NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
20 reportsClear category filter117,000 miles · Aug 20, 2015
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 PONTIAC VIBE. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED AND THE VEHICLE HESITATED AND BACK FIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 10V387000 (ENGINE AND ENGINE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 PONTIAC VIBE. WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED AND THE VEHICLE HESITATED AND BACK FIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 10V387000 (ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING). THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 117,000. MA 09/25
NHTSA ODI #10749957
Mileage unknown · Sep 23, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train
2006 PONTIAC VIBE. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO POWER TRAIN MODULE RECALL NOTICE *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED ON JUNE 23, 2009, THE PCM UNIT FAILED ON THE VEHICLE AND IT HAD TO BE TOWED. THE REPAIR SHOP WAS INFORMED BY THE DEALER, THAT THE PCM UNIT WAS NOT UNDER WARRANTY, SO THE CONSUMER HAD TO PAY $429.30. ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2009, …
Read full complaint
2006 PONTIAC VIBE. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO POWER TRAIN MODULE RECALL NOTICE *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED ON JUNE 23, 2009, THE PCM UNIT FAILED ON THE VEHICLE AND IT HAD TO BE TOWED. THE REPAIR SHOP WAS INFORMED BY THE DEALER, THAT THE PCM UNIT WAS NOT UNDER WARRANTY, SO THE CONSUMER HAD TO PAY $429.30. ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2009, THE PCM UNIT FAILED AGAIN. THE CONSUMER WENT TO THE DEALER, WHO INFORMED THE CONSUMER THAT SINCE THE PREVIOUS WORK WAS NOT PERFORMED AT A DEALER AND HE DIDN'T KEEP THE PREVIOUS MALFUNCTIONING PART, THE REPLACEMENT WOULD NOT BE COVERED BY WARRANTY. THE COST WAS $605.92. THE CONSUMER IS SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10427255
145,545 miles · Aug 4, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
2006 PONTIAC VIBE WAS GOING IN CITY LOOK DOWN TO SEE MY CAR WAS OVER HEATING PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF ROAD TO LOOK UNDER HOOD FOUND THAT THE COOLING FAN HAD FALLEN OFF . AND THE FAN FUSE WAS BLOWN MY CAR IS ONLY 5YRS OLD THE HAS TO BE A DEFECT MY MACHINE TOLD MY THE BARING OR BUSHING WERE GONE IN THE MOTOR. IF I DIDN'T HAPPEN TO N…
Read full complaint
2006 PONTIAC VIBE WAS GOING IN CITY LOOK DOWN TO SEE MY CAR WAS OVER HEATING PULLED OVER TO SIDE OF ROAD TO LOOK UNDER HOOD FOUND THAT THE COOLING FAN HAD FALLEN OFF . AND THE FAN FUSE WAS BLOWN MY CAR IS ONLY 5YRS OLD THE HAS TO BE A DEFECT MY MACHINE TOLD MY THE BARING OR BUSHING WERE GONE IN THE MOTOR. IF I DIDN'T HAPPEN TO NOTICE THE PROBLEM I WOULD HAVE BLOWN THE ENGINE I AM ALSO WONDERING IF THIS IS PART OF THE RECALL FOR THE COOLING PROBLEM THAT HAS TO DO WITH SENSORS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10417120
31,691 miles · May 17, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train
CONSUMER WRITES TO REQUEST REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE PCM REPLACEMENT *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THE PCM WAS REPLACED TWICE AND THE PROBLEM STILL EXISTS. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND THE VEHICLE EXHIBITED A HARSH TRANSMISSION SHIFT AS WELL AS ENGINE STALLING. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10401884
Mileage unknown · Mar 7, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train
