← 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

Service Brakes complaints

17 reports
Clear category filter
34,000 miles · Mar 12, 2017
Fuel/propulsion SystemService BrakesCrashInjury

MY DAUGHTER WAS ATTEMPTING TO PARK IN HER COLLEGE PARKING LOT AT FGCU. SHE SAID , THINKS THE BRAKE DIDN'T WORK WHEN SHE APPLIED IT. CAR HIT CONCRETE WALL TO STOP. AAA TOW TRUCK DRIVER CAME AND SAID BRAKES WENT TO FLOOR AND HE HAD TO USE E-BRAKE TO PUT ON TRUCK. HE STATES WHEN HE GOT BACK TO GARAGE BRAKES WORKED. I TOLD TOYOTA.…

Read full complaint

MY DAUGHTER WAS ATTEMPTING TO PARK IN HER COLLEGE PARKING LOT AT FGCU. SHE SAID , THINKS THE BRAKE DIDN'T WORK WHEN SHE APPLIED IT. CAR HIT CONCRETE WALL TO STOP. AAA TOW TRUCK DRIVER CAME AND SAID BRAKES WENT TO FLOOR AND HE HAD TO USE E-BRAKE TO PUT ON TRUCK. HE STATES WHEN HE GOT BACK TO GARAGE BRAKES WORKED. I TOLD TOYOTA. THEY CHECKED BRAKES OUT AND SAID EVERYTHING WAS WORKING FINE. I ASKED THEM TO LOOK AT BLACK BOX. THEY SENT ME RESULTS. I HAD MY INSURANCE CO. LOOK AT THEM ALONG WITH TOYOTA SERVICE ADVISER. BOTH SAID DATA SHOWS GAS APPLIED BEFORE BRAKE. I LOOKED UNDER CAR COMPLAINTS. OTHER PEOPLE HAD SAME PROBLEM. SOME HAD AUTOMATIC ACCELERATION. I DID NOT TELL THEM TO CHECK THAT OUT BECAUSE OF STATEMENT FROM TOW TRUCK GUY. SHE SAID IT HAPPENED SO FAST SHE DOESN'T REMEMBER. THE TIN WHISKERING WAS A PROBLEM FOR TOYOTA IN THE PAST. I BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE NOT FIXED THE PROBLEM. CAN THE DATA SHOW IF GAS APPLIED BY DRIVER OR AUTOMATICALLY CAME ON? I HAVE SPOKEN TO ATTORNEYS AND NO ONE SEEMS TO WANT TO TAKE THIS CASE. MY DAUGHTER HAS BACK PAIN AND OTHER ISSUES. AS A PARENT I'M NOT SURE WHAT TO DO. CAR HAS BEEN REPAIRED. IT IS A LEASE. ( NINE MONTHS LEFT TO PAY.) I WOULD LIKE TO GET HER OUT OF THIS CAR AND GET A NEW ONE. ANY SUGGESTIONS? THANK YOU MIKE.

NHTSA ODI #10960210

15,000 miles · Apr 25, 2016
Service Brakes

BRAKES OVERHEAT AFTER DRIVING FOR SEVERAL HOURS AND AFTER THEY HEAT CAR NEEDS MORE DISTANCE TO BE ABLE TO STOP AND WAS ALMOST IN AN ACCIDENT (BRAKE PADS GET DEFORMED FROM HEAT)

NHTSA ODI #10861286

1,562 miles · Apr 20, 2016
EngineService BrakesSuspension

BOUGHT MAY 2015, WARM DAY, FIRM BRAKES. WET, COLD FALL MONTHS BRAKES BECAME SOFT W/ EXCESSIVE TRAVEL & ERRATIC DURING 40MPH & UNDER. TOOK TO DEALER SEPT 2015 AT 1,562 MILES. TECH PERFORMED ROAD TEST. COULDN'T DUPLICATE CONDITIONS. CHECKED FOR CODES. STATED 'FOUND NORMAL BRAKING CONDITIONS'. I STARTED DRIVING AGAIN & NOTICED DURI…

