← 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

Power Train complaints

30 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Aug 28, 2025
Power TrainSeat BeltsVehicle Speed Control

Falla en tren motriz o transmisión

NHTSA ODI #11683640

Mileage unknown · Nov 15, 2021
Power Train

The problem started 11/12/2021. The car started jerking and dropping out of gear while driving. A mechanic changed the transmission fluid and filter thinking it may resolve the problem. It did not now getting a code P2757 indicating the torque converter clutch pressure control solenoid was failing. Toyota issued a bulletin dated…

Read full complaint

The problem started 11/12/2021. The car started jerking and dropping out of gear while driving. A mechanic changed the transmission fluid and filter thinking it may resolve the problem. It did not now getting a code P2757 indicating the torque converter clutch pressure control solenoid was failing. Toyota issued a bulletin dated October 20, 2018 on CK313 CVT P2757 valve body replacement. It’s on your website and also a software update for CVT transmission dated August 13,2018 also on your website. This car did not get the update or either bulletin. Toyota has had multiple problems with the control solenoid but no recall . There were no problems with warning lights or issues prior to the incident. A mechanic has assessed the problem . We have contacted Toyota dealership locally they have said no recalls on the car.

NHTSA ODI #11440530

Mileage unknown · Aug 30, 2021
Power Train

vehicle was going down highway. then decreased speed. then wont go at all. mechanic stated cvt transmission not working.

NHTSA ODI #11431017

Mileage unknown · Jul 15, 2021
Power Train

Transmission is out and have 120,000 miles

NHTSA ODI #11424992

105,000 miles · Jul 9, 2021
Power Train

The contact owns a 2015 Toyota Corolla. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, the vehicle hesitated to accelerate with the accelerator pedal depressed. The contact stated that the vehicle loss motive power with the fuel, check engine, traction control, and oil level warning lights illuminated. The dealer was not ma…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2015 Toyota Corolla. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, the vehicle hesitated to accelerate with the accelerator pedal depressed. The contact stated that the vehicle loss motive power with the fuel, check engine, traction control, and oil level warning lights illuminated. The dealer was not made aware of the failure. The vehicle was not diagnosed nor repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and informed the contact that the VIN was not included in a recall. The approximate failure mileage was 105,000.

NHTSA ODI #11424113

19,752 miles · May 10, 2021
Power TrainUnknown Or Other

THE TRANSMISSION ON THE VEHICLE HAS A TITAL OF 19,752MILES AS OF 5/3/2021. THE VEHICLE'S TRANSMISSION HAS FAILED DUE TO A "BAD CYLENOID" IN THE TRANSMISSION. I AM A 90 YEAR OLD WOMAN WHO WENT TO MY PHYSICIANS OFFICE AFTER MY APPOINTMENT I GIT IN THE CAR AND ATTEMPTED TO PLACE THE CAR IN REVERSE WHEN IT FAILED TO MOVE. …

Read full complaint

THE TRANSMISSION ON THE VEHICLE HAS A TITAL OF 19,752MILES AS OF 5/3/2021. THE VEHICLE'S TRANSMISSION HAS FAILED DUE TO A "BAD CYLENOID" IN THE TRANSMISSION. I AM A 90 YEAR OLD WOMAN WHO WENT TO MY PHYSICIANS OFFICE AFTER MY APPOINTMENT I GIT IN THE CAR AND ATTEMPTED TO PLACE THE CAR IN REVERSE WHEN IT FAILED TO MOVE. I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF THIS VEHICLE AND WAS SHOCKED THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM ESPECIALLY DIBCE I HAD JUST TAKEN IT TO THE DEALER FOR REGULAR MAINTENANCE . DURING THAT MAINTENANCE THERE WERE NO NOTED PROBLEM BOUGHT TO MY STTENTIO. HENCE I FELL THAT THIS IS A SEVERE MANUFACTURERES DEFECR. I'M CONCERNED THAT THERE IS A SERIOUS DEFECT AND RELATED ISDUES DUE TO THE DEDIGN OR MANUFACTURING OF THE CVT TRANSMISSION WHICH I UNDERSTAND IS A BIG ISSUE THAT HAS BEEN ENCOUNTERED IN TOYOTA'S 2014 TO 2019 LINE OF VEHICLES. WHILE IT SEEMS THAT NO RECALL WERE FORMALLY ISSUED, I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A HUGE PROBLEM BASED ON THE FAILURE OF THE CVT TRAMSMISSION... GIVEN THAT THE NORMAL TRANSMISSION MILEAGE FOR THIS MODEL IS ~ 250K MILES SO I STRONGLY FEEL THIS SITUATION IS SUSPECT. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT VEHICLES WITH THE CVT TRANSMISSION ARE SUBJECT TO A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN. AS SUCH, I WOULD LIKE TO REPORT MY VEHICLE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION UNDER THIS STATUS AS I DESIRE TO SECURE A FAVORABLE REMEDY FOR THIS MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT. I WOULD LIKE ASSISTANCE IS EXPLORING MY OPTIONS TO GET MY VEJICLE BACK ON THE ROAD WITHOUT MY HAVING TO COME OUT OF POCKET WITH TBOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO CORRECT THE MANUFACTURER'S KNOWN DEFECT.