2006 PONTIAC VIBE. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO LACK OF PARTS FOR RECALL REPAIRS *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THAT HE WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT HE BELIEVED THE VEHICLE TO BE FULLY REPAIRED AFTER TAKING THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THE AIRBAG RECALL PERFORMED. THE CONSUMER WAS LATER MADE AWARE OF THAT VEHICLE WAS REPAIRE…
Read full complaint
2006 PONTIAC VIBE. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO LACK OF PARTS FOR RECALL REPAIRS *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THAT HE WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT HE BELIEVED THE VEHICLE TO BE FULLY REPAIRED AFTER TAKING THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THE AIRBAG RECALL PERFORMED. THE CONSUMER WAS LATER MADE AWARE OF THAT VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED WITH INTERIM PARTS. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10387710
92,000 miles · Jan 26, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train
I OWN A 2006 PONTIAC VIBE I PURCHASED FROM A DEALER IN 2009. I STARTED HAVING ISSUES WITH IT SHIFTING HARSHLY,ROLLING BACKWARD ON HILLS AT A STOP AS A MANUAL WOULD WITHIN APPROXIMATELY 2 MONTHS AFTER I PURCHASED IT. I HAD IT LOOKED AT A LOCAL DEALER BUT THEY COULD NOT FIND THE PROBLEM SO I JUST HAVE BEEN DRIVING IT AS IT IS. NO…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2006 PONTIAC VIBE I PURCHASED FROM A DEALER IN 2009. I STARTED HAVING ISSUES WITH IT SHIFTING HARSHLY,ROLLING BACKWARD ON HILLS AT A STOP AS A MANUAL WOULD WITHIN APPROXIMATELY 2 MONTHS AFTER I PURCHASED IT. I HAD IT LOOKED AT A LOCAL DEALER BUT THEY COULD NOT FIND THE PROBLEM SO I JUST HAVE BEEN DRIVING IT AS IT IS. NOW YESTERDAY I WAS DRIVING UP A HILL AND THE CAR COMPLETELY STALLED SO I QUICKLY PUT IT IN PARK, TURNED IT OFF AND BACK ON PUT IT IN GEAR AND IT TOOK OFF. I WAS FORTUNATE THERE WAS NO TRAFFIC IN THOSE FEW MINUTES. I DID RECEIVE AN ADVISORY LETTER LAST FALL SO I CALLED GM ON THE ISSUE AND THEY PROCEEDED TO TELL ME THAT EVERYONE THAT OWNS A VIBE GOT THOSE LETTERS AND MY CAR WAS NOT ONE UNDER RECALL BUT SINCE I WAS HAVING ISSUES I WAS TO TAKE IT INTO A DEALER TO BE FIXED AT MY OWN EXPENSE AND FILL OUT A REIMBURSEMENT FORM. ID LIKE TO KNOW HOW IS IT THAT MY CAR JUST HAPPENED TO HAVE THE SAME ISSUES THAT WAS LISTED IN THE RECALL ADVISORY BUT ISN'T INCLUDED IN THE RECALL? AND HOW IS IT THAT THEY KEEP TELLING US THEY DO NOT HAVE THE PARTS AVAILABLE. I EVEN SPOKE TO ONE DEALER THAT TOLD ME HE WAS INFORMED BY GM WHEN HE SPOKE TO THEM RECENTLY THAT IF SOMEONE'S CAR HAS SERIOUS ISSUES SUCH AS STALL OUT AND WONT START THAT WE ARE TO DROP IT AND LEAVE IT UNTIL THE PART IS AVAILABLE. I JUST WANT TO DRIVE MY CAR SAFELY ESPECIALLY SINCE I AM STILL MAKING PAYMENTS,BUT IT SEEMS THAT I AM GETTING A RUNAROUND FROM GM BECAUSE THERE ARE TOO MANY CARS INVOLVED AND THEY WANT US TO PAY FOR THE PROBLEM OURSELVES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10378794
92,000 miles · Dec 23, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS 2006 PONTIAC VIBE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHECK ENGINE ILLUMINATED WHILE SHE WAS DRIVING 55 MPH. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO STATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS CAUSED BY THE PRESSURE CONTROL SOLENOID. ALSO, SHE MENTIONED THAT SHE CONTACTED THE DEALER BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS 2006 PONTIAC VIBE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHECK ENGINE ILLUMINATED WHILE SHE WAS DRIVING 55 MPH. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHO STATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS CAUSED BY THE PRESSURE CONTROL SOLENOID. ALSO, SHE MENTIONED THAT SHE CONTACTED THE DEALER BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE BECAUSE THE PARTS WERE UNAVAILABLE. THE VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 92,000
