← New search

2018 Nissan Altima

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2018 Nissan Altima do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 231.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

110 reports with mileage · 115 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.

  • Service Brakes. Review the 48 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 37 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 36 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

11 crash reports0 fire reports5 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

37 reports
Clear category filter
53 miles · Aug 4, 2020
Electrical SystemService BrakesUnknown Or Other

SINCE I PURCHASED THIS 2018 ALTIMA (I HAD PREVIOUSLY DRIVEN A 2016 ALTIMA WITHOUT AEB), I HAVE GOTTEN FALSE POSITIVES FROM THE FRONT SENSOR, STOPPING MY CAR AT RANDOM TIMES IN CLEAR DAY LIGHT TRAFFIC, ON DRY PAVEMENT, WITH NO LEAVES OR OTHER ROAD DEBRIS. FRONT SENSOR HAS CONTINUOUSLY REPORTED THE "FRONT SENSOR NOT AVAILABLE" ALE…

Read full complaint

SINCE I PURCHASED THIS 2018 ALTIMA (I HAD PREVIOUSLY DRIVEN A 2016 ALTIMA WITHOUT AEB), I HAVE GOTTEN FALSE POSITIVES FROM THE FRONT SENSOR, STOPPING MY CAR AT RANDOM TIMES IN CLEAR DAY LIGHT TRAFFIC, ON DRY PAVEMENT, WITH NO LEAVES OR OTHER ROAD DEBRIS. FRONT SENSOR HAS CONTINUOUSLY REPORTED THE "FRONT SENSOR NOT AVAILABLE" ALERT MULTIPLE TIMES IN MY CARS SHORT LIFETIME, FOLLOWED BY THE CRASH ICON AT RANDOM TIMES OF THE DAYS, AND ALL SPEEDS INCLUDING IN THE STOPPED POSITION. THE SENSOR GOES OUT REGARDLESS OR WHETHER THERE ARE OTHER VEHICLES AROUND. I REPORTED THESE ISSUES BEGINNINGIN OCTOBER 2018 (THE SAME MONTH I PURHCASED MY CAR). NO NISSAN VEHICLE SHOULD BE EQUIPPED WITH THE TECHNOLOGY WHERE DRIVER'S HAD NO CLUE WHEN THE VEHICLES WILL COME TO A HALT AND LOCK WITHOUT WARNING. THIS COMMONLY HAPPENS WHEN THERE ARE CARS AROUND ME AND THERE IS A CHANGE IN SPEED (ANTICIPATED OR NTO), WHICH IS COMMON IN LA. MY FRONT SENSOR HAS MALFUNCTIONED SEVERAL TIMES AND ENGAGED THE BRAKES, SEVERAL TIMES WHILE DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY AT 50MPH. MY CAR ALSO SEEMS TO LUG AT TIMES WHEN I BRAKE FROM A DISTANCE AND NORMALLY WHICH CONCERNS ME. I HAVE REPORTED THIS ISSUES TO TECHNICIANS AND HAD THE BRAKES CHECKED WITH NO PROBLEMS FOUND SO I HAVE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO WAIT FOR THE ISSUES WITH MY BRAKES AND CAR TO COMPILE. THE OWNER'S MANUAL ADMITS AEB SYSTEMS DO "NOT FUNCTION IN ALL DRIVING, TRAFFIC, WEATHER, AND ROAD CONDITIONS" BUT THE MANUAL LEAVES OUT THE PART ABOUT HOW THE SYSTEMS CAN CAUSE VEHICLES TO SUDDENLY STOP EVEN WHEN NO OBJECTS ARE IN THE DRIVING LANE. I ORIGINALLY REPORTED THIS ISSUE TO STEVE YAEGER ON OCTOBER 19, 2018--THE SAME MONTH I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE. HAVE BROUGHT IN MY VEHICLE INTO TO NISSAN VARIOUS TIMES IN THE FIRST 3 MONTHS BUT TECHNICIANS ALWAYS TOLD ME THERE IS NOTHING THEY CAN DO AND JUST SHAKE OFF MY CONCERNS/TRY TO GIVE EXPLANATIONS.

