NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
39 reports60,000 miles · Jul 30, 2020
Engine
THE VEHICLE WOULD ACCELERATE NORMALLY THAN OUT OF THE BLUE. IT LOOSES POWER, ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATING ADVISING NOT TO CONTINUE DRIVING. CODE ADVISING P0299 'TURBO CHARGER'COMMON PROBLEM APPARENTLY MECHANICS ADVISING ONLINE FORUMS AND REPAIR IDEAS. VEHICLE ONLY HAS APPROXIMATELY 60,000 ON IT AND ALL APPROVED MAINTENANCE. NOW THE…
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE WOULD ACCELERATE NORMALLY THAN OUT OF THE BLUE. IT LOOSES POWER, ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATING ADVISING NOT TO CONTINUE DRIVING. CODE ADVISING P0299 'TURBO CHARGER'COMMON PROBLEM APPARENTLY MECHANICS ADVISING ONLINE FORUMS AND REPAIR IDEAS. VEHICLE ONLY HAS APPROXIMATELY 60,000 ON IT AND ALL APPROVED MAINTENANCE. NOW THEY ARE DENYING MAJOR REPAIR THAT IS A COMMON ISSUE!!
NHTSA ODI #11342410
19,400 miles · May 13, 2020
EngineService Brakes
BOTH BACK ROTORS FAILED, UNABLE TO SAFELY DRIVE. REPEATED ENGINE LIGHT NOTIFICATIONS. POOR DRIVING, STALLING WHEN TURNING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #11324429
28,000 miles · Feb 5, 2020
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)Engine
WAS DRIVING SPEED LIMIT AND MOVING WITH TRAFFIC ON MAJOR CITY ROAD WHEN BATTERY LIGHT CAME ON AND CAR COMPLETELY SHUT OFF. WAS ABLE TO MOVE TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ROAD BUT STILL IN THE MIDDLE OF ONCOMING TRAFFIC DURING RUSH HOUR. CAR IMMEDIATELY WENT INTO PARK AND COULD NOT MOVE OR TURN ON. GOT A NOTE ON THE DASH THAT SYSTEM W…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING SPEED LIMIT AND MOVING WITH TRAFFIC ON MAJOR CITY ROAD WHEN BATTERY LIGHT CAME ON AND CAR COMPLETELY SHUT OFF. WAS ABLE TO MOVE TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ROAD BUT STILL IN THE MIDDLE OF ONCOMING TRAFFIC DURING RUSH HOUR. CAR IMMEDIATELY WENT INTO PARK AND COULD NOT MOVE OR TURN ON. GOT A NOTE ON THE DASH THAT SYSTEM WAS SHUTTING DOWN. CAR HAD JUST BEEN SERVICED 4 MONTH PRIOR.
NHTSA ODI #11307322
13,680 miles · Jan 26, 2019
Service Brakes
ON JANUARY 2, 2019, WHILE DRIVING, THE "BRAKE PADS WORN" LIGHT CAME ON IN MY VEHICLE. I WAS ON A CITY STREET, IN MOTION WITHOUT MY BRAKES DEPRESSED, BUT RATHER MY FOOT ON THE GAS DRIVING. I IN TURN CONTACTED LAND ROVER CUSTOMER SERVICE TO SEE IF THIS IS A KNOWN ISSUE AS THIS LIGHT APPEARED WHEN MY VEHICLE HAD 13,680 DRIVEN MI…
Read full complaint
ON JANUARY 2, 2019, WHILE DRIVING, THE "BRAKE PADS WORN" LIGHT CAME ON IN MY VEHICLE. I WAS ON A CITY STREET, IN MOTION WITHOUT MY BRAKES DEPRESSED, BUT RATHER MY FOOT ON THE GAS DRIVING. I IN TURN CONTACTED LAND ROVER CUSTOMER SERVICE TO SEE IF THIS IS A KNOWN ISSUE AS THIS LIGHT APPEARED WHEN MY VEHICLE HAD 13,680 DRIVEN MILES ON IT. I WAS ADVISED AT THAT TIME TO TAKE THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION OF THE BRAKES. I DID AS I WAS TOLD, TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP 1.09.2019--THEIR EARLIEST DATE AVAILABLE. THEY ADVISED MY THAT MY BACK ROTORS WERE