NHTSA ODI #10372227
46,000 miles · Dec 4, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY 2006 PONTIAC VIBE BEGAN SHIFTING HARSHLY AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. THIS OCCURRED BEGINNING BEFORE THANKSGIVING. I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE ON THE VEHICLE EARLIER IN NOVEMBER, STATING THESE WERE 2 OF THE SIGNS OF THE DEFECTIVE PART. I CALLED THE 800 NUMBER ON THE RECALL NOTICE AND THE PONTIAC REPRESENTATIVE TOLD ME…
Read full complaint
MY 2006 PONTIAC VIBE BEGAN SHIFTING HARSHLY AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. THIS OCCURRED BEGINNING BEFORE THANKSGIVING. I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE ON THE VEHICLE EARLIER IN NOVEMBER, STATING THESE WERE 2 OF THE SIGNS OF THE DEFECTIVE PART. I CALLED THE 800 NUMBER ON THE RECALL NOTICE AND THE PONTIAC REPRESENTATIVE TOLD ME THE REPAIR WORK HAD NOT BEGUN ON THE RECALL, THE REPRESENTATIVE ALSO TOLD ME MY CAR WAS NOT ONE BEING RECALLED. I ASKED WHY I RECEIVED THE RECALL NOTICE AND SHE TOLD ME ALL VIBE OWNERS GOT THE NOTICE AND I WOULD RECEIVE ANOTHER NOTICE WHEN THE PARTS WERE AVAILABLE. I CALLED A LOCAL PONTIAC DEALERSHIP AND WAS INFORMED THIS CONDITION WAS NOT UNSAFE OR DETRIMENTAL TO THE VEHICLE. MY VEHICLE HAS NOT STALLED, NOR HAS THE ENGINE DIED. I HAVE NOT DRIVEN THE CAR OF THE PAST WEEK - I OWN AN EXTRA CAR. I JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE WITH THE PONTIAC 800 NUMBER AGAIN AND AFTER GETTING THE SAME "BE PATIENT" RESPONSE, I ASKED TO SPEAK WITH A SUPERVISOR - THIS TIME I WAS INFORMED MY CAR WAS STILL UNDER POWERTRAIN WARRANTY AND SHOULD TAKE IT TO THE CLOSEST PONTIAC DEALERSHIP. MY COMPLAINT IS, 1) WHY DID THE FIRST PONTIAC REP. GIVE ME THE STALL AND DELAY ANSWER BEFORE THANKSGIVING AND I RECEIVED THE SAME ANSWER TODAY 12-4-10 UNTIL I SPOKE WITH A SUPERVISOR? 2) WHY AREN'T THE PARTS AVAILABLE FOR AN IMMEDIATE FIX IF THE COMPANY KNOWS IT'S A DEFECTIVE PART? I ALSO OWN A 2008 PONTIAC VIBE WITH THE SAME RECALL NOTICE THAT I HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED ANY PROBLEMS TO DATE. I WOULD HAVE TAKEN THE CAR IN FOR REPAIR BEFORE THANKSGIVING IF I WERE GIVEN THE CORRECT INFORMATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10369202
125,000 miles · Sep 29, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 PONTIAC VIBE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SINCE THE DATE OF PURCHASE, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED PERIODICALLY AND WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING 15 MPH, IT WOULD SUDDENLY STALL. ALSO THE ENGINE SHUT OFF WHEN THE CONTACT TURNED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER SEVERAL TIMES BUT THE DEA…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 PONTIAC VIBE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SINCE THE DATE OF PURCHASE, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED PERIODICALLY AND WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS TRAVELING 15 MPH, IT WOULD SUDDENLY STALL. ALSO THE ENGINE SHUT OFF WHEN THE CONTACT TURNED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER SEVERAL TIMES BUT THE DEALER COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE DEALER RESET THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT BUT NO REMEDY WAS ABLE TO BE OFFERED. THE CONTACT REFERENCED RECALL 10V387000 (ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING) BUT WAS TOLD BY THE MANUFACTURER THAT IT ONLY AFFECTED VEHICLES WITH TWO WHEEL DRIVE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 125,000.