NHTSA ODI #11343267

32,344 miles · May 1, 2020
Electrical System

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PUSH TO START FEATURE FAILED TO OPERATE AS DESIGNED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SEVERAL UNKNOWN WARNING LIGHTS WERE ILLUMINATED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS DEPRESSING THE PUSH TO START BUTTON THE VEHICLE STARTED AND OPERATED AS INTENDED. THE…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PUSH TO START FEATURE FAILED TO OPERATE AS DESIGNED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SEVERAL UNKNOWN WARNING LIGHTS WERE ILLUMINATED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS DEPRESSING THE PUSH TO START BUTTON THE VEHICLE STARTED AND OPERATED AS INTENDED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO GRAND BLANC NISSAN (8346 HOLLY RD, GRAND BLANC, MI 48439, (810)893-6510) TO BE DIAGNOSED. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FAILURE WAS DUE TO A DEFECTIVE STOP LAMP SWITCH. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 32,344.

NHTSA ODI #11322980

48,000 miles · Apr 29, 2020
Electrical System

THE BACKUP CAMERA WOULD NOT WORK. CAMERA SCREEN WAS BLACK IN REVERSE MODE. SOMETIMES THE SCREEN GET STATIC LINES AND THEN BLACKS OUT. I NEED THE BACKUP CAMERA VERY MUCH BECAUSE I HAVE LIMITED TWISTING AT MY WAIST.

NHTSA ODI #11322609

35,000 miles · Mar 15, 2020
Electrical SystemService BrakesUnknown Or Other

RADAR SENSOR FOR AEB AND FCW MALFUNCTIONING, TURNING OFF AT RANDOM SITUATIONS, BRAKING WHEN NO VEHICLE IS NEAR, FALSE ALERTS CROSSING RAIL ROAD TRACKS, ETC. TOOK TO NISSAN DEALERSHIP UNDER WARRANTY BUT ISSUE WAS NOT FIXED SINCE THEY CLAIM TO BE BECAUSE OF POTENTIAL PRIOR CRASH. VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED IN A CRASH, AND AEB I…

Read full complaint

RADAR SENSOR FOR AEB AND FCW MALFUNCTIONING, TURNING OFF AT RANDOM SITUATIONS, BRAKING WHEN NO VEHICLE IS NEAR, FALSE ALERTS CROSSING RAIL ROAD TRACKS, ETC. TOOK TO NISSAN DEALERSHIP UNDER WARRANTY BUT ISSUE WAS NOT FIXED SINCE THEY CLAIM TO BE BECAUSE OF POTENTIAL PRIOR CRASH. VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED IN A CRASH, AND AEB IS MALFUNCTIONING CONSTANTLY TO THE POINT WHERE IT MAY BE UNSAFE INSTEAD OF A SAFETY FEATURE.

NHTSA ODI #11318157

50,000 miles · Jan 22, 2020
Electrical SystemService Brakes

THE CAR WILL NOT START USING PUSH TO START WITH THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED. THE CAR IS AN AUTOMATIC AND THE PROBLEM IS DUE TO A FAULTY STOP LIGHT SWITCH. THE SAFETY CONCERN IS THAT THE BRAKE LIGHTS ARE NOT FUNCTIONING CORRECTLY AND IS A SAFETY CONCERN. THIS SEEMS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM AND THE CAR IS LESS THAN 2 YEARS OLD.

NHTSA ODI #11301051

20,000 miles · Jan 10, 2020
Electrical System

NTERMITTENT FRONT RADAR. WARNING MESSAGE WILL APPEAR STATING "FRONT RADAR UNAVAILBLE DUE TO OBSTRUCTION" WHEN THERE IS NOT AN OBSTRUCTION. THIS ALSO HAPPENS WHEN IT RAINS INTERMITTANTLY. AFTER A FEW MINUTES, THE "OBSTRUCTION" IS CLEARED AND THE SYSTEM RESUMES FUNCTIONALITY.

NHTSA ODI #11298438

21,000 miles · Dec 3, 2019
Electrical SystemService BrakesUnknown Or Other

INTERMITTENT FRONT RADAR. WARNING MESSAGE WILL APPEAR STATING "FRONT RADAR UNAVAILBLE DUE TO OBSTRUCTION" WHEN THERE IS NOT AN OBSTRUCTION, THEN THE SYSTEM DEACTIVATES THE AUTOMATIC EMERGENCY BRAKING. AFTER A FEW MINUTES, THE "OBSTRUCTION" IS CLEARED AND THE SYSTEM RESUMES FUNCTIONALITY. THIS WILL REPEAT QUITE OFTEN. WHILE I OWN…

Read full complaint

INTERMITTENT FRONT RADAR. WARNING MESSAGE WILL APPEAR STATING "FRONT RADAR UNAVAILBLE DUE TO OBSTRUCTION" WHEN THERE IS NOT AN OBSTRUCTION, THEN THE SYSTEM DEACTIVATES THE AUTOMATIC EMERGENCY BRAKING. AFTER A FEW MINUTES, THE "OBSTRUCTION" IS CLEARED AND THE SYSTEM RESUMES FUNCTIONALITY. THIS WILL REPEAT QUITE OFTEN. WHILE I OWN A NISSAN ALTIMA, IT APPEARS THIS IS AN ISSUE IN THE NISSAN SENTRA, AS WELL.

