← New search

2016 Toyota Corolla

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2016 Toyota Corolla do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 129.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Compare all Corolla years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

139 reports with mileage · 75 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 65 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Seat Belts. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

66 crash reports1 fire reports43 injury reports

Air Bags complaints

65 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Dec 28, 2025
Air BagsCrashInjury

In 2024, my 2016 Toyota Corolla was involved in a collision. The airbags did not deploy. I went to the emergency room following the crash and later required additional medical treatment, including rehabilitation.

NHTSA ODI #11707349

Mileage unknown · Nov 17, 2025
Air BagsElectrical SystemSeat BeltsCrashInjury

The driver seat belt dont work and once in a great while it will work but even whenever it does latch it still shows the seat belt isn't on and that noise keeps going off but after a while the noise goes off but the symbol is still on the dash board. I recently got hit from behind (09/15/2025) at a red light and no air bags depl…

Read full complaint

The driver seat belt dont work and once in a great while it will work but even whenever it does latch it still shows the seat belt isn't on and that noise keeps going off but after a while the noise goes off but the symbol is still on the dash board. I recently got hit from behind (09/15/2025) at a red light and no air bags deployed. Im not sure if they were suppose to deploy but either way my seat belt dont work. And I know this isn't a safety matter but my radio doesn't turn off when I turn off my car and I can't lock/unlock my doors with the key fob I have to lock it with the key on the driver door. I have to take the fuse out for the radio so my battery won't die and so the radio turns off.

NHTSA ODI #11699858

60,000 miles · Mar 26, 2024
Air BagsCrashInjury

The contact owns a 2016 Toyota Corolla. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle was rear-ended. The contact stated that the air bags did not deploy. The contact stated that the other driver was driving at about 45 MPH when the contact's vehicle was rear-ended. A police report was filed. The…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2016 Toyota Corolla. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle was rear-ended. The contact stated that the air bags did not deploy. The contact stated that the other driver was driving at about 45 MPH when the contact's vehicle was rear-ended. A police report was filed. The contact did not seek medical attention at the scene but later went to the hospital where the contact was treated for whiplash. The vehicle was towed to a repair shop, however the vehicle had not been inspected. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 60,000.

NHTSA ODI #11579473

80,000 miles · Mar 6, 2024
Air BagsCrash

The contact's daughter owned a 2016 Toyota Corolla. The contact stated that the vehicle was stolen, and while being chased by the police, the suspect crashed into a supporting beam located on the expressway. The front end of the vehicle was damaged. The air bags did not deploy. A police report was not filed. The contact was unaw…

Read full complaint

The contact's daughter owned a 2016 Toyota Corolla. The contact stated that the vehicle was stolen, and while being chased by the police, the suspect crashed into a supporting beam located on the expressway. The front end of the vehicle was damaged. The air bags did not deploy. A police report was not filed. The contact was unaware of any injuries. The vehicle was towed to a tow lot for the city. The local dealer was contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The vehicle was deemed to be a total loss by the Insurance Provider. The manufacturer was not notified of the failre. The failure mileage was 80,000.

NHTSA ODI #11575853

Mileage unknown · Feb 27, 2024
Air BagsCrashInjury

Airbags did not deploy on time of the accident that I was very injured and hospitalized for 4 days in the iCU

NHTSA ODI #11574147

Mileage unknown · Jun 19, 2023
Air BagsElectrical SystemUnknown Or OtherFire

We discovered that there was an explosion of some sort inside the car on the passenger side, which seems to have potentially involve the air bag system and/or electrical around the system, but this is not entirely known. The car was parked at the time and had not been driven for approximately 65 hours. It appears there was a f…