NHTSA ODI #10358242
99,500 miles · Sep 20, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 PONTIAC VIBE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AS HE STARTED THE VEHICLE, THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED. WHEN SHIFTING GEARS, THE VEHICLE WOULD SHIFT HARD AND WOULD JERK ABNORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE WAS REPLACED. THE CONTACT INQUIRED WITH THE MANU…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 PONTIAC VIBE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AS HE STARTED THE VEHICLE, THE CHECK ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED. WHEN SHIFTING GEARS, THE VEHICLE WOULD SHIFT HARD AND WOULD JERK ABNORMALLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE WAS REPLACED. THE CONTACT INQUIRED WITH THE MANUFACTURER IN REGARDS TO NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 10V387000 (ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING) BUT WAS ADVISED BY THE MANUFACTURER THAT HER VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CAMPAIGN. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 99,500.
NHTSA ODI #10356561
Official recalls
5Aug 28, 2019
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2003-2008 Corolla, 2005-2008 Corolla Matrix, and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with a front passenger air bag assembly replaced under a prior recall. The air bag may not unfold as designed during inflation under high temperature conditions, possibly resulting in the air bag not inflating properly.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: An improperly inflated air bag increases the risk of injury during a crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify their owners. Pontiac Vibe owners will be notified by GM. Dealers will replace the front passenger air bag assembly or sub-assembly, free of charge. Toyota owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are K1Q and K0Q. Pontiac owners may contact GM customer service at 1-800-762-2737. GM's number for this recall is N192273760.
Dec 12, 2018
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2002-2005 Lexus SC and Toyota Sequoia, 2003-2005 Toyota Corolla and Tundra, and 2003-2007 Pontiac Vibe vehicles. These vehicles are equipped with certain air bag inflators assembled as part of the passenger frontal air bag modules used as original equipment or replacement equipment. In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger frontal air bag, these inflators may explode due to propellant degradation.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: An inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.
Remedy: Toyota will notify the Toyota and Lexus owners. General Motors will notify the Pontiac Vibe owners. Depending on the vehicle model, dealers will replace the front passenger air bag inflator with an alternate inflator, or replace the air bag assembly that includes an alternate inflator, free of charge. The recall began January 23, 2019. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371, Lexus customer service at 1-800-255-3987 or Pontiac customer service at 1-800-762-2737. Toyota's numbers for these recalls are J0A (Zone A Toyota), J0B (Zone B Toyota), J0C (Zone C Toyota), JLI (Zone A Lexus), JLJ (Zone B Lexus), and JLK (Zone C Lexus). Note: This recall includes vehicles that have had their air bag previously replaced under an earlier air bag campaign.