NHTSA ODI #11286535

21,000 miles · Nov 22, 2019
Electrical SystemSteeringUnknown Or Other

SECOND ISSUE WITH MY 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA. WAS IN THE SHOP IN OCTOBER FOR THE FRONT COLLISION SENSOR MALFUNCTIONING. SENSOR WAS DETECTING OBSTRUCTIONS WHEN NOTHING WAS THERE. LOCAL DEALERSHIP REPLACED THE SENSOR IN OCTOBER. LESS THAN ONE MONTH OUT OF THE SHOP (THIS WEEK), THE SENSOR MALFUNCTIONED AGAIN. STATED FEB: UNAVAILABLE…

Read full complaint

SECOND ISSUE WITH MY 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA. WAS IN THE SHOP IN OCTOBER FOR THE FRONT COLLISION SENSOR MALFUNCTIONING. SENSOR WAS DETECTING OBSTRUCTIONS WHEN NOTHING WAS THERE. LOCAL DEALERSHIP REPLACED THE SENSOR IN OCTOBER. LESS THAN ONE MONTH OUT OF THE SHOP (THIS WEEK), THE SENSOR MALFUNCTIONED AGAIN. STATED FEB: UNAVAILABLE FRONT RADAR OBSTRUCTION AND WAS STEADILY BLINKING AGAIN.AGAIN, NOTHING IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE THAT WOULD HAVE TRIGGERED THE SENSOR. CONTACTED NISSAN CUSTOMER SERVICE AND WAS ADVISED TO TAKE THE VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP AGAIN FOR REPAIR. DROPPED VEHICLE TO LOCAL DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD THEY WOULD LOOK AT THE SENSOR AND CHANGE OUT THE BRACKET THE SENSOR SITS IN TO SEE IF THAT CORRECTS THE ISSUE. VERY FRUSTRATED WITH THIS ISSUE. .

NHTSA ODI #11281726

Mileage unknown · Oct 27, 2019
Electrical SystemService Brakes

THE FRONT COLLISION RADAR SENSOR KEEPS GOING OFF AND ON. TOOK INTO DEALER AND SAID IT WAS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM AND DON'T KNOW WHY IT IS NOT RECALLED YET. THE PART IS $1500 WHICH IS OVER 10% OF THE VEHICLE. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AS I DO NOT KNOW WHEN IT IS ON OR OFF. THE THE SENSOR GOES OFF STAY FRONT SENSOR IS UNAVAILABLE DUE…

Read full complaint

THE FRONT COLLISION RADAR SENSOR KEEPS GOING OFF AND ON. TOOK INTO DEALER AND SAID IT WAS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM AND DON'T KNOW WHY IT IS NOT RECALLED YET. THE PART IS $1500 WHICH IS OVER 10% OF THE VEHICLE. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AS I DO NOT KNOW WHEN IT IS ON OR OFF. THE THE SENSOR GOES OFF STAY FRONT SENSOR IS UNAVAILABLE DUE TO OBSTRUCTION AND THERE IS NOTHING THERE. IT WILL TURN OFF AND ON SEVERAL TIMES IN A DRIVE.