RUSTING, THAT THE LEFT BACK BRAKE WAS 2MM AND THE RIGHT WAS 4MM. THEY RECOMMENDED AT THAT TIME TO REPLACE ONLY THE LEFT SIDE. WHEN I QUESTIONED WHY THEY WERE NOT WEARING EQUALLY, THE SERVICE ADVISOR SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS BECAUSE IT WAS MY FIRST TIME DRIVING AN SUV--WHICH WAS NOT THE CASE AND I TOLD HIM THIS AT THAT TIME. I ALSO ASKED WHY THE ROTORS WERE RUSTING SO QUICKLY, HE STATED THAT PERHAPS IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE AREA OF THE COUNTRY WHERE WE LIVE--I REFUTTED THIS STATING I HAVE OWNED OTHER SUVS BY OTHER MANUFACTURERS ALL WHILE LIVING IN THE SAME AREA AND DID NOT HAVE THIS ISSUE. I DID NOT ACCEPT THEIR QUOTE AND TOOK THE VEHICLE TO BE REPAIRED ELSEWHERE--OF WHICH THEY TOO COULD NOT EXPLAIN WHY THE BRAKES WENT TO QUICKLY ON THE VEHICLE AND COMMENTED TO ME THAT THIS IS ABNORMAL. I CONTACTED LAND ROVER CUSTOMER SERVICE, THEY STATED THEY WOULD INVESTIGATE THE ISSUE--THEY SIMPLY CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND NOTHING MORE, ADVISING ME THAT THE BRAKES NEED REPAIRED OUT OF POCKET. MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS IS A MANUFACTURER DEFECT WHERE THE ROTORS SHOULD NOT TYPICALLY RUST THIS QUICKLY, THE BRAKE PADS SHOULD NOT BE, AS THE SERVICE ADVISOR STATED BE "CHEWED UP FROM THE RUSTING ROTORS." LAST, THE BRAKES SHOULD NOT BE WEARING UNEVENLY ON THE VEHICLE.
NHTSA ODI #11172244
31,000 miles · Dec 19, 2018
Electrical SystemEngineSteering
I WAS DRIVING FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NY TO LONG ISLAND VIA I-695 HEADING TOWARD THE THROGS NECK BRIDGE ON 12/12/18. I WAS IN THE LEFT LANE JUST BEFORE THE LAST EXIT BEFORE THE BRIDGE WHEN MY DASHBOARD WENT DARK, THE RED BATTERY LIGHT (BELOW THE SPEEDOMETER) CAME ON, I LOST POWER AND STEERING. LUCKILY A SMALL SHOULDER OPENED …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NY TO LONG ISLAND VIA I-695 HEADING TOWARD THE THROGS NECK BRIDGE ON 12/12/18. I WAS IN THE LEFT LANE JUST BEFORE THE LAST EXIT BEFORE THE BRIDGE WHEN MY DASHBOARD WENT DARK, THE RED BATTERY LIGHT (BELOW THE SPEEDOMETER) CAME ON, I LOST POWER AND STEERING. LUCKILY A SMALL SHOULDER OPENED UP AND I WAS ABLE TO TUG THE WHEEL LEFT TO GET INTO THE SHOULDER BEFORE MY CAR COMPLETELY ROLLED TO A STOP. I AVOIDED A CRASH BUT IT WAS LUCK. I HAD TO BE TOWED OFF THE HIGHWAY AND BACK TO THE DEALER. CLEARLY THIS WAS NO BATTERY ISSUE (AS DRIVING RECHARGES A BATTER). THE DEALER'S SERVICE CENTER DIAGNOSED IT AS A DISCONNECTED VACUUM LINE. THE REPAIR NOTES INDICATE THAT IT WAS RECONNECTED USING A "ZIP TIE." WHEN I INQUIRED ABOUT WHETHER THAT WAS THE APPROPRIATE FIX, THE DEALER SENT ME LR'S TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN DESCRIBING THE REPAIR FOR A CERTAIN RANGE OF VINS, INCLUDING MINE. THE ZIP TIE IS THE LAST STEP - THE BULLETIN ALSO SAYS THE LOCKING RING NEEDS TO BE DISCARDED AND A NEW ONE INSTALLED. THE DEALER STILL HAS NOT CONFIRMED WITH ME (2 DAYS LATER) THAT THEY DID THIS. IN ANY EVENT, THIS IS MORE THAN A TECHNICAL SERVICE ISSUE; THIS COULD BE A LIFE OR DEATH ISSUE THAT WARRANTS A RECALL FOR AFFECTED VEHICLES.
