NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
26 reportsClear category filter82,000 miles · Apr 23, 2016
EnginePower Train
I PURCHASED A USED CAR FROM MR. BILL MOTOR CO IN ARLINGTON, TX ON PIONEER PARKWAY. THE VEHICLE STARTED TO OVERHEAT. I CALLED TO INFORM MR. BILL MOTORS AND I WAS TOLD THEY WOULD SEND IT OUT TO BE LOOKED AT AND LET ME KNOW WHEN IT WAS READY FOR PICK UP. IT WAS TAKEN TO DG'S PERFORMANCE ON PIONEER PARKWAY FOR REPAIRS. ABOUT A WEEK …
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A USED CAR FROM MR. BILL MOTOR CO IN ARLINGTON, TX ON PIONEER PARKWAY. THE VEHICLE STARTED TO OVERHEAT. I CALLED TO INFORM MR. BILL MOTORS AND I WAS TOLD THEY WOULD SEND IT OUT TO BE LOOKED AT AND LET ME KNOW WHEN IT WAS READY FOR PICK UP. IT WAS TAKEN TO DG'S PERFORMANCE ON PIONEER PARKWAY FOR REPAIRS. ABOUT A WEEK LATER THE CAR RESUMED OVERHEATING, I CONTACTED MR. BILL MOTORS AGAIN AND THEY SAID THEY WOULD SEND THE VEHICLE OUT FOR REPAIR. THEY SENT IT TO LONGHORN TRANSMISSIONS. AS MY DAUGHTER WAS HEADED TO SCHOOL AFTER THE REPAIRS WERE COMPLETED ON I-20 IN ARLINGTON, TX THE CAR STARTS TO OVERHEAT AND STOPS ON HER, SHE COULD NOT DRIVE THE CAR. SHE CALLS LONGHORN AND THEY SEND A TOW TO GET HER. SHE WAS TOLD THEY DID NOT PLACE THE CAP ON THE TRANSMISSION WHEN THEY ADDED FLUID TO IT SO THEY WOULD TAKE CARE OF IT. TWO DAYS LATER THE CAR IS HEATING AGAIN. I CONTACT MR. BILL MOTORS AGAIN IN PERSON SO THEY COULD SEE AND WITH A VIDEO OF WHAT THE CAR HAD BEEN DOING, THEY TELL ME THEY WILL WORK ON IT THE NEXT DAY. I COULD NOT DRIVE THE CAR FROM THE LOT, THE ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON AND I ROLLED INTO THE STREET. TWO SALES MEN HAD TO PUSH THE CAR UNTO THE PROPERTY FROM THE STREET. TWO DAYS GO BY AND I AM TOLD THAT IT IS A TRANSMISSION ISSUE THAT WILL COST ME $1500 AND TAKE A WEEK TO REPAIR FROM SCOTT AND HE STATES THAT MATT ANOTHER MANAGER IS PRESENT WITH HIM. I CALLED TO DISCUSS STATUS UPDATE, MISSING ITEMS FROM THE CAR TO FIND OUT THEY WERE CHARGING ME $235 FOR THE TOW THAT LONGHORN TRANSMISSION BILLED THEM. I EXPLAINED THAT I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THIS CHARGE, NOR DO I FEEL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHARGE. THEY DID NOT PUT THE CAP ON THEY SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHARGE AND THAT YOU DO NOT CHARGE ANYONE WITHOUT DISCUSSING THE AMOUNT WITH THE PERSON. I ASKED FOR THE TOTAL COST OF THE REPAIR AND I STATED I WANTED TO SPEAK TO THE REPAIR PLACE. I WAS GIVEN A NUMBER FOR JEFF.
NHTSA ODI #10861088
3,000 miles · Feb 10, 2016
EngineStructure
HEAT SHIELDS- UNDERCARRIAGE VIBRATE, MAKE ALL SORTS OF NOISE, THEN CRACK AT BOLTS WHERE MOUNTED AND HAVE TO BE REPLACED. THIS WAS DONE ON MY VEHICLE AND UNLESS CORRECTED WILL BE A CONTINUAL PROBLEM. ALSO, THE PLASTIC, POORLY MADE, AIR INTAKE AT AND NEAR AIR BREATHER VIBRATE AND CLATTER TERRIBLY! THIS CAR HAS MORE UNDERCARRIA…
Read full complaint
HEAT SHIELDS- UNDERCARRIAGE VIBRATE, MAKE ALL SORTS OF NOISE, THEN CRACK AT BOLTS WHERE MOUNTED AND HAVE TO BE REPLACED. THIS WAS DONE ON MY VEHICLE AND UNLESS CORRECTED WILL BE A CONTINUAL PROBLEM. ALSO, THE PLASTIC, POORLY MADE, AIR INTAKE AT AND NEAR AIR BREATHER VIBRATE AND CLATTER TERRIBLY! THIS CAR HAS MORE UNDERCARRIAGE AND ENGINE COMPARTMENT NOISE THAN ANY VEHICLE I'VE OWNED. I MIGHT ALSO ADD THE ENGINE HAS VALVE TICK, WHICH DOES NOT SEEM TO SHOW IT'S UGLY HEAD WHEN AT THE DEALERSHIP.
