← 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
106,128 miles · Feb 11, 2020
Power Train

SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN JSD PERFORMED ON NOV 03, 2019. THE SOFTWARE COMPONENT WAS UPDATED, HOWEVER THE SOLENOID VALVE INSPECTION AND THE VALVE BODY ASSEMBLY REPLACEMENT WAS DETERMINED AS "NOT REQUIRED". SINCE THEN THE CVT SEEMS TO HAVE STARTED TO FAIL. AT THIS POINT IN TIME THE TRANSMISSION MAKES NOISE WHILE ACCELERATING AND DE…

Read full complaint

SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN JSD PERFORMED ON NOV 03, 2019. THE SOFTWARE COMPONENT WAS UPDATED, HOWEVER THE SOLENOID VALVE INSPECTION AND THE VALVE BODY ASSEMBLY REPLACEMENT WAS DETERMINED AS "NOT REQUIRED". SINCE THEN THE CVT SEEMS TO HAVE STARTED TO FAIL. AT THIS POINT IN TIME THE TRANSMISSION MAKES NOISE WHILE ACCELERATING AND DECELERATING. THE DEALERSHIP RECOMMENDS THE REPLACEMENT OF THE TRANSMISSION AND SITES ISSUES WITH THE BELT IN THE CVT. *LN THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED WITH A USED TRANSMISSION. CONSUMER INFORMED MANUFACTURER OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER REFUSED TO HELP BECAUSE THE VEHICLE IS OUT OF WARRANTY. *DL

NHTSA ODI #11308454

26,000 miles · Nov 4, 2019
Power Train

PASSENGER SIDE WHEEL WOBBLES WHEN ACCELERATING. HAD TOYOTA CHECK FOR PROBLEMS THEY SAID IT WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE ROTORS. CHANGED BRAKES AND ROTORS AND PROBLEM STILL EXIST. WAS TOLD IT WAS TIRES AND BALANCE HAD THEM CHECKED AND IT STILL WOBBLES.

NHTSA ODI #11278012

53,110 miles · Sep 25, 2019
Power Train

THE 'AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION' SEEMS TO HAVE AN ISSUE ON THIS PARTICULAR VEHICLE! WHILE DRIVING THE CAR, I NOTICE THAT THE RPM GAUGE REACHES APPROXIMATELY 5,000 TO 5,250 RPMS BEFORE THE 'AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION' SHIFTS INTO THE NEXT FORWARD GEAR! THIS SITUATION HAPPENS WHILE DRIVING CITY STREETS AND DEFINITELY WHILE DRIVING HIGHWAY…

Read full complaint

THE 'AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION' SEEMS TO HAVE AN ISSUE ON THIS PARTICULAR VEHICLE! WHILE DRIVING THE CAR, I NOTICE THAT THE RPM GAUGE REACHES APPROXIMATELY 5,000 TO 5,250 RPMS BEFORE THE 'AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION' SHIFTS INTO THE NEXT FORWARD GEAR! THIS SITUATION HAPPENS WHILE DRIVING CITY STREETS AND DEFINITELY WHILE DRIVING HIGHWAYS AND INTERSTATES HIGHWAYS!!! TO BEST DESCRIBE THIS PROBLEM, IT IS BASICALLY LIKE WHEN I FIRST LEARNED HOW TO DRIVE A 'MANUAL TRANSMISSION VEHICLE' AND I DID NOT FULLY UNDERSTAND WHEN IT WAS TIME TO SHIFT INTO THE NEXT GEAR. BECAUSE THE RPM GAUGE IS READING SO HIGH BEFORE THE 'AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION' AUTOMATICALLY SHIFTS INTO THE NEXT GEAR RATIO, IT CONCERNS ME QUITE A BIT!!! I HAD THIS SIMILAR ISSUE WHEN I OWNED A 1976 PONTIAC TRANS-AM. AFTER THE TRANSMISSION ON MY CURRENT 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA STARTED ACTING LIKE MY OLD PONTIAC TRANS-AM, I STARTED BECOMING VERY CONCERNED WITH THIS TRANSMISSION ISSUE! BECAUSE ON MY OLD 1976 PONTIAC TRANS-AM WHEN THE RPM GAUGE WAS RUNNING VERY HIGH BEFORE THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION WOULD SHIFT TO THE NEXT GEAR RATIO, ONE DAY THE TRANSMISSION FINALLY BURNED OUT ALL THE FORWARD 'AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION' GEARS AND ALL I HAD LEFT TO GO UP A HILL WAS MY 'REVERSE GEAR'!!! WHEN I TOOK THE 1976 PONTIAC TRANS-AM INTO A PONTIAC DEALERSHIP, I WAS INFORMED THAT ALL THE FORWARD GEAR CLUTCH PLATES WERE BURNED OUT!!! SO, IF THERE ARE ANY ADDITIONAL COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS VEHICLES 'AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION' THEN TOYOTA SHOULD LOOK IN TO THIS ISSUE AND MAKE THE APPROPRIATE 'RECALL(S)'! I PURCHASED THIS 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA TWO YEARS AGO. THIS PROBLEM STARTED APPROXIMATELY SIX-MONTHS AGO, OR AROUND MARCH OF 2019!

