IllustrationFIRST LARGE CRACK APPEARED JUST 4 MONTHS AFTER PURCHASING THE CAR IN AUGUST 31, 2016 AT A FAIRLY SLOW SPEED (UNDER 40 MPH). SECOND CRACK APPEARED MAY 2018. THE THIRD AND LARGEST CRACK HAPPENED JUNE 30, 2018, AGAIN AT A FAIRLY SLOW SPEED.
2017 Subaru Outback
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Outback years
Owner complaints for the 2017 Subaru Outback are substantially higher than the model-year median of 207.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Outback years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
2040–25K
20725–50K
7750–75K
2075–100K
6100–150K
2150K+
516 reports with mileage · 401 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Electrical System. Review the 391 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Visibility/wiper. Review the 205 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 47 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
32 crash reports3 fire reports17 injury reports
Visibility/wiper complaints
205 reportsTHE WINDSHIELD SPONTANEOUSLY CRACKED WHILE SITTING STATIONARY OUTSIDE MY OFFICE YESTERDAY. THE VEHICLE WAS HALF IN SUN AND HALF IN SHADE. THE CRACK STARTED NEAR THE TOP DRIVER'S SIDE AND SPREAD DOWNWARD AND OUTWARD. THE VEHICLE HAS LESS THAN 7,000 MILES ON IT.
> THE AUTO IN THIS COMPLAINT IS EQUIPPED WITH SUBARU'S "EYESIGHT" DRIVER ASSIST TECHNOLOGY. > JUNE 18, 2018 - DRIVING ON DIVIDED INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, THERE WAS A VERY LOUD "BANG," - THE NEW REPLACEMENT WINDSHIELD CRACKED AND INSTANTLY THE CRACK EXTENDED 2/3 OF THE WAY ACROSS THE FULL WIDTH OF THE WINDSHIELD. AFTER PULLING OVER…
Read full complaint
> THE AUTO IN THIS COMPLAINT IS EQUIPPED WITH SUBARU'S "EYESIGHT" DRIVER ASSIST TECHNOLOGY. > JUNE 18, 2018 - DRIVING ON DIVIDED INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, THERE WAS A VERY LOUD "BANG," - THE NEW REPLACEMENT WINDSHIELD CRACKED AND INSTANTLY THE CRACK EXTENDED 2/3 OF THE WAY ACROSS THE FULL WIDTH OF THE WINDSHIELD. AFTER PULLING OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY AND TAKING A LOOK AT THE WINDSHIELD TO DETERMINE WHAT CAUSED THE CRACK, I SADLY DISCOVERED THAT ONE SECTION OF THE OUTSIDE GLASS HAD SEPARATED FROM PLASTIC BEHIND IT TO THE DEGREE, THAT WHEN RANNING MY HAND AGAINST THE OUTSIDE GLASS SURFACE, IT CUT MY HAND. THE SEPARATION WAS ENOUGH THAT I QUESTIONED WHETHER IT WAS SAFE TO CONTINUE TO DRIVE THE CAR. I DID DRIVE THE CAR HOME. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK THE CAR TO MY DEALERSHIP'S SERVICE DEPT. - THEY POINTED TO A MINUTE NICK ON THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE WINDSHIELD, SO SMALL THAT I DID NOT SEE IT UNTIL IT WAS POINTED OUT TO ME, AS THE "OUTSIDE SOURCE" CAUSING THE CRACK. I DON'T BUY WHAT THEY ARE SAYING. I BELIEVE THE THE GLASS IS SO FRAGILE THAT IT SIMPLY CRACKS FROM STRESS FROM NORMAL DRIVING MOVEMENT OF THE AUTO. AND THAT THE FRAGILE GLASS BEGINS TO SEPARATE FROM THE PLASTIC SECURELY HOLDING IT IN PLACE. > MY COMPLAINT IS THIS: 1) THIS PARTICULAR SUBARU MODEL HAS A RECORD OF "CRACKED WINDSHIELD" COMPLAINTS. BASED ON MY LAST EXPERIENCE WITH A CRACKED WINDSHIELD, THE GLASS IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND NORMAL CAR IMPOSSED STRESS WHILE DRIVING .... AND, THE SUBSEQUENT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE GLASS AND THE PLASTIC BEHIND THE GLASS HOLDING IT IN PLACE IS LARGE ENOUGH THAT IT CONSTITUTES A DRIVER SAFETY HAZARD. WORTHY OF YOUR INVESTIGATION. NOTE - A PHOTO CANNOT ADEQUATELY SHOW THE SEPARATION.