NHTSA ODI #10825424
29,313 miles · Apr 8, 2015
Engine
I EXPERIENCED MY CAR SHAKING, REVVING UP AND THEN STALLING AT A PARKING LOT. UPON TRYING TO GET ON THE FREEWAY THE CAR STALLED ON THE FREEWAY ON RAMP. ONCE STARTING THE CAR, I HAD TO DEPRESS THE ACCELERATOR ALL THE WAY DOWN FOR THE CAR TO GET UP TO 20 MI/HR. THE CAR MAINTAINED THIS SPEED FOR 4-5 MI, SUDDENLY THE CAR WOULD ACCELE…
Read full complaint
I EXPERIENCED MY CAR SHAKING, REVVING UP AND THEN STALLING AT A PARKING LOT. UPON TRYING TO GET ON THE FREEWAY THE CAR STALLED ON THE FREEWAY ON RAMP. ONCE STARTING THE CAR, I HAD TO DEPRESS THE ACCELERATOR ALL THE WAY DOWN FOR THE CAR TO GET UP TO 20 MI/HR. THE CAR MAINTAINED THIS SPEED FOR 4-5 MI, SUDDENLY THE CAR WOULD ACCELERATE TO 60MI/HR AT WHICH POINT I NEARLY COLLIDED INTO THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME. THEN THE CAR PROCEEDED TO SHUT DOWN COMPLETELY. I ARRIVED AT THE DEALERSHIP AND WAS INFORMED THERE'S A POSSIBLE ISSUE WITH THE TRANSMISSION. I BOUGHT MY CAR BRAND NEW IN 2013, HAVE HAD ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, USED TOP TIER FUEL, AND HAVE NOT HAD ANY MAJOR ACCIDENTS, THE CAR HAS LESS THAN 30K MI. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10704404
20,000 miles · Nov 4, 2014
EngineVehicle Speed Control
LAST NIGHT SUDDENLY ON THE HIGHWAY I-95 IT LOST A POWER. TO BE MORE EXACT, IT SEEMED LIKE TRANSMISSION STUCK ON THE HIGH (4TH) GEAR. ON PARKING OR NEUTRAL GEAR POSITIONS WHEN I PRESS GAS PEDAL, ENGINE REACTS AND INCREASES RPMS, MAKES NOISE, ETC BUT WHEN ON THE DRIVE POSITION, IT BARELY MOVES, LIKE IF YOU TRY TO START FROM 4…
Read full complaint
LAST NIGHT SUDDENLY ON THE HIGHWAY I-95 IT LOST A POWER. TO BE MORE EXACT, IT SEEMED LIKE TRANSMISSION STUCK ON THE HIGH (4TH) GEAR. ON PARKING OR NEUTRAL GEAR POSITIONS WHEN I PRESS GAS PEDAL, ENGINE REACTS AND INCREASES RPMS, MAKES NOISE, ETC BUT WHEN ON THE DRIVE POSITION, IT BARELY MOVES, LIKE IF YOU TRY TO START FROM 4TH OR 5TH GEAR. THIS MORNING I BROUGHT IT TO THE AUTONATION PEMBROKE PINES NISSAN DEALERSHIP (PEMBROKE PINES, FL). AFTER INSPECTION THEY GAVE ME THE SUCH A SURPRISING CONCLUSION: PROBLEM WITH TAIL LIGHT CAUSED MIS-FUNCTIONING OF TRANSMISSION. AND THE TAILLIGHT WAS FUNCTIONING WELL, NOT DAMAGED. BUT THEY TOLD, HIS ELECTRIC RESISTANCE WAS WRONG. AFTER REPLACING THE TAIL LIGHT TRANSMISSION STARTED WORKING. IT'S REALLY VERY HARD TO BELIEVE, THAT MISFUNCTIONING (WRONG ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE) OF THE TAIL LIGHT CAN AFFECT THE PRIMARY FUNCTIONALITY OF THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD REALLY CAUSE AN ACCIDENT AND INJURIES OR EVEN LOOS OF LIFE. IT WAS VERY FORTUNE FOR ME THAT I DISCOVERED THIS ISSUE WHEN I WAS TAKING AN EXIT RAMP I FOUND SIMILAR HISTORIES DESCRIBED HERE HTTP://FORUMS.NICOCLUB.COM/2013-NISSAN-SENTRA-TRANSMISSION-ISSUES-POWER-LOSS-T584502.HTML AND HERE HTTPS://ANSWERS.YAHOO.COM/QUESTION/INDEX?QID=20131125173224AAB6P8P. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10652413
3,000 miles · Mar 6, 2014
EnginePower Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 NISSAN VERSA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY STALLED. THE VEHICLE WAS RESTARTED AND OPERATED NORMALLY FOR APPROXIMATELY 5 MILES BEFORE STALLING A SECOND TIME. THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS RECURRING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER BUT…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 NISSAN VERSA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY STALLED. THE VEHICLE WAS RESTARTED AND OPERATED NORMALLY FOR APPROXIMATELY 5 MILES BEFORE STALLING A SECOND TIME. THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS RECURRING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER BUT THE DEFECT COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED AND NO REPAIRS WERE PERFORMED. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE TRANSMISSION ERRONEOUSLY ENGAGED INTO NEUTRAL. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 3000. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10567709
7,300 miles · Jul 23, 2013
Engine
AT ABOUT 7:10AM ON JULY 18, 2013, I STARTED THE CAR AND A BAD NOISE CAME FROM ENGINE. I POOPED THE HOOD AND LOOKED BUT FOUND NOTHING VISUALLY. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER THE NEXT MORNING AND THEY HAD TO KEEP IT OVERNIGHT. THREE MASTER MECHANIC'S VERIFIED THE NOISE AND STATED THEY HAVE NEVER HERD THIS BEFORE AND HAD NO CLUE WH…
Read full complaint
