NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Electrical System complaints
52 reportsClear category filter35,000 miles · Sep 29, 2016
Electrical System
DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE LOCKS GET STUCK WHEN USING THE BEEPER OR THE DOOR BUTTONS, TRYING TO LOCK OR UNLOCK THEM. I THOUGHT IT WAS THE BEEPER BUT IT DOESN'T EVEN LOCK/UNLOCK USING THE DOORS BUTTONS. I ALREADY KNOW TOYOTA COROLLA OWNERS WHO HAVE THE LOCK STUCK PROBLEM, SO THIS IS NOT ONLY MY CAR, BUT THERE'S MORE CARS WITH THE …
Read full complaint
DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE LOCKS GET STUCK WHEN USING THE BEEPER OR THE DOOR BUTTONS, TRYING TO LOCK OR UNLOCK THEM. I THOUGHT IT WAS THE BEEPER BUT IT DOESN'T EVEN LOCK/UNLOCK USING THE DOORS BUTTONS. I ALREADY KNOW TOYOTA COROLLA OWNERS WHO HAVE THE LOCK STUCK PROBLEM, SO THIS IS NOT ONLY MY CAR, BUT THERE'S MORE CARS WITH THE SAME PROBLEM.
NHTSA ODI #10910491
3,000 miles · Aug 16, 2016
Electrical SystemWheels
2014 COROLLA WITH THE PREMIUM WHEELS (BLACK AND SILVER). THE TIRES LOOSE TIRE PRESSURE FASTER THAN ANY OTHER CAR REQUIRING ME TO ADD AIR EVERY MONTH. THEY LOOSE 3-6 PSI EACH MONTH AND THE WEATHER +/- 10 DEGREES CHANGE ACCOUNTS FOR 1 PSI LOSS RULE DOESN'T FIT BECAUSE ITS ALWAYS 90F IN FLORIDA. THIS IS AN ISSUE FOR EVERYONE BEC…
Read full complaint
2014 COROLLA WITH THE PREMIUM WHEELS (BLACK AND SILVER). THE TIRES LOOSE TIRE PRESSURE FASTER THAN ANY OTHER CAR REQUIRING ME TO ADD AIR EVERY MONTH. THEY LOOSE 3-6 PSI EACH MONTH AND THE WEATHER +/- 10 DEGREES CHANGE ACCOUNTS FOR 1 PSI LOSS RULE DOESN'T FIT BECAUSE ITS ALWAYS 90F IN FLORIDA. THIS IS AN ISSUE FOR EVERYONE BECAUSE WE TYPICALLY DON'T CHECK TIRE PRESSURE MORE FREQUENT THAN 4 X A YEAR FOR EACH SEASON. NOT SURE IF THIS HAPPENS TO THOSE WITH THE REGULAR RIMS BUT I HAVE THE SPORT TOYOTA RIMS THAT CAME WITH THE S PLUS TRIM.
NHTSA ODI #10896331
12,000 miles · Aug 16, 2016
Electrical System
2014 COROLLA. LOCKS WILL GET STUCK BETWEEN OPEN AND CLOSE WHEN USING REMOTE CONTROL. THIS IS A FLAW IN THE LOCK MECHANISM. HAPPENS TO ME ONCE A MONTH AND THE ONLY WAY TO OPEN IT IS WITH A KEY.