CAME OUT OF WORK AND FOUND A 12 INCH CRACK GOING ACROSS THE WINDSHIELD WITHOUT A REASON. TOOK IT TO MY SUBARU DEALER AND THEY CLAIMED IT WAS A ROCK CHIP AND NOT COVERED BY THE WARRANTY. THIS IS THE 2ND WINDSHIELD THAT HAS CRACKED IN LESS THAN A YEAR. THE 1ST WAS 4 MONTHS AFTER WE BOUGHT THE CAR. SALESMAN DID NOT TELL US WHEN WE …
Read full complaint
CAME OUT OF WORK AND FOUND A 12 INCH CRACK GOING ACROSS THE WINDSHIELD WITHOUT A REASON. TOOK IT TO MY SUBARU DEALER AND THEY CLAIMED IT WAS A ROCK CHIP AND NOT COVERED BY THE WARRANTY. THIS IS THE 2ND WINDSHIELD THAT HAS CRACKED IN LESS THAN A YEAR. THE 1ST WAS 4 MONTHS AFTER WE BOUGHT THE CAR. SALESMAN DID NOT TELL US WHEN WE BOUGHT THE CAR THAT THE WINDSHIELD IS THINNER THAN NORNAL WINDSHIELDS. SUBARU HAS A FAULTY WINDSHIELD AND THEY WON'T ADMIT IT. I COULD SEE IF THE WINDSHIELD HAD BEEN HIT WITH A 1 INCH ROCK BUT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT IT WAS A ROCK CHIP OTHER THAN THE SERVICE GUYS GRAB A PEN AND RUN IT ALONG THE CRACK UNTIL THEY FIND A PLACE THAT THE PEN JUMPS AND THEN STATES ROCK CHIP DID IT. THE WINDSHIELD SEEMS TO HAVE SHIFTED CAUSING A STRESS FRACTURE BREAK AND IT IS A SAFETY HAZARD. THOUGHT SUBARU STOOD FOR QUALITY BUT THEY DON'T STAND BEHIND THEIR VEHICLES. IT'S LIKE TAKE YOUR MONEY AND RUN. SEEMS THAT THEIR ENGINEERS COULD FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE A WINDSHIELD WITH THICKER GLASS TO WORK INSTEAD OF THE INFERIOR GLASS IN THEM. TEMPTED TO PURCHASE ANOTHER BRAND OF VEHICLE THAT WOULD BE SAFER. I THINK SUBARU OUGHT TO STAND BEHIND THEIR VEHICLES INSTEAD OF HIDING FROM THE ISSUES.
THE QUALITY OF THE WINDSHIELD LEAVES A LOT TO BE DESIRED. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME IN LESS THAN A YEAR I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE MY WINDSHIELD. IN BOTH OCCASIONS, THE WINDSHIELD CRACKED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION. I THOUGHT THE FIRST CRACK WAS CAUSED BY A SMALL OBJECT/PROJECTILE I COULD NOT SEE. THEN THE SECOND CRACK OCCURRE…
Read full complaint
THE QUALITY OF THE WINDSHIELD LEAVES A LOT TO BE DESIRED. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME IN LESS THAN A YEAR I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE MY WINDSHIELD. IN BOTH OCCASIONS, THE WINDSHIELD CRACKED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN MOTION. I THOUGHT THE FIRST CRACK WAS CAUSED BY A SMALL OBJECT/PROJECTILE I COULD NOT SEE. THEN THE SECOND CRACK OCCURRED A FEW MONTHS LATER (ABOUT 5 MONTHS APART) AROUND THE SAME SPOT (DRIVER SIDE) AS THE FIRST ONE. IN ABOUT 30 MINUTES, THE CRACK RADIATED QUICKLY FROM THE DRIVER SIDE ALL THE WAY TO THE MIDDLE OF THE WINDSHIELD. IN BOTH CASES, EVEN IF THE CRACK WAS CAUSED BY A SMALL OBJECT, THE IMPACT WAS TOO SMALL TO EXPLAIN SUCH MAJOR DAMAGE. THE FIRST TIME THE WINDSHIELD CRACKED, IT WAS REPLACED BY A SUBARU RECOMMENDED PART AND NOT BY AN AFTERMARKET WINDSHIELD. I WILL USE A SUBARU RECOMMENDED PART AGAIN. HOWEVER, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE, I DO NOT HAVE ANY CONFIDENCE THAT THE PROBLEM WILL NOT RESURFACE. I THINK THE WINDSHIELD IS FUNDAMENTALLY DEFECTIVE.