Read full complaint

BOUGHT MAY 2015, WARM DAY, FIRM BRAKES. WET, COLD FALL MONTHS BRAKES BECAME SOFT W/ EXCESSIVE TRAVEL & ERRATIC DURING 40MPH & UNDER. TOOK TO DEALER SEPT 2015 AT 1,562 MILES. TECH PERFORMED ROAD TEST. COULDN'T DUPLICATE CONDITIONS. CHECKED FOR CODES. STATED 'FOUND NORMAL BRAKING CONDITIONS'. I STARTED DRIVING AGAIN & NOTICED DURING WARM DAYS AROUND 70 DEG BRAKES CHANGED HARDNESS WITH A/C ON. MORE FIRM. DURING COLDER DAYS BRAKES WOULD GO WITHIN 2 INCHES OF FLOOR BEFORE WORKING. TOOK TO DEALER ON 'WALK-IN' BASIS WHEN CAR WAS ACTING UP. DROVE W/ TECH 1 HR TRIED TO GET HIM TO NOTICE DIFFERENCE IN BRAKES. TECH STATED BRAKES WERE ACTING 'NORMAL' & THAT I JUST WASN'T FAMILIAR W/ HOW THE SYSTEMS OPERATED. I INSISTED IT WASN'T NORMAL. TECH CONTACTED MANUFACTURER. THEY SAID REPLACE MASTER CYLINDER AND BLEED SYSTEM. RETURNED CAR & STATED 'DRIVING CORRECTLY NOW'. I STARTED DRIVING AGAIN & NOTICED WHISTLING SOUND COMING FROM ENGINE COMPT WHEN DRIVING UNDER 30MPH BETWEEN BDLGS W/ WINDOW DOWN. BRAKES GO ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR AT TIMES & THEY GRAB & THE CAR STOPS ABRUPTLY. ESPECIALLY IN STOP-&-GO TRAFFIC. TOOK TO DEALER MARCH 2016 AT 4,800 MILES. I SUGGESTED CHECKING ENTIRE VACUUM SYSTEM FOR LEAKS. TECH ONLY CHECKED LINE TO BRAKE BOOSTER. TECH MADE 'LITTLE' ADJUSTMENT TO E-BRAKE & REAR BRAKES. TECH STATED BRAKES 'FEELS SIMILAR TO NEW COROLLA' & NO WHISTLING SOUND. I CAN STILL HEAR WHISTLING SOUND & BRAKES STILL HAVE SAME ISSUES! I THINK IT'S A DESIGN FLAW RELATED TO THE ENTIRE VACUUM SYSTEM & SHOULD BE RECALLED! TOLD DEALER. TEST DROVE 2016 HONDA CIVIC W/ SIMILAR BRAKING SYSTEMS IT PERFORMED LIKE A NEW CAR SHOULD! OTHER ISSUES W/THIS COROLLA ARE THE SUSPENSION IS TOO 'LOOSE' WHEN TRAVELING ABOVE 55MPH & CHANGING LANES, THE ENGINE IS WAY TOO LOUD WHEN ACCEL & OFTEN KNOCKS DURING ACCEL & IDLING (CHANGED GAS STATIONS & CHECKED FUEL TYPE, STILL SAME PROBLEM), & HEADLIGHTS R 2 BRIGHT...

