NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
38 reportsClear category filter36,500 miles · May 22, 2015
EngineVehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN THE PARK POSITION, THE RPMS SUDDENLY INCREASED TO APPROXIMATELY 4,000. AFTER TURNING THE VEHICLE OFF AND RESTARTING THE ENGINE, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO IDLE AT APPROXIMATELY 4,000 RPMS. AFTER TURNING THE ENGINE OFF AND BACK ON A SECOND TIME, THE VEHICLE OPERATED …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS IN THE PARK POSITION, THE RPMS SUDDENLY INCREASED TO APPROXIMATELY 4,000. AFTER TURNING THE VEHICLE OFF AND RESTARTING THE ENGINE, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO IDLE AT APPROXIMATELY 4,000 RPMS. AFTER TURNING THE ENGINE OFF AND BACK ON A SECOND TIME, THE VEHICLE OPERATED NORMALLY. THE FAILURE OCCURRED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS AND WAS INTERMITTENT. WHILE DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, THE RPMS WOULD ALSO ERRONEOUSLY INCREASE. THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 36,500.
NHTSA ODI #10720962
71,000 miles · Apr 22, 2015
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION : WHILE MY WIFE WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE ON THE DRIVING LANE ON I-5 SOUTH AT ABOUT 60MPH AND I WAS AT PASSENGER'S SEAT, MY WIFE YELLED "THE CAR IS GETTING FASTER AND FASTER." AND I TOLD HER TO STEP ON THE BRAKE. SHE SAID SHE WAS ALREADY PEDDLING THE BRAKE BUT IT DID NOT WORK, AND THE CAR WAS APPROAC…
Read full complaint
SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION : WHILE MY WIFE WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE ON THE DRIVING LANE ON I-5 SOUTH AT ABOUT 60MPH AND I WAS AT PASSENGER'S SEAT, MY WIFE YELLED "THE CAR IS GETTING FASTER AND FASTER." AND I TOLD HER TO STEP ON THE BRAKE. SHE SAID SHE WAS ALREADY PEDDLING THE BRAKE BUT IT DID NOT WORK, AND THE CAR WAS APPROACHING TO A BIG TRUCK IN FRONT OF US WITH FRIGHTENING SPEED. SINCE THERE WERE MANY CARS IN FRONT, BEHIND AND ON THE PASSING LANE AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT, WE COULD NOT DO ANYTHING ELSE BUT STEERING THE CAR TO THE RIGHT SIDE OFF THE DRIVING LANE IN ORDER TO AVOID FATAL ACCIDENT. THERE WAS SPACE COVERED WITH ROUGH GRASSES, BUSHES AND SOFT FENCES THERE. THE VEHICLE KEPT MOVING ALONG, CRASHING THE OBJECTS WITH HIGH SPEED OF ABOUT MORE THAN 85 MPH. FINALLY THE CAR STOPPED AFTER GOING ALONG MORE THAN 50 YARDS. AS SOON AS THE CAR STOPPED, WE BARELY OPENED THE DOORS AND ESCAPED FROM THE TERRIBLY DAMAGED CAR. THE CAR'S FRONT SIDE WAS FACING BACKWARD, AND I HEARD AFTERWARD THAT MY WIFE USED THE HAND BRAKE TO STOP THE CAR. AIR BAGS OF DRIVER'S AND PASSENGER'S SEAT, AND SIDE AIRBAG WERE DEPLOYED. OTHER THREE CARS STOPPED AT THE SCENE OFF THE LANE, AND ADVISED US TO REMOVE VALUABLES INSIDE THE CAR, BECAUSE IT MAY CATCH FIRE. THEY CALLED 911, AND FIRE FIGHTERS AND THE POLICE ARRIVED AT THE SCENE. I REPORTED THE ACCIDENT TO MY INSURANCE, DMV, AND HONDA USA. MY WIFE'S RIGHT KNEE GOT BRUISE, AND I HAVE LIGHT PAIN ON THE LEFT SIDE OF MY NECK AND CHEST. MY WIFE IS PANIC, AND AFRAID OF DRIVING. I AM ALSO VERY MUCH SHOCKED. I KNOW HONDA WOULD NOT EASILY ADMIT THE DEFECT OF THE CAR, EVEN THOUGH IT WILL INVESTIGATE THE CAR. BUT I SWEAR TO GOD THAT THE SUA TOOK PLACE. NOW I BELIEVE THAT SUA OCCURS WITHOUT DRIVER'S MALOPERATION OF THE CAR, BECAUSE THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO MISOPERATION OF THE CAR. I PLEASE REQUEST NHTSA CONSIDER THIS INCIDENT VERY SERIOUSLY. THANKS *TR