AT ABOUT 7:10AM ON JULY 18, 2013, I STARTED THE CAR AND A BAD NOISE CAME FROM ENGINE. I POOPED THE HOOD AND LOOKED BUT FOUND NOTHING VISUALLY. I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER THE NEXT MORNING AND THEY HAD TO KEEP IT OVERNIGHT. THREE MASTER MECHANIC'S VERIFIED THE NOISE AND STATED THEY HAVE NEVER HERD THIS BEFORE AND HAD NO CLUE WHAT WAS WRONG. IT SOUNDS AS IF A BALL BEARING IS LOOSE IN THE TOP PART OF THE MOTOR AND BOUNCING AROUND. WHAT IS ODD, IS THAT THE NOISE WILL GO AWAY ONCE THE MOTOR IS WARMED UP. NOW THE DEALER IS SAYING NOTHING IS WRONG!!!!! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10526336
NHTSA investigations
4EA21002 · 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.
EA15003 · Pedal Operation Interference
Opened Apr 1, 2015 · Closed Sep 1, 2015
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
On August 11, 2015, Nissan North America, Inc., submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) describing a condition that may impede the driver's ability to transition quickly and smoothly from the accelerator pedal to the brake pedal in certain model year (MY) 2012 through 2015 Nissan Versa Sedans and MY 2014 through 2015 Nissan Versa Note vehicles (NHTSA Recall No. 15V-507).According to Nissan's DIR, in certain circumstances related to driver foot position and shoe type, the right edge of the driver?s shoe may catch the edge of the center console lower trim panel.Nissan indicated that this condition could cause a slight delay in the smooth transition between the accelerator pedal and the brake pedal which may increase the braking distance; therefore increasing the risk of a crash.Nissan's recall instructs dealers to trim the console panel so that the leading edge is at a greater distance from the driver?s foot.Nissan had previously issued a service campaign (Nissan Campaign ID #P5308; TSB #NTB15-033) on April 16, 2015, to provide the remedy for the same set of vehicles before deciding to change the program to a safety recall.Of the approximately 421,305 vehicles covered by recall 15V-507, approximately 122,558 have already been repaired under the service campaign. ODI's investigation also examined allegations that an HVAC duct in the driver's footwell area may interfere with the driver's right foot in certain circumstances.ODI's analysis of all complaints related to foot obstructions in the subject vehicles identified 45 complaints, 7 crashes and 1 minor soft tissue injury.Thirty-five (35) of the complaints, all 7 crashes and the only injury were caused by the trim panel condition which is the subject of the recall.ODI will continue to monitor complaints related to the HVAC duct condition.This investigation is closed based on Nissan's recall.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10725339, 10723544, 10711794, 10691631, 10649259, 10640644, 10629161, 10614957, 10610356, 10606832, 10606766, 10606670, 10597004, 10573057, 10503811, and 10498000.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
On August 11, 2015, Nissan North America, Inc., submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) describing a condition that may impede the driver's ability to transition quickly and smoothly from the accelerator pedal to the brake pedal in certain model year (MY) 2012 through 2015 Nissan Versa Sedans and MY 2014 through 2015 Nissan Versa Note vehicles (NHTSA Recall No. 15V-507).According to Nissan's DIR, in certain circumstances related to driver foot position and shoe type, the right edge of the driver?s shoe may catch the edge of the center console lower trim panel.Nissan indicated that this condition could cause a slight delay in the smooth transition between the accelerator pedal and the brake pedal which may increase the braking distance; therefore increasing the risk of a crash.Nissan's recall instructs dealers to trim the console panel so that the leading edge is at a greater distance from the driver?s foot.Nissan had previously issued a service campaign (Nissan Campaign ID #P5308; TSB #NTB15-033) on April 16, 2015, to provide the remedy for the same set of vehicles before deciding to change the program to a safety recall.Of the approximately 421,305 vehicles covered by recall 15V-507, approximately 122,558 have already been repaired under the service campaign. ODI's investigation also examined allegations that an HVAC duct in the driver's footwell area may interfere with the driver's right foot in certain circumstances.ODI's analysis of all complaints related to foot obstructions in the subject vehicles identified 45 complaints, 7 crashes and 1 minor soft tissue injury.Thirty-five (35) of the complaints, all 7 crashes and the only injury were caused by the trim panel condition which is the subject of the recall.ODI will continue to monitor complaints related to the HVAC duct condition.This investigation is closed based on Nissan's recall.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10725339, 10723544, 10711794, 10691631, 10649259, 10640644, 10629161, 10614957, 10610356, 10606832, 10606766, 10606670, 10597004, 10573057, 10503811, and 10498000.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages
