NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
23 reportsClear category filter74,000 miles · Feb 10, 2016
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES-BENZ C230. WHILE DEPRESSING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AT 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE AND THE RPMS REVVED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 MERCEDES-BENZ C230. WHILE DEPRESSING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AT 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE AND THE RPMS REVVED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 74,000.
NHTSA ODI #10825406
58,000 miles · Feb 10, 2012
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY 2006 MERCEDES C230 HAS A DEFECTIVE BALANCE SHAFT. I DID SOME RESEARCH AND MULTIPLE PEOPLE ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM. THERE IS A CLASS ACTION SUIT IN THE WORKS. I BELIEVE THIS IS A DEFECTIVE PART THAT NEEDS TO BE RECALLED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10447370
Mileage unknown · Feb 6, 2012
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train
HAVING PROBLEM WITH THE GEAR SHIFTING, BELIEVE THIS IS CAUSED BY THE SHAFT BALANCER, ETC. THE CAR GRABS AND JERKS FROM TIME TO TIME MAKING ME UNSURE OF THE SAFETY OF MY CAR. MY CAR ONLY HAS 84,000 MILES ON IT. THE CAR IS LIKE NEW, BUT AS I READ THE CLASS ACT AGAINST MERCEDES I NOTICED THAT MY CAR HAS SEVERAL OF THE SAME ISSUES A…
Read full complaint
HAVING PROBLEM WITH THE GEAR SHIFTING, BELIEVE THIS IS CAUSED BY THE SHAFT BALANCER, ETC. THE CAR GRABS AND JERKS FROM TIME TO TIME MAKING ME UNSURE OF THE SAFETY OF MY CAR. MY CAR ONLY HAS 84,000 MILES ON IT. THE CAR IS LIKE NEW, BUT AS I READ THE CLASS ACT AGAINST MERCEDES I NOTICED THAT MY CAR HAS SEVERAL OF THE SAME ISSUES AS OTHERS LISTED IN THE COMPLAINT. THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR OF MY CAR IS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION, AND I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT THE MERCEDES COMPANY WOULD ALLOW AN ERROR LIKE THIS TO CONTINUE. I WOULD LIKE FOR THIS TO BE CORRECTED BY MERCEDES OR TO BE PLACED ON THE CLASS ACT SUIT AS WELL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10446820
65,000 miles · Jan 30, 2012
Engine And Engine Cooling
CHECK ENGINE LIGHT KEEPS COMING ON SAYING SOMETHING IN ENGINE IS BAD WITH A PRICE TAG OF OVER 6000.00 TO FIX. *TT
NHTSA ODI #10445806
Mileage unknown · Jan 20, 2012
Engine And Engine CoolingPower TrainVehicle Speed Control
PERIODICALLY THE CAR WOULD LOSE ACCELERATION AND RPMS WOULD BE HIGH AND THE VEHICLE WOULD JERK WHEN I TRIED CHANGING GEARS. AS I CHANGE GEARS FROM PARK, REVERSE OR DRIVE, THE GEAR SHIFT JERKS AND I AM UNABLE TO ACCELERATE PAST 20 MPH NO MATTER HOW MUCH PRESSURE I PLACE ON THE GAS. : EXTREME LOSS OF ACCELERATION UP HILL AND THE …
Read full complaint
PERIODICALLY THE CAR WOULD LOSE ACCELERATION AND RPMS WOULD BE HIGH AND THE VEHICLE WOULD JERK WHEN I TRIED CHANGING GEARS. AS I CHANGE GEARS FROM PARK, REVERSE OR DRIVE, THE GEAR SHIFT JERKS AND I AM UNABLE TO ACCELERATE PAST 20 MPH NO MATTER HOW MUCH PRESSURE I PLACE ON THE GAS. : EXTREME LOSS OF ACCELERATION UP HILL AND THE STEPTRONIC (+/- SHIFTING) DID NOT WORK... (I COULD ONLY GO 35MPH WHEN EVERY ONE ELSE WAS GOING 70MPH UP HILL) WHEN I TRAVELED ON A FLAT SURFACE WITH NO INCLINATION MY CAR WORKED FINE, I THEN DECIDED TO PUT IT ON NEUTRAL WHILE TRAVELING AT 65MPH...WHEN I PUT IT BACK IN DRIVE IT DID NOT PICK UP THE GEARS IT JUST CONTINUED AS IF IT WAS IN NEAUTRAL. I HAD TO PULL OVER AND SHIFT IT INTO PARK...AS