NHTSA ODI #10712244
25,000 miles · Apr 11, 2015
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
THE CAR LOSES POWER WHEN GOING UP HILLS AND HAS STALLED TWICE. IF I LIGHTLY BUMP THE SHIFT WHILE DRIVING IT GOES INTO NEUTRAL. I MUST USE THE EMERGENCY BRAKE WHEN PARKED EVEN ON A FLAT SURFACE OR THE CAR WILL ROLL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10705125
2,363 miles · Mar 24, 2014
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
CONTACT OWNED A 2012 HONDA CIVIC WITH 2363 MILES AT TIME OF INCIDENT. BEFORE REACHING A DOWNTOWN INTERSECTION IN THE EARLY EVENING ONE DAY LAST MONTH, CONTACT WAS GOING TO TURN RIGHT SOUTHBOUND TOWARDS HOME NEARBY. THE CAR SUDDENLY MADE A LOUD REVVING NOISE AND SHOT STRAIGHT FORWARD AT TERRIFYING SPEED. CONTACT STEPPED ON THE…
Read full complaint
CONTACT OWNED A 2012 HONDA CIVIC WITH 2363 MILES AT TIME OF INCIDENT. BEFORE REACHING A DOWNTOWN INTERSECTION IN THE EARLY EVENING ONE DAY LAST MONTH, CONTACT WAS GOING TO TURN RIGHT SOUTHBOUND TOWARDS HOME NEARBY. THE CAR SUDDENLY MADE A LOUD REVVING NOISE AND SHOT STRAIGHT FORWARD AT TERRIFYING SPEED. CONTACT STEPPED ON THE BRAKE AND STEERED TO THE RIGHT. THE CAR DID NOT STOP AND SEEMED TO HAVE A MIND OF ITS OWN. CONTACT COULD NOT SEE WHERE IT WENT BUT HEARD IT HITTING HARD AT OBJECTS UNTIL IT FINALLY STOPPED. CONTACT DID NOT KNOW HOW LONG HAD ELAPSED BEFORE SHE SAW THROUGH A HAZE WISPS OF SMOKE COMING OUT IN FRONT OF THE CAR AND NOTICED THE AIRBAG WAS DEPLOYED. FEARING THE CAR MIGHT CATCH FIRE, CONTACT PUSHED OPEN THE DOOR AND FOUND THE CAR HAD STOPPED IN THE SOUTHBOUND LANE RIGHT NEXT TO THE RAISED CONCRETE MEDIUM THAT SEPARATED NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND LANES. CONTACT SAW A BLACK CAR ON THE NORTHBOUND LANE NEXT TO THE RAISED MEDIUM WITH WHITE SIDE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. POLICE OFFICERS AND PARAMEDICS WERE AT THE SCENE. CONTACT AND THE OTHER DRIVER BOTH SUSTAINED INJURIES. CONTACT'S CAR WAS LATER DECLARED "A TOTAL LOSS" BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY. CONTACT WAS PHYSICALLY AND MENTALLY SOUND BEFORE AND AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT AND HAD A TOTALLY UNBLEMISHED DRIVING RECORD IN OVER 50 YEARS. CONTACT IS UNWAVERING IN THE BELIEF THAT THE INCIDENT WAS DUE TO THE VEHICLE'S SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. CONTACT HAD STRESSED THIS MALFUNCTION TO THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND ALSO REPORTED THE INCIDENT TO THE AMERICAN HONDA MOTORS. WHICH CONTACT BELIEVED HAD SENT REPRESENTATIVES TO INSPECT THE VEHICLE AT THE COLLISION SHOP.. *TR *TR
NHTSA ODI #10574318
37,500 miles · Mar 21, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, THE ENGINE RPM INCREASED EXCESSIVELY AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR A DIAGNOSTIC. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, THE ENGINE RPM INCREASED EXCESSIVELY AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR A DIAGNOSTIC. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 37,500.
