← 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

What owners actually said

214 reports
183,000 miles · Jun 3, 2020
Air BagsCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS). THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO PAT LOBB'S TOYOTA OF MCKINNEY (3350 S CENTRAL EXPY, MCKINNEY, TX 75070) HOWEVER, THE PARTS FOR THE RECALL WERE UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS). THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO PAT LOBB'S TOYOTA OF MCKINNEY (3350 S CENTRAL EXPY, MCKINNEY, TX 75070) HOWEVER, THE PARTS FOR THE RECALL WERE UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT THE DAY AFTER THE DEALER INFORMED HIM THAT THAT PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT 50 MPH, HE HIT A HIGHWAY MEDIAN DURING A RAIN STORM AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY UPON IMPACT. A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED INJURIES TO HIS NECK AND BACK BUT DID NOT SEEK MEDICAL TREATMENT. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE MANUFACTURER WHO INFORMED HIM TO TAKE THE VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALER TO HAVE THE VEHICLE INSPECTED BY A FIELD INSPECTOR HOWEVER, HE WAS STILL AWAITING THE FIELD DIAGNOSES REPORT. THE CONTACT STATED HE THEN TOOK THE VEHICLE TO TOYOTA OF PLANO (6888 TX-121, PLANO, TX 75024) WHERE THE RECALL WAS REMEDIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 183,000. *JS

NHTSA ODI #11327162

71,000 miles · Jun 3, 2020
Air BagsCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO REAR OF A ANOTHER VEHICLE CAUSING SEVERE DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END. DURING THE CRASH NO AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED NECK AND SHOULDER INJURIES. THE FRONT PASSENGER DID NOT REPORT INJURIES. A POLIC…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO REAR OF A ANOTHER VEHICLE CAUSING SEVERE DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END. DURING THE CRASH NO AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED NECK AND SHOULDER INJURIES. THE FRONT PASSENGER DID NOT REPORT INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT WAS TAKEN AT THE SCENE AND THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED AWAY. THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DETERMINED. THE LOCAL DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 71,000.

NHTSA ODI #11327139

54,000 miles · May 29, 2020
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL UPON APPROACHING A STOP SIGN; THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT SWERVED THE VEHICLE TO THE RIGHT TO AVOID HITTING ANOTHER VEHICLE AND HIT A POLE. DESPITE HITTING THE POLE, THE VEHICLE CONT…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL UPON APPROACHING A STOP SIGN; THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT SWERVED THE VEHICLE TO THE RIGHT TO AVOID HITTING ANOTHER VEHICLE AND HIT A POLE. DESPITE HITTING THE POLE, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE AND HIT ANOTHER POLE, WHICH FINALLY CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO HALT. THE DRIVER'S FRONTAL AIR BAG AS WELL AS THE KNEE AIR BAG DEPLOYED UPON IMPACT WITH THE FIRST POLE. THE CONTACT SUFFERED SORENESS THROUGHOUT HER BODY AND HAD A MINOR CUT ON HER LIP, LEFT INDEX FINGER, AND RIGHT KNEE CAP. THE CONTACT DID NOT SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR HER INJURIES. THE POLICE WERE CALLED AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE BELIEVES THE VEHICLE SHALL BE DEEMED TOTAL LOSS HOWEVER, WAS AWAITING INSPECTION BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY. THE VEHICLE WAS INITIALLY TOWED TO A TOW YARD. A FEW DAYS LATER, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT REMAINED IN THEIR POSSESSION. THE DEALER NOR THE MANUFACTURER HAD BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 54,000. *LN CONSUMER STATED RIGHT COMPARTMENT CORNER OF AIRBAG CUT HER KNEES.*JB

NHTSA ODI #11326505

Mileage unknown · May 18, 2020
Air Bags

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PART TO DO THE RECALL REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. NEITHER THE MANUFACTURER NOR THE DEALER WERE …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PART TO DO THE RECALL REPAIR WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. NEITHER THE MANUFACTURER NOR THE DEALER WERE MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. VIN TOOL CONFIRMS PARTS NOT AVAILABLE.

