IllustrationSee attached document
2017 Nissan Titan
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Titan years
Owner complaints for the 2017 Nissan Titan are substantially higher than the model-year median of 46.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Titan years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
420–25K
1225–50K
1150–75K
875–100K
2100–150K
2150K+
77 reports with mileage · 110 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Engine. Review the 98 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 31 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
5 crash reports9 fire reports4 injury reports
Engine complaints
98 reportsEngine is knocking at only 83k miles. No. 7 cylinder issue. Nissan won’t cover repairs even though they’re aware of the design flaw.
I am submitting this complaint on behalf of the vehicle owner. On March 31, 2025 (136,962 miles), the vehicle was brought to Fred Anderson Nissan of [XXX] for Voluntary Emission Recall PD128 (NTB24-061), which required a new Particulate Matter Sensor and ECM reprogramming. One day later, the Check Engine Light illuminated. On …
Read full complaint
I am submitting this complaint on behalf of the vehicle owner. On March 31, 2025 (136,962 miles), the vehicle was brought to Fred Anderson Nissan of [XXX] for Voluntary Emission Recall PD128 (NTB24-061), which required a new Particulate Matter Sensor and ECM reprogramming. One day later, the Check Engine Light illuminated. On April 2, 2025 (137,083 miles), the dealer diagnosed code P2002-00 (DPF Efficiency Below Specs). Repair Order #XXX states: "The new sensor that is now monitoring DPF is able to see this and is setting the code as designed." The dealer's own documentation confirms the fault code was triggered by the recall — not a pre-existing failure. The vehicle had no warning lights before the recall was performed. Nissan Consumer Affairs (Case #XXX) declined goodwill assistance citing mileage, without addressing the documented causal link between the recall and the fault code. The owner now faces a DPF replacement costing several thousand dollars as a direct result of complying with a manufacturer recall. Safety concern: A DPF in confirmed fault condition can trigger unexpected limp mode, including at highway speeds. If other PD128 recipients are experiencing the same recall-induced fault and cannot absorb the repair cost, those vehicles may be operating in a compromised condition. We request NHTSA investigate whether Recall PD128 is creating safety and repair liability for consumers who complied in good faith. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Premature turbocharger failure
I live in [XXX] . Went on vacation to visit our son outside of Nashville Tennessee. Vehicle had approximately 80,000 miles at the time. While driving in traffic and sitting still at lights and odor was coming in the cab. When I got home, I called the dealer about Catalytic converter failure possibly they told me that it was not …
Read full complaint
I live in [XXX] . Went on vacation to visit our son outside of Nashville Tennessee. Vehicle had approximately 80,000 miles at the time. While driving in traffic and sitting still at lights and odor was coming in the cab. When I got home, I called the dealer about Catalytic converter failure possibly they told me that it was not covered that I should take it to a reputable exhaust repair shop. I took it to Callahan’s auto repair in Pontiac Michigan. They put it on the Hoist and came and told me it had a cracked exhaust manifold which the catalytic converter was attached to and that’s where the odor was coming from. When I purchased the vehicle, I have a lifetime drive caring warranty from infinity through the dealership. I called the dealership and talked to Service and they told me to bring it in while waiting for an appointment. I was due for an oil change and canceled it and looked on Google For problems with the 2017 V8 engine and found a nine page technical service report on the failure of that particular line of engine, I was never notified at any time that my engine was subject to failure, and it had been to the dealership within the last 30 days to have a new transmission pan put underneath the vehicle which Nissan paid 60% of on their own and I paid 40. Upon taking it to the dealership and leaving it, I have to pay $181 for them to analyze the problem they have verbally told me on the phone That my truck needs a new engine because there’s a lifetime warranty on the drivetrain. I don’t feel this problem should be covered under that this is a problem Nissan should put a brand new engine in my vehicle. I would like a response to this. My email is [XXX] . My telephone number is [XXX] . INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
My vehicle lost power driving down the road while pulling my horse trailer. The engine began to vibrate and knock then shut down completely. I did not make it off the road entirely so the police had to assist with lights to ensure other motorists would avoid collision with me. The engine will not turn over, it makes a single cli…
Read full complaint
My vehicle lost power driving down the road while pulling my horse trailer. The engine began to vibrate and knock then shut down completely. I did not make it off the road entirely so the police had to assist with lights to ensure other motorists would avoid collision with me. The engine will not turn over, it makes a single click and is locked up completely.
The contact owns a 2017 Nissan Titan. The contact stated that while driving at 65 MPH, the vehicle lost motive power. There was an abnormally loud sound coming from the engine. Additionally, the TPMS warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer, where it was diagnosed with engine failure. The vehicle …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Nissan Titan. The contact stated that while driving at 65 MPH, the vehicle lost motive power. There was an abnormally loud sound coming from the engine. Additionally, the TPMS warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer, where it was diagnosed with engine failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was contacted, and a case was opened. The failure mileage was approximately 80,100.