NHTSA ODI #11162489
9,000 miles · Nov 12, 2018
Structure
THERE WERE POOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE B PILLAR AND SPOT WELDS THAT HAVE MADE THE FRAME LESS STABLE. THE ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO BE RESOLVED THROUGH MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS AT REPAIR, AND THE MANUFACTURER HAS KNOWN THIS ISSUE AND NOW DOES NOT WANT TO REPAIR, REPLACE OR REFUND. THIS HAS ALSO CREATED A DISTRACTING ISSUE OF NOISE IN TH…
Read full complaint
THERE WERE POOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE B PILLAR AND SPOT WELDS THAT HAVE MADE THE FRAME LESS STABLE. THE ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO BE RESOLVED THROUGH MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS AT REPAIR, AND THE MANUFACTURER HAS KNOWN THIS ISSUE AND NOW DOES NOT WANT TO REPAIR, REPLACE OR REFUND. THIS HAS ALSO CREATED A DISTRACTING ISSUE OF NOISE IN THE DRIVER EAR THAT MAKES IT DISTRCTING TO DRIVE. THIS SAME ISSUE HAS BEEN ISSUED AS A RECALL BY SUBARU FOR A B PILLAR WELDING ISSUE WITH INSUFFICIENT SPOT WELDS WHICH IS THE SAME ISSUE THE LAND ROVER DISCOVERY SPORT HAS HAD AND IS DOCUMENTED IN NUMBEROUS AREAS BOTH INTERNAL TO LAND ROVER AND EXTERNAL SITES AND SOURCES. THIS HAPPENS WHEN THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION ON AN SURFACE AND IS VERY DISTRACTING AND IS ALSO SEEMINGLY A SAFETY PROBLEM AS REPORTED BY THE NHTSA AS "NOT HAVING THOSE WELDS MEANS THE STRENGTH OF THE STRUCTURE IS REDUCED AND THAT COULD "INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY IN A CRASH" SUBARU SAID. IN THIS CASE THE PROBLEM COULD NOT BE FIXED, AND IN THE LAND ROVER ISSUE I HAVE THE PROBLEMS COULD NOT BE FIXED OVER 6 REPAIR ATTEMPTS ACROSS 2 DIFFERENT DISCOVERY SPORT VEHICLES, WHERE THE FIRST ONE WAS SWAPPED FOR A SECOND NEW ONE WHICH BOTH EXPERIENCE THE SAME PROBLEM.
