NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Power Train complaints
26 reportsClear category filter54,000 miles · Dec 3, 2018
Power TrainUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed Control
JSD RECALL. CAR INVOLUNTARILY ACCELORATES. BOUNCING OF RMP, REVVING AND STICKING AT HIGH REV. TEAM TOYOTA DEEMED THE TRANSMISSION UNSERVICEABLE AND REFUSED TO DO THE JSD RECALL. WHILE HIGHWAY DRIVING, INTERSECTION ACCELLORATION CAR REVS AND SLOWS DOWN. ADVISED THE CVT TRANS NEEDS TO BE REPLACED AT 5500.00. CAR IS AT 55,000 M…
Read full complaint
JSD RECALL. CAR INVOLUNTARILY ACCELORATES. BOUNCING OF RMP, REVVING AND STICKING AT HIGH REV. TEAM TOYOTA DEEMED THE TRANSMISSION UNSERVICEABLE AND REFUSED TO DO THE JSD RECALL. WHILE HIGHWAY DRIVING, INTERSECTION ACCELLORATION CAR REVS AND SLOWS DOWN. ADVISED THE CVT TRANS NEEDS TO BE REPLACED AT 5500.00. CAR IS AT 55,000 MILES AND IS APPARENTLY OVER THE 5 YEAR FACTORY WARRANTEE BY 6 DAYS AT TIME IT WAS BROUGHT IN FOR SERVICE. ISSUE ONLY STARTED HAPPENING IN OCTOBER 2018, 1 MONTH BEFORE THE FACTORY WARRANTEE RAN OUT. I WAS OUT OF TOWN FOR 10 DAYS AND BROUGHT THE CAR IN FOR SERVICE UPON MY RETURN AND WAS ADVISED THE CVT TRANS NEEDED REPLACING BEFORE THEY WOULD DO A RECALL. PICKED CAR UP AND IT WAS 500 TIMES WORSE THAN WHEN I DROPPED IT OFF 4 DAYS EARLIER. I HAVE OWNED MORE THAN 2 TOYOTAS AND NEVER HAD AN ISSUE. I AM MORE THAN UNHAPPY WITH THIS SITUATION AND FEE THE 5 YEAR/60,000 MILE FACTORY WARRANTEE SHOULD BE HONORED.
NHTSA ODI #11155545
90,000 miles · Jul 17, 2018
Power Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DETERMINED THAT THE TRANSMISSION FAILED AND NEEDED REPLACEMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TES…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DETERMINED THAT THE TRANSMISSION FAILED AND NEEDED REPLACEMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000.
NHTSA ODI #11111989
Mileage unknown · Jul 9, 2018
Electrical SystemPower Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF AN UNKNOWN MANUFACTURER RECALL REGARDING THE POWER TRAIN; HOWEVER, THE REMEDY WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO PROVIDE THE SOFTWARE UPDATE ACCORDING TO THE DEALER (ROUND ROCK TOYOTA, 2307 I-35, ROUND ROCK, TX 78664, (512) 904-6700). THE CONTACT WAITED BEYOND A …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF AN UNKNOWN MANUFACTURER RECALL REGARDING THE POWER TRAIN; HOWEVER, THE REMEDY WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO PROVIDE THE SOFTWARE UPDATE ACCORDING TO THE DEALER (ROUND ROCK TOYOTA, 2307 I-35, ROUND ROCK, TX 78664, (512) 904-6700). THE CONTACT WAITED BEYOND A REASONABLE TIMEFRAME AND WAS UNCERTAIN OF WHEN THE MANUFACTURER WOULD PROVIDE THE MANUFACTURER RECALL REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. *TT *TR
NHTSA ODI #11110343
70,777 miles · May 15, 2018
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHECK ENGINE INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. WHILE DRIVING AT UNKNOWN SPEEDS, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS APPLIED AND TRAVELED TO THE FLOORBOARD. THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE CODES WERE RESET. THE MECHANIC…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHECK ENGINE INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. WHILE DRIVING AT UNKNOWN SPEEDS, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS APPLIED AND TRAVELED TO THE FLOORBOARD. THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE THE CODES WERE RESET. THE MECHANIC REFERRED THE CONTACT TO A DEALER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL DEALER (BILL WALSH TOYOTA, 4000 N COLUMBUS STREET, OTTAWA, IL 61350) WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND OPENED CASE NUMBER: 181200125. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN A RECALL NOR WAS IT UNDER WARRANTY. THE VIN WAS UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 70,777.
