Recently purchased a used 2017 Toyota Corolla. During the test drive I did not attempt to use the cruise control as it was only driven on city or small highways. Travel with the car at those locations has been good. Yesterday while on a freeway, I used the cruise control. It started out okay, but when I got to a downhill or uphi…
Read full complaint
Recently purchased a used 2017 Toyota Corolla. During the test drive I did not attempt to use the cruise control as it was only driven on city or small highways. Travel with the car at those locations has been good. Yesterday while on a freeway, I used the cruise control. It started out okay, but when I got to a downhill or uphill location, the car engine got very loud. The rpm’s revved to an extremely high level and the car accelerated and kept accelerating beyond the cruise set speed. I became very scared and didn’t know what was happening. Luckily I had quick thinking to hit the brakes immediately. I actually pulled over and stopped due to the issue and my nerves. The engine looked okay so once calmed, I began traveling again. I wanted to use the cruise on the freeway, so attempted a second time later. The same exact thing happened in the uphill / downhill scenario. I realized there is something wrong and it is not a good issue at all! This morning I began researching things related to the car. Prior to my purchase, I had checked for any outstanding recalls (which there were none) and problems people may have had with this car. There were no general concerning things I saw. This morning I began searches specific to cruise control issues and found discussions and even videos pertaining to cruise problems. People mention an array of scenarios and possible reasons such as the brake pedal sensor not working. Then I came across this site where other people described the same exact problem and safety concern of mine. I agree with all of them that it is definitely scary and thank goodness the brake works otherwise it would be a MAJOR safety concern!! I am now concerned and wondering why after many people have problems with this, there is not a fix or something being done?
NHTSA ODI #11521880
55,000 miles · May 27, 2022
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
The contact owns a 2017 Toyota Corolla. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the engine revved and the vehicle experienced unintended acceleration. The vehicle crashed into a concrete barrier while turning into a parking space. The contact was not able to depress the brake pedal in time to stop the vehi…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Toyota Corolla. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the engine revved and the vehicle experienced unintended acceleration. The vehicle crashed into a concrete barrier while turning into a parking space. The contact was not able to depress the brake pedal in time to stop the vehicle. No air bags were deployed. No injury was sustained and no medical attention was received. A police report was filed. The vehicle was towed to a body shop; however, the vehicle was not diagnosed nor repaired. The vehicle was not deemed totaled by the insurance company. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 55,000.
NHTSA ODI #11466447
Mileage unknown · Aug 31, 2021
Vehicle Speed Control
Vehicle went out of control in regards of speed when traveling downhill with cruise control on. Vehicle began heavily decelerating and accelerating along with high engine rpm. This is extremely dangerous and I am unable to use cruise control because of it.
NHTSA ODI #11431291
Mileage unknown · Jul 10, 2021
Forward Collision AvoidancePower TrainVehicle Speed Control
I HAD TO DRIVE AROUND 600 MILES TO AND FROM FAMILY FUNERAL. AS OTHERS HAVE REPORTED THE CRUISE CONTROL ON A DOWN HILL SLOPE GOES OUT OF CONTROL. AS I REACHED THE TOP OF A HILL AND STARTED DOWN THE CRUISE CONTROL WOULD ACCELERATE TO 4000 RPM ( IT IS REALLY LOUD) THE SPEED WOULD START INCREASING AND GO 15-20 MPH OVER WHAT THE CRU…
Read full complaint
I HAD TO DRIVE AROUND 600 MILES TO AND FROM FAMILY FUNERAL. AS OTHERS HAVE REPORTED THE CRUISE CONTROL ON A DOWN HILL SLOPE GOES OUT OF CONTROL. AS I REACHED THE TOP OF A HILL AND STARTED DOWN THE CRUISE CONTROL WOULD ACCELERATE TO 4000 RPM ( IT IS REALLY LOUD) THE SPEED WOULD START INCREASING AND GO 15-20 MPH OVER WHAT THE CRUISE CONTROL SPEED WAS SET AT. I HAD TO TURN OFF THE CRUISE CONTROL TO REGAIN CONTROL OVER THE SPEED. I WAS AFRAID THAT SOMETHING MIGHT HAPPEN IF I DID NOT. WHERE IT SEEMED MY CAR SHOULD DOWN SHIFT IT WAS NOT. SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH THE PROGRAMMING OF THE CRUISE CONTROL. THIS SHOULD NOT HAPPEN ON A DECLINE. ALSO, AT ONE POINT WHEN I WAS IN THE LEFT LANE AND A CAR PASSED ME ON THE RIGHT, MY CAR SLOWED DOWN REALLY QUICKLY. IF SOMEONE HAD BEEN BEHIND ME IT COULD HAVE CAUSED A SERIOUS ACCIDENT. THIS IS MY FOURTH TOYOTA AND I HAVE NEVER HAD THESE PROBLEMS BEFORE.
NHTSA ODI #11424164
1,000 miles · Sep 27, 2020
Vehicle Speed Control
WHEN GOING DOWN HILL, THE CRUISE CONTROL RACES THE ENGINE INTO HIGH RPM (4000+ RPM) RATHER THAN SLOWING THE ENGINE AND CONTROLLING THE CAR SPEED. IT HAS DONE THIS SINCE IT WAS NEW.
NHTSA ODI #11361337
72,310 miles · Aug 19, 2019
Vehicle Speed Control
WHEN CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED, IF IT HITS A LEVEL OR DOWN HILL IT APPEARS TO DOWN SHIFT, BUT CONTINUE TO SPEED UP. IT SHOULD JUST REDUCE THE FUEL TO SLOW DOWN. THIS APPEARS TO BE A PROGRAM PROBLEM. THIS HAPPENS AT ALL SPEEDS. IT WAS BOUGHT USED FROM A TOYOTA DEALER. I HAVE NOT ASKED THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT YET.