Read full complaint

We discovered that there was an explosion of some sort inside the car on the passenger side, which seems to have potentially involve the air bag system and/or electrical around the system, but this is not entirely known. The car was parked at the time and had not been driven for approximately 65 hours. It appears there was a fire but we did not witness. The dash is melted leaving a gaping hole, what appears to be portions of the air bag are partially disintegrated and stuck to the ceiling, the ceiling is charred, the sun visor is melted and distorted, and hanging down, underneath the dash is also melted, and the smell in the car is absolutely stifling. The windshield is shattered in one spot, with additional cracks stemming from that point of contact. The windshield is damaged from the impact from inside the car and is pushing out. The car was locked, there is no evidence of forced entry or attempted forced entry. It has never been in a collision. The car was parked three feet away from our motorhome in the confines of our RV spot at an asphalt campground. The safety of all in the area was at risk, and furthermore, since this explosion was unprovoked, if we had been in the car at the time, it's unimaginable as to what sort of bodily damage the passengers, especially the passenger seat occupant, would have incurred. I do not believe the problem can be reproduced, but the car has yet to be inspected. I am currently awaiting insurance to take the car via tow truck to inspect it. There were no warnings, messages, or other symptoms.

NHTSA ODI #11527728

Mileage unknown · Feb 3, 2023
Air BagsElectrical SystemSeat BeltsCrash

12/09/2019, The ECU did not have adequate protection against certain electrical noise that occurred during the collision. Airbags did not deploy in the event of under ride collision, a freak accident involving wildlife crossing the street. Seat belt pretensioners did not engage. I called Allstate insurance that same day. Had I …

Read full complaint

12/09/2019, The ECU did not have adequate protection against certain electrical noise that occurred during the collision. Airbags did not deploy in the event of under ride collision, a freak accident involving wildlife crossing the street. Seat belt pretensioners did not engage. I called Allstate insurance that same day. Had I not worn my seat belt, I might have gone through the windshield. Safety was in danger, and not protected. Meineke informed me the oil housing component, fused onto the component that allows for an oil change because it was made with a plastic material, that is an incorrect material, Oxygen sensor lit up after that finding. Vehicle is not available for inspection upon request. Tyler Law Enforcement might have inspected the vehicle in general. My VIN for my vehicle does not describe the style of my vehicle, which is a 2016 Toyota Carolla Sport, Red.

NHTSA ODI #11505391

74,000 miles · Dec 15, 2022
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

The contact owns a 2016 Toyota. The contact stated that while driving forward into a parking space, the vehicle suddenly experienced unintended acceleration and crashed into a building wall. During the incident, the front end of the vehicle was severely damaged but the air bags did not deploy. The driver sustained a neck injury …

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2016 Toyota. The contact stated that while driving forward into a parking space, the vehicle suddenly experienced unintended acceleration and crashed into a building wall. During the incident, the front end of the vehicle was severely damaged but the air bags did not deploy. The driver sustained a neck injury and the front passenger sustained a bruised rib, both required medical treatment. A police report was taken at the scene and the vehicle was towed away. The cause of the failure was not yet determined. The local dealer and manufacturer were notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 74,000.

NHTSA ODI #11497613

Mileage unknown · Apr 12, 2022
Air BagsCrashInjury

Vehicle rollover totaled and steering wheel ejected no evidence of any airbags none deployed

NHTSA ODI #11460603

Mileage unknown · Jul 8, 2021
Air BagsCrashInjury

Question: What component or system failed or malfunctioned, and is it available for inspection upon request? Answer: Airbags; Yes they car is available to inspect upon request. Question: How was your safety or the safety of others put at risk? Answer: Airbags failed to deploy during a motor vehicle accident. This resulted…

Read full complaint

Question: What component or system failed or malfunctioned, and is it available for inspection upon request? Answer: Airbags; Yes they car is available to inspect upon request. Question: How was your safety or the safety of others put at risk? Answer: Airbags failed to deploy during a motor vehicle accident. This resulted in injuries that could have possibly been prevented. Question: Has the problem been reproduced or confirmed by a dealer or independent service center? Answer: No. Question: Has the vehicle or component been inspected by the manufacturer, police, insurance representatives or others? Answer: No. Question: Were there any warning lamps, messages or other symptoms of the problem prior to the failure, and when did they first appear? Answer: No.

NHTSA ODI #11423962

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