V8 endurance engine has a known defect with scaring of cylinder 7 causing knocking in the engines and engines replacements. I purchased this Titan brand new in 2017. It required a brand new engine at 18,000 miles that was covered by the warranty. That engine developed another knock that required another engine replacement at 89,…
Read full complaint
V8 endurance engine has a known defect with scaring of cylinder 7 causing knocking in the engines and engines replacements. I purchased this Titan brand new in 2017. It required a brand new engine at 18,000 miles that was covered by the warranty. That engine developed another knock that required another engine replacement at 89,000 miles. Initially Nissan refused to cover as the truck was more than 5 years old even though the miles were well below 100,000 manufacturer warranty. I have found that these are bad engines that dealership is continue to install in these trucks even knowing that it could develop another knock. Other engine manufacturers refused to work on these engines due to this known defect. Nissan has thus far refused to recall this engine. The replacement cost is $18,000 without warranty.
I was droving down the road with the cruise control set at 70MPH, when all of the sudden the engine lost power and stopped. It did not have a check engine light or anything on the dash to indicate that there was a problem. I coasted to the edge of the road where i attempted to restart the vehicle, but it would not even turn ov…
Read full complaint
I was droving down the road with the cruise control set at 70MPH, when all of the sudden the engine lost power and stopped. It did not have a check engine light or anything on the dash to indicate that there was a problem. I coasted to the edge of the road where i attempted to restart the vehicle, but it would not even turn over. I had the vehicle towed to a repair shop where I was informed that they engine was locked solid. The mechanic suspects that they crankshaft is broken, but the entire engine will need to be replaced.
Broken crankshaft
Official recalls
319V495000 · Electrical System:alternator/generator/regulator; Electrical System:wiring
Jun 26, 2019
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2017-2019 gasoline, light duty, Titan vehicles. The alternator harness may have been damaged during the engine installation process, possibly resulting in an electrical short.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: An electrical short may cause an engine stall, increasing the risk of a crash. In addition, it increases the risk of a fire.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the alternator harness for the proper routing and any damage. The harness will be clipped into the correct position or replaced as necessary, free of charge. The recall began August 8, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Electrical System:wiring
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2017-2019 gasoline, light duty, Titan vehicles. The alternator harness may have been damaged during the engine installation process, possibly resulting in an electrical short.
Consequence: An electrical short may cause an engine stall, increasing the risk of a crash. In addition, it increases the risk of a fire.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the alternator harness for the proper routing and any damage. The harness will be clipped into the correct position or replaced as necessary, free of charge. The recall began August 8, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669.
Electrical System:alternator/generator/regulator
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2017-2019 gasoline, light duty, Titan vehicles. The alternator harness may have been damaged during the engine installation process, possibly resulting in an electrical short.
Consequence: An electrical short may cause an engine stall, increasing the risk of a crash. In addition, it increases the risk of a fire.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the alternator harness for the proper routing and any damage. The harness will be clipped into the correct position or replaced as necessary, free of charge. The recall began August 8, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669.
18V240000 · Equipment:other:labels
Apr 16, 2018
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2016-2018 Nissan Titan, 2016 and 2018 Nissan Titan XD vehicles. Accessories installed on these vehicles reduced the load carrying capacity, however, a Load Carrying Capacity modification label was not installed, possibly allowing the vehicle to be overloaded. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 110, "Tire Selection and Rims."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: An overloaded vehicle can increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners and provide a new modification label, with installation instructions, free of charge. The recall began on June 4, 2018. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669.
17V268000 · Seat Belts:rear/other
Apr 24, 2017
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2016-2017 Nissan Titan Crew Cab and Titan XD Crew Cab vehicles. In the event of a crash, the rear seatbelt assembly may not adequately protect the occupant's head, allowing it to contact the D-ring bolt trim cap. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 201, "Occupant Protection in Interior Impact."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the occupant's head contacts the D-ring bolt trim cap during a crash, there is an increased risk of injury.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will install energy absorbing material to the C-Pillar Finishers and replace the Seatbelt Bolt and Bolt Cap, free of charge. The recall began September 19, 2017. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7261.
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
2PE23020 · Loss Of Motive Power Due To Broken Crankshaft With No Ability To Restart.
