Topic: Recalls/Campaigns VIN: [XXX] Vehicle Mileage: 64,935 Description: Subject: Transmission Recall Concern – 2015 Honda CR-V CVT Dear American Honda Customer Service / NHTSA, I am reporting transmission problems with my 2015 Honda CR-V that appear directly related to the CVT transmission recall and service bul…
Read full complaint
Case #16014967 Topic: Recalls/Campaigns VIN: [XXX] Vehicle Mileage: 64,935 Description: Subject: Transmission Recall Concern – 2015 Honda CR-V CVT Dear American Honda Customer Service / NHTSA, I am reporting transmission problems with my 2015 Honda CR-V that appear directly related to the CVT transmission recall and service bulletin for 2015–2016 models. Timeline of Events: • Aug 25, 2025: Vehicle lost battery charge despite a new battery; AAA confirmed battery was good but required a jump. • Oct 29, 2025: Battery failed again; required another jump. • Nov 30, 2025: Battery dead once more; AAA again confirmed battery was good but not charging. After replacement, the car stalled mid-road, “D” light disappeared, and only restarting allowed me to move briefly. • Dec 1, 2025: Mechanic confirmed transmission fluid was fine. Shortly after, vehicle experienced jolts, “D” light disappeared, and car stalled completely near home. It would only move in reverse and had to be rolled back to the mechanic. Diagnostic Results: • P0741 – Torque Converter Clutch Circuit Performance/Stuck Off • P0780 – Shift Malfunction • P0746 – Pressure Control Solenoid A Performance/Stuck Off • P1898 – CVT Drive Pulley Pressure Control Valve Stuck ON/OFF These codes match known CVT transmission issues documented by Honda, including hydraulic pressure regulation failures and belt slippage. My vehicle has never received recall updates or PCM reprogramming, yet it is now showing the exact failures described in Honda’s bulletin. Although my VIN does not currently appear in Honda’s recall database, I request that Honda review my case and extend recall or goodwill coverage, as the defect is clearly present and poses a serious safety risk. I also ask NHTSA to record this complaint since my vehicle is excluded despite being the same year/model with identical failures. Please confirm recall eligibility and advise on next steps for repair. I INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6
The frame on my Wisconsin-owned vehicle has rotted out to the point I am unable to safely have it repaired. The control arm simple pulled out of the frame as the frame was so rusted. The shop says they cannot in good conscience repair it. The manufacturer has recalled frames for this issue, but mine is apparently not included. H…
Read full complaint
The frame on my Wisconsin-owned vehicle has rotted out to the point I am unable to safely have it repaired. The control arm simple pulled out of the frame as the frame was so rusted. The shop says they cannot in good conscience repair it. The manufacturer has recalled frames for this issue, but mine is apparently not included. Honda has refused to help.
While driving at normal speed, the vehicle suddenly began to shudder and produce unusual mechanical noise. Within seconds, the car lost all ability to accelerate despite pressing the gas pedal. The vehicle lost power in live traffic and had to be coasted to the side of the road. There were no warning lights, no error codes, and …
Read full complaint
While driving at normal speed, the vehicle suddenly began to shudder and produce unusual mechanical noise. Within seconds, the car lost all ability to accelerate despite pressing the gas pedal. The vehicle lost power in live traffic and had to be coasted to the side of the road. There were no warning lights, no error codes, and no fluid leaks. This was a sudden, dangerous failure. A family member who is a new driver was operating the vehicle at the time, with passengers on board. This created a serious safety risk to both my family and surrounding drivers. The situation could have resulted in a serious accident if it had occurred on a highway instead of a city street. The problem was diagnosed by a trusted independent repair shop as a complete internal failure of the CVT transmission. They confirmed the component failure occurred without any external damage or signs of neglect. The transmission had to be replaced at significant cost. The component has not been inspected by Honda. However, I have dashcam video showing the moment of failure, including the vehicle shuddering, power loss, and driver reaction. The video clearly shows the dangerous nature of the incident and is available for inspection upon request. To my knowledge, this is a known issue affecting this generation of Honda CR-Vs with CVT transmissions. Honda refused reimbursement assistance despite full documentation, citing the vehicle being out of warranty — even though this is the type of premature mechanical failure their Goodwill Assistance policy is supposed to address. No warning lamps, messages, or prior symptoms appeared before the failure.
the car intermittently will not start. I had the starter replaced and that fixed the problem for a little while now it is back. My mechanic cleaned all the connectors and replaced them which worked for a couple of days now it intermittently will not start again. This seems to be a known problem with the 2015 CRV. Why isn't Hond…
Read full complaint
the car intermittently will not start. I had the starter replaced and that fixed the problem for a little while now it is back. My mechanic cleaned all the connectors and replaced them which worked for a couple of days now it intermittently will not start again. This seems to be a known problem with the 2015 CRV. Why isn't Honda addressing the issue?
Instrument panel lights Check engine light, TPMS, VAS, EPS lights come on. Had the car serviced. Lights comes on after driving for the while they turn off. Occurred 5 times in the last month.
There are no lights on the dashboard indicating a problem, but the smell of gasoline in the car is very strong while driving I have researched and found there are complaints of the same issue, but researching a recall for my car shows zero recalls for my Vin number.
I broke down on the road the car was still on but was not moving at any direction.
Official recalls
323V858000 · 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
2EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
EA19001 · Electrical Overstress
Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect. During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW. The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications. The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU. In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment. FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle. Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW. These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes. An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time. In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU. This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners. Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW. The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation. The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage. There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation. The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU. If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC. Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC. All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled. In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024. With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Illustration