NHTSA ODI #11093969
75,000 miles · Feb 28, 2018
Power Train
PURCHASED CAR ON 2014 ON 02/21/2018, 4 YEARS LATER THE CAR SLOWS DOWN WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY. I PULL OVER TO THE SIDE MEDIAN AND TOW THE CAR TO TOYOTA DEALER. THEY EXPLAINED THE TRANSMISSION LOCKED IT WILL NEED A NEW ONE FOR 6K OR REBUILT FOR 3K. HOW DOES THIS HAPPEN TO A 4 YEAR OLD TOYOTA .
NHTSA ODI #11075447
68,500 miles · Sep 30, 2017
Power Train
DRIVING AT 30 MPH, CAR ON ITS OWN DOWNSHIFTS TO LOW GEAR WHILE IN DRIVE MODE. HAPPENED 2 TIMES IN HEAVY AFTERNOON DRIVE TRAFFIC ON SIDE ROADS. TRANSMISSION IS JERKY UP HILLS. DOESN'T HAPPEN AT FREEWAY SPEEDS, BUT CAME TO A STOP OFF THE FREEWAY, AND THEN COULDN'T GET IT OUT OF LOW GEAR. BECAUSE I CAN'T TRAVEL AS FAST AND TRAF…
Read full complaint
DRIVING AT 30 MPH, CAR ON ITS OWN DOWNSHIFTS TO LOW GEAR WHILE IN DRIVE MODE. HAPPENED 2 TIMES IN HEAVY AFTERNOON DRIVE TRAFFIC ON SIDE ROADS. TRANSMISSION IS JERKY UP HILLS. DOESN'T HAPPEN AT FREEWAY SPEEDS, BUT CAME TO A STOP OFF THE FREEWAY, AND THEN COULDN'T GET IT OUT OF LOW GEAR. BECAUSE I CAN'T TRAVEL AS FAST AND TRAFFIC BEHIND ME, CAUSES AN ENORMOUS SAFETY PROBLEM. DEALER SAYS COMPUTER SAYS NOTHING WRONG. COROLLA HAS FEWER THAN 69,000 MILES ON IT.
NHTSA ODI #11030609
23,500 miles · Dec 2, 2016
Power Train
REGARDING A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA S WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSION: THE VEHICLE HAS LESS THAN 24,000 MILES AND THE CLUTCH WAS WORN OFF SUBSTANTIALLY. I HAVE OVER 30 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE DRIVING VEHICLES WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSIONS (USED AND NEW) AND I HAVE NEVER HAD THIS PROBLEM. AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE LEASE, I NOTICED THAT THE CLU…
Read full complaint
REGARDING A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA S WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSION: THE VEHICLE HAS LESS THAN 24,000 MILES AND THE CLUTCH WAS WORN OFF SUBSTANTIALLY. I HAVE OVER 30 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE DRIVING VEHICLES WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSIONS (USED AND NEW) AND I HAVE NEVER HAD THIS PROBLEM. AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE LEASE, I NOTICED THAT THE CLUTCH PEDAL SAT HIGHER THAN I AM USED TO. MOREOVER, THE TRANSMISSION KICKED A BIT IF I RELEASED THE CLUTCH AT THE SPEED THAT I AM USED TO. I INFORMED THIS TO THE TECHNICIAN'S AT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, BUT THEY SAID THAT THESE BEHAVIORS WERE BY DESIGN AND THAT THE CLUTCH COULD NOT BE ADJUSTED BECAUSE IT IS A HYDRAULIC SYSTEM. AGAIN, THIS EVENT IS VERY STRANGE AND BASED ON MY PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE WITH NUMEROUS MANUAL TRANSMISSION VEHICLES, I AM LEAD TO CONCLUDE THAT THE CLUTCH SYSTEM FOR THIS VEHICLE IS POORLY DESIGNED/MANUFACTURED/ASSEMBLED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10929676
15,000 miles · Jul 11, 2016
Power Train
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN THE VEHICLE INCLINES, THE VEHICLE WOULD FAIL TO ACCELERATE AND ROLLED BACKWARD. THE FAILURE RECURRED THREE TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE TRANSMISSION WAS BAD DESIGNED AND THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE REPAIRED. THE MA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2014 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN THE VEHICLE INCLINES, THE VEHICLE WOULD FAIL TO ACCELERATE AND ROLLED BACKWARD. THE FAILURE RECURRED THREE TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE TRANSMISSION WAS BAD DESIGNED AND THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 15,000.