NHTSA ODI #10896325
18,000 miles · Jun 29, 2016
Electrical SystemService BrakesStructureCrash
I WAS PARKED IN THE UNDERGROUND PARKING AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF AMHERST AVE AND SANTA MONICA BLVD IN LOS ANGELES. I WAS EXITING DRIVING UP THE VERY NARROW EXIT RAMP. 1.THE ONE WAY EXIT TO THE LOT CURVES AND IS VERY NARROW. AS I NAVIGATED THE NARROW EXIT, I FELT THAT I WAS ALMOST TOUCHING THE WALL ON THE RIGHT SIDE. 2.I…
Read full complaint
I WAS PARKED IN THE UNDERGROUND PARKING AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF AMHERST AVE AND SANTA MONICA BLVD IN LOS ANGELES. I WAS EXITING DRIVING UP THE VERY NARROW EXIT RAMP. 1.THE ONE WAY EXIT TO THE LOT CURVES AND IS VERY NARROW. AS I NAVIGATED THE NARROW EXIT, I FELT THAT I WAS ALMOST TOUCHING THE WALL ON THE RIGHT SIDE. 2.I APPLIED THE BRAKES AND PUT THE CAR IN REVERSE IN ORDER TO GET AWAY FROM THE WALL. HOWEVER, THE BRAKES DID NOT RESPOND AND THE CAR ROLLED BACKWARDS AROUND THE BEND, HITTING THE WALL BEHIND ME. THE CAR CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP. 3.APPLYING THE BRAKES HAD NO IMPACT ON THE CAR NEITHER DECELERATING NOR ACCELERATING. THIS SHOWS THAT THE BRAKES DEFINITELY DID NOT WORK. 4.WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKES, I PUT THE CAR IN DRIVE. AT NO TIME DID I PRESS THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. I WOULD HAVE HEARD THE ENGINE. THE INSTANT I SHIFTED TO DRIVE, THE CAR LUNGED FORWARD AT A VERY HIGH RATE OF SPEED. CONSEQUENTIALLY, MY CAR ZOOMED UP THE DRIVEWAY INTO THE GROUND LEVEL PARKING FACING WEST. WITHIN A SECOND OR SO, MY CAR COLLIDED WITH ANOTHER CAR, PARKED FACING WEST IN FRONT OF PIZZA HUT. DUE TO THE FORCE OF THE IMPACT AT SUCH A HIGH RATE OF SPEED, THE PARKED HYUNDAI SUPERSEDED THE CONCRETE PARKING BARRIER CRASHING INTO PIZZA HUT, SHATTERING THE STORE FRONT WINDOW. 5.MY CAR WAS THANKFULLY STOPPED DUE TO IMPACT WITH THE HYUNDAI ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF MY VEHICLE AND A LOW WALL ON THE LEFT SIDE.
NHTSA ODI #10881511
Mileage unknown · Jan 12, 2016
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
THE LOW BEAM PART OF THE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY IN THE COROLLA SPORTS 2014 IS IRREPLACEABLE. I HAVE SEEN MULTIPLE COROLLA 2014S ON THE ROAD WITH ATLEAST 1 OF THE LOWBEAM HEADLIGHTS NOT WORKING AND IT COULD BE A PROBLEM EITHER WITH THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM OR THE WIRING MUST BE GETTING PINCHED AS IT HAS NO GUARD FROM GETTING PINCHED IF …
Read full complaint
THE LOW BEAM PART OF THE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY IN THE COROLLA SPORTS 2014 IS IRREPLACEABLE. I HAVE SEEN MULTIPLE COROLLA 2014S ON THE ROAD WITH ATLEAST 1 OF THE LOWBEAM HEADLIGHTS NOT WORKING AND IT COULD BE A PROBLEM EITHER WITH THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM OR THE WIRING MUST BE GETTING PINCHED AS IT HAS NO GUARD FROM GETTING PINCHED IF IT'S HARNESSED VIA THE FRONT OF THE CAR NEAR THE BUMPER. I AM PERSONALLY TRYING TO FIGHT THIS PROBLEM BUT THE DEALERSHIP WILL NOT HELP ME.
NHTSA ODI #10819697
27,500 miles · May 6, 2015
Electrical SystemEngine
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE, THE ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO DECELERATE. THE CONTACT HAD TO GENTLY DEPRESS THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE SPEED; HOWEVER, WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED WITH FORC…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE, THE ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO DECELERATE. THE CONTACT HAD TO GENTLY DEPRESS THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE SPEED; HOWEVER, WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED WITH FORCE, THE VEHICLE'S SPEED DECREASED. THE FAILURE RECURRED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE ECM SOFTWARE NEEDED TO BE UPDATED. THE SOFTWARE WAS UPDATED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 27,500.