I SHIFTED FORM "D" TO NEUTRAL IT SHIFTED FINE, BUT THEN FROM NEUTRAL TO "R" THE CAR JERKED...FROM REVERSE TO "P" IT JERKED AGAIN AND SHIFTED HARD. I THEN SHIFTED AGAIN TO REVERSE, NEUTRAL, AND DRIVE THUS THE CAR JERKED AND DID A HARD SHIFT WITH KNOCKING NOISE AND WOULD NOT DRIVE. I SHIFTED TO NEUTRAL AGAIN AND SHUT THE CAR OFF. WHEN I TURNED IT BACK ON IT SHIFTED SMOOTH AND I DROVE OFF WITHOUT ANY PROBLEM. TOOK IT TO A REPAIR SHOP AND RECEIVED P0717/P0718 FAULT CODES AND SOMETHING ABOUT THE VALVE BODY. I WAS ALSO TOLD THAT IT WAS AN TRANSMISSION INTERNAL SPEED SENSOR ISSUE. THERE IS SOMETHING FAULTY WITH THE DESIGN AND OPERATION OF THIS MODEL YEAR TRANSMISSION AND LOSING POWER AND BEING ABLE TO ONLY GO 35 MPH NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU PRESS THE GAS ON THE INTERSTATE OR HEAVY FAST MOVING TRAFFIC IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. MERCEDES BENZ IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM AS MANY OWNERS HAVE COMPLAINED BUT THEY WILL NOT INSTITUTE A RECALL. *TT
NHTSA ODI #10444620
64,884 miles · Dec 21, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
AFTER HAVING THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT COME ON, WE TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP WE PURCHASED IT FROM TO PERFORM A DIAGNOSTIC AFTER RECEIVING CODES P0170 AND P0173 (MB CODES 2092/2096) WHICH MB CLASSIFIES AS "MIXTURE IN RIGHT / LEFT CYLINDER BANK IS TOO RICH WHEN IDLING" AND WERE TOLD WE WOULD NEED TO REPLACE THE INTAKE MANIFOLD F…
Read full complaint
AFTER HAVING THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT COME ON, WE TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP WE PURCHASED IT FROM TO PERFORM A DIAGNOSTIC AFTER RECEIVING CODES P0170 AND P0173 (MB CODES 2092/2096) WHICH MB CLASSIFIES AS "MIXTURE IN RIGHT / LEFT CYLINDER BANK IS TOO RICH WHEN IDLING" AND WERE TOLD WE WOULD NEED TO REPLACE THE INTAKE MANIFOLD FOR $2110. THE EXPLANATION WE RECEIVED (VERBAL ONLY AS THEY REFUSED TO DESCRIBE THE PROBLEM IN WRITING AFTER ASKING MULTIPLE TIMES) WAS THAT A BUSHING THAT CONTROLS THE AIR FLOW VALVES WAS WORN. THEY COULD NOT PROVIDE A REASON AS TO WHAT WOULD CAUSE THIS WEAR CONSIDERING THE BUSHING IS INTERNAL TO THE CONTROL VALVES. THEY ALSO COULD NOT TELL ME WHICH SPECIFIC SIDE THIS LEAK WAS COMING FROM. SINCE THE INTAKE MANIFOLD IS ONE LARGE COMPONENT WE WOULD NEED TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE THING. THE CAR IS FIVE YEARS OLD SO ROUGHLY JUST OVER 12K MILES PER YEAR AND ALREADY MAJOR COMPONENTS ARE FAILING. THIS IS FROM THE SAME DEALER (MB GEORGETOWN, TEXAS) WHO ONCE TOLD US OUR BRAKES (ROTORS AND PADS) WERE ALL BAD AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. WE TOOK IT TO A TRUSTED MECHANIC AND ONLY NEEDED TO REPLACE THE FRONT PADS AS THEY WERE GETTING CLOSE TO BEING WORN OUT. WE NOW NEED A SECOND OPINION SINCE I SIMPLY DO NOT TRUST THEM. THE INFORMATION THEY PROVIDED WAS "PROVIDE ESTIMATE TO REPLACE INTAKE MANIFOLD FOR VACUUM LEAK AT $2110. AIR LEAK COMING FROM INTAKE TUMBLE FLAP ASSEMBLY." *TR
NHTSA ODI #10440915
74,321 miles · Dec 9, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
THE VEHICLE WAS BEING DRIVEN ON INTERSTATE 95 IN POMPANO BEACH FLORIDA, THE CAR STARTED TO RUN ROUGH AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT BECAME ILLUMINATED. TOOK THE CAR TO THE REPAIR SHOP AND IT CAME UP WITH 2 CODES 1200 AND 1208 INTAKE AND EXHAUST CAMSHAFT SENSOR RIGHT CYLINDER, THE MECHANICS REPLACED THE 2 SENSORS AND A COUPLE WEEKS …