NHTSA ODI #11151034
37,942 miles · May 13, 2018
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
FRIDAY MAY 11, 2018 WHILE DRIVING WESTBOUND ON TWO LANE HIGHWAY US 90, APPROXIMATELY 8 MILES EAST OF LIBERTY, TEXAS POWER FAILED. WAS DRIVING 60 MILES PER HOUR, APPROXIMATELY, AND TWO WARNING MESSAGES APPEARED. GEARBOX FAULT AND PARKING BRAKE FAULT. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OUT OF TRAFFIC LANE BY COASTING AND STOP ON SIDE OF ROAD. …
Read full complaint
FRIDAY MAY 11, 2018 WHILE DRIVING WESTBOUND ON TWO LANE HIGHWAY US 90, APPROXIMATELY 8 MILES EAST OF LIBERTY, TEXAS POWER FAILED. WAS DRIVING 60 MILES PER HOUR, APPROXIMATELY, AND TWO WARNING MESSAGES APPEARED. GEARBOX FAULT AND PARKING BRAKE FAULT. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OUT OF TRAFFIC LANE BY COASTING AND STOP ON SIDE OF ROAD. PLACED VEHICLE IN PARK AND READ THE FAULTS AGAIN. WAS NOT ABLE TO MOVE GEAR SELECTOR OUT OF PARK. SHUT OFF ENGINE AND RESTARTED WITH FOOT ON BRAKE. STILL SAME FAULT MESSAGES ALTERNATING. UNABLE TO SHIFT OUT OF PARK WITH FOOT ON BRAKE. CALLED LAND ROVER ASSISTANCE AND THEY SUGGESTED TURNING VEHICLE BACK OFF AND THEN ON AGAIN. NO RESOLUTION AFTER THREE TRIES. VEHICLE TOWED BY FLATBED WRECKER TO SOUTHWEST LAND ROVER HOUSTON TEXAS. WRECKER DRIVER STATED THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH LAND ROVERS IN GENERAL AND WAS VERY HELPFUL. AT DEALER THE VEHICLE WAS UNLOADED FROM WRECKER AND NO PROBLEMS FOUND. DEALER DID NOT HAVE EXPLANATION FOR REASON NO POWER AND COULD NOT SHIFT OUT OF PARK. NO FAULT CODES WERE RECORDED BY COMPUTER. IF ROAD DID NOT HAVE SHOULDER, COULD HAVE CAUSED SEROUS OR FATAL ACCIDENT. MANY ROADS IN HOUSTON DO NOT HAVE ESCAPE LANES OR SHOULDERS AND SPEEDS ARE IN EXCESS OF 60 MPH. CONCERNED NO FAULT CODES RECORDED AND NO GUARANTEE WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.
NHTSA ODI #11093577
22,000 miles · Dec 5, 2017
EngineUnknown Or Other
MY 2017 DISCOVERY SPORT WITH 22K MILES, RANDOMLY SHUTS OFF WHILE DRIVING. THE FIRST TIME WAS ON THE FREEWAY IN TRAFFIC, AND THE CAR SHUT OFF, I HAD TO PUT IT IN PARK AND RESTART THE CAR TO PUT IT BACK IN GEAR. IT WENT TO THE DEALER WHO SAID IT WAS A SOFTWARE PROBLEM, THEY UPDATED THE SOFTWARE AND RETURNED IT TO ME. FOUR DAYS LAT…
Read full complaint
MY 2017 DISCOVERY SPORT WITH 22K MILES, RANDOMLY SHUTS OFF WHILE DRIVING. THE FIRST TIME WAS ON THE FREEWAY IN TRAFFIC, AND THE CAR SHUT OFF, I HAD TO PUT IT IN PARK AND RESTART THE CAR TO PUT IT BACK IN GEAR. IT WENT TO THE DEALER WHO SAID IT WAS A SOFTWARE PROBLEM, THEY UPDATED THE SOFTWARE AND RETURNED IT TO ME. FOUR DAYS LATER IT HAPPENED AGAIN, TOTAL SHUT OFF WHILE IN MOVEMENT, ENGINE HAD TO BE RESTARTED! NOT WORTH MY LIFE!!!