NHTSA ODI #11257901

106,800 miles · Aug 5, 2019
Power Train

I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE IN THE MAIL FROM TOYOTA - REFERENCE ID JSD. THE NOTICE STATED THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH PROGRAMMING WITHIN THE ECU THAT COULD POTENTIALLY LEAD TO ISSUES WITH THE CAR'S TRANSMISSION THAT WOULD CAUSE THE TRANSMISSION TO NOT WORK PROPERLY AND WOULD ALSO CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO LOSE SPEED. SHORTLY AFTER RECEIVI…

Read full complaint

I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE IN THE MAIL FROM TOYOTA - REFERENCE ID JSD. THE NOTICE STATED THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH PROGRAMMING WITHIN THE ECU THAT COULD POTENTIALLY LEAD TO ISSUES WITH THE CAR'S TRANSMISSION THAT WOULD CAUSE THE TRANSMISSION TO NOT WORK PROPERLY AND WOULD ALSO CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO LOSE SPEED. SHORTLY AFTER RECEIVING THE NOTICE I EXPERIENCED ISSUES WITH MY CAR'S TRANSMISSION WHILE DRIVING AROUND SPEEDS OF 35-40 MPH. AROUND THESE SPEEDS, TRANSMISSION WOULD RANDOMLY DOWNSHIFT TO A LOW GEAR AND WOULD NOT PROVIDE ANY POWER TO ENGINE. NOTHING COULD BE DONE TO CORRECT THE ISSUE WHILE DRIVING - ANY ATTEMPT TO ACCELERATE WOULD JUST REV THE ENGINE TO HIGH RPM - AND I WOULD HAVE TO PULL OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND COMPLETELY STOP THE CAR BEFORE THE CAR WOULD CORRECTLY DRIVE. THIS PROBLEM OCCURRED MULTIPLE TIMES THAT MORNING. THESE FIRST EXPERIENCES OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING ON CITY STREETS. I CALLED TOYOTA DEALERSHIP TO BRING CAR IN FOR SERVICE UNDER THE RECALL NOTICE THE SAME MORNING. WHILE DRIVING TO THE DEALERSHIP ON THE HIGHWAY I EXPERIENCED THE SAME ISSUES. TOYOTA CALLED ME LATER THAT DAY ASKING IF I HAD EXPERIENCED ANY ISSUES, AND I TOLD THEM ABOUT THE EXPERIENCES I HAD THAT MORNING WHILE DRIVING TO WORK AND WHILE DRIVING TO THE DEALERSHIP. THEY TOLD ME THE CAR WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE DUE TO THE TRANSMISSION ISSUES. LATER IN THE MONTH THEY INFORMED ME THAT THE ISSUES WERE UNRELATED TO THE RECALL AND THAT THE TRANSMISSION FAILED ON ITS OWN SO NOTHING WAS COVERED. NO WARNING LIGHTS WERE ILLUMINATED ON THE DASH, AND THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNING SIGNS OF ANY ISSUES TO ALERT ME THAT SOMETHING MAY BE WRONG WITH THE TRANSMISSION.

NHTSA ODI #11241746

60,000 miles · Apr 27, 2019
Power TrainUnknown Or OtherCrash

POSSIBLE STICKING ACCELERATOR PEDAL . WHEN SLOWLY PULLING INTO PARKING SPOT, THE CAR ACCELERATED AT MASS SPEED INTO BARRIER

NHTSA ODI #11204181

63,762 miles · Feb 28, 2019
Power Train

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE SHOOK VIOLENTLY. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO NORTH HILLS TOYOTA (7401 MCKNIGHT RD, PITTSBURGH, PA 15237, (412) 318-3000) WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE CV HALF SHAFT ASSEMBLY FAILED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED.…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE SHOOK VIOLENTLY. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO NORTH HILLS TOYOTA (7401 MCKNIGHT RD, PITTSBURGH, PA 15237, (412) 318-3000) WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE CV HALF SHAFT ASSEMBLY FAILED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND INFORMED THE CONTACT TO SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT FOR AN INVESTIGATION. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 63,762.