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE WAS BEING DRIVEN ON INTERSTATE 95 IN POMPANO BEACH FLORIDA, THE CAR STARTED TO RUN ROUGH AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT BECAME ILLUMINATED. TOOK THE CAR TO THE REPAIR SHOP AND IT CAME UP WITH 2 CODES 1200 AND 1208 INTAKE AND EXHAUST CAMSHAFT SENSOR RIGHT CYLINDER, THE MECHANICS REPLACED THE 2 SENSORS AND A COUPLE WEEKS LATER IT APPEARED AGAIN. THE ORIGINAL MECHANIC RECOMMENDED ANOTHER SHOP THAT SPECIALIZED IN MERCEDES. I TOOK IT THERE A FEW WEEKS LATER AND WE WERE INFORMED IT IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE MERCEDES AND THAT THEY WERE BEING SUED FOR IT,AND MERCEDES HAS PUT OUT OVER 10 TSB ON THE ISSUE AND IT HAS BEEN HAPPENING TO CARS WITH THIS NEW ENGINE. THE PROBLEM IS THE SPROCKET ON THE BALANCE SHAFT WAS NOT HARDENED METAL,LIKE IT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10439125
Mileage unknown · Nov 28, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. I HAVE THE MB C230 2006. I'VE BEEN LOSING POWER WHILE DRIVING. WHILE THE CAR IDLES IT'S RUNNING AS IF IT'S MISSING LIKE OUT OF TIMING. I'VE BEEN TO THE PARTS DEPT BECAUSE I WAS TOLD THE VEHICLE WAS MISSING. I HAD THE COILS CHANGED. SPARK PLUGS CHANGED, YET STILL THE CAR HAS NO POWER AND WHEN IDLING THE EN…
Read full complaint
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. I HAVE THE MB C230 2006. I'VE BEEN LOSING POWER WHILE DRIVING. WHILE THE CAR IDLES IT'S RUNNING AS IF IT'S MISSING LIKE OUT OF TIMING. I'VE BEEN TO THE PARTS DEPT BECAUSE I WAS TOLD THE VEHICLE WAS MISSING. I HAD THE COILS CHANGED. SPARK PLUGS CHANGED, YET STILL THE CAR HAS NO POWER AND WHEN IDLING THE ENGINE RUNS SO VIOLENT IT'S CAUSING THE BELT TO WEAR. SO FAR I HAD TO BUY 5 BELTS AND THEY WON'T LAST MORE THAN 4 DAYS. THIS PAST WEEK I WAS ALSO TOLD THAT THE 4 MAGETS WOULD HAVE TO BE CHANGED. WELL I HAD THEM CHANGED AND STILL I HAVE A CAR THAT HAS NO POWER. I WAS FINALLY TOLD BY A MD MECHANIC MY PROBLEM WITH THE CAR IS THERE'S A BALANCE SHAFT THAT'S INOPERABLE. WHEN I INQUIRE ABOUT THIS ITEM I WAS TOLD THAT MERCEDES BENZ DOES NOT HAVE THIS AS A RECALL ITEM WHEN IN FACT THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN AN ISSUE SINCE 2004. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ANY INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO REPAIR. THERE IS NO WAY A CUSTOMER OF THIS AUTO MAKER SHOULD HAVE TO BEAR THE BURDEN OF PAYING FOR AN ITEM WHEN IN FACT IT'S BEEN A PROBLEM WITH MERCERDES BENZ FROM THE START. *KB
NHTSA ODI #10437627
33,800 miles · Oct 12, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingVehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE ON THE HIGHWAY DURING MORNING RUSH HOUR WHEN I NOTICED THAT THE CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE OVER 35 MPH. I MOVED THE CAR OFF THE HIGHWAY AND STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT. ONCE I STOPPED THE CAR IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE AT ALL WHEN I STEPPED ON THE GAS. I HAD TO PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND THEN MOVE IT BACK TO DRIV…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE ON THE HIGHWAY DURING MORNING RUSH HOUR WHEN I NOTICED THAT THE CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE OVER 35 MPH. I MOVED THE CAR OFF THE HIGHWAY AND STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT. ONCE I STOPPED THE CAR IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE AT ALL WHEN I STEPPED ON THE GAS. I HAD TO PUT THE CAR IN PARK AND THEN MOVE IT BACK TO DRIVE TO GET THE CAR TO MOVE. THE CAR WOULD JUMP AND LURCH FORWARD WHEN I SHIFTED