On August 11, 2015, Nissan North America, Inc., submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) describing a condition that may impede the driver's ability to transition quickly and smoothly from the accelerator pedal to the brake pedal in certain model year (MY) 2012 through 2015 Nissan Versa Sedans and MY 2014 through 2015 Nissan Versa Note vehicles (NHTSA Recall No. 15V-507).According to Nissan's DIR, in certain circumstances related to driver foot position and shoe type, the right edge of the driver?s shoe may catch the edge of the center console lower trim panel.Nissan indicated that this condition could cause a slight delay in the smooth transition between the accelerator pedal and the brake pedal which may increase the braking distance; therefore increasing the risk of a crash.Nissan's recall instructs dealers to trim the console panel so that the leading edge is at a greater distance from the driver?s foot.Nissan had previously issued a service campaign (Nissan Campaign ID #P5308; TSB #NTB15-033) on April 16, 2015, to provide the remedy for the same set of vehicles before deciding to change the program to a safety recall.Of the approximately 421,305 vehicles covered by recall 15V-507, approximately 122,558 have already been repaired under the service campaign. ODI's investigation also examined allegations that an HVAC duct in the driver's footwell area may interfere with the driver's right foot in certain circumstances.ODI's analysis of all complaints related to foot obstructions in the subject vehicles identified 45 complaints, 7 crashes and 1 minor soft tissue injury.Thirty-five (35) of the complaints, all 7 crashes and the only injury were caused by the trim panel condition which is the subject of the recall.ODI will continue to monitor complaints related to the HVAC duct condition.This investigation is closed based on Nissan's recall.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10725339, 10723544, 10711794, 10691631, 10649259, 10640644, 10629161, 10614957, 10610356, 10606832, 10606766, 10606670, 10597004, 10573057, 10503811, and 10498000.
Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
On August 11, 2015, Nissan North America, Inc., submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) describing a condition that may impede the driver's ability to transition quickly and smoothly from the accelerator pedal to the brake pedal in certain model year (MY) 2012 through 2015 Nissan Versa Sedans and MY 2014 through 2015 Nissan Versa Note vehicles (NHTSA Recall No. 15V-507).According to Nissan's DIR, in certain circumstances related to driver foot position and shoe type, the right edge of the driver?s shoe may catch the edge of the center console lower trim panel.Nissan indicated that this condition could cause a slight delay in the smooth transition between the accelerator pedal and the brake pedal which may increase the braking distance; therefore increasing the risk of a crash.Nissan's recall instructs dealers to trim the console panel so that the leading edge is at a greater distance from the driver?s foot.Nissan had previously issued a service campaign (Nissan Campaign ID #P5308; TSB #NTB15-033) on April 16, 2015, to provide the remedy for the same set of vehicles before deciding to change the program to a safety recall.Of the approximately 421,305 vehicles covered by recall 15V-507, approximately 122,558 have already been repaired under the service campaign. ODI's investigation also examined allegations that an HVAC duct in the driver's footwell area may interfere with the driver's right foot in certain circumstances.ODI's analysis of all complaints related to foot obstructions in the subject vehicles identified 45 complaints, 7 crashes and 1 minor soft tissue injury.Thirty-five (35) of the complaints, all 7 crashes and the only injury were caused by the trim panel condition which is the subject of the recall.ODI will continue to monitor complaints related to the HVAC duct condition.This investigation is closed based on Nissan's recall.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10725339, 10723544, 10711794, 10691631, 10649259, 10640644, 10629161, 10614957, 10610356, 10606832, 10606766, 10606670, 10597004, 10573057, 10503811, and 10498000.
