← 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

What owners actually said

225 reports
19,000 miles · Jun 11, 2020
Unknown Or OtherCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HIS VEHICLE WAS REAR ENDED WHEN HE WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN. THE CONTACT WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL BY AMBULANCE FOR BACK PAINS AND FACIAL INJURIES. THE CONTACT WAS UNAWARE OF INJURES TO THE OTHER VEHICLE OCCUPANTS. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE W…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HIS VEHICLE WAS REAR ENDED WHEN HE WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN. THE CONTACT WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL BY AMBULANCE FOR BACK PAINS AND FACIAL INJURIES. THE CONTACT WAS UNAWARE OF INJURES TO THE OTHER VEHICLE OCCUPANTS. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER HERITAGE NISSAN (1500 VETERANS MEMORIAL HWY NE, ROME, GA 30161 706-291-1981) AND THEY SAID THE DAMAGE WOULD COST OVER $10,000 TO FIX. THEY WELDED THE FRAME BACK TOGETHER EVEN THOUGH THEY SHOULD HAVE TOTALED THE VEHICLE. THEY REPAIRED THE VEHICLE WITH USED PARTS AND THE CONTACT NOTICED THE SUBPAR WORK WHEN HE GOT HIS VEHICLE BACK. THE MANUFACTURER WAS LEFT A MESSAGE TO CALLBACK THE CONTACT BUT NO RETURN CALL HAD OCCURRED. THE VEHICLE PERFORMS POORLY WITH THE REPAIRS BY THE DEALER. THE INSURANCE COMPANY HAD NOT RESPONDED TO THE CONTACT'S ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 19,000. *BF THE CONSUMER STATED THE REPAIRS WERE MADE BY THE REPAIR SHOP NOT THE DEALER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #11328304

45,000 miles · Jun 6, 2020
Unknown Or Other

CRASH WARNING RADAR KEEPS GOING IN AND OUT OF DETECTION. IT WILL START IN MODE CORRECTLY AND THEN BECOME UNAVAILABLE ESPECIALLY WHEN IT RAINS OR AT HIGH SPEEDS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #11327527

39,171 miles · May 29, 2020
EngineInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVAILING AT 40 MPH, THE VEHICLE ABRUPTLY CEASED WHICH CAUSED THE CONTACT TO HIT HIS HEAD ON THE STEERING WHEEL. THE CONTACT SUFFERED INJURIES TO HIS NECK AND BACK BUT HE DID NOT SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION. AFTER THE FAILURE OCCURRED, THE FLIP INDICATOR AND T…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVAILING AT 40 MPH, THE VEHICLE ABRUPTLY CEASED WHICH CAUSED THE CONTACT TO HIT HIS HEAD ON THE STEERING WHEEL. THE CONTACT SUFFERED INJURIES TO HIS NECK AND BACK BUT HE DID NOT SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION. AFTER THE FAILURE OCCURRED, THE FLIP INDICATOR AND THE ABS WARNING LIGHTS BOTH ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. DUE TO THE FAILURE, THE CONTACT HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO SOUTH AUSTIN NISSAN (4914 S IH 35 FRONTAGE RD, AUSTIN, TX 78745) WHERE THEY DIAGNOSED THE VEHICLE WITH A PISTON SENSOR FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER HAD ALSO BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND DENIED THAT THIS PARTICULAR DEFECT WOULD HAVE CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO ABRUPTLY CEASE. THEY REFERRED HIM BACK TO THE DEALER WHO DISPUTE THE CLAIM THAT WAS MADE BY THE MANUFACTURER. THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN REPAIRED OUT OF POCKET. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 39,171.

NHTSA ODI #11326512

Mileage unknown · May 27, 2020
Unknown Or Other

CAR IS #1 OF THE TOP 10 STOLEN CARS. CONSUMER WAS NOT ALERTED TO THAT PRIOR TO PURCHASE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #11326242

43,714 miles · May 16, 2020
Steering

WHEN I FIRST PICKED UP MY CAR THE STEERING WHEEL WAS VERY STIFF SO I ASKED THE DEALERSHIP ABOUT IT THE SAME DAY- I WAS TOLD IT WAS PROBABLY THE ALIGNMENT AND TO NOT BRING IT BACK. AND IF I DID, THEY MAY CHARGE ME TO LOOK AT. ABOUT 2 MONTHS LATER I HAD BEEN NOTICING MY CAR WOULD MAKE AN ODD NOISE AFTER ABOUT 5 MINUTES OF DRIVING …