NHTSA ODI #10860456

1,562 miles · Apr 20, 2016
EngineService BrakesSuspension

BOUGHT MAY 2015, WARM DAY, FIRM BRAKES. WET, COLD FALL MONTHS BRAKES BECAME SOFT W/ EXCESSIVE TRAVEL & ERRATIC DURING 40MPH & UNDER. TOOK TO DEALER SEPT 2015 AT 1,562 MILES. TECH PERFORMED ROAD TEST. COULDN'T DUPLICATE CONTIONS. CHECKED FOR CODES. STATED 'FOUND NORMAL BRAKING CONITIONS'. I STARTED DRIVING AGAIN & NOTICED DURIN…

Read full complaint

BOUGHT MAY 2015, WARM DAY, FIRM BRAKES. WET, COLD FALL MONTHS BRAKES BECAME SOFT W/ EXCESSIVE TRAVEL & ERRATIC DURING 40MPH & UNDER. TOOK TO DEALER SEPT 2015 AT 1,562 MILES. TECH PERFORMED ROAD TEST. COULDN'T DUPLICATE CONTIONS. CHECKED FOR CODES. STATED 'FOUND NORMAL BRAKING CONITIONS'. I STARTED DRIVING AGAIN & NOTICED DURING WARM DAYS AROUND 70 DEG BRAKES CHANGED HARDNESS WITH A/C ON. MORE FIRM. DURING COLDER DAYS BRAKES WOULD GO WITHIN 2 INCHES OF FLOOR BEFORE WORKING. TOOK TO DEALER ON 'WALK IN' BASIS WHEN CAR WAS ACTING UP. DROVE W/ TECH 1 HR TRIED TO GET HIM TO NOTICE DIFFERENCE IN BRAKES. TECH STATED BRAKES WERE ACTING 'NORMAL' & THAT I JUST WASN'T FAMILIAR W/ HOW THE SYSTEMS OPERATED. I INSTISTED IT WASN'T NORMAL. TECH CONTACTED MANUFACTURER. THEY SAID REPLACE MASTER CYLINDER AND BLEED SYSTEM. RETURNED CAR & STATED 'DRIVING CORRECTLY NOW'. I STARTED DRIVING AGAIN & NOTICED WHISTELING SOUND COMING FROM ENGINE COMPT WHEN DRIVING UNDER 30MPH BETWEEN BDLGS W/ WINDOW DOWN. BRAKES GO ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR AT TIMES & THEY GRAB & STOP THE CAR ABRUPTLY. ESPECIALLY IN STOP-&-GO TRAFFIC. TOOK TO DEALER MARCH 2016 AT 4,800 MILES. I SUGGESTED CHECKING ENTIRE VACUUM SYSTEM FOR LEAKS. TECH ONLY CHECKED LINE TO BRAKE BOOSTER. TECH MADE 'LITTLE' ADJUSTMENT TO E-BRAKE & REAR BRAKES. TECH STATED BRAKES 'FEELS SIMILAR TO NEW COROLLA' & NO WHISTLING SOUND. I CAN STILL HEAR WHISTLING SOUND & BRAKES STILL HAVE SAME ISSUES! I THINK IT'S A DESIGN FLAW RELATED TO THE ENTIRE VACUUM SYSTEM & SHOULD BE RECALLED! TOLD DEALER. TEST DROVE 2016 HONDA CIVIC W/ SIMILAR BRAKING SYSTEMS IT PERFORMED LIKE A NEW CAR SHOULD! OTHER ISSUES W/THIS COROLLA ARE THE SUSPENSION IS TOO 'LOOSE' WHEN TRAVELING ABOVE 55MPH & CHANGING LANES, THE ENGINE IS WAY TO LOUD WHEN ACCEL & OFTEN KNOCKS DURING ACCEL & IDLING (CHANGED GAS STATIONS & CHECKED FUEL TYPE, STILL SAME PROBLEM), & HEADLIGHTS R 2 BRIGHT...