NHTSA ODI #10883949
24,000 miles · Jun 19, 2016
EnginePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
ON 6/19/2016 DRIVING HOME FROM RUNNING ERRANDS, I STOPPED AT AT RED LIGHT BUT WHEN THE LIGHT TURNED GREEN, THE CAR DIDN'T BUDGE EVEN THOUGH I WAS TAPPING AND PRESSING THE PEDAL. AFTER ABOUT 7-8 SECONDS, THE CAR FINALLY RESPONDED AND STARTED SLOWLY ROLLING TO NORMAL SPEED. ON THE SAME TRIP AND THE LAST INTERSECTION, THE CAR DID T…
Read full complaint
ON 6/19/2016 DRIVING HOME FROM RUNNING ERRANDS, I STOPPED AT AT RED LIGHT BUT WHEN THE LIGHT TURNED GREEN, THE CAR DIDN'T BUDGE EVEN THOUGH I WAS TAPPING AND PRESSING THE PEDAL. AFTER ABOUT 7-8 SECONDS, THE CAR FINALLY RESPONDED AND STARTED SLOWLY ROLLING TO NORMAL SPEED. ON THE SAME TRIP AND THE LAST INTERSECTION, THE CAR DID THIS AGAIN BUT AT A STOP SIGN. THE GAS PEDAL WAS DEAD WHEN COMING OUT OF A COMPLETE STOP. IT TOOK ANOTHER 7-8 SECONDS FOR THE ENGINE/TRANSMISSION TO RECOGNIZE IT WAS TIME TO ROLL. LUCKILY THERE WAS NO CROSS TRAFFIC BECAUSE I COULD HAVE EASILY BEEN HIT DUE TO CRUISING AT 5 MILES PER HOUR. I'M TAKING THE CAR TOMORROW TO THE DEALER. THE CAR CURRENTLY HAS 24,000 MILES ON IT AND THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THIS HAS OCCURRED. THE FIRST TIME THIS HESITATION HAPPENED WAS IN 2015 AROUND THE 12,000 MILE MARK. THE CAR WAS AT STOP AND DIDN'T DO ANYTHING FOR A FEW SECONDS WHEN I HIT THE GAS PEDAL. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND THE DEALER COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. I TOLD THEM EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED AND WHY I TOOK IT. THIS TIME THEY SENT A SERVICE MANAGER WITH ME FOR A TEST DRIVE AND HE SAID IT FELT FINE. I WAS SENT HOME WITH THEIR ASSURANCE THAT THE CAR WAS FINE AND THAT IT WAS A FLUKE THAT THE ENGINE WAS ACTING UP BUT EVERYTHING WAS FINE. I'VE READ FORUMS WHERE THIS HAS HAPPENED WITH OTHER COROLLAS AND CAMRYS. THIS IS DANGEROUS AND IS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. I HOPE TOYOTA TAKES RESPONSIBILITIES WITH MY CAR AND OTHER CARS WITH THE SAME ISSUE. NHTSA, PLEASE DO SOMETHING BEFORE THIS TRANSMISSION/ACCELERATION ISSUE BECOMES A REAL SAFETY ISSUE. I HAVE VIDEO ON MY CELL PHONE OF THE CAR ACTING ERRATIC.
NHTSA ODI #10875137
990 miles · Oct 4, 2014
Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train
WHEN SLOWING AND THEN ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE, THE ENGINE WOULD SEEM TO STALL ALMOST LIKE A DEAD SPOT. THEN WHEN DEPRESSING THE GAS PEDAL SEVERAL TIMES THE ENGINE WOULD CATCH AND JUMP FORWARD. ALMOST HITTING THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF US. TOYOTA DEALERSHIP TELLS US THIS HESITATION IS ABSOLUTELY NORMAL, DUE TO A NEW TRANSMISSION …
Read full complaint
WHEN SLOWING AND THEN ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE, THE ENGINE WOULD SEEM TO STALL ALMOST LIKE A DEAD SPOT. THEN WHEN DEPRESSING THE GAS PEDAL SEVERAL TIMES THE ENGINE WOULD CATCH AND JUMP FORWARD. ALMOST HITTING THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF US. TOYOTA DEALERSHIP TELLS US THIS HESITATION IS ABSOLUTELY NORMAL, DUE TO A NEW TRANSMISSION SYSTEM ON THE 2014 COROLLA... ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS THIS SO CALLED HESITATION LASTED SEVERAL SECONDS DURING WHICH TIME WE HAD NO MOVEMENT WHAT SO EVER...WITH THIS CONDITION CARS COULD HIT US IN THE BACK CAUSE WE ARE MOMENTARILY STALLED!!!POOR PERFORMANCE AND A SAFETY ISSUE!
NHTSA ODI #10644040
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.