Read full complaint

WHEN I FIRST PICKED UP MY CAR THE STEERING WHEEL WAS VERY STIFF SO I ASKED THE DEALERSHIP ABOUT IT THE SAME DAY- I WAS TOLD IT WAS PROBABLY THE ALIGNMENT AND TO NOT BRING IT BACK. AND IF I DID, THEY MAY CHARGE ME TO LOOK AT. ABOUT 2 MONTHS LATER I HAD BEEN NOTICING MY CAR WOULD MAKE AN ODD NOISE AFTER ABOUT 5 MINUTES OF DRIVING AND WHEN I WOULD BRAKE. THE DEALERSHIP DIDN?T HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT MY CAR SO I TOOK IT TO A MECHANIC TO CHECK IF THERE WAS SOMETHING IN BRAKES THAT WAS MAKING THE NOISE. THEY ADVISED ME TO GO TO THE DEALERSHIP AS THE NOISE WAS NOT COMING FROM MY BRAKES BUT AROUND MY TRANSMISSION- WHICH WARRANTY WOULD COVER. I FINALLY GOT AN APPOINTMENT WITH THE DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD I WOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEM TO CHECK IT ***IF NOTHING WAS WRONG***. MID DAY AFTER DROPPING THE CAR OFF THE NIGHT BEFORE- I WAS TOLD THAT THEY COULDN'T HEAR ANY NOISE AND TO EITHER LEAVE IT WITH THEM OR TAKE IT HOME AND IF IT?S MAKES THE NOISE TO BRING IT BACK. SO I WENT TO THE DEALERSHIP THE NEXT MORNING AND I WAS GIVEN THAT OPTION AGAIN. THE MECHANIC WALKED BACK TO PULL THE CAR AROUND AND NOT EVEN 5 MINUTES LATER HE RETURNS TO SAY AS SOON AS HE STARTED THE CAR- HE HEARD IT. AND IT WAS LOUD ENOUGH TO HEAR THROUGH MUSIC (WHICH IT WASN'T REALLY AT THE TIME) AND TO LEAVE IT FOR IT TO BE CHECKED AGAIN. I WAS THEN TOLD A DAY LATER THAT MY POWER STEERING PUMP WOULD NEED TO REPLACED AND THAT IT WOULD WELL OVER 1K. THEY DIDN'T NOT OFFER AN APOLOGY OR HELP. INSTEAD THEY CHARGED ME WHEN I WENT TO PICK UP THE CAR AND WERE RUDE. I HAD ASKED FOR MY PAPERWORK AS WELL AS THEY DIDN'T PROVIDE IT TO ME WHEN I BOUGHT THE CAR, I WAS MET WITH INCREDIBLE RUDENESS AND BADGERING. I DID REACH OUT TO NISSAN CORPORATE FOR MONTHS WITH NO RESOLUTION. THE LAST I HEARD WAS FROM AN AGENT THAT HE ASKED THEM TO PROVIDE ME WITH THE PAPERWORK, BUT HE COULDN'T GUARANTEE THEY WOULD. I WAS OFFERED NO FURTHER HELP. *TR

NHTSA ODI #11324742

56,000 miles · May 9, 2020
Service BrakesVehicle Speed Control

AFTER 10 MIN OF OPERATION AND AT A REGULAR SPEED IN A FRW 55 MPH THE COLLUSION SENSOR COMES UP STATING THAT THERE IS NO WARNING IF A CAR IS TOO CLOSE TO THE FRONT OF VEHICLE. CRUISE CONTROL DOESN'T WORK AND APPEARS THAT WORKS WITH THE COLLUSION SENSOR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #11323992

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

Mileage unknown · Apr 22, 2020
Service BrakesUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed Control

I LEASED A 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA (FROM NISSAN) ON 3/24/18. APPROX 12K MILES INTO LEASING THE VEHICLE I HAD A BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH/BRAKE LAMP SWITCH (BRAKE SWITCH) GO BAD. THE VEHICLE IS A PUSH TO START VEHICLE AND THE BRAKE SWITCH IS A SENOR ABOVE THE BRAKE THAT WHEN YOU PRESS ON THE BRAKE, IT TELLS THE VEHICLE THAT YOUR PRESSING T…