PURCHASED OUR 2017 SUBARU OUTBACK 2.5 I LIMITED IN AUGUST 2016. AS OF APRIL 30, 2018 WE HAVE HAD TO HAVE THE WINDSHIELD REPLACED 4 TIMES! EACH TIME WE WERE ON HIGHWAYS. THE MOST RECENT INCIDENT WE WERE TRAVELING AT ONLY 45 MPH. EACH TIME, AS SOON AS WE HEARD THE IMPACT, A HUGE CRACK APPEARED. THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A PROBLEM WI…
Read full complaint
PURCHASED OUR 2017 SUBARU OUTBACK 2.5 I LIMITED IN AUGUST 2016. AS OF APRIL 30, 2018 WE HAVE HAD TO HAVE THE WINDSHIELD REPLACED 4 TIMES! EACH TIME WE WERE ON HIGHWAYS. THE MOST RECENT INCIDENT WE WERE TRAVELING AT ONLY 45 MPH. EACH TIME, AS SOON AS WE HEARD THE IMPACT, A HUGE CRACK APPEARED. THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A PROBLEM WITH EITHER THE QUALITY OF GLASS BEING USED OR THE DESIGN. WE HAVE CONTACTED SUBARU OF AMERICA AND REPORTED THE INCIDENTS. AND YET, SUBARU WILL SAY THERE IS NO PROBLEM AND NO COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN FILED. WE ARE FRUSTRATED AND NOW ANXIOUS EACH TIME WE ARE TRAVELING THAT WE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH GETTING THE WINDSHIELD REPLACED. TODAY, WE AGAIN CONTACTED SUBARU OF AMERICA AND SAID WE WANT SUBARU TO ADMIT THERE IS A PROBLEM AND DEAL WITH IT. WE ALSO MET WITH THE SERVICE DIRECTOR OF OUR LOCAL SUBARU DEALER AND FILED A COMPLAINT. HE HAS AGREED TO FORWARD THE COMPLAINT TO THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR.
EXPLODING SUN ROOF: ON 11/23/2017 OUR FAMILY WAS DRIVING FROM HILLSBORO, OR TO COOSBAY, OR FOR A FAMILY THANKSGIVING DINNER. WHILE WE WERE ON INTERSTATE I-5 SOUTH JUST NEAR COTTAGE GROVE, OR WE HEARD A LOUD SHATTER WHICH SCARED ALL OF US, WE IMMEDIATELY PULLED TO THE SHOULDER SAFELY AND NOTICED THAT THE SUNROOF WAS SHATTERED. WE…
Read full complaint
EXPLODING SUN ROOF: ON 11/23/2017 OUR FAMILY WAS DRIVING FROM HILLSBORO, OR TO COOSBAY, OR FOR A FAMILY THANKSGIVING DINNER. WHILE WE WERE ON INTERSTATE I-5 SOUTH JUST NEAR COTTAGE GROVE, OR WE HEARD A LOUD SHATTER WHICH SCARED ALL OF US, WE IMMEDIATELY PULLED TO THE SHOULDER SAFELY AND NOTICED THAT THE SUNROOF WAS SHATTERED. WE WERE GOING AT 65-70MPH WITH DRIZZLE OREGON RAIN AND TEMPS AT 50'S F
WE PURCHASED THE OUTBACK 2017 A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND HAVE DISCOVERED THAT VISIBILITY IS SEVERELY LIMITED WHEN RAINING AND WIPERS ARE ON, ESPECIALLY WHEN LIGHTS ARE REFLECTED ON THE WINDSHIELD. WE HAVE RESEARCHED AND HAVE FOUND ON THE INTERNET THAT OTHERS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM....FOR YEARS BEFORE AND FOR THE 2017 MODELS. WE …
Read full complaint
WE PURCHASED THE OUTBACK 2017 A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND HAVE DISCOVERED THAT VISIBILITY IS SEVERELY LIMITED WHEN RAINING AND WIPERS ARE ON, ESPECIALLY WHEN LIGHTS ARE REFLECTED ON THE WINDSHIELD. WE HAVE RESEARCHED AND HAVE FOUND ON THE INTERNET THAT OTHERS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM....FOR YEARS BEFORE AND FOR THE 2017 MODELS. WE WERE DRIVING ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS AND LOCAL ROADS. A HEAVY HAZE APPEARS ON THE EXTERIOR WINDSHIELD WITH EVERY SWIPE OF THE WIPERS . SO, THE WINDSHIELD IS EXTREMELY GLARY WHEN LIGHT HITS IT, THUS VISIBILITY IS TREMENDOUSLY IMPAIRED. WE NOTICED THAT BEADING OCCURRED ON THE WINDSHIELD AS RAIN FELL AND CHANGED TO HAZE AFTER EACH SWIPE OF THE WIPERS. DEFROST DID NOT HELP; CLEANING WINDSHIELD DID NOT HELP.
