← New search

2017 Toyota Corolla

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2017 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

107 reports with mileage · 71 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 54 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes. Review the 25 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

44 crash reports1 fire reports29 injury reports

Exterior Lighting complaints

6 reports
Clear category filter
35,000 miles · Feb 25, 2020
Exterior Lighting

HEADLIGHTS ARE INADEQUATE, EVEN DANGEROUS. YOU CAN SEE A DISTINCT "HORIZON LINE" IN FRONT OF THE CAR WHICH HAS A SHARP CUTOFF ABOVE WHICH THERE IS NO ILLUMINATION. IN SPITE OF THEIR EXTREME INTENSITY, THESE HEADLIGHTS ILLUMINATE EVERYTHING BUT THE ROAD AHEAD. MAKES ME FEEL LIKE I AM DRIVING WITHOUT HEADLIGHTS. I THOUGHT THEY WER…

Read full complaint

HEADLIGHTS ARE INADEQUATE, EVEN DANGEROUS. YOU CAN SEE A DISTINCT "HORIZON LINE" IN FRONT OF THE CAR WHICH HAS A SHARP CUTOFF ABOVE WHICH THERE IS NO ILLUMINATION. IN SPITE OF THEIR EXTREME INTENSITY, THESE HEADLIGHTS ILLUMINATE EVERYTHING BUT THE ROAD AHEAD. MAKES ME FEEL LIKE I AM DRIVING WITHOUT HEADLIGHTS. I THOUGHT THEY WERE NOT ALIGNED PROPERLY BUT DEALER SAYS THEY LOOK OK. I HAVE SINCE OBSERVED MANY SIMILAR COMPLAINTS ON VARIOUS WEB SITES FOR THE COROLLA OVER SEVERAL MODEL YEARS. HERE IS ONE OF MANY SIMILAR COMPLAINTS FOUND ON THE WEB: "THE MAIN FRONT LED LOW BEAM IS A PROBLEM ON ALL TRIMS OF THIS CURRENT GENERATION. IT IS TOO BRIGHT AND BLINDS ONCOMING DRIVERS, THERE IS ALSO A HARD CUTOFF LINE IN WHICH YOU CAN'T SEE ANYTHING ABOVE IT. THEY ALSO POORLY LIGHT THE ROAD. THE BEAM GOES EVERYWHERE BUT THE ROAD. IT SEEMS THEY ARE INCORRECTLY AIMED." "WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN?" ONLY ALLOWS FOR A SINGLE DATE. THIS IS A CONTINUOUS PROBLEM. WHICH OCCURS ANYTIME YOU TRY TO DRIVE AT NIGHT.

NHTSA ODI #11311385

50,000 miles · Feb 18, 2020
Air BagsElectrical SystemExterior Lighting

HELP

NHTSA ODI #11309909

20,000 miles · Feb 22, 2019
Exterior Lighting

AFTER BEING BLINDED BY RIDICULOUSLY BRIGHT HEADLIGHTS ON NEWER TOYOTA VEHICLES THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, I RECENTLY RENTED A TOYOTA COROLLA. I WAS HORRIFIED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS ON THIS CAR ARE LEGAL. NOT ONLY DO YOU BLIND ONCOMING VEHICLES, BUT YOU CAN'T SEE SAFELY! THE BRIGHTNESS OF THESE HEADLIGHTS IS SUCH THAT ANYTHING REFLECTIV…

Read full complaint

AFTER BEING BLINDED BY RIDICULOUSLY BRIGHT HEADLIGHTS ON NEWER TOYOTA VEHICLES THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, I RECENTLY RENTED A TOYOTA COROLLA. I WAS HORRIFIED THAT THE HEADLIGHTS ON THIS CAR ARE LEGAL. NOT ONLY DO YOU BLIND ONCOMING VEHICLES, BUT YOU CAN'T SEE SAFELY! THE BRIGHTNESS OF THESE HEADLIGHTS IS SUCH THAT ANYTHING REFLECTIVE BLINDS YOURSELF! (ROAD SIGNS, ETC.) YET, SOMEHOW THEY DON'T ,IN MY OPINION, LIGHT THE ROAD AHEAD ADEQUATELY. THEY DO SEEM TO LIGHT THE TREES AND THINGS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD PRETTY WELL, BUT NOT WHAT NEEDS TO BE SEEN. ALSO THE HIGH BEAMS ARE WORTHLESS, AS THE JUST SEEM TO LIGHT THE TREES MORE. ALL OF THIS WAS OBSERVED WHILE DRIVING IN THE DESERT OF NEW MEXICO AND TEXAS ON TWO LANE HIGHWAYS. I AM CONVINCED AMERICANS ARE DYING BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUACIES OF THESE HEADLIGHTS.

NHTSA ODI #11182053

28,000 miles · Dec 9, 2018
Exterior Lighting

THE AUTO HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHTS WILL DIM FOR AN ONCOMING CAR AND QUITE OFTEN NOT GO BACK TO BRIGHT FOR QUITE SOME TIME (MINUTES/MILES). WHEN DRIVING DARK, TWO LANE ROADS I HAVE TO TURN MY HEADLIGHTS OFF OF AUTO SETTING, THUS COMPLETELY SWITCHING THEM OFF AS I TWIST THE KNOB FORWARD TO ON INSTEAD OF AUTO. THEN I HAVE TO FLICK THE H…

Read full complaint

THE AUTO HIGH BEAM HEADLIGHTS WILL DIM FOR AN ONCOMING CAR AND QUITE OFTEN NOT GO BACK TO BRIGHT FOR QUITE SOME TIME (MINUTES/MILES). WHEN DRIVING DARK, TWO LANE ROADS I HAVE TO TURN MY HEADLIGHTS OFF OF AUTO SETTING, THUS COMPLETELY SWITCHING THEM OFF AS I TWIST THE KNOB FORWARD TO ON INSTEAD OF AUTO. THEN I HAVE TO FLICK THE HIGH BEAMS ON MANUALLY. THIS PROCESS TAKES A FEW SECONDS WHILE DRIVING AT 55+MPH WHICH IS VERY DANGEROUS. THE AUTO HIGH BEAM INDICATOR ALSO COMPLETELY DISAPPEARS WHEN THIS ISSUE HAPPENS EVEN THOUGH THE LIGHT IS TOGGLED FORWARD TO THE HIGH BEAM SETTING.