Read full complaint

I LEASED A 2018 NISSAN ALTIMA (FROM NISSAN) ON 3/24/18. APPROX 12K MILES INTO LEASING THE VEHICLE I HAD A BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH/BRAKE LAMP SWITCH (BRAKE SWITCH) GO BAD. THE VEHICLE IS A PUSH TO START VEHICLE AND THE BRAKE SWITCH IS A SENOR ABOVE THE BRAKE THAT WHEN YOU PRESS ON THE BRAKE, IT TELLS THE VEHICLE THAT YOUR PRESSING THE BRAKE TO START THE VEHICLE. THE PART WAS BACK ORDERED SO NISSAN AS A WHOLE HAD ZERO BRAKE SWITCHES TO REPLACE MY BAD ONE. I EXPLAINED TO THE NISSAN SERVICE REP THAT IM IN THE MILITARY AND I NEED MY VEHICLE TO DRIVE ME TO DIFFERENT DUTY LOCATIONS AND ALSO I HAVE COURT ORDERED CUSTODY IN WHICH I HAVE TO DRIVE 424 MILES TO GO SEE MY DAUGHTER AND THAT PARTICULAR WEEKEND I NEEDED MY VEHICLE TO DRIVE TO SEE HER. THE REP ADVISED ME THAT HE WOULD TAKE ONE FROM A NEW VEHICLE AND PLACE IT INTO MINES SO I COULD GO SEE MY DAUGHTER. BECAUSE HE DID THAT, THE MAINTENANCE WAS UNDOCUMENTED. AT 21,254K MILES THE PART FAILED AGAIN. CAUSING MY VEHICLE NOT TO START (IT WAS START RANDOMLY). WHEN IT DID START, I WAS NOT ABLE TO SHIFT MY VEHICLE OUT OF PARK OR SOMETIMES IF I DID GET IT INTO PARK, I COULDNT SHIFT IT FROM DRIVE OR REVERSE, CAUSING A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN. ALSO WHILE DRIVING THE CARS ANTI-COLLISION BRAKING SYSTEM, WHICH WAS INCORPORATED WITH THE SWITCH, WOULD SUDDENLY CAUSE MY VEHICLE TO BRAKE (EVEN WHILE DRIVING 70MPH ON THE HIGHWAY). SOMETIMES THE VEHICLE WOULDN'T GO OVER 30MPH. I WAS ABLE TO GET THAT FIXED UNDER WARRANTY. THE PART FAILED AGAIN AT 62,155K MILES AND AT 129,025K MILES. THE LAST TIME THE PART FAILED I ASKED THE NISSAN SERVICE REP IF THERE ANYTHING NISSAN CAN DO BECAUSE I CANT KEEP PAYING FOR THIS PART TO KEEP FAILING. I NEED MY VEHICLE TO SEE MY DAUGHTER AND TO TRAVEL FOR THE MILITARY. HE ADVISED ME TO CALL THE NISSAN CORPORATE, I CALLED AND THEY STARTED A CASE BUT THE NEXT DAY I WAS ADVISED THAT THEY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING.

NHTSA ODI #11321914

5 miles · Apr 14, 2020
Power TrainUnknown Or Other

AIR COOLING SYSTEM DOES NOT WORK. IT WILL NOT BLOW ANY COLD AIR. ATTEMPTED TO PUT FREON ONLY FOR IT TO BURST OUT A PIPE. I WAS TOLD THERE IS A LEAKAGE. WHEN DRIVING AND TRYING TO CHANGE GEARS TO DRIVE THERE IS A VERY UGLY GRINDING NOISE AND GEAR SWITCHING IS HARD. BACK UP CAMERA GOES IN AND OUT. SOMETIMES IT'S JUST A BLAC…

Read full complaint

AIR COOLING SYSTEM DOES NOT WORK. IT WILL NOT BLOW ANY COLD AIR. ATTEMPTED TO PUT FREON ONLY FOR IT TO BURST OUT A PIPE. I WAS TOLD THERE IS A LEAKAGE. WHEN DRIVING AND TRYING TO CHANGE GEARS TO DRIVE THERE IS A VERY UGLY GRINDING NOISE AND GEAR SWITCHING IS HARD. BACK UP CAMERA GOES IN AND OUT. SOMETIMES IT'S JUST A BLACK SCREEN. THIS ONLY HAPPENS WHEN REVERSING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #11321061

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