NHTSA ODI #10714946
5,432 miles · Nov 17, 2014
Electrical System
VEHICLE STALLS. AFTER PUTTING VEHICLE IN REVERSE AND BACKING OUT OF PARKING SPOT, VEHICLE STALLED. AFTER RESTARTING AND PULLING BACK INTO PARKING SPOT VEHICLE STALLED. I SHUT CAR OFF AND RESTARTED IN PARK AND AFTER 5 SECONDS VEHICLE STALLED AGAIN. CAR HAD TO BE TOWED AND RENTAL CAR WAS NECESSARY TO GET HOME. TOYOTA REP SAID THAT…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE STALLS. AFTER PUTTING VEHICLE IN REVERSE AND BACKING OUT OF PARKING SPOT, VEHICLE STALLED. AFTER RESTARTING AND PULLING BACK INTO PARKING SPOT VEHICLE STALLED. I SHUT CAR OFF AND RESTARTED IN PARK AND AFTER 5 SECONDS VEHICLE STALLED AGAIN. CAR HAD TO BE TOWED AND RENTAL CAR WAS NECESSARY TO GET HOME. TOYOTA REP SAID THAT IT WAS THE COMPUTER. EITHER HAD TO BE UPDATED OR REBOOTED (DTC P2645 AND OR P265B WERE DOCUMENTED AS THE CAUSE). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10658735
6,120 miles · Nov 17, 2014
Electrical System
VEHICLE DOORS WOULD NOT UNLOCK AFTER PUMPING GAS AT STATION. VEHICLE WAS NOT STARTED AT THE TIME AND KEYS WERE IN CAR (KEY-LESS SYSTEM WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO AUTOMATICALLY UNLOCK DOORS WHEN KEYS ARE IN VEHICLE). AFTER ATTEMPTING TO OPEN THE DRIVER SIDE DOOR WITHOUT SUCCESS, THE PASSENGER DOOR DID THE SAME. AFTER A FEW MINUTES OF …
Read full complaint
VEHICLE DOORS WOULD NOT UNLOCK AFTER PUMPING GAS AT STATION. VEHICLE WAS NOT STARTED AT THE TIME AND KEYS WERE IN CAR (KEY-LESS SYSTEM WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO AUTOMATICALLY UNLOCK DOORS WHEN KEYS ARE IN VEHICLE). AFTER ATTEMPTING TO OPEN THE DRIVER SIDE DOOR WITHOUT SUCCESS, THE PASSENGER DOOR DID THE SAME. AFTER A FEW MINUTES OF WAITING THE PASSENGER DOOR FINALLY UNLOCKED. THE VEHICLE STARTED HOWEVER, THERE WAS A SMELL OF GASOLINE COMING FROM THE VENTS. THE AIR CONDITIONER ALSO STOPPED WORKING. WHEN THE BUTTON FOR VENTING OUTSIDE/INSIDE WAS SWITCH TO OUTSIDE AIR, THE GASOLINE SMELL DISSIPATED. WHEN I PRESSED INSIDE AIR THE STRONG SMELL OF GASOLINE OCCURRED AGAIN. AFTER APPROXIMATELY 20 MINUTES, THE AIR CONDITIONER BEGAN TO WORK AND SHORTLY THERE AFTER THE SMELL OF GASOLINE RESOLVED. AFTER A FEW HOURS THE HEADACHE FROM GASOLINE INHALATION WENT AWAY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10658734
200 miles · Aug 26, 2014
Electrical SystemExterior LightingVisibility/wiper
I WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE LIGHT SWITCH ON THE VEHICLE THAT I HAD JUST PURCHASED AND BELIEVED THAT I HAD TURNED ON THE LIGHTS OF MY VEHICLE. IN REALITY I WAS DRIVING WITH THE TAILLIGHTS OFF BECAUSE THE LIGHT SWITCH WAS IN THE "DLR" POSITION. (THE LIGHT SWITCH IS BEHIND THE STEERI…
Read full complaint
I WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE LIGHT SWITCH ON THE VEHICLE THAT I HAD JUST PURCHASED AND BELIEVED THAT I HAD TURNED ON THE LIGHTS OF MY VEHICLE. IN REALITY I WAS DRIVING WITH THE TAILLIGHTS OFF BECAUSE THE LIGHT SWITCH WAS IN THE "DLR" POSITION. (THE LIGHT SWITCH IS BEHIND THE STEERING WHEEL WITH SMALL LETTERS THAT CAN'T BE READ IN THE DARK). THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THE TAILLIGHTS ARE OFF WHEN THE SWITCH IS IN THIS POSITION. THE HEADLIGHTS ARE ON AS WELL AS THE INSTRUMENT PANEL ILLUMINATION. SINCE THEN I HAVE SEEN THE SAME VEHICLE / MODEL YEAR DRIVING WITHOUT TAILLIGHTS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT IN APPROXIMATELY 5 OCCASIONS. I BELIEVE THAT SOONER OR LATER THIS DESIGN FLAW WILL CAUSE ACCIDENTS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10628537
7,000 miles · Aug 5, 2014
Electrical SystemStructure
TOYOTA REDESIGNED THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND WENT FROM A SINGLE CLEAR COVER ANGLED TOWARDS THE FRONT TO 2 SEPARATE INSTRUMENT COVERS ANGLED TOWARDS THE LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE. THE DESIGN OF THESE COVERS RESULTS IN EXTREME REFLECTIONS MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO READ THE SPEEDOMETER DURING MORNIN…
Read full complaint