May 13, 2015
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) notified the agency on May 13, 2015 that they are recalling certain model year 2004 Sequoia vehicles manufactured August 18, 2003, to August 19, 2004, and 2003-2004 Tundra vehicles manufactured March 18, 2003, to August 25, 2004. On June 16, 2015, Toyota expanded the recall to include an additional 1,270,468 vehicles, including model year 2002-2003 and 2005-2007 Sequoia, 2005-2006 Tundra, 2003-2007 Corolla, 2003-2007 Corolla Matrix, 2003-2007 Pontiac Vibe and 2002-2007 Lexus SC vehicles. This is to address a safety defect in the passenger side frontal air bag inflator which may produce excessive internal pressure causing the inflator to rupture upon deployment of the air bag. This recall addresses both the passenger side frontal air bags that were originally installed in the vehicles, as well as replacement air bags that may have been installed as replacement service parts. A replacement air bag may have been installed, as one example, if a vehicle had been in a crash necessitating the replacement of the passenger side frontal air bag.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants potentially resulting in serious injury or death.
Remedy: 2003-2004 Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles that are recalled under both 15V-043 and 15V-285 are under a Do Not Drive advisory. Owners of these vehicles are advised not to drive their vehicles until the recall remedy has been completed. Toyota will notify their owners. Pontiac Vibe owners will be notified by GM. Dealers will replace the front passenger air bag. The recall began on July 13, 2015. Toyota owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331. Pontiac owners may call 1-800-762-2737. NOTE: This recall supersedes recall 14V-312 in its entirety.
May 13, 2015
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) notified the agency on May 13, 2015, that they are recalling 2005-2007 Lexus SC, Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix, Sequoia, and Pontiac Vibe, and 2005-2006 Toyota Tundra vehicles that were originally sold, or ever registered, in Florida, along the Gulf Coast, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, Saipan and American Samoa. On June 16, 2015 Toyota expanded the recall to cover an additional 769,055 vehicles, including certain model year 2002-2004 Lexus SC, Toyota Sequoia, 2003-2004 Toyota Corolla Matrix, Toyota Corolla, Pontiac Vibe, and Toyota Tundra vehicles, as well the vehicles covered by the May 13, 2015 notification in the portions of Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas that were not previously included. The inflators in the front passenger air bags are susceptible to rupture in the event of a crash necessitating the deployment of the front passenger air bag.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants potentially resulting in serious injury or death.
Remedy: 2003-2004 Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles that are recalled under both 15V-043 and 15V-286 are under a Do Not Drive advisory. Owners of these vehicles are advised not to drive their vehicles until the recall remedy has been completed. Toyota will notify their owners. Pontiac Vibe owners will be notified by GM. Dealers will replace the passenger side front air bag, free of charge. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331. Toyota began the recall on July 13, 2015. Pontiac Vibe owners may contact GM at 1-800-762-2737. GM began the recall on June 29, 2015. NOTE: This recacll supersedes recall 14V-655 in its entirety. For vehicles located in the U.S. states not listed above, please see Toyota recall 15V-285 which covers all other U.S. states.
Aug 26, 2010
GM IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2008 PONTIAC VIBE VEHICLES. THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE (ECM) FOR THE SUBJECT MODELS EQUIPPED WITH THE 1ZZ-FE (LV6) ENGINE AND TWO-WHEEL DRIVE MAY HAVE BEEN IMPROPERLY MANUFACTURED. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT A CRACK MAY DEVELOP AT CERTAIN SOLDER POINTS OR ON VARISTORS ON THE CIRCUIT BOARD.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THERE ARE A VARIETY OF WARNINGS AND CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEFECT. THE ENGINE WARNING LAMP COULD BE ILLUMINATED, HARSH SHIFTING COULD RESULT, THE ENGINE MAY NOT START, OR THE ENGINE COULD SHUT OFF WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN. AN ENGINE SHUTOFF WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN INCREASES THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE PRODUCTION NUMBER OF THE ECM AND REPLACE THE ECM IF NECESSARY. THIS SERVICE WILL BE PERFORMED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON FEBRUARY 8, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT GM AT 1-800-620-7668.
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
2EA21002 · 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.
EA10006 · Engine Stall
Opened Aug 18, 2010 · Closed Sep 16, 2010
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling
On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Engine And Engine Cooling
On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.
Engine And Engine Cooling
On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.
Illustration