NHTSA ODI #11183251

85,400 miles · Dec 7, 2018
Power Train

VEHICLE IS AN LE ECO MODEL WITH CONTINUOUSLY VARIABLE TRANSMISSION (CVT). ENGINE RPM WILL SUDDENLY FLARE...OFTEN CLOSE TO REDLINE WITH THROTTLE IN STEADY CRUISE POSITION, REGARDLESS OF ENGINE OPERATING AND AMBIENT TEMPERATURE. VEHICLE WILL NOT ACCELERATE (SLUGGISH). IT IS SUBJECT TO A DEALER CAMPAIGN, BUT DEALER CLAIMS AN INT…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE IS AN LE ECO MODEL WITH CONTINUOUSLY VARIABLE TRANSMISSION (CVT). ENGINE RPM WILL SUDDENLY FLARE...OFTEN CLOSE TO REDLINE WITH THROTTLE IN STEADY CRUISE POSITION, REGARDLESS OF ENGINE OPERATING AND AMBIENT TEMPERATURE. VEHICLE WILL NOT ACCELERATE (SLUGGISH). IT IS SUBJECT TO A DEALER CAMPAIGN, BUT DEALER CLAIMS AN INTERNAL FAILURE AND IS BEING HIGHLY AMBIGUOUS ABOUT THE ACTUAL FAILURE. THEY SIMPLY WANT TO INSTALL A $5,000+ REPLACEMENT TRANSMISSION. THE VEHICLE IS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE AND SEEMS TO HAVE A MIND OF ITS OWN. IT IS WORSE NOW SINCE THE DEALER LOOKED AT IT. TOYOTA AND THE DEALER WILL NOT HELP THE CUSTOMER (ME) IN ANY WAY AND CLAIM THAT THERE ARE NO PROBLEMS KNOWN WITH THIS TRANSMISSION, AN ASSERTION THAT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE SCOPE OF INTERNET POSTINGS THAT CAN READILY BE LOCATED.

NHTSA ODI #11156836

60 miles · Oct 2, 2018
Power Train

VEHICLE SPEEDS UP AND LUNGES FORWARD ON ITS OWN

NHTSA ODI #11132992

94,000 miles · Jul 3, 2018
Power Train

CVT TRANSMISSION, CAR WILL NOT GOING OVER 35 MILES PER HOUR. EVERYDAY THE CAR HAS THIS PROBLEM.

NHTSA ODI #11105369

8,126 miles · Jun 11, 2018
Power Train

SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN J0D - REMEDY NOTICE CERTAIN 2014 - 2017 MODEL YEAR COROLLA VEHICLES CERTAIN 2017 MODEL YEAR COROLLA IM VEHICLES CERTAIN 2016 MODEL YEAR SCION IM VEHICLES - (SUSPENDED) VEHICLE WILL LOSE ACCELERATION OR NOT ACCELERATE AFTER COMING TO A COMPLETE STOP AND TRYING TO ACCELERATE. VEHICLE WAS SERVICED AT TOYOT…

Read full complaint

SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN J0D - REMEDY NOTICE CERTAIN 2014 - 2017 MODEL YEAR COROLLA VEHICLES CERTAIN 2017 MODEL YEAR COROLLA IM VEHICLES CERTAIN 2016 MODEL YEAR SCION IM VEHICLES - (SUSPENDED) VEHICLE WILL LOSE ACCELERATION OR NOT ACCELERATE AFTER COMING TO A COMPLETE STOP AND TRYING TO ACCELERATE. VEHICLE WAS SERVICED AT TOYOTA SERVICE CENTER FOR A SIMILAR ISSUE INCLUDING AN IDLE ISSUE. ACCELERATION ISSUE COULD NOT BE REPLICATED, BUT STILL HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES AFTERWARDS. INITIAL ISSUES STARTED AT 8K MILES AND HAS BEEN SERVICED ON TIME, MULTIPLE TIMES FOR SAME ISSUE WITH NO RESOLVE. TOYOTA HAS ISSUED A RECALL IN MARCH 2018 FOR ISSUE AND SUSPENDED IT DUE TO THE RECALL MAKING THE ISSUES WORSE. NO SOLUTION OR OTHER SERVICE OFFERED TO REPAIR PROBLEM.

NHTSA ODI #11101175

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