NHTSA ODI #11271282

19,575 miles · Oct 17, 2019
Electrical SystemService BrakesUnknown Or Other

WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE, NOTIFICATION OF "FEB: UNAVAILABLE FRONT RADAR OBSTRUCTION" COMES ON AND STAYS ILLUMINATED FOR UPWARDS OF 5 TO 10 MINUTES BEFORE TURNING OFF. THIS OCCURS WHEN THERE ARE NO VEHICLES IN FRONT OF MINE AND NO ROAD HAZARDS THAT WOULD HAVE TRIGGERED IT TO TURN ON. I FEEL THAT THIS IS A BIG SAFETY ISSUE WITH T…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE, NOTIFICATION OF "FEB: UNAVAILABLE FRONT RADAR OBSTRUCTION" COMES ON AND STAYS ILLUMINATED FOR UPWARDS OF 5 TO 10 MINUTES BEFORE TURNING OFF. THIS OCCURS WHEN THERE ARE NO VEHICLES IN FRONT OF MINE AND NO ROAD HAZARDS THAT WOULD HAVE TRIGGERED IT TO TURN ON. I FEEL THAT THIS IS A BIG SAFETY ISSUE WITH THE WAY THE CAR IS DESIGNED TO STOP WHEN IT DETECTS A HAZARD. THIS STARTED OUT RANDOMLY OVER THIS PAST SUMMER AND IN THE LAST WEEK, HAS BEEN A DAILY OCCURRENCE. WHEN I SPOKE TO THE DEALERSHIP ABOUT IT, THE SOONEST THEY HAD AN OPENING TO ADDRESS IT IS A MONTH AWAY. NO A HAPPY CAMPER, FEELS LIKE THEY ARE NOT AS CONCERNED AS I AM WITH THE SAFETY OF MY VEHICLE. BRAKE SWITCH FAILURE LESS THAN ONE YEAR OF OWNERSHIP OF THE VEHICLE. UNABLE TO PUSH THE BRAKE PEDAL IN TO START THE VEHICLE. THE ONLY WAY TO GET THE SWITCH TO RELEASE IS TO TAP ON IT WITH A HAMMER. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN OCCURRING FAIRLY REGULARLY FOR THE PAST WEEK BEFORE I COULD GET IT TO THE DEALERSHIP TODAY. (IS SUPPOSED TO BE FIXED TOMORROW??) AT ONE POINT, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START ALTOGETHER. POPPED THE HOOD TO JUMP START IT, AND NOTICED BLACK POWDERY STUFF ON THE TOP OF THE BATTERY AS THOUGH THE BATTER HAD GOTTEN TOO HOT AND BOILED OVER POSSIBLY. THE DEALERSHIP TEST THE BATTERY AND TOLD ME THAT MY BATTERY IS FINE AND FULLY CHARGED. THIS WAS AFTER I HAD IT ON THE CHARGER FOR SEVERAL HOURS YESTERDAY SO THAT IT WOULD START FOR ME TO TAKE IT TO THE DEALERSHIP.

NHTSA ODI #11269272

Official recalls

2

20V315000 · Latches/locks/linkages:hood:latch

May 28, 2020

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain model year 2013-2018 Nissan Altima vehicles. If the primary hood latch is inadvertently released, there is an increased likelihood that the secondary hood latch may corrode over time.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Corrosion to the secondary latch may cause it to bind and remain in the unlatched position when the hood is closed. If the primary latch is inadvertently released again and the secondary latch is not engaged, the hood could unexpectedly open while driving, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will install a stronger release spring in the hood release lever, a warning label near the secondary hood latch, and an Owner’s Manual addendum card with instructions on how to lubricate and maintain the secondary hood latch mechanism, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed June 30, 2021. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669. Note: Recall 16V-029 remains open for any unremedied 2013-2015 Altimas and this recall applies to all vehicles covered by 16V-029 even if those repairs have already been performed.

19V654000 · Back Over Prevention: Sensing System: Camera

Sep 12, 2019

Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2018-2019 Nissan Altima, Armada, Frontier, Kicks, Leaf, Maxima, Murano, NV, NV200, Pathfinder, Rogue, Rogue Sport, Sentra, Titan, Titan Diesel, Versa Note and Versa Sedan vehicles, as well as Infiniti Q50, Q60, QX30 and QX80 vehicles. Additionally included are 2019 Nissan GT-R and Taxi and Infiniti QX50, QX60, Q70, Q70L vehicles. The back-up camera and display settings can be adjusted such that the rear view image is no longer visible and the system will retain that setting the next time the vehicle is placed in reverse. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 111, "Rear Visibility."

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The lack of an image in the back-up camera display increases the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Nissan will notify owners in phases, having dealers update the back-up camera settings software, free of charge. The recall began November 11, 2019 and all affected VINs should be activated. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669 or INFINITI customer service at 1-800-662-6200.

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

4

AQ22003 · Hertz/vehicles Rented With Open Recalls

Opened Dec 16, 2022 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Latches/locks/linkages:hood:latch

NHTSA is opening this audit query to investigate whether The Hertz Corporation (Hertz) has complied with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act). The Safety Act requires, among other things, that a rental company shall not rent a vehicle subject to a safety recall unless the recall remedy has been performed. 49 U.S.C. § 30120(i).NHTSA is in receipt of information that indicates Hertz rented vehicles to customers without having performed required recall repairs. Accordingly, we are opening this audit query to seek additional information concerning this issue.

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.