NHTSA ODI #11052634
110 miles · Sep 18, 2017
StructureUnknown Or Other
I PURCHASED A BRAND NEW 2017 LAND ROVER DISCOVERY SPORT HSE FOR MY DAUGHTER ON MAY 20, 2017 FROM RUSNAK JAGUAR/LAND ROVER IN ANAHEIM HILLS, CALIFORNIA AND IT HAS BEEN AT THE LAND ROVER DEALERSHIP MORE THAN IT HAS BEEN IN MY HOUSE. WE NOTICED WITHIN A FEW DAYS OF BUYING THE VEHICLE THAT THERE WAS A LOUD NOISE COMING FROM THE PAS…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A BRAND NEW 2017 LAND ROVER DISCOVERY SPORT HSE FOR MY DAUGHTER ON MAY 20, 2017 FROM RUSNAK JAGUAR/LAND ROVER IN ANAHEIM HILLS, CALIFORNIA AND IT HAS BEEN AT THE LAND ROVER DEALERSHIP MORE THAN IT HAS BEEN IN MY HOUSE. WE NOTICED WITHIN A FEW DAYS OF BUYING THE VEHICLE THAT THERE WAS A LOUD NOISE COMING FROM THE PASSENGER'S SIDE. THE DEALERSHIP CONFIRMED THE NOISE BEING THE B PILLAR. THE SERVICE MANAGER INSTRUCTED A LAND ROVER LEAD SERVICE TECH TO DO A ROAD TEST WITH ME AND HE VERIFIED THE CREAKING NOISE. WE HAVE LEFT THE VEHICLE WITH THE DEALERSHIP MANY TIMES AND AFTER SEVERAL FAILED ATTEMPTS TO FIX THE B PILLAR (IT HAS BEEN DOCUMENTED THAT SERVICE EVEN USED CAULKING TO TRY AND FIX THE B PILLAR) WHICH ALSO FAILED. WE ARE VERY DISAPPOINTED THAT THE LAND ROVER DEALERSHIP/SERVICE CENTER CANNOT FIX THE PROBLEM AFTER THE 4TH TIME. I PAID CASH FOR THIS VEHICLE AND I AM NOT HAPPY AT ALL. I HAVE SUBMITTED EMAILS AND SPOKE WITH THE DEALER ABOUT THE CONCERN FOR MY FAMILY'S SAFETY WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN. THIS IS A BLATANT DISREGARD FOR MY FAMILY'S SAFETY; BEING THAT THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THIS VEHICLE IS UNDERMINED. THIS 2017 LAND ROVER DISCOVERY SPORT HSE IS A COMPLETE LEMON AND NEEDS TO BE REPLACED IMMEDIATELY SINCE THE LAND ROVER SERVICE CENTER HAS HAD NUMEROUS ATTEMPTS AND AMPLE TIME TO REPAIR B PILLAR. ON THE DEALERSHIPS LAST ATTEMPT TO FIX THE B PILLAR (BY USING CAULKING) IT IS STILL CREAKING WITH A METAL SOUND.
NHTSA ODI #11024120
Official recalls
2Dec 29, 2016
Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (Land Rover) is recalling certain model year 2017 Land Rover Discovery Sport vehicles and 2016-2017 Land Rover Range Rover and Range Rover Sport vehicles. The affected vehicles have seatbelt pretensioners that may not function properly in the event of a crash.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the front seat seatbelt pretensioners do not function properly, the seat occupants may not be adequately restrained in the event of a crash, increasing the risk of injury.
Remedy: Land Rover will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the front seat belt assemblies, replacing them as necessary, free of charge. The recall began February 20, 2017. Owners may contact Land Rover customer service at 1-800-637-6837. Land Rover's number for this recall is P095.
Dec 9, 2016
Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (Land Rover) is recalling certain model year 2016-2017 Land Rover Discovery Sport vehicles manufactured May 30, 2016, to August 24, 2016, and 2016-2017 Range Rover Evoque vehicles manufactured June 7, 2016, to August 26, 2016. The affected vehicles have front lower control arm fasteners that may fail due to an assembly error, possibly resulting in separation of the steering knuckle.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the fasteners were to fail causing the knuckle to separate, vehicle handling may be affected, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Land Rover will notify owners, and dealers will replace the hardware that connects the front lower control arm to the knuckle, free of charge. The recall began on January 27, 2017. Owners may contact Land Rover customer service at 1-800-637-6837. Land Rover's number for this recall is Q650/Q651.
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
1EA21002 · 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.