I VERY SMALL ROCK CHIP HIT MY WINDSHIELD INITIALLY CAUSING AN 8 INCH CRACK AND IS NOW OVER TWO FEET LONG. THE CHIP DID NOT EVEN LEAVE AN IMPACT MARK; IF YOU TRIED RIGHT NOW TO SEE WHERE THE CRACK STARTED YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO. I REVIEWED FORUMS ONLINE AND HAVE SEEN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ABOUT OUTBACK WINDSHIELDS. WEAK OR CHE…
Read full complaint
I VERY SMALL ROCK CHIP HIT MY WINDSHIELD INITIALLY CAUSING AN 8 INCH CRACK AND IS NOW OVER TWO FEET LONG. THE CHIP DID NOT EVEN LEAVE AN IMPACT MARK; IF YOU TRIED RIGHT NOW TO SEE WHERE THE CRACK STARTED YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO. I REVIEWED FORUMS ONLINE AND HAVE SEEN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ABOUT OUTBACK WINDSHIELDS. WEAK OR CHEAP IS HOW THEY WERE OFTEN DESCRIBED. THIS WAS A VERY SMALL ROCK CHIP THAT HIT MY WINDSHIELD. THIS AMOUNT OF DAMAGE SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED. I AGREE WITH THE FORUMS; WEAK AND CHEAP. I SEE THERE IS EVEN A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST SUBARU.
PURCHASED A 2015 OUTBACK AND EXPERIENCED 4 CRACKED WINDSHIELDS IN AN 18 MONTH PERIOD. TRADED THE CAR IN FOR A 2017 OUTBACK HOPING THEY FIXED THE DESIGN FLAW. NOW 6 MONTHS AFTER 2017 OUTBACK PURCHASE AN OUTRAGEOUS CRACK FORMED ON THIS NEW VEHICLE. ALL 5 CRACKS BEGAN NOT FURTHER THAN 2 TO 3 INCHES FROM THE FRAME. SO 5 CRACKED …
Read full complaint
PURCHASED A 2015 OUTBACK AND EXPERIENCED 4 CRACKED WINDSHIELDS IN AN 18 MONTH PERIOD. TRADED THE CAR IN FOR A 2017 OUTBACK HOPING THEY FIXED THE DESIGN FLAW. NOW 6 MONTHS AFTER 2017 OUTBACK PURCHASE AN OUTRAGEOUS CRACK FORMED ON THIS NEW VEHICLE. ALL 5 CRACKS BEGAN NOT FURTHER THAN 2 TO 3 INCHES FROM THE FRAME. SO 5 CRACKED WINDSHIELDS IN A 2 YEAR PERIOD FROM SUBARU OUTBACK. AUTOMOBILES. THE DEALERSHIP AND MANUFACTURER NEVER WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER PEOPLE EXPERIENCING THIS PROBLEM. SOMETIMES THE CRACK WOULD APPEAR SPONTANEOUSLY, SOMETIMES IT ACTUALLY SOUNDED LIKE CRACKLING SOUNDS HAPPENING IN FRAME AND MAYBE (?) ONE TIME THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A SMALL PEBBLE HIT THE WINDSHIELD. TWICE I WASN'T EVEN DRIVING THE VEHICLE. IMPEDES VISION. DISTRACTS DRIVER.
Official recalls
419V910000 · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
Dec 19, 2019
Subaru of America, Inc. (Subaru) is recalling certain 2016-2017 Outback vehicles. A replacement air bag control module may have been installed that is not compatible with the passenger air bag module, possibly affecting air bag deployment.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating passenger frontal air bag deployment, the air bag may not deploy properly, increasing the risk of injury.
Remedy: Subaru will notify owners, and dealers will replace the passenger air bag module, free of charge. The recall began February 3, 2020. Owners may contact Subaru customer service at 1-844-373-6614. Subaru's number for this recall is WUX-09.
16V716000 · Air Bags:knee Bolster; Steering:column
Oct 6, 2016
Subaru of America, Inc. (Subaru) is recalling certain model year 2017 Legacy and Outback vehicles manufactured September 21, 2016, to September 23, 2016. In the affected vehicles, the knee guard bracket may not be properly attached to the steering beam assembly.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the knee guard is not properly attached and the driver is not wearing a seatbelt, the knee guard may not be able to properly restrain the driver's lower body in the event of a crash, increasing the risk of injury.