NHTSA ODI #11157129

3,000 miles · Nov 6, 2018
Exterior Lighting

THE AUTOMATIC HIGH/LOW BEAM HEADLIGHT SYSTEM INTERMITTENTLY STOPS WORKING. WITH THE SWITCH IN CORRECT POSITION, EVERYTHING IS WORKING AS EXPECTED, THEN THE AUTO INDICATOR ON DASH GOES OFF AND THE LIGHTS STAY ON LOW BEAMS, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO ONCOMING TRAFFIC OR TAIL LIGHTS AHEAD. THIS MAY ONLY BE FOR ABOUT A MINUTE TO SEVE…

Read full complaint

THE AUTOMATIC HIGH/LOW BEAM HEADLIGHT SYSTEM INTERMITTENTLY STOPS WORKING. WITH THE SWITCH IN CORRECT POSITION, EVERYTHING IS WORKING AS EXPECTED, THEN THE AUTO INDICATOR ON DASH GOES OFF AND THE LIGHTS STAY ON LOW BEAMS, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO ONCOMING TRAFFIC OR TAIL LIGHTS AHEAD. THIS MAY ONLY BE FOR ABOUT A MINUTE TO SEVERAL MINUTES. WITH THE AUTO INDICATOR OFF, I AM STUCK ON LOW BEAMS. WHEN THE AUTO INDICATOR COMES BACK ON, THE SYSTEM FUNCTIONS NORMALLY. DURING THE TIME THE AUTO INDICATOR IS OFF, I CANNOT GET HIGH BEAMS UNLESS I TURN THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH FROM AUTO TO ON. THIS IS DANGEROUS BECAUSE I HAVE TO MANUALLY CHANGE THE SWITCH SETTING AND THE LIGHTS GO OFF WHILE THE SWITCH IS MOVED. THIS HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES WITH THE LAST TIME BEING 11/5/2018.

NHTSA ODI #11149708

10,000 miles · Sep 17, 2017
Electrical SystemExterior LightingUnknown Or Other

WAS DRIVING MY CAR HOME FROM WORK AND ABOUT 5 MINUTES AFTER I STARTED IT AND BEGAN TO DRIVE, I WENT OVER A SPEED BUMP GOING 5MPH AND SUDDENLY MY THEFT ALARM SYSTEM STARTS GOING OFF AND INCESSANTLY HONKING. MY HAZARD LIGHTS ALSO BEGAN TO BLINK AND MY HIGH BEAMS TURNED ON. I PULLED OVER AND PRESSED MY SMART KEY ALARM MULTIPLE TIME…

Read full complaint

WAS DRIVING MY CAR HOME FROM WORK AND ABOUT 5 MINUTES AFTER I STARTED IT AND BEGAN TO DRIVE, I WENT OVER A SPEED BUMP GOING 5MPH AND SUDDENLY MY THEFT ALARM SYSTEM STARTS GOING OFF AND INCESSANTLY HONKING. MY HAZARD LIGHTS ALSO BEGAN TO BLINK AND MY HIGH BEAMS TURNED ON. I PULLED OVER AND PRESSED MY SMART KEY ALARM MULTIPLE TIMES UNTIL THE ALARM STOPPED. EVERY TIME I WOULD HIT ANY SORT OF BUMP OR USE MY TURN SIGNAL SWITCH, THE ALARM AND HEADLIGHTS LIGHTS WOULD START GOING OFF. I TOOK IT TO TOYOTA AND THEY CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT'S WRONG. THEY SAID IT IS AN ELECTRICAL ISSUE, BUT NOT A TOYOTA ONE. THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE SINCE TOYOTA ENGINEERS THE ELECTRIC COMPONENTS.

NHTSA ODI #11023870

Official recalls

3

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.

19V503000 · Equipment:other:labels

Jun 28, 2019

Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain 2017-2019 Toyota Camry, Corolla, Rav4, Sienna, and Yaris iA vehicles equipped with factory-installed floor mats. The load carrying capacity modification label may be incorrect. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 110, "Tire Selection and Rims."

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An incorrect label may lead to unintentionally overloading the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: SET will notify owners and provide a corrected label for placement over the inaccurate label, free of charge. The recall began August 23, 2019. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. SET's number for this recall is SET19A.

17V295000 · Tires:temporary/emergency Spare Tire

May 2, 2017

Gulf States Toyota, Inc. (Gulf States) is recalling certain 2017 4Runner , 86, Avalon, Camry, Camry Hybrid, Corolla, Corolla iM, Highlander, Highlander Hybrid, Prius, Prius C, RAV4, RAV4 Hybrid, Sienna and Yaris vehicles. The spare tire air pressure was not adjusted to the proper pressure as stated on the Tire Pressure Label.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A spare tire that is not inflated to the proper value may not perform as intended, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Gulf States will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the spare tires, adjusting their pressure as necessary, free of charge. The recall began June 15, 2017. Owners may contact Gulf States customer service at 1-800-444-1074. Toyota's number for this recall is 17R2.

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