TOYOTA REDESIGNED THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND WENT FROM A SINGLE CLEAR COVER ANGLED TOWARDS THE FRONT TO 2 SEPARATE INSTRUMENT COVERS ANGLED TOWARDS THE LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE. THE DESIGN OF THESE COVERS RESULTS IN EXTREME REFLECTIONS MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO READ THE SPEEDOMETER DURING MORNING AND AFTERNOON HOURS WHEN THE SUN ENTERS THE VEHICLE FROM THE SIDE. THE REFLECTIONS UNDER THESE CONDITIONS ARE SO EXTREME THAT I CAN'T EVEN SEE THE SPEEDOMETER NEEDLE. TINTING THE WINDOWS DID NOT RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. TOYOTA'S SERVICE DEPARTMENT TOLD ME THAT THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO FIX THE ISSUE. ON JULY, 03, 2014 I HAD TO GUESS MY SPEED BECAUSE THE SPEEDOMETER WAS UNREADABLE. I RECEIVED A SPEEDING TICKET SAYING THAT I WAS GOING AT A SPEED WHICH WOULD MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO AVOID A COLLISION. I HAVE DRIVEN OVER 20 DIFFERENT CARS IN MY LIFE AND NEVER HAD A SITUATION WHERE I WAS NOT ABLE TO READ THE SPEEDOMETER, EVEN IN MY 1968 OLDSMOBILE. TO MY UNDERSTANDING, A CAR MANUFACTURER HAS TO DESIGN THE SPEEDOMETER THE WAY THAT IT CAN BE READ UNDER ANY CONDITIONS WHICH IS POSSIBLE. IT APPEARS THAT TOYOTA'S ENGINEERS TOTALLY NEGLECTED THE PROBLEM OF SUNLIGHT REFLECTIONS WHEN DESIGNING THE 2014 COROLLA INSTRUMENT PANEL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10619002
Official recalls
2Jan 17, 2020
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2011-2019 Corolla, 2011-2013 Matrix, 2012-2018 Avalon, and 2013-2018 Avalon Hybrid vehicles. During certain crashes, the air bag electronic control unit (ECU) may malfunction, possibly disabling the deployment of the air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash, air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners that do not deploy as intended may increase the risk of injury.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the ECU and install a noise filter between the air bag control module and its wire harness, as necessary, free of charge. Owners were notified of the safety risk beginning March 2, 2020. A second letter notifying owners of the remedy repair will be mailed between March 16, 2020 and June 27, 2020. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are 20TB03, 20TA03 and 20TA05.
Oct 17, 2013
Toyota Motor Engineering & manufacturing North America, Inc. (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2013-2014 Camry and Camry HV, model year 2013 Avalon and Avalon HV and model year 2014 Corolla vehicles. In the affected vehicles, the windshield wiper switch assembly may short circuit. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard, No. 104, "Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A short circuit could cause inoperative windshield wipers, reducing driver visibility and increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will replace the wiper switch assembly, free of charge. The recall began on November 8, 2013. Owners may contact Toyota at 1-800-331-4331.
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.
EA19001 · Electrical Overstress
Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect. During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW. The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications. The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU. In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment. FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle. Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW. These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes. An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time. In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU. This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners. Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW. The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation. The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage. There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation. The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU. If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC. Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC. All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled. In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024. With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.