NHTSA ODI #11325028

32,000 miles · May 3, 2020
Tires

2016 TOYOTA COROLLA WITH 30,000 MILES ON ORIGINAL HANKOOK OPTIMO 195/65R H426 TIRES. MY COMPLAINT IS ABOUT COMPLETE TIRE TREAD SEPARATION. DOT# 5MDH DL H. I WAS DRIVING ON A COUNTRY ROAD AT 55 MPH WHEN COMPLETE TIRE TREAD SEPARATION OCCURRED. NO INJURIES, HOWEVER TIRE TREAD SEPARATION DESTROYED INSIDE WHEEL-WELL PLASTIC PROTEC…

Read full complaint

2016 TOYOTA COROLLA WITH 30,000 MILES ON ORIGINAL HANKOOK OPTIMO 195/65R H426 TIRES. MY COMPLAINT IS ABOUT COMPLETE TIRE TREAD SEPARATION. DOT# 5MDH DL H. I WAS DRIVING ON A COUNTRY ROAD AT 55 MPH WHEN COMPLETE TIRE TREAD SEPARATION OCCURRED. NO INJURIES, HOWEVER TIRE TREAD SEPARATION DESTROYED INSIDE WHEEL-WELL PLASTIC PROTECTION COVER.

NHTSA ODI #11323149

Mileage unknown · Apr 27, 2020
Air BagsElectrical System

RECEIVED ANOTHER RECALL NOTICE ON ANOTHER TOYOTA COROLLA LE VEHICLE. I HAVE MADE A COMPLAINT IN 2018 WHEN I HAD A PRIOR 2010 TOYOTA COROLLA LE AND THE JIM WHITE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN TOLEDO, OHIO HAD MY VEHICLE FOR OVER 1 YEAR- SITTING IN THEIR PARKING LOT WITH NO WORD ON A PART REMEDY- AFTER COMPLAINING TO YOUR ORGANIZATION AND …

Read full complaint

RECEIVED ANOTHER RECALL NOTICE ON ANOTHER TOYOTA COROLLA LE VEHICLE. I HAVE MADE A COMPLAINT IN 2018 WHEN I HAD A PRIOR 2010 TOYOTA COROLLA LE AND THE JIM WHITE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN TOLEDO, OHIO HAD MY VEHICLE FOR OVER 1 YEAR- SITTING IN THEIR PARKING LOT WITH NO WORD ON A PART REMEDY- AFTER COMPLAINING TO YOUR ORGANIZATION AND TOYOTA CORPORATE- THE DEALER OFFERED ME THE 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA LE - I HAD TO PUT DOWN $3,000 AND HAVE A HIGHER CAR NOTE- I ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT EXPERIENCING ANOTHER RECALL WHICH I WAS ASSURED I WOULDN'T- BUT NOW I AM. TOYOTA HAS FAILED ONCE AGAIN. I WAS PART OF THE TOYOTA TAKATA CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT FOR OVER 2YEARS AND RECEIVED A MEASLY $62.00 CHECK FOR ALL THE AGONY I WENT THROUGH. I AM SCHEDULED TO BRING MY VEHICLE IN THIS THURSDAY, APRIL 30, 2020 AT 9:30 AM AND WAS PROMISED I WOULD NOT EXPERIENCE WHAT I HAD BEFORE- BUT WELL SEE AND I WILL KEEP YOU UPDATED.

NHTSA ODI #11322417

35,651 miles · Apr 20, 2020
Service Brakes

DOLAN TOYOTA SCION INFORMED ME THAT MY BRAKE CALIPER WAS LEAKING--I WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE THE ASSEMBLY CYLINDER-- IT COULD NOT BE REPAIRED. I NEEDED NEW PADS AND THE ROTORS TO BE RESURFACED. THE CAR WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE I HAD TO HAVE THEM REPAIR IT. TOTAL BILL: $794.01. THE ISSUE IS WHY DID THIS HAPPEN? SEVERAL MECHANICS AND…

Read full complaint

DOLAN TOYOTA SCION INFORMED ME THAT MY BRAKE CALIPER WAS LEAKING--I WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE THE ASSEMBLY CYLINDER-- IT COULD NOT BE REPAIRED. I NEEDED NEW PADS AND THE ROTORS TO BE RESURFACED. THE CAR WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE I HAD TO HAVE THEM REPAIR IT. TOTAL BILL: $794.01. THE ISSUE IS WHY DID THIS HAPPEN? SEVERAL MECHANICS AND EVEN THE SERVICE MANAGER AT DOLAN AGREED THAT THIS WAS A RARE EVENT ON A CAR WITH 35651 MILES. IT POINTS TO A DEFECTIVE PART OR A PROBLEM IN THE MANUFACTURING/ASSEMBLY PROCESS. THE WARRANTY HAS RUN OUT ON THIS VEHICLE, BUT I THINK TOYOTA SHOULD ACCEPT SOME RESPONSIBILITY IN THIS CASE. THEY SOLD ME A CAR WITH DEFECTIVE BRAKES THAT COULD HAVE CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE. I CALLED TOYOTA MOTOR SALES,USA, INC, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WHOLE $794.01 BILL OR AT LEAST A PART OF IT! THE DISAGREED WITH ME--THEY WANT NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR SELLING ME A CAR WITH DEFECTIVE BRAKES THAT COULD HAVE CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED--THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE. COULD YOU INVESTIGATE? I HAVE INCLUDED A COPY OF THE REPAIR INVOICE AND A COPY OF AN E MAIL FROM TOYOTA MOTOR SALES. MY CASE NUMBER IS:[XXX] AND THEIR NUMBER IS: 800-331-4331. PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED ANY FURTHER INFORMATION. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR *LN*JB