PE14018 · Pedal Operation Interference
Opened Jun 24, 2014 · Closed Apr 27, 2015
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
On June 24, 2014, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE14-018 to investigate allegations that the tunnel carpet cover trim panel on model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Nissan Versa, Versa Sedan and Versa Note vehicles has, in certain situations, interfered with the driver's ability to promptly release the accelerator pedal and transition to the brake pedal. This may result in delayed brake application or brief incidents of unwanted acceleration.At the opening of PE14-018, ODI had identified one complaint, VOQ 10597004, alleging that the driver's foot became caught by the subject trim panel to the extent that the driver decided that it was necessary to pull on their leg to get the foot free of the interference, almost causing a crash. The trim panel in question (Figure 1) is located next to the accelerator pedal and the lower corner is positioned such that it is near the right outer edge of the driver's shoe. The complainant supplied a photograph (Figure 2) showing how the edge of the panel wedged itself in the driver's shoe.An additional complainant, 10573057, alleged that when attempting to remove their foot from the accelerator pedal to apply the brake, their shoe was caught by the trim panel which delayed braking ability several times. During the investigation ODI received a VOQ, 10614957, that alleged that the driver's foot was interfered with by the trim panel, delaying the driver's ability to apply the brakes, resulting in a crash and minor injuries to the driver.In addition, during PE14-018, ODI has received VOQs alleging that the HVAC relay actuator/duct, (Figures 3 and 4) can also interfere with the driver's ability to react quickly to apply the brakes, which has been added to the scope of Engineering Analysis EA15-003. MY 2015 Versa Sedan and Note vehicles have been added to EA15-003 as they are believed to have the same panel design and actuator/duct placement as the subject vehicles.MY 2012 vehicles were found to be of a different design and not included in the scope of EA15-003.This Preliminary Evaluation PE14-018 is hereby closed and upgraded to Engineering Analysis EA15-003.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:pedals And Linkages
On June 24, 2014, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE14-018 to investigate allegations that the tunnel carpet cover trim panel on model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Nissan Versa, Versa Sedan and Versa Note vehicles has, in certain situations, interfered with the driver's ability to promptly release the accelerator pedal and transition to the brake pedal. This may result in delayed brake application or brief incidents of unwanted acceleration.At the opening of PE14-018, ODI had identified one complaint, VOQ 10597004, alleging that the driver's foot became caught by the subject trim panel to the extent that the driver decided that it was necessary to pull on their leg to get the foot free of the interference, almost causing a crash. The trim panel in question (Figure 1) is located next to the accelerator pedal and the lower corner is positioned such that it is near the right outer edge of the driver's shoe. The complainant supplied a photograph (Figure 2) showing how the edge of the panel wedged itself in the driver's shoe.An additional complainant, 10573057, alleged that when attempting to remove their foot from the accelerator pedal to apply the brake, their shoe was caught by the trim panel which delayed braking ability several times. During the investigation ODI received a VOQ, 10614957, that alleged that the driver's foot was interfered with by the trim panel, delaying the driver's ability to apply the brakes, resulting in a crash and minor injuries to the driver.In addition, during PE14-018, ODI has received VOQs alleging that the HVAC relay actuator/duct, (Figures 3 and 4) can also interfere with the driver's ability to react quickly to apply the brakes, which has been added to the scope of Engineering Analysis EA15-003. MY 2015 Versa Sedan and Note vehicles have been added to EA15-003 as they are believed to have the same panel design and actuator/duct placement as the subject vehicles.MY 2012 vehicles were found to be of a different design and not included in the scope of EA15-003.This Preliminary Evaluation PE14-018 is hereby closed and upgraded to Engineering Analysis EA15-003.
Service Brakes
On June 24, 2014, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE14-018 to investigate allegations that the tunnel carpet cover trim panel on model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Nissan Versa, Versa Sedan and Versa Note vehicles has, in certain situations, interfered with the driver's ability to promptly release the accelerator pedal and transition to the brake pedal. This may result in delayed brake application or brief incidents of unwanted acceleration.At the opening of PE14-018, ODI had identified one complaint, VOQ 10597004, alleging that the driver's foot became caught by the subject trim panel to the extent that the driver decided that it was necessary to pull on their leg to get the foot free of the interference, almost causing a crash. The trim panel in question (Figure 1) is located next to the accelerator pedal and the lower corner is positioned such that it is near the right outer edge of the driver's shoe. The complainant supplied a photograph (Figure 2) showing how the edge of the panel wedged itself in the driver's shoe.An additional complainant, 10573057, alleged that when attempting to remove their foot from the accelerator pedal to apply the brake, their shoe was caught by the trim panel which delayed braking ability several times. During the investigation ODI received a VOQ, 10614957, that alleged that the driver's foot was interfered with by the trim panel, delaying the driver's ability to apply the brakes, resulting in a crash and minor injuries to the driver.In addition, during PE14-018, ODI has received VOQs alleging that the HVAC relay actuator/duct, (Figures 3 and 4) can also interfere with the driver's ability to react quickly to apply the brakes, which has been added to the scope of Engineering Analysis EA15-003. MY 2015 Versa Sedan and Note vehicles have been added to EA15-003 as they are believed to have the same panel design and actuator/duct placement as the subject vehicles.MY 2012 vehicles were found to be of a different design and not included in the scope of EA15-003.This Preliminary Evaluation PE14-018 is hereby closed and upgraded to Engineering Analysis EA15-003.
Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
On June 24, 2014, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE14-018 to investigate allegations that the tunnel carpet cover trim panel on model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Nissan Versa, Versa Sedan and Versa Note vehicles has, in certain situations, interfered with the driver's ability to promptly release the accelerator pedal and transition to the brake pedal. This may result in delayed brake application or brief incidents of unwanted acceleration.At the opening of PE14-018, ODI had identified one complaint, VOQ 10597004, alleging that the driver's foot became caught by the subject trim panel to the extent that the driver decided that it was necessary to pull on their leg to get the foot free of the interference, almost causing a crash. The trim panel in question (Figure 1) is located next to the accelerator pedal and the lower corner is positioned such that it is near the right outer edge of the driver's shoe. The complainant supplied a photograph (Figure 2) showing how the edge of the panel wedged itself in the driver's shoe.An additional complainant, 10573057, alleged that when attempting to remove their foot from the accelerator pedal to apply the brake, their shoe was caught by the trim panel which delayed braking ability several times. During the investigation ODI received a VOQ, 10614957, that alleged that the driver's foot was interfered with by the trim panel, delaying the driver's ability to apply the brakes, resulting in a crash and minor injuries to the driver.In addition, during PE14-018, ODI has received VOQs alleging that the HVAC relay actuator/duct, (Figures 3 and 4) can also interfere with the driver's ability to react quickly to apply the brakes, which has been added to the scope of Engineering Analysis EA15-003. MY 2015 Versa Sedan and Note vehicles have been added to EA15-003 as they are believed to have the same panel design and actuator/duct placement as the subject vehicles.MY 2012 vehicles were found to be of a different design and not included in the scope of EA15-003.This Preliminary Evaluation PE14-018 is hereby closed and upgraded to Engineering Analysis EA15-003.