NHTSA ODI #10860453

1,200 miles · Nov 13, 2015
Service Brakes

I PURCHASED A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA FROM CHARLES MAUND TOYOTA ON JUNE 15, 2015 AND AROUND A MONTH AFTER I BOUGHT IT, I HAVE BEEN HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE BREAKS EVER SINCE. MY SERVICE TECHNICIAN AND OTHER SERVICE MEN SAID A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD BEEN BRINGING THESE CARS (2015 TOYOTA COROLLA) BACK FOR THE SAME NOISE AND OTHER BRAKE I…

Read full complaint

I PURCHASED A 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA FROM CHARLES MAUND TOYOTA ON JUNE 15, 2015 AND AROUND A MONTH AFTER I BOUGHT IT, I HAVE BEEN HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE BREAKS EVER SINCE. MY SERVICE TECHNICIAN AND OTHER SERVICE MEN SAID A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD BEEN BRINGING THESE CARS (2015 TOYOTA COROLLA) BACK FOR THE SAME NOISE AND OTHER BRAKE ISSUES AS I DESCRIBED. THERE IS A CRACKING NOISE WHEN I PUT MY FOOT ON THE BRAKES SOMETIMES. DEALER SERVICE MEN SAID THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I WILL ALWAYS HEAR BECAUSE OF THE MATERIALS TOYOTA MAKES THEIR BRAKES AND PADS OUT OF, ONCE IT REACHES A CERTAIN TEMPERATURE, I WILL HEAR THE NOISE. SOMETIMES BRAKE PEDAL GOES DOWN TO THE FLOOR BY ITS SELF AFTER I HAVE STOPPED. SERVICE MEN SAID THEY FELT THE BRAKE PEDAL GO DOWN AND SAID THEY FIXED IT. BUT ON OCTOBER 30, 2015 IT STARTED GOING DOWN BY ITS SELF AGAIN. BOTH FRONT WHEELS NOW MAKING LOUD POPPING OR KNOCKING NOISE WHEN I PUT MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE SOMETIMES AND WHEELS DO NOT STOP, THEY KEEP TURNING. SERVICE MEN SAID THEY COULD NOT DO ANYTHING BECAUSE IT NEVER HAPPENED WHEN THEY DROVE THE CAR. OCTOBER 21, I HAD ANOTHER SCARY EVENT IN THE PARKING LOT AT MY JOB AS I WAS LEAVING WORK FOR THE DAY IN MY 2015 TOYOTA COROLLA. AS I WENT AROUND THE FIRST CURVE IN THE GARAGE, THE POPPING OR KNOCKING NOISE FROM THE RIGHT WHEEL STARTED AGAIN WHEN I PUT MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE, AS I WENT AROUND THE 2ND CURVE AND BRAKED, THE POPPING NOISE CAME FROM BOTH WHEELS AND THEY DID NOT STOP ROLLING WHEN I PUT MY FOOT ALL THE WAY DOWN ON THE BRAKE. THE WHEELS KEPT TURNING, IT FELT LIKE WHEN YOU THINK YOU HAVE TIGHTEN A BOLT ALL THE WAY, BUT THEN IT SLIPS A LITTLE FURTHER. I HAVE THE MOST PROBLEMS WHEN GOING DOWN A SLOPE.

NHTSA ODI #10790149

8,625 miles · Aug 30, 2015
EngineService BrakesUnknown Or OtherCrash

STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT WITH FOOT ON THE BRAKES. OUT OF NOWHERE THE CAR ACCELERATED FORWARD EXTREMELY FAST. FORCED TO HIT AN CAR IN FRONT OF ME WITHIN A CAR OR TWO, DISTANCE WISE. AFTER THE INCIDENT THE RPM GAUGE FLUCTUATES FROM LOW TO HIGH. IN ADDITION, ONCE GAS PEDAL IS PRESSED CAR SLOWS DOWN AND ECO ACTIVATES, THEN AFTER ABOUT…

Read full complaint

STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT WITH FOOT ON THE BRAKES. OUT OF NOWHERE THE CAR ACCELERATED FORWARD EXTREMELY FAST. FORCED TO HIT AN CAR IN FRONT OF ME WITHIN A CAR OR TWO, DISTANCE WISE. AFTER THE INCIDENT THE RPM GAUGE FLUCTUATES FROM LOW TO HIGH. IN ADDITION, ONCE GAS PEDAL IS PRESSED CAR SLOWS DOWN AND ECO ACTIVATES, THEN AFTER ABOUT 5 SECONDS CAR ACCELERATOR EXTREMELY FAST.