Opened Nov 15, 2023 · Closed Jun 27, 2025
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:diesel
On November 15, 2023, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE23020 to investigate allegations of loss of motive power in model year (MY) 2016 through 2019 Nissan Titan XD trucks equipped with 5.0L Cummins diesel engines. The complaints allege the condition was due to a failure of the engine crankshaft. The purpose of the investigation was to understand the scope, frequency, and safety related consequence of the alleged defect. During the investigation, it was found that the subject vehicles can experience a loss of motive power due to a failure of the crankshaft main bearings which can lead to a fractured crankshaft. This resulted in a loss of motive power and an inability to restart. An analysis of all complaint sources shows many vehicles exhibit knocking, vibration, malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) warnings, and/or poor engine performance prior to a total failure. Some consumers report driving their truck in for repairs only to be diagnosed with a failed crankshaft. ODI has not identified any injuries or fires attributable to this failure. ODI is aware of one complaint alleging a non-injury crash involving a curb strike. ODI is also aware of complaints of overheating starter motors and melted starter motor wiring occurring after prolonged attempts to start engines that have suffered a broken crankshaft. In its response to ODI's January 26, 2024 information request letter, Nissan provided information detailing several material and process changes involved in the production of the subject vehicle’s engine.These changes appear to coincide with incremental improvements in failure rates but there is no indication that a single factor was the primary cause of the failures. Analysis of ODI consumer complaints and manufacturer provided data found that failure rates decreased progressively for each model year. Review of failure mileage found that 50% of the failures occurred by 60,000 miles with a significant decrease in failures after 80,000 miles. Assuming average yearly mileage driven, the newest model year trucks (2019) would be near or past peak failure mileage. Given the low failure rate, the observable warnings available to the driver, and much of the fleet being past peak failure mileage, ODI is closing this Preliminary Evaluation with no further action. The closing of the investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a defect does not exist, and NHTSA will take further 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.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:diesel
On November 15, 2023, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE23020 to investigate allegations of loss of motive power in model year (MY) 2016 through 2019 Nissan Titan XD trucks equipped with 5.0L Cummins diesel engines. The complaints allege the condition was due to a failure of the engine crankshaft. The purpose of the investigation was to understand the scope, frequency, and safety related consequence of the alleged defect. During the investigation, it was found that the subject vehicles can experience a loss of motive power due to a failure of the crankshaft main bearings which can lead to a fractured crankshaft. This resulted in a loss of motive power and an inability to restart. An analysis of all complaint sources shows many vehicles exhibit knocking, vibration, malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) warnings, and/or poor engine performance prior to a total failure. Some consumers report driving their truck in for repairs only to be diagnosed with a failed crankshaft. ODI has not identified any injuries or fires attributable to this failure. ODI is aware of one complaint alleging a non-injury crash involving a curb strike. ODI is also aware of complaints of overheating starter motors and melted starter motor wiring occurring after prolonged attempts to start engines that have suffered a broken crankshaft. In its response to ODI's January 26, 2024 information request letter, Nissan provided information detailing several material and process changes involved in the production of the subject vehicle’s engine.These changes appear to coincide with incremental improvements in failure rates but there is no indication that a single factor was the primary cause of the failures. Analysis of ODI consumer complaints and manufacturer provided data found that failure rates decreased progressively for each model year. Review of failure mileage found that 50% of the failures occurred by 60,000 miles with a significant decrease in failures after 80,000 miles. Assuming average yearly mileage driven, the newest model year trucks (2019) would be near or past peak failure mileage. Given the low failure rate, the observable warnings available to the driver, and much of the fleet being past peak failure mileage, ODI is closing this Preliminary Evaluation with no further action. The closing of the investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a defect does not exist, and NHTSA will take further 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.
Engine
On November 15, 2023, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE23020 to investigate allegations of loss of motive power in model year (MY) 2016 through 2019 Nissan Titan XD trucks equipped with 5.0L Cummins diesel engines. The complaints allege the condition was due to a failure of the engine crankshaft. The purpose of the investigation was to understand the scope, frequency, and safety related consequence of the alleged defect. During the investigation, it was found that the subject vehicles can experience a loss of motive power due to a failure of the crankshaft main bearings which can lead to a fractured crankshaft. This resulted in a loss of motive power and an inability to restart. An analysis of all complaint sources shows many vehicles exhibit knocking, vibration, malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) warnings, and/or poor engine performance prior to a total failure. Some consumers report driving their truck in for repairs only to be diagnosed with a failed crankshaft. ODI has not identified any injuries or fires attributable to this failure. ODI is aware of one complaint alleging a non-injury crash involving a curb strike. ODI is also aware of complaints of overheating starter motors and melted starter motor wiring occurring after prolonged attempts to start engines that have suffered a broken crankshaft. In its response to ODI's January 26, 2024 information request letter, Nissan provided information detailing several material and process changes involved in the production of the subject vehicle’s engine.These changes appear to coincide with incremental improvements in failure rates but there is no indication that a single factor was the primary cause of the failures. Analysis of ODI consumer complaints and manufacturer provided data found that failure rates decreased progressively for each model year. Review of failure mileage found that 50% of the failures occurred by 60,000 miles with a significant decrease in failures after 80,000 miles. Assuming average yearly mileage driven, the newest model year trucks (2019) would be near or past peak failure mileage. Given the low failure rate, the observable warnings available to the driver, and much of the fleet being past peak failure mileage, ODI is closing this Preliminary Evaluation with no further action. The closing of the investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a defect does not exist, and NHTSA will take further 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.
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.