PE14014 · Excessive Brake Pedal Travel
Opened May 20, 2014 · Closed May 13, 2015
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes; Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:master Cylinder
On May 20, 2014, ODI opened PE14-014 based on eight complaints alleging incidents of excessive brake pedal travel in model year (MY) 2013 through 2014 Nissan Sentra, Versa Sedan and Versa Note passenger cars (Figure 1) and information in Early Warning Reporting field reports indicating issues with master cylinder internal seals.In response to an information request letter sent by ODI, Nissan identified a condition with the master cylinder in early production subject vehicles that could result in a slow internal leak past one of the recuperating seals to the brake reservoir when the brake pedal is depressed very slowly or lightly (Figure 2).The subject vehicles are equipped with fixed seal master cylinders supplied by TRW.To address concerns with water hammer noise with the standard seal design, the master cylinders in the early production subject vehicles used AWH (anti-water hammer) seals.The AWH seals are sensitive to contamination from assembly plant cleanliness issues, which can produce the internal leak condition during slow or light brake applies but perform as designed with normal or emergency brake applications.TRW indicated that the risk of contamination interacting with the subject seals is greatest after the evacuation and pressure fill process used to fill the brake system during the manufacturing process (early life issue).TRW developed a new master cylinder seal design (EVO seal) that addresses the noise concern and eliminates the internal leak concern associated with contamination by providing a secondary seal (Figure 3).Nissan implemented the new master cylinder design in vehicle production on September 23, 2013.ODI's analysis shows that the master cylinder warranty claim rate is much higher in vehicles produced before the change (Figure 4).Statistical analysis showed that the condition is an early-life problem with relatively low failure rates projected through 100,000 miles and approximately 58 percent of the failures projected to occur by that mileage have already occurred (Table 1).Warranty claims are highest (78% of claims) in vehicles with less than 10,000 miles (Figure 5) and 50 percent of claims involved vehicles with less than 90 days in service (Figure 6).ODI evaluated 22 crash claims that included allegations of master cylinder failure, sinking brake pedal or pedal to the floor (Table 2).The analysis identified only three crashes in which a brake performance issue related to the master cylinder was duplicated by post-incident inspection, including one with a different problem than the seal leak issue (a broken plunger).The two crash complaints related to a possible master cylinder concern involved 1 vehicle with the AWH seal and 1 with the EVO seal.Both were minor crashes.The remaining crashes do not appear to be related to any issues with the master cylinder or other brake system fault.In the 4 crashes with Event Data Recorderinformation available, the data indicated that the brakes were applied too late to avoid the collisions.These include 2 crashes with less than a half second of braking before impact and 2 in which brake applications lasting 1.0 to 2.5 seconds resulted in high decelerations consistent with fully functioning brake systems, but too late to avoid the collision.Overall, the rates of crashes adjusted for vehicle exposure (total vehicle years in service) do not show any correlation to the high warranty rates associated with the AWH seal leak concern (Table 3 & Figure 7).Given these circumstances, further use of the agency resources in this matter does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing o
Additional source detail variants (4)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:master Cylinder
On May 20, 2014, ODI opened PE14-014 based on eight complaints alleging incidents of excessive brake pedal travel in model year (MY) 2013 through 2014 Nissan Sentra, Versa Sedan and Versa Note passenger cars (Figure 1) and information in Early Warning Reporting field reports indicating issues with master cylinder internal seals.In response to an information request letter sent by ODI, Nissan identified a condition with the master cylinder in early production subject vehicles that could result in a slow internal leak past one of the recuperating seals to the brake reservoir when the brake pedal is depressed very slowly or lightly (Figure 2).The subject vehicles are equipped with fixed seal master cylinders supplied by TRW.To address concerns with water hammer noise with the standard seal design, the master cylinders in the early production subject vehicles used AWH (anti-water hammer) seals.The AWH seals are sensitive to contamination from assembly plant cleanliness issues, which can produce the internal leak condition during slow or light brake applies but perform as designed with normal or emergency brake applications.TRW indicated that the risk of contamination interacting with the subject seals is greatest after the evacuation and pressure fill process used to fill the brake system during the manufacturing process (early life issue).TRW developed a new master cylinder seal design (EVO seal) that addresses the noise concern and eliminates the internal leak concern associated with contamination by providing a secondary seal (Figure 3).Nissan implemented the new master cylinder design in vehicle production on September 23, 2013.ODI's analysis shows that the master cylinder warranty claim rate is much higher in vehicles produced before the change (Figure 4).Statistical analysis showed that the condition is an early-life problem with relatively low failure rates projected through 100,000 miles and approximately 58 percent of the failures projected to occur by that mileage have already occurred (Table 1).Warranty claims are highest (78% of claims) in vehicles with less than 10,000 miles (Figure 5) and 50 percent of claims involved vehicles with less than 90 days in service (Figure 6).ODI evaluated 22 crash claims