GEARS. I DROVE THE CAR DIRECTLY TO THE DEALER. THE MERCEDES DEALER TOLD ME THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE SOFTWARE AND THAT THE SOFTWARE WOULD NEED TO BE UPDATED. I WENT TO PICK UP MY CAR AFTER THE "SOFTWARE " WAS UPDATED ($1,700 COST) AND DROVE THE CAR ABOUT 10 MILES WHEN I NOTICED THAT THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT HAD COME ON. I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO THE MERCEDES DEALER TO LET THEM KNOW THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS NOW ON. THE MERCEDES DEALER TOLD ME I HAVE A DEFECTIVE BALANCE SHAFT THAT NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED. THE MERCEDES DEALER ASK ME IF I HAD KEPT UP THE OIL CHANGES ON THE CAR. I TOLD THE THEM THAT I HAD. THE MERCEDES DEALER TOLD ME THAT I HAVE TO PAY $2,500 JUST FOR THEM TO TAKE THE ENGINE APART AND THAT THE TOTAL REPAIR WILL COST AROUND $6,000. I JUST PURCHASED THE CAR IN JULY 2010 ( 14 MONTHS OWNERSHIP) WITH ABOUT 19,500 MILES ON IT. *KB
NHTSA ODI #10429596
100,731 miles · Sep 28, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON MARCH 12, 2011, DURING AN "A" SERVICE, I WAS INFORMED BY MY MECHANIC, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED DUE TO THE LEFT INTAKE CAM SENSOR WAS DEFECTIVE BUT IT WAS NOT A BIG CONCERN. ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2011, DURING A "B" SERVICE, MY MECHANIC STATED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED AGAIN FOR THE LEFT INTAKE CAM AND TH…
Read full complaint
ON MARCH 12, 2011, DURING AN "A" SERVICE, I WAS INFORMED BY MY MECHANIC, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED DUE TO THE LEFT INTAKE CAM SENSOR WAS DEFECTIVE BUT IT WAS NOT A BIG CONCERN. ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2011, DURING A "B" SERVICE, MY MECHANIC STATED THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED AGAIN FOR THE LEFT INTAKE CAM AND THE RIGHT EXHUAST CAM ADJUSTER MAGNETS WERE DEFECTIVE OR THE BALANCE SHAFT WAS WORN. AT THIS POINT THE CAR WAS RUNNING OK BUT HE SAID IF HE RUNS A DIAGNOSTIC TEST ON THE ENGINE AGAIN IN THE NEAR FUTURE AND IT READS A SECOND PROBLEM ON THE RIGHT SIDE CAM SIDE, THERE IS A STRONG POSSIBILITY TEETH ON THE CAM SPOCKET DUE TO THE USAGE OF AN INFERIOR PRODUCT. HE EXPLAINED IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $4,000.00 TO REPAIR, HE WAS REPAIRING A VEHICLE WITH THE SAME PROBLEM AND SHOWED ME THE WEAR ON THE TEETH WHICH CAUSE THE INBALANCE OF THE SHAFT AND THE CAMS COME OFF LINE. IN MY MECHANICS OPINION, MERCEDES BENZ KNOWS ABOUT THEIR DEFECTIVE PART BYT THEY DO NOT WANT TO HAVE A "CAMPAIGN" TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE AND MY TYPE/YEAR ENGINE WAS MADE WITH THIS INFERIOR PART. I TRAVEL 80 MILES TO AND FROM WORK AND CANNOT AFFORD TO SPEND THIS MONEY FOR A REPAIR ON A VEHICLE THAT IS SUPPOSE TO LAST ME FOREVER. *TT
NHTSA ODI #10427695
Official recalls
5Nov 19, 2024
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 C-Class, CLK, E-Class, and CLS vehicles. Please see the recall report for a complete list of models and model years. The glass sunroof panel may not be properly secured and can detach.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached sunroof panel can become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the sunroof panel as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed January 10, 2025. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall is an expansion of previous NHTSA recall number 22V-954. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2024120001/2/3.