NHTSA ODI #11245122
50,000 miles · May 21, 2019
Fuel/propulsion SystemSteeringVehicle Speed Control
WHILE DRIVING DOWN A DOWNGRADE WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED AND SET TO 65MPH, THE CVT TRANSMISSION DOWNSHIFTS, THE RPMS INCREASED AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO WELL OVER THE SPEED LIMIT. IT FELT LIKE I WAS LOSING CONTROL. I HAD TO ACTIVATE THE BRAKES TO DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL IN ORDER TO REDUCE MY SPEED TO BELOW THE PO…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING DOWN A DOWNGRADE WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED AND SET TO 65MPH, THE CVT TRANSMISSION DOWNSHIFTS, THE RPMS INCREASED AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO WELL OVER THE SPEED LIMIT. IT FELT LIKE I WAS LOSING CONTROL. I HAD TO ACTIVATE THE BRAKES TO DISENGAGE THE CRUISE CONTROL IN ORDER TO REDUCE MY SPEED TO BELOW THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT. I TRIED IT AGAIN ON ANOTHER DOWNGRADE AND THE SAME SITUATION WAS DUPLICATED. THE CAR WILL ALSO ENGAGE RPMS WHEN YOU ARE DOWNGRADING OR UPGRADING IN CRUISE CONTROL I DID NOT TAKE THE CAR INTO A DEALER SINCE THE ISSUE HAS BEEN REPORTED TO DEALERSHIPS WITH A SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM.
NHTSA ODI #11209005
48,235 miles · Feb 17, 2019
Vehicle Speed Control
WHEN GOING DOWNHILL ON CRUISE CONTROL MY COROLLA'S RPM'S GO UP TO 5000 AND INSTEAD OF KEEPING STABLE SPEEDS IT INCREASES THE SPEEDS. I FEEL LIKE I CAN'T CONTROL MY VEHICLE WHEN THIS HAPPENS. THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE. I'M NOT SURE IF SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE RE-PROGRAMMED BUT I'VE SEEN SO MANY COMPLAINTS ON THIS ISSUE. I WOULDN'T…
Read full complaint
WHEN GOING DOWNHILL ON CRUISE CONTROL MY COROLLA'S RPM'S GO UP TO 5000 AND INSTEAD OF KEEPING STABLE SPEEDS IT INCREASES THE SPEEDS. I FEEL LIKE I CAN'T CONTROL MY VEHICLE WHEN THIS HAPPENS. THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE. I'M NOT SURE IF SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE RE-PROGRAMMED BUT I'VE SEEN SO MANY COMPLAINTS ON THIS ISSUE. I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF A WRECK HAS HAPPENED BECAUSE OF THIS. TOYOTA NEEDS TO BE FORCED TO FIX THIS ISSUE BEFORE SOMEONE SERIOUSLY GETS HURT OR DIES.
NHTSA ODI #11180655
Mileage unknown · Dec 29, 2018
Vehicle Speed Control
DISAPPOINTED WITH TOYOTA ON THIS, LAST ONE I WILL PURCHASE IF THEY ARE UNABLE TO PROVIDE A FIX! WHILE IN MOTION ON EVERY OCCASION THE CRUISE CONTROL IS ENGAGED AND THE VEHICLE IS ON A DECLINE THE CRUISE CONTROL DOES NOT MAINTAIN THE SET SPEED. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME OF 4 OTHER COROLLA'S I HAVE OWNED THAT RESPONDED LIKE THIS. DE…
Read full complaint
DISAPPOINTED WITH TOYOTA ON THIS, LAST ONE I WILL PURCHASE IF THEY ARE UNABLE TO PROVIDE A FIX! WHILE IN MOTION ON EVERY OCCASION THE CRUISE CONTROL IS ENGAGED AND THE VEHICLE IS ON A DECLINE THE CRUISE CONTROL DOES NOT MAINTAIN THE SET SPEED. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME OF 4 OTHER COROLLA'S I HAVE OWNED THAT RESPONDED LIKE THIS. DEPENDING ON THE SEVERITY OF THE DECLINE THE SPEED WILL INCREASE FROM 5 TO 15 MPH AND THE ENGINE REVS TO 4,000 RPMS IN AN ATTEMPT TO MAINTAIN SPEED. ADAM'S TOYOTA DEALERSHIP HAS STATED THAT THIS IS A NORMAL OCCURRENCE FOR ALL 2017 COROLLA'S CVT'S AND I MAINTAIN IT'S NOT AND CRUISE IS USELESS THEREFORE I SHOULD BE REIMBURSED. THE CRUISE CONTROL IN ALL OTHER VEHICLES (PRIOR COROLLA'S AND OTHER MAKES) I HAVE OWNED HAS MAINTAINED A CONSISTENT SPEED NO MATTER THE ROAD BEING TRAVELED. SINCE I HAVE OWNED THIS VEHICLE THIS ISSUE HAS OCCURRED EVERY TIME I HAVE ENGAGED THE CRUISE CONTROL. OTHERS ONLINE HAVE COMPLAINTS ON THIS ISSUE AS WELL. TOYOTA PLEASE PROVIDE FIX
NHTSA ODI #11163960
1,079 miles · Dec 22, 2018
Vehicle Speed Control
THE CVT TRANSMISSION MAKE A SOUND UNKNOW THE DEALER SAY ME THAT IS ALL NORMAL IN THE CAR FOR ME IS NOT NORMAL OTHER CARS CONTAIN CVT TRANSMISSION AND THIS SOUND NOT MAKE IN OTHERS CVT TRANSMISSION IS MORE MAKING SOUND IN CLIMB AND WHEN ON AIR CONDITIONER
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.
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.
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.