NHTSA ODI #11321726

60,000 miles · Apr 15, 2020
Air BagsSeat BeltsSteeringCrashInjury

INVOLVED IN COLLISION ON OCTOBER 14, 2019. VEHICLE LIABLE FOR COLLISION HIT THE FRONT OF LEFT SIDE OF MY VEHICLE. AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY, SAFETY RESTRAINT DID NOT OPERATE CORRECTLY. SUFFERED INJURIES TO LEFTS SIDE OF BODY, HEAD, NECK, LEG, FRONT AND BACK. BODY PROPELLED FORWARD TOWARDS WHEEL AND DASH ARM, SHOULDER AND ONE C…

Read full complaint

INVOLVED IN COLLISION ON OCTOBER 14, 2019. VEHICLE LIABLE FOR COLLISION HIT THE FRONT OF LEFT SIDE OF MY VEHICLE. AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY, SAFETY RESTRAINT DID NOT OPERATE CORRECTLY. SUFFERED INJURIES TO LEFTS SIDE OF BODY, HEAD, NECK, LEG, FRONT AND BACK. BODY PROPELLED FORWARD TOWARDS WHEEL AND DASH ARM, SHOULDER AND ONE CONTACTED VEHICLE AND HEAD HIT STEERING WHEEL. WENT TO ER. SEEKING TREATMENT FOR INJURIES FOR 6 MONTHS NOW AND ONGOING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #11321186

Mileage unknown · Apr 2, 2020
Air Bags

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PART TO DO THE RECALL REPAIR WAS NOT YET AVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER HAD EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. THE CONTACT CALLED THE HERITAGE TOY…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS) HOWEVER, THE PART TO DO THE RECALL REPAIR WAS NOT YET AVAILABLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER HAD EXCEEDED A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE RECALL REPAIR. THE CONTACT CALLED THE HERITAGE TOYOTA LOCATED AT 6324 BALTIMORE NATIONAL PIKE, BALTIMORE, MD 21228, (844) 315-0964, WHERE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT THE PART WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE CONTACT HAD NOT EXPERIENCED A FAILURE. PARTS DISTRIBUTION DISCONNECT.

NHTSA ODI #11320056

145,000 miles · Mar 29, 2020
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrashInjury

I WAS IN CAR ACCIDENT AND REAR ENDED MY AIRBAGS FAILED DEPLOY AND SEAT BELT SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS TO STOP FORCE MY BODY FELT RAGGED DOGGED AS BEING HIT MY NECK FELT IT WAS GOING SNAPPED I WAS SCARED FOR LIFE.I WAS ON CITY CITY STREET STOPPED AT RED LIGHT WHEN REAR ENDED BY LARGE SUV. I GOT LETTER FROM TOYOTA SAYING I NEED HAV…

Read full complaint

I WAS IN CAR ACCIDENT AND REAR ENDED MY AIRBAGS FAILED DEPLOY AND SEAT BELT SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS TO STOP FORCE MY BODY FELT RAGGED DOGGED AS BEING HIT MY NECK FELT IT WAS GOING SNAPPED I WAS SCARED FOR LIFE.I WAS ON CITY CITY STREET STOPPED AT RED LIGHT WHEN REAR ENDED BY LARGE SUV. I GOT LETTER FROM TOYOTA SAYING I NEED HAVE AIRBAG REPLACE, AND WHEN WENT DEALER ON FRIDAY 9:00 AM THE RECH JOHN KELLER REFUSE TO SERVICE FOR RECALL, AND TOLD ME HE LOOKED UP VIN AND MY CAR DIDN'T NEEDED IT TOYOTA OF HB REUSE TO REPAIR IT.

NHTSA ODI #11319675

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