Dec 23, 2022
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 C-Class, CLK, E-Class, and CLS vehicles. Please refer to MBUSA's recall report for specific vehicle model details. The glass sunroof panel may not be properly secured and may detach.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached sunroof panel may become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the sunroof panel as necessary free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed February 3, 2023. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall expands NHTSA recall number 19V-918. MBUSA's numbers for this recall are 2023010004, 2023010005, and 2023010006.
Mar 19, 2021
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2006-2007 C350, C230, C280, CLK350, E320CDI, E350 Wagon, E350, 2006 C55 AMG, CLK500, CLS500, CLS55 AMG, E500 Wagon, E500, E55 AMG, 2007 CLK550, CLS550, CLS63 AMG, E550, E63 AMG, and E63 Wagon AMG vehicles. The bonding between the glass panel and the sliding roof frame may deteriorate, possibly causing the glass panel to detach from the vehicle.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached glass panel can separate from the vehicle and become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: MBUSA will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the glass panel bonding and replace the sliding roof, as necessary, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed May 7, 2021. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. This recall is an expansion of recall number 19V-918. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2021040012.
Dec 20, 2019
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (MBUSA) is recalling certain 2001-2011 vehicles. The bonding between the glass panel and the sliding roof frame may deteriorate, possibly resulting in the glass panel detaching from the vehicle. For a full list of the affected models visit: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2019/RMISC-19V918-4126.pdf
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached glass panel can separate from the vehicle and become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: MBUSA will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the glass panel bonding and replace the sliding roof, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began July 10, 2020. Owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372. MBUSA's number for this recall is 2020040011.
Feb 11, 2016
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. (MBUSA) is recalling certain model year 2009-2010 ML320 BlueTec 4Matic, GL320 BlueTec 4Matic and R320 CDI 4Matic, 2011 E350 Cabriolet and E550 Cabriolet, 2009-2011 ML350, ML350 4Matic, ML550 4Matic, ML63 AMG, and C63 AMG, 2010-2011 ML450 4Matic Hybrid, E350 Coupe, E350 4Matic, E550 Coupe, E550 4Matic, and E63 AMG, 2011-2012 GL350 BlueTec 4Matic and R350 BlueTec 4Matic, 2009-2012 GL450 4Matic, GL550 4Matic and R350 4Matic, 2007-2008 SLK280, SLK350, and SLK55 AMG, 2011-2014 SLS AMG Coupe, 2012 SLS AMG Cabriolet, 2013-2014 SLS AMG GT and SLS AMG GT Cabriolet, 2005 C230 Kompressor and C320, 2006-2007 C230, 2006-2011 C350, 2008-2011 C300 and C300 4Matic, 2010-2012 GLK350 and GLK350 4Matic and 2007-2008 Chrysler Crossfire vehicles. Upon deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, excessive internal pressure may cause the inflator to rupture.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.
Remedy: MBUSA will their notify owners, and Fiat Chrysler will notify the affected Chrysler owners. Dealers for the respective brands will replace the driver's frontal air bag module, free of charge. This recall began November 2016. Mercedes-Benz owners may contact MBUSA customer service at 1-800-367-6372 and Chrysler owners may contact Fiat Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403.
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.