The Radio/Display is in a never-ending updating loop and the screen becomes very bright at the start of the update loop. In which cause temporary blindness at night while driving.
2014 Toyota Corolla
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Corolla years
Owner complaints for the 2014 Toyota Corolla are substantially higher than the model-year median of 129.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Corolla 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
180 reports with mileage · 89 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.
- Air Bags. Review the 69 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 52 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 32 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Exterior Lighting complaints
9 reportsThe contact owns a 2014 Toyota Corolla equipped with four Bridgestone Tires, Tires Line: Eldorado, Tire Size: 21545R17, and DOT Nuber: N/A. The contact stated that the tire pressure warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic who informed her there was internal tire wear. The local dealer was …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2014 Toyota Corolla equipped with four Bridgestone Tires, Tires Line: Eldorado, Tire Size: 21545R17, and DOT Nuber: N/A. The contact stated that the tire pressure warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic who informed her there was internal tire wear. The local dealer was not contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified. The vehicle mileage was approximately 100,000. The tire mileage was unknown.
PASSENGER SIDE LOW BEAM IS DIM. HIGH BEAM WORKS FINE. HAD MECHANIC REPLACE ENTIRE HEADLAMP WITH NO IMPROVEMENT
REAR END COLLISION HAZARD DUE TO DEFECTIVE, POORLY DESIGNED, AUTOMATIC HEADLIGHT SYSTEMS. ALMOST GOT REAR ENDED TWICE DUE TO LACK OF TAIL LIGHTS, WHILE IN MOTION, DRIVING! TOYOTA CLAIMS THE 2014 COROLLA HAS AUTO HEADLIGHTS. WHILE THE SWITCH IS KEPT IN "DRL" DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHT MODE THE CAR TRICKS YOU AT NIGHT INTO THINKING THE…
Read full complaint
REAR END COLLISION HAZARD DUE TO DEFECTIVE, POORLY DESIGNED, AUTOMATIC HEADLIGHT SYSTEMS. ALMOST GOT REAR ENDED TWICE DUE TO LACK OF TAIL LIGHTS, WHILE IN MOTION, DRIVING! TOYOTA CLAIMS THE 2014 COROLLA HAS AUTO HEADLIGHTS. WHILE THE SWITCH IS KEPT IN "DRL" DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHT MODE THE CAR TRICKS YOU AT NIGHT INTO THINKING THE AUTO HEADLIGHT, SIDE MARKERS AND TAILLIGHTS ARE ON AFTER STARTING THE CAR, WHEN THEY ARE NOT ON. YOU START THE CAR AND THE HEADLIGHTS, AND DASH GAGE LIGHTS COME ON BUT NOTHING ELSE IS LIT. NO TAILIGHTS, NO SIDE LIGHTS. I AM TOLD BY THE DEALER CANADIAN VERSIONS OF THE COROLLA HAVE TRUE AUTO HEADLIGHTS AND MY CAR WOULD HAVE TO BE PROGRAMMED TO WORK AS AN AUTO SYSTEM, AFTER ADDING THE DASH SENSOR. I AM REQUESTING TOYOTA DO THIS TO CORRECT THIS SAFETY HAZARD TO AVOID A REAR END COLLISION ON THIS CAR. ALL OF MY CARS THE LAST 20 YRS HAD AUTO HEADLIGHTS AND WORKED FLAWLESSLY EXCEPT THIS TOYOTA COROLLA. I EVEN PUT A NOTE ON THE DASH TO REMIND ME TO MANUALLY TURN THE LIGHT SWITCH ON, BUT IT IS NOT SEEN IN THE DARK WHEN STARTING THE CAR. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO OTHER THAN APPEAL TO THE NHTSA FOR A COMPLETE REVIEW OF THIS MAJOR MANUFACTURER FLAW.
HEADLIGHT IS ONE ASSEMBLY AND COST SO MUCH TO REPLACE THAT'S WHY WHEN THE BULBS GETS BURNT OUT OWNERS WILL JUST WAIT UNTIL THE OTHER ONE GETS BURNT ALSO BECAUSE IT IS TOO EXPENSIVE TO REPLACE THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY NOT LIKE OTHER CARS THAT YOU CAN REPLACE THE BULBS FOR LESS THAN $5.00 BUT WITH THIS CAR IT IS LIKE $250 TO REPLACE A B…
Read full complaint
HEADLIGHT IS ONE ASSEMBLY AND COST SO MUCH TO REPLACE THAT'S WHY WHEN THE BULBS GETS BURNT OUT OWNERS WILL JUST WAIT UNTIL THE OTHER ONE GETS BURNT ALSO BECAUSE IT IS TOO EXPENSIVE TO REPLACE THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY NOT LIKE OTHER CARS THAT YOU CAN REPLACE THE BULBS FOR LESS THAN $5.00 BUT WITH THIS CAR IT IS LIKE $250 TO REPLACE A BURNT HEADLIGHT. PEOPLE WHO DRIVE THIS COROLLA'S ARE TAKING THEIR RISK SPECIALLY AT NIGHT DRIVING WITHOUT SUFFICIENT LIGHTS BECAUSE IT IS TOO EXPENSIVE TO REPLACE. PLEASE CHECK ON THIS, THANKS.
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.
WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, WITH LOW BEAMS ON, ONCOMING TRAFFIC WILL FLASH THEIR HEADLIGHTS. THIS HAS HAPPENED NUMEROUS TIMES WITH SOME ONCOMING TRAFFIC TURNING ON THEIR HIGH BEAMS AND LEAVING THEM ON AS THEY APPROACH OUR CAR. I HAVE CHECKED TO MAKE SURE THAT LOW BEAMS ARE ON WHEN THERE IS ONCOMING TRAFFIC. I HAVE HAD THE TOYOTA DEA…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, WITH LOW BEAMS ON, ONCOMING TRAFFIC WILL FLASH THEIR HEADLIGHTS. THIS HAS HAPPENED NUMEROUS TIMES WITH SOME ONCOMING TRAFFIC TURNING ON THEIR HIGH BEAMS AND LEAVING THEM ON AS THEY APPROACH OUR CAR. I HAVE CHECKED TO MAKE SURE THAT LOW BEAMS ARE ON WHEN THERE IS ONCOMING TRAFFIC. I HAVE HAD THE TOYOTA DEALER CHECK THE HEADLIGHT ADJUSTMENT TWICE. THEIR RESPONSE IS THAT THE HEADLIGHTS ARE ADJUSTED TO SPEC. WE ARE HESITANT TO DRIVE THE CAR AT NIGHT BECAUSE OF THE COMPLAINTS WE HAVE RECEIVED ABOUT THE HEADLIGHTS.
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
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS WERE EQUIPPED WITH AN OUTER SHIELD THAT CAUSED THE LIGHT BEAMS TO PRODUCE DIM VISIBILITY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 11,000.
Official recalls
220V024000 · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
Jan 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.
13V505000 · Visibility:windshield Wiper/washer:switch/wiring
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.
Illustration