NHTSA ODI #10760217

6,500 miles · Feb 1, 2015
Service BrakesVehicle Speed Control

ON DECEMBER 24TH 2014 I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE (2014 TOYOTA COROLLA S) IN (D) AND WAS TRYING TO SLOW DOWN, BECAUSE THE DRIVER IN FRONT OF ME BRAKE. WHEN I DEPRESSED MY BRAKE PEDAL THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. I SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL AND CONTINUED TO BRAKE AND IT EVENTUALLY SLOWED ME DOWN. I SHIFTED BACK INTO (D) AND CONTINUED ON MY W…

Read full complaint

ON DECEMBER 24TH 2014 I WAS DRIVING MY VEHICLE (2014 TOYOTA COROLLA S) IN (D) AND WAS TRYING TO SLOW DOWN, BECAUSE THE DRIVER IN FRONT OF ME BRAKE. WHEN I DEPRESSED MY BRAKE PEDAL THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. I SHIFTED INTO NEUTRAL AND CONTINUED TO BRAKE AND IT EVENTUALLY SLOWED ME DOWN. I SHIFTED BACK INTO (D) AND CONTINUED ON MY WAY, ALTHOUGH SHAKEN UP. THE ROAD CONDITIONS WERE GOOD, THERE WAS NO RAIN OR ICE ON THE ROAD THAT DAY. I CHECKED MY FLOOR MATS TO SEE IF THEY WERE STICKING TO THE ACCELERATION PEDAL WHEN I GOT INTO THE DRIVEWAY, BUT I DID NOT NOTICE ANY SUCH DEFECT WITH THE FLOOR MATS STICKING TO THE PEDAL. A FEW WEEKS LATER DRIVING TO WORK ON 01/20/2015 AROUND THE SAME SPEED ON THE SAME ROAD CONDITIONS THE VEHICLE GAVE ME UNWANTED ACCELERATION AGAIN WHILE ATTEMPTING TO BRAKE. I PERFORMED THE SAME WAY I HAD PREVIOUSLY, I ENTERED INTO NEUTRAL AND BRAKED, EXCEPT THIS TIME I CAME WITHIN INCHES OF THE VEHICLE FORWARD OF ME. THE NEXT DAY ON 01/21/2015 WHILE DRIVING TO WORK THE VEHICLE AGAIN PERFORMED THE EXACT SAME MALFUNCTION AS THE PREVIOUS DAY. ON ALL DAYS THE ROAD CONDITIONS WERE FINE AND SHOULD HAVE NOT AFFECTED THE VEHICLES PERFORMANCE. I DECIDED TO BRING THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE I HAD LEASED THE VEHICLE. I SET UP AN APPOINTMENT AND HAD LEFT IT THERE 01/24/2015-01/26/2015. I RECEIVED THE VEHICLE BACK ON 01/26/2015 AND THE MASTER MECHANIC FOUND NO DEFECTS. I FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD THE SERVICE MANAGER WOULD CONTACT ME. AFTER HE HAD NOT FOR A FEW DAYS, I DECIDED TO CALL HIM. I HAD GOTTEN HIS VOICEMAIL AND LEFT A MESSAGE. TO DATE I HAVE STILL NOT RECEIVED A CALL BACK FROM THE SERVICE MANAGER. I HAVE DECIDED TO TAKE PRECAUTIONS AND BEGIN A VEHICLE SAFETY COMPLAINT. I WOULD LIKE THIS MATTER RESOLVED BEFORE MYSELF OR ANYONE ELSE BECOMES INJURED OR WORSE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10680323

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