that included allegations of master cylinder failure, sinking brake pedal or pedal to the floor (Table 2).The analysis identified only three crashes in which a brake performance issue related to the master cylinder was duplicated by post-incident inspection, including one with a different problem than the seal leak issue (a broken plunger).The two crash complaints related to a possible master cylinder concern involved 1 vehicle with the AWH seal and 1 with the EVO seal.Both were minor crashes.The remaining crashes do not appear to be related to any issues with the master cylinder or other brake system fault.In the 4 crashes with Event Data Recorderinformation available, the data indicated that the brakes were applied too late to avoid the collisions.These include 2 crashes with less than a half second of braking before impact and 2 in which brake applications lasting 1.0 to 2.5 seconds resulted in high decelerations consistent with fully functioning brake systems, but too late to avoid the collision.Overall, the rates of crashes adjusted for vehicle exposure (total vehicle years in service) do not show any correlation to the high warranty rates associated with the AWH seal leak concern (Table 3 & Figure 7).Given these circumstances, further use of the agency resources in this matter does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing o
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components
On May 20, 2014, ODI opened PE14-014 based on eight complaints alleging incidents of excessive brake pedal travel in model year (MY) 2013 through 2014 Nissan Sentra, Versa Sedan and Versa Note passenger cars (Figure 1) and information in Early Warning Reporting field reports indicating issues with master cylinder internal seals.In response to an information request letter sent by ODI, Nissan identified a condition with the master cylinder in early production subject vehicles that could result in a slow internal leak past one of the recuperating seals to the brake reservoir when the brake pedal is depressed very slowly or lightly (Figure 2).The subject vehicles are equipped with fixed seal master cylinders supplied by TRW.To address concerns with water hammer noise with the standard seal design, the master cylinders in the early production subject vehicles used AWH (anti-water hammer) seals.The AWH seals are sensitive to contamination from assembly plant cleanliness issues, which can produce the internal leak condition during slow or light brake applies but perform as designed with normal or emergency brake applications.TRW indicated that the risk of contamination interacting with the subject seals is greatest after the evacuation and pressure fill process used to fill the brake system during the manufacturing process (early life issue).TRW developed a new master cylinder seal design (EVO seal) that addresses the noise concern and eliminates the internal leak concern associated with contamination by providing a secondary seal (Figure 3).Nissan implemented the new master cylinder design in vehicle production on September 23, 2013.ODI's analysis shows that the master cylinder warranty claim rate is much higher in vehicles produced before the change (Figure 4).Statistical analysis showed that the condition is an early-life problem with relatively low failure rates projected through 100,000 miles and approximately 58 percent of the failures projected to occur by that mileage have already occurred (Table 1).Warranty claims are highest (78% of claims) in vehicles with less than 10,000 miles (Figure 5) and 50 percent of claims involved vehicles with less than 90 days in service (Figure 6).ODI evaluated 22 crash claims that included allegations of master cylinder failure, sinking brake pedal or pedal to the floor (Table 2).The analysis identified only three crashes in which a brake performance issue related to the master cylinder was duplicated by post-incident inspection, including one with a different problem than the seal leak issue (a broken plunger).The two crash complaints related to a possible master cylinder concern involved 1 vehicle with the AWH seal and 1 with the EVO seal.Both were minor crashes.The remaining crashes do not appear to be related to any issues with the master cylinder or other brake system fault.In the 4 crashes with Event Data Recorderinformation available, the data indicated that the brakes were applied too late to avoid the collisions.These include 2 crashes with less than a half second of braking before impact and 2 in which brake applications lasting 1.0 to 2.5 seconds resulted in high decelerations consistent with fully functioning brake systems, but too late to avoid the collision.Overall, the rates of crashes adjusted for vehicle exposure (total vehicle years in service) do not show any correlation to the high warranty rates associated with the AWH seal leak concern (Table 3 & Figure 7).Given these circumstances, further use of the agency resources in this matter does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing o
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
On May 20, 2014, ODI opened PE14-014 based on eight complaints alleging incidents of excessive brake pedal travel in model year (MY) 2013 through 2014 Nissan Sentra, Versa Sedan and Versa Note passenger cars (Figure 1) and information in Early Warning Reporting field reports indicating issues with master cylinder internal seals.In response to an information request letter sent by ODI, Nissan identified a condition with the master cylinder in early production subject vehicles that could result in a slow internal leak past one of the recuperating seals to the brake reservoir when the brake pedal is depressed very slowly or lightly (Figure 2).The subject vehicles are equipped with fixed seal master cylinders supplied by TRW.To address concerns with water hammer noise with the standard seal design, the master cylinders in the early production subject vehicles used AWH (anti-water hammer) seals.The AWH seals are sensitive to contamination from assembly plant cleanliness issues, which can produce the internal leak condition during slow or light brake applies but perform