← New search

2015 Toyota Corolla

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2015 Toyota Corolla do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 129.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

133 reports with mileage · 86 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 56 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 →
  • Power Train. Review the 30 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

60 crash reports1 fire reports42 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

18 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Nov 30, 2017
Electrical SystemStructureVisibility/wiper

I WANT TO REPORT THAT I FOUND A LOOSE BOLT POKING OUT OF THE DRAIN HOLE ON THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR OF OUR 2015 TOYTOTA COROLLA. IT WAS ORIENTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT ONLY THE THREADED END WAS POKING OUT THE HOLE AND HELD INSIDE THE DOOR BY THE BOLT HEAD. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND AS A COURTESY THEY REMOVED THE DOOR PANEL AND DET…

Read full complaint

I WANT TO REPORT THAT I FOUND A LOOSE BOLT POKING OUT OF THE DRAIN HOLE ON THE REAR PASSENGER DOOR OF OUR 2015 TOYTOTA COROLLA. IT WAS ORIENTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT ONLY THE THREADED END WAS POKING OUT THE HOLE AND HELD INSIDE THE DOOR BY THE BOLT HEAD. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND AS A COURTESY THEY REMOVED THE DOOR PANEL AND DETERMINED IT HAD COME FROM ONE OF THE WINDOW PARTS (REGULATOR OR MOTOR). THEY REINSTALLED AND TIGHTENED THE BOLT. I READ ON THE INTERNET THIS WAS A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH PREVIOUS TOYOTAS AND CREATED SAFETY CONCERNS. THIS MAY BE A CONTINUED PROBLEM WITH TOYOTAS. IT WAS OBVIOUSLY A VERY SMALL CHANCE THAT THE BOLT ACTUALLY LANDED IN A FASHION TO PARTIALLY STICK OUT OF THE DRAIN HOLE SO I WAS ABLE TO SPOT THIS, SO I CAN'T HELP BUT WONDER IF OTHER WINDOW BOLTS IN THE CAR HAVE, OR WILL, COME LOOSE AND FALL INTO THE INTERIOR OF THE DOORS WITHOUT DETECTION. THIS MAY ALSO BE THE CASE WITH MANY OTHER COROLLAS SOLD. BOLTS THAT BECOME LOOSE AND FALL OFF OF WINDOW PARTS COULD LEAD TO INADVERTENT AND DANGEROUS FAILURE OF WINDOWS ON THE ROAD. I SUGGEST YOU INVESTIGATE THIS POTENTIAL SAFETY ISSUE.

NHTSA ODI #11051602

Mileage unknown · Oct 10, 2017
Electrical SystemUnknown Or Other

TAMARA RECALL I HAVE A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA LE I HAVE SEARCHED ALL OVER THE WEB AND FIND ALL ASPECTS OF THIS VEHICLE AND COMPLAINTS ARE THE SAME THAT THIS VEHICLE HAS FAULTY WIRING ON THE PCM THIS CODE KEEP POPPING UP WHEN I CONNECT MY COMPUTER TO IT P2757 WHICH IS P2757 MEANS A PROBLEM WITH THE TORQUE CONVERTER CLUTCH PRESSURE C…

Read full complaint

TAMARA RECALL I HAVE A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA LE I HAVE SEARCHED ALL OVER THE WEB AND FIND ALL ASPECTS OF THIS VEHICLE AND COMPLAINTS ARE THE SAME THAT THIS VEHICLE HAS FAULTY WIRING ON THE PCM THIS CODE KEEP POPPING UP WHEN I CONNECT MY COMPUTER TO IT P2757 WHICH IS P2757 MEANS A PROBLEM WITH THE TORQUE CONVERTER CLUTCH PRESSURE CONTROL SOLENOID DUE TO A BAD TORQUE CONVERTER OR SOLENOID OR ELECTRICAL ISSUES. THE CAR IS ONLY TWO YEARS OLD IT SHOULD NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM THIS CAR ONLY HAS 6,100 MILES AND I HAVE HAD THIS CAR FOR ALL MOST A YEAR ALSO THE THE TRAC OFF LIGHT IS ALSO ON WHICH MEANS THAT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE ABS SYSTEM ALSO SHOULD BE NO REASON FOR THIS CAR TO HAVE THAT PROBLEM THIS CAR IS TO NEW

NHTSA ODI #11032693

55,000 miles · Aug 13, 2017
Air BagsElectrical SystemWheelsCrashInjury

TAMARA RECALL MY AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY DURING IMPACT. CONSTANT LOWVTIRE PRESSURE AND ELECTRICAL ISSUES

NHTSA ODI #11014880

22,000 miles · Dec 19, 2016
Electrical SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed ControlCrash

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. AFTER THE VEHICLE WAS TURNED OFF AND THE KEY WAS REMOVED FROM THE IGNITION SWITCH, THE VEHICLE INDEPENDENTLY BEGAN TO ROLL AND CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED AND THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SURGE FOR APPROXIMATELY A …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. AFTER THE VEHICLE WAS TURNED OFF AND THE KEY WAS REMOVED FROM THE IGNITION SWITCH, THE VEHICLE INDEPENDENTLY BEGAN TO ROLL AND CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED AND THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO SURGE FOR APPROXIMATELY A MONTH BEFORE THE FAILURE OCCURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND SENT A FIELD SUPERVISOR TO DIAGNOSE THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE WAS UNABLE TO BE DUPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 22,000.