EA19002 · Rear Suspension Control Arm Failure

Opened Jul 29, 2019 · Closed Jun 16, 2025

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:rear

On July 29, 2019, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened EA19002 to investigate instances of alleged rear lower control arm failures in 2013-2018 Nissan Altima and 2016-2018 Nissan Maxima vehicles. At the time the investigation was opened ODI had 91 consumer complaints alleging rear lower control arm failures in the subject vehicles.ODI was concerned about these complaints because many of them alleged an increased steering effort or loss of vehicle control.At the time these complaints were received, ODI was also aware of a proactive service campaign addressing 2013 Nissan Altima in salt-belt states for a similar concern. Since opening the investigation, ODI has confirmed, based on consumer complaints, warranty data, and testing conducted by Nissan and ODI, that owners of the subject vehicles are experiencing a corroded bushing at one of three mounting points of the control arm to the rear subframe.ODI has also confirmed that drivers become aware of the problem because of sound and abnormal vibrations. In addition, the failure mileage is typically over 113,000 miles at the time of failure.In conjunction with Nissan and VRTC, ODI participated in testing to assess the potential safety consequence of a bushing failure.It was found the Vehicle Dynamic Control system allows the driver to maintain vehicle control in the event of a bushing failure.With between 7 to 13 years of field exposure, ODI is aware of only one low speed crash allegation describing minor contact with another vehicle’s trailer hitch. Nissan acknowledges that a crack can develop in affected control arms due to stress loading from normal use and that salts commonly used for roadway snow and ice treatment may result in corrosion that exacerbates the progression of the crack.Nissan implemented a design change in January of 2018 to improve the durability of the lower control arm.Affected vehicles have either been repaired with the countermeasure part under a customer satisfaction campaign or been provided a warranty extension from 3 years/36,000 miles to 10 year/unlimited mileage. Through testing and analysis of the information obtained to date, ODI has not identified a defect representing an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety involving corrosion of the subject rear lower control arm at this time.With a declining trend of reports and Nissan’s actions to implement a countermeasure and extended warranty coverage, further investigation of the issue does not appear to be warranted at this time.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov. A detailed discussion of the investigation and related complaint numbers can be viewed in the attached closing report.

PE18013 · Rear Suspension Control Arm Failure

Opened Dec 1, 2018 · Closed Aug 21, 2019

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:rear

PE18-013 was opened on December 1, 2018, with 4 complaints to ODI alleging incidents of the lower control arm fracturing at a connection point to the vehicle chassis due to corrosion. ODI has received an additional 87 complaints since the PE was opened. During PE18-013, Nissan indicated model years 2013-2018 shared a common rear lower control arm design. Nissan provided complaint and warranty data regarding 48 incidents of the subject failure. The majority of the complaints are from vehicles registered in salt belt states. There have been no crashes, injuries, or fatalities confirmed as of this date. Nissan advised that it has conducted testing to assess safety risk. Nissan states that due to low incident rate, high detectability, and low risk of adverse vehicle dynamics, it does not believe the subject lower control arm failure poses an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.This preliminary evaluation has been upgraded to Engineering Analysis (EA) 19-002. During the EA, ODI will continue to collect and analyze complaint and field data in its efforts to fully assess the scope and frequency of the alleged defect. More importantly, ODI will also seek additional information and data regarding the potential safety consequences of rear lower control arm failure, both from evidence collected from field failures and through more rigorous and comprehensive vehicle testing to be conducted by either Nissan and/or NHTSA.The ODI reports (VOQs) cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers: 11234334, 11234232, 11234189, 11233771, 11233234, 11232381, 11231589, 11230323, 11230184, 11229023, 11229003, 11228730, 11228651, 11228631, 11228625, 11223086, 11222602, 11222427, 11222303, 11221802, 11219943, 11217980, 11217542, 11217505, 11217290, 11210699, 11209647, 11208580, 11208274, 11207545, 11206310, 11205711, 11205461, 11203864, 11203005, 11195416, 11193545, 11193020, 11192269, 11192066, 11191270, 11191207, 11191185, 11191042, 11190360, 11190323, 11187334, 11187157, 11186747, 11186195, 11185664, 11185632, 11185589, 11183799, 11183295, 11183198, 11182705,11182528, 11182265, 11182137, 11182088, 11181373, 11181223, 11181155, 11181009, 11180126, 11176565, 11176261, 11176135, 11175821, 11172604, 11172200, 11172065, 11170019, 11169930, 11165194, 11163833, 11163489, 11162559, 11162195, 11161956, 11161497, 11161117, 11157323, 11157234, 11156772, 11141169, 11139516, 11129476, 11122829, 11114374.

Go deeper into Nissan Altima problems