as designed with normal or emergency brake applications.TRW indicated that the risk of contamination interacting with the subject seals is greatest after the evacuation and pressure fill process used to fill the brake system during the manufacturing process (early life issue).TRW developed a new master cylinder seal design (EVO seal) that addresses the noise concern and eliminates the internal leak concern associated with contamination by providing a secondary seal (Figure 3).Nissan implemented the new master cylinder design in vehicle production on September 23, 2013.ODI's analysis shows that the master cylinder warranty claim rate is much higher in vehicles produced before the change (Figure 4).Statistical analysis showed that the condition is an early-life problem with relatively low failure rates projected through 100,000 miles and approximately 58 percent of the failures projected to occur by that mileage have already occurred (Table 1).Warranty claims are highest (78% of claims) in vehicles with less than 10,000 miles (Figure 5) and 50 percent of claims involved vehicles with less than 90 days in service (Figure 6).ODI evaluated 22 crash claims that included allegations of master cylinder failure, sinking brake pedal or pedal to the floor (Table 2).The analysis identified only three crashes in which a brake performance issue related to the master cylinder was duplicated by post-incident inspection, including one with a different problem than the seal leak issue (a broken plunger).The two crash complaints related to a possible master cylinder concern involved 1 vehicle with the AWH seal and 1 with the EVO seal.Both were minor crashes.The remaining crashes do not appear to be related to any issues with the master cylinder or other brake system fault.In the 4 crashes with Event Data Recorderinformation available, the data indicated that the brakes were applied too late to avoid the collisions.These include 2 crashes with less than a half second of braking before impact and 2 in which brake applications lasting 1.0 to 2.5 seconds resulted in high decelerations consistent with fully functioning brake systems, but too late to avoid the collision.Overall, the rates of crashes adjusted for vehicle exposure (total vehicle years in service) do not show any correlation to the high warranty rates associated with the AWH seal leak concern (Table 3 & Figure 7).Given these circumstances, further use of the agency resources in this matter does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing o
Service Brakes
On May 20, 2014, ODI opened PE14-014 based on eight complaints alleging incidents of excessive brake pedal travel in model year (MY) 2013 through 2014 Nissan Sentra, Versa Sedan and Versa Note passenger cars (Figure 1) and information in Early Warning Reporting field reports indicating issues with master cylinder internal seals.In response to an information request letter sent by ODI, Nissan identified a condition with the master cylinder in early production subject vehicles that could result in a slow internal leak past one of the recuperating seals to the brake reservoir when the brake pedal is depressed very slowly or lightly (Figure 2).The subject vehicles are equipped with fixed seal master cylinders supplied by TRW.To address concerns with water hammer noise with the standard seal design, the master cylinders in the early production subject vehicles used AWH (anti-water hammer) seals.The AWH seals are sensitive to contamination from assembly plant cleanliness issues, which can produce the internal leak condition during slow or light brake applies but perform as designed with normal or emergency brake applications.TRW indicated that the risk of contamination interacting with the subject seals is greatest after the evacuation and pressure fill process used to fill the brake system during the manufacturing process (early life issue).TRW developed a new master cylinder seal design (EVO seal) that addresses the noise concern and eliminates the internal leak concern associated with contamination by providing a secondary seal (Figure 3).Nissan implemented the new master cylinder design in vehicle production on September 23, 2013.ODI's analysis shows that the master cylinder warranty claim rate is much higher in vehicles produced before the change (Figure 4).Statistical analysis showed that the condition is an early-life problem with relatively low failure rates projected through 100,000 miles and approximately 58 percent of the failures projected to occur by that mileage have already occurred (Table 1).Warranty claims are highest (78% of claims) in vehicles with less than 10,000 miles (Figure 5) and 50 percent of claims involved vehicles with less than 90 days in service (Figure 6).ODI evaluated 22 crash claims that included allegations of master cylinder failure, sinking brake pedal or pedal to the floor (Table 2).The analysis identified only three crashes in which a brake performance issue related to the master cylinder was duplicated by post-incident inspection, including one with a different problem than the seal leak issue (a broken plunger).The two crash complaints related to a possible master cylinder concern involved 1 vehicle with the AWH seal and 1 with the EVO seal.Both were minor crashes.The remaining crashes do not appear to be related to any issues with the master cylinder or other brake system fault.In the 4 crashes with Event Data Recorderinformation available, the data indicated that the brakes were applied too late to avoid the collisions.These include 2 crashes with less than a half second of braking before impact and 2 in which brake applications lasting 1.0 to 2.5 seconds resulted in high decelerations consistent with fully functioning brake systems, but too late to avoid the collision.Overall, the rates of crashes adjusted for vehicle exposure (total vehicle years in service) do not show any correlation to the high warranty rates associated with the AWH seal leak concern (Table 3 & Figure 7).Given these circumstances, further use of the agency resources in this matter does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing o
Illustration