NHTSA ODI #11415839

74,000 miles · Apr 1, 2021
Power Train

WHEN DRIVING, MY 2015 COROLLA WITH A CVT TRANSMISSION WITH ~74,000 MILES, THE CAR WILL OFTEN NOT ACCELERATE, SOMETIMES AT HIGH SPEEDS ON THE FREEWAY OR LOW SPEEDS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. FOR EXAMPLE, ON THURSDAY, MARCH 25, I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM WORK WHEN I HAD TO SAFELY PULL OVER BECAUSE MY CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. SINCE I W…

Read full complaint

WHEN DRIVING, MY 2015 COROLLA WITH A CVT TRANSMISSION WITH ~74,000 MILES, THE CAR WILL OFTEN NOT ACCELERATE, SOMETIMES AT HIGH SPEEDS ON THE FREEWAY OR LOW SPEEDS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. FOR EXAMPLE, ON THURSDAY, MARCH 25, I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM WORK WHEN I HAD TO SAFELY PULL OVER BECAUSE MY CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. SINCE I WAS NOT ON A BUSY STREET, I WAS ABLE TO DRIVE HOME BUT AT A HIGHLY REDUCED SPEED. WHENEVER THIS OCCURS IT HAPPENS WHEN I PRESS THE GAS PEDAL. THE CAR EITHER LURCHES REPEATEDLY OR THE ENGINE REVS TO A HIGH RPM WITH OUT ACCELERATING. BASIC MAINTENANCE SUCH AS CHANGING THE OIL AND COOLANT AS REQUIRED WAS DONE, HOWEVER I AM NOT SURE WHAT MAY HAVE CAUSED THE ISSUE. WHEN I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER ON THE 27TH, I WAS ALSO NOT AWARE THAT THERE WAS A RECALL THAT WOULD HELP MINIMIZE WEAR ON MY CVT AND SINCE MY VEHICLE IS OUT OF WARRANTY, I AM STUCK WITH THE ONLY OPTION OF COMPLETELY REPLACING THE CVT TRANSMISSION. I SUSPECT THAT OTHER DRIVERS OF THE SAME VEHICLE MAY HAVE NOT BROUGHT THEIR CAR IN FOR THE RECALL AND MAY BE IN THE SAME POSITION AS ME. PLUS, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT A SOFTWARE UPDATE WOULD HAVE FIXED ANYTHING. MY CAR WOULD STUTTER AT A STOP A YEAR OR TWO AFTER I GOT THE CAR.

NHTSA ODI #11406027

76,000 miles · Dec 18, 2020
Power Train

I WAS DIVING DOWN AN INTERSTATE AND AFTER EXITING TO A STOP, THE CAR WOULD BARELY GO AFTER TURNING LEFT. AFTER A FEW MORE MILES, THE CAR JUAT STOPPED. THE ENGINE WOULD STILL RUN BUT NO ACCELERATION. AFTER HAVING THE CAR TOWED AND INSPECTED, WAS TOLD I NEEDED A NEW TRANSMISSION.

NHTSA ODI #11384009

70,000 miles · Oct 29, 2020
EnginePower Train

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE JERKED AND LOSS MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS RESTARTED HOWEVER, THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED SEVERAL TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO WALTERS TOYOTA (30 WALTERS LN, PIKEVILLE…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE JERKED AND LOSS MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS RESTARTED HOWEVER, THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED SEVERAL TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO WALTERS TOYOTA (30 WALTERS LN, PIKEVILLE, KY 41501) TO BE DIAGNOSED HOWEVER, THE MECHANIC WAS UNABLE TO RETRIEVE A DIAGNOSTIC TROUBLE CODE. THE VEHICLE WAS LATER TAKEN TO MANN TOYOTA (1811 US-23, PRESTONSBURG, KY 41653) TO BE DIAGNOSED HOWEVER, THE MECHANIC ALSO FAILED TO RETRIEVE A DIAGNOSTIC TROUBLE CODE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE BUT OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 70,000.

NHTSA ODI #11366980

126,000 miles · May 19, 2020
Power Train

I GOT A RECALL ABOUT MY TRANSMISSION LAST YEAR (2019) AND THEY CHECKED IT WITHIN MINUTES AND SAID IT SEEMED FINE BUT IF I HAD ANYMORE ISSUES TO BRING IT BACK. WELL THE CAR WAS MAKING SOUNDS AND I WENT TO BRYAN EASLER TOYOTA IN HENDERSONVILLE, N.C. AND SPOKE TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT REGARDING MY CONCERNS SINCE THERE HAD BEEN A R…

Read full complaint

I GOT A RECALL ABOUT MY TRANSMISSION LAST YEAR (2019) AND THEY CHECKED IT WITHIN MINUTES AND SAID IT SEEMED FINE BUT IF I HAD ANYMORE ISSUES TO BRING IT BACK. WELL THE CAR WAS MAKING SOUNDS AND I WENT TO BRYAN EASLER TOYOTA IN HENDERSONVILLE, N.C. AND SPOKE TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT REGARDING MY CONCERNS SINCE THERE HAD BEEN A RECALL AND I WAS TOLD IT WASN'T,'T PROBABLY ANYTHING BAD. WELL I LEFT WENT UP THE ROAD AND TEN MINUTES LATER THE TRANSMISSION FAILED. TOYOTA TOWED IT IN AND TOOK A COUPLE OF DAYS TO CALL ME AND TELL ME THAT IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TRANSMISSION RECALL. THAT IS BULL WHAT ELSE MAKES A TRANSMISSION JUST QUIT OUT OF THE BLUE . THERE ARE SO MANY TOYOTA COROLLA TRANSMISSIONS FAILING DUE TO BAD CVT TRANSMISSIONS AND PEOPLE WHO'S WARRANTY HAS EXPIRED ARE TRYING TO BE MADE TO PAY FOR TOYOTA CRAPPY ENGINE. I FEEL LIKE IT IS A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE AND TOYOTA SHOULD HONOR THE TRANSMISSION RECALL AND REPLACE THE TRANSMISSION AT NO COST TO THE CUSTOMER. THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME $6800 ON TOP OF THE $7200 I OWE NOT FOR A PILE OF JUNK. *TR

NHTSA ODI #11325185

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