Remedy: Subaru will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the knee guard welding on each vehicle's steering beam, replacing the beam as necessary, free of charge. The recall began November 14, 2016. Owners may contact Subaru customer service at 1-800-782-2783. Subaru's number for this recall is WTL-72.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:knee Bolster
Subaru of America, Inc. (Subaru) is recalling certain model year 2017 Legacy and Outback vehicles manufactured September 21, 2016, to September 23, 2016. In the affected vehicles, the knee guard bracket may not be properly attached to the steering beam assembly.
Consequence: If the knee guard is not properly attached and the driver is not wearing a seatbelt, the knee guard may not be able to properly restrain the driver's lower body in the event of a crash, increasing the risk of injury.
Remedy: Subaru will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the knee guard welding on each vehicle's steering beam, replacing the beam as necessary, free of charge. The recall began November 14, 2016. Owners may contact Subaru customer service at 1-800-782-2783. Subaru's number for this recall is WTL-72.
Steering:column
Subaru of America, Inc. (Subaru) is recalling certain model year 2017 Legacy and Outback vehicles manufactured September 21, 2016, to September 23, 2016. In the affected vehicles, the knee guard bracket may not be properly attached to the steering beam assembly.
Consequence: If the knee guard is not properly attached and the driver is not wearing a seatbelt, the knee guard may not be able to properly restrain the driver's lower body in the event of a crash, increasing the risk of injury.
Remedy: Subaru will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the knee guard welding on each vehicle's steering beam, replacing the beam as necessary, free of charge. The recall began November 14, 2016. Owners may contact Subaru customer service at 1-800-782-2783. Subaru's number for this recall is WTL-72.
16V576000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:disc:caliper; Suspension
Aug 3, 2016
Subaru of America, Inc. (Subaru) is recalling certain model year 2017 Outback vehicles manufactured June 20, 2016, to June 23, 2016. The affected vehicles may have improperly tightened attaching bolts for the front left and right brake calipers, wheel hubs, and the right stabilizer clamp.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If any of the front brake caliper, wheel hub or stabilizer clamp attaching bolts loosen or detach, the related components would also become loose and may detach possibly making the vehicle unstable and reducing the braking capability. These conditions would increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Subaru has notified owners, and dealers will inspect the bolts for proper torque, and replace any loose bolts, free of charge. The recall began on August 8, 2016. Owners may contact Subaru customer service at 1-800-782-2783. Subaru's number for this recall is WTE-66.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:disc:caliper
Subaru of America, Inc. (Subaru) is recalling certain model year 2017 Outback vehicles manufactured June 20, 2016, to June 23, 2016. The affected vehicles may have improperly tightened attaching bolts for the front left and right brake calipers, wheel hubs, and the right stabilizer clamp.
Consequence: If any of the front brake caliper, wheel hub or stabilizer clamp attaching bolts loosen or detach, the related components would also become loose and may detach possibly making the vehicle unstable and reducing the braking capability. These conditions would increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Subaru has notified owners, and dealers will inspect the bolts for proper torque, and replace any loose bolts, free of charge. The recall began on August 8, 2016. Owners may contact Subaru customer service at 1-800-782-2783. Subaru's number for this recall is WTE-66.
Suspension
Subaru of America, Inc. (Subaru) is recalling certain model year 2017 Outback vehicles manufactured June 20, 2016, to June 23, 2016. The affected vehicles may have improperly tightened attaching bolts for the front left and right brake calipers, wheel hubs, and the right stabilizer clamp.
Consequence: If any of the front brake caliper, wheel hub or stabilizer clamp attaching bolts loosen or detach, the related components would also become loose and may detach possibly making the vehicle unstable and reducing the braking capability. These conditions would increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Subaru has notified owners, and dealers will inspect the bolts for proper torque, and replace any loose bolts, free of charge. The recall began on August 8, 2016. Owners may contact Subaru customer service at 1-800-782-2783. Subaru's number for this recall is WTE-66.
16V292000 · Steering:column
May 11, 2016
Subaru of America, Inc. (Subaru) is recalling certain model year 2016-2017 Legacy and Outback vehicles manufactured February 29, 2016, to May 6, 2016. The steering column on the affected vehicles may have been improperly machined, and as a result, turning the steering wheel may have no effect on the direction of the wheels.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The loss of steering ability would increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Subaru will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the lot number on the steering column, replacing the steering column, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began May 13, 2016. Owners may contact Subaru customer service at 1-800-782-2783 or by visiting http://www.wtd65.service-campaign.com. Subaru's number for this recall is WTD-65. Note: Until the vehicles have been inspected, owners are advised not to drive their vehicles.
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
1EA21002 · 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.