NHTSA ODI #10936233

17,000 miles · Oct 15, 2015
Electrical SystemExterior LightingStructureCrashInjury

ON THE FREEWAY DRIVING AND EIGHTEEN WHEELER CAME OVER ON MY CAR AND HIT AND DRAGGED MY UNTIL MY DETACHED FROM THE TRUCK SPIN AROUND AND THE BACK OF MY CAR SLAMMED INTO THE MEDIAN WALL. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY....UPDATED 10/29/15*BF

NHTSA ODI #10782267

4,900 miles · Oct 2, 2015
Electrical SystemEnginePower Train

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE LOST POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT MOVE AND THE ENGINE SEIZED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED OR DUPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE AP…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE VEHICLE LOST POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT MOVE AND THE ENGINE SEIZED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, BUT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED OR DUPLICATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 4,900. UPDATED 1/21/16 *SS *TR

NHTSA ODI #10779291

Mileage unknown · Jul 16, 2015
Electrical SystemPower TrainVehicle Speed ControlCrash

FILING A COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF OUR INSURED/POLICYHOLDER. SHE WAS BACKING OUT OF DRIVEWAY IN REVERSE AND FOOT APPLIED ON BRAKE, AT THIS TIME THE ACCELERATOR BEGAN SURGING AND THE VEHICLE WHILE IN REVERSE AND BRAKE BEING PRESSED WENT UP IN SPEED TO POSSIBLY 35 MILES PER HOUR AND ACROSS THE STREET, HIT CURB AND JUMPED CURB, AND TH…

Read full complaint

FILING A COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF OUR INSURED/POLICYHOLDER. SHE WAS BACKING OUT OF DRIVEWAY IN REVERSE AND FOOT APPLIED ON BRAKE, AT THIS TIME THE ACCELERATOR BEGAN SURGING AND THE VEHICLE WHILE IN REVERSE AND BRAKE BEING PRESSED WENT UP IN SPEED TO POSSIBLY 35 MILES PER HOUR AND ACROSS THE STREET, HIT CURB AND JUMPED CURB, AND THE REAR END ULTIMATELY STRUCK A TREE AND CAME TO A REST IN THE OPPOSING HOME'S YARD. RESEARCH ONLINE SUCH AS THE LATIMES.COM SHOWS THAT THIS YEAR/MAKE/MODEL HAS HAD NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS OF ACCELERATOR SURGING OCCURRING WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN DRIVE OR REVERSE.

NHTSA ODI #10734509

1,869 miles · Feb 12, 2015
Electrical SystemSteering

THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKED UP AND FAILED TO ROTATE WHILE I WAS MAKING A LEFT TURN IN A BUSY INTERSECTION. USING MY FULL WEIGHT I WAS ABLE TO TURN THE WHEEL AND THANKFULLY ONCOMING TRAFFIC AVOIDED HITTING ME. TOYOTA TOWED MY CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP. I HAVE OWNED THE VEHICLE FOR ONLY TWO MONTHS, AND IT WAS PURCHASED WITH LESS THAN 10…

Read full complaint

THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKED UP AND FAILED TO ROTATE WHILE I WAS MAKING A LEFT TURN IN A BUSY INTERSECTION. USING MY FULL WEIGHT I WAS ABLE TO TURN THE WHEEL AND THANKFULLY ONCOMING TRAFFIC AVOIDED HITTING ME. TOYOTA TOWED MY CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP. I HAVE OWNED THE VEHICLE FOR ONLY TWO MONTHS, AND IT WAS PURCHASED WITH LESS THAN 10 MILES. AFTER A DAY OF TESTING, I WAS TOLD THAT AN ELECTRICAL ITEM MALFUNCTIONED. THE PIECE HAS TO BE REPLACED AND IS ON BACKORDER. IT WAS AN EXTREMELY SCARY INCIDENT AND UNBELIEVABLE CONSIDERING THE AGE OF MY VEHICLE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10682998

Official recalls

1

20V024000 · 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.

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

2

EA21002 · 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.

Go deeper into Toyota Corolla problems