NHTSA ODI #10573989
Mileage unknown · Oct 1, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO RESPOND TO ACCELERATION ATTEMPTS. THE CONTACT ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED SEVERAL TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO RESPOND TO ACCELERATION ATTEMPTS. THE CONTACT ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED SEVERAL TIMES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DIAGNOSED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS NOT AVAILABLE. UPDATED 11/12/13*CN
NHTSA ODI #10546373
18,559 miles · Sep 5, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
SUDDEN ACCELERATION: I HAVE BEEN OBSERVING THAT THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATES WHILE DRIVING DOWNHILL OR MERGING ON THE HIGHWAY. I HAVE ALSO NOTICED THAT IT WILL ACCELERATE WHEN YOU TURN OFF THE CRUISE CONTROL. THE SPEED IS UNCONTROLLABLE FOR FEW SECONDS BEFORE THE ENGINE STARTS THE DECELERATION. I HAVE TAKEN A VEHICLE TO THE…
Read full complaint
SUDDEN ACCELERATION: I HAVE BEEN OBSERVING THAT THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATES WHILE DRIVING DOWNHILL OR MERGING ON THE HIGHWAY. I HAVE ALSO NOTICED THAT IT WILL ACCELERATE WHEN YOU TURN OFF THE CRUISE CONTROL. THE SPEED IS UNCONTROLLABLE FOR FEW SECONDS BEFORE THE ENGINE STARTS THE DECELERATION. I HAVE TAKEN A VEHICLE TO THE DEALER TWICE AND THEY HAVE ASSURED THAT THIS IS NORMAL FUNCTION SINCE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS NOT ON. THE VEHICLE IS 1.5 YEARS OLD AND HAS @15K MILES ON IT. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10542113
Mileage unknown · Aug 13, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
MY 2012 HONDA CIVIC HAS INTERMITTENT PROBLEMS WITH UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THESE OCCURRENCES ONLY OCCUR ON THE FREEWAY AND SEEM TO OCCUR MORE FREQUENTLY WHEN I AM NEAR SKY HARBOR AIRPORT. THE WILL SUDDENLY GO FROM 2 RPM TO 7 RPM IN A MANNER NOT ACHIEVABLE BY APPLYING THE GAS PEDAL OR ANY OTHER METHOD. ONCE THE CAR REACHES 7 RP…
Read full complaint
MY 2012 HONDA CIVIC HAS INTERMITTENT PROBLEMS WITH UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THESE OCCURRENCES ONLY OCCUR ON THE FREEWAY AND SEEM TO OCCUR MORE FREQUENTLY WHEN I AM NEAR SKY HARBOR AIRPORT. THE WILL SUDDENLY GO FROM 2 RPM TO 7 RPM IN A MANNER NOT ACHIEVABLE BY APPLYING THE GAS PEDAL OR ANY OTHER METHOD. ONCE THE CAR REACHES 7 RPM IT WILL IMMEDIATELY GO BACK DOWN TO 2 RPM AND THIS CYCLE WILL OCCUR TWO MORE TIMES BEFORE THE CAR WILL OPERATE NORMALLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10535032
9,000 miles · May 31, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING ACCELERATE, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE IN A TIMELY MANNER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2012 HONDA CIVIC. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING ACCELERATE, THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE IN A TIMELY MANNER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 9,000. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10514532
20,000 miles · Apr 6, 2013
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service BrakesVehicle Speed Control
WHEN EXITING A SPEED RAMP OFF OF THE HIGHWAY THE RPM'S SPEED UP CAUSING A HORRIBLE SOUND IN THE ENGINE AND THE FEELING THAT YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SLOW DOWN IN TIME TO EXIT THE RAMP. ADDITIONALLY, MORE THAN A NUMEROUS TIMES THE CAR IS VERY UNSTEADY GOING OVER 55MPH IF IT ENCOUNTERS ANY TYPE OF "BUMP" IN THE HIGHWAY UPON MERGING…
Read full complaint
WHEN EXITING A SPEED RAMP OFF OF THE HIGHWAY THE RPM'S SPEED UP CAUSING A HORRIBLE SOUND IN THE ENGINE AND THE FEELING THAT YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SLOW DOWN IN TIME TO EXIT THE RAMP. ADDITIONALLY, MORE THAN A NUMEROUS TIMES THE CAR IS VERY UNSTEADY GOING OVER 55MPH IF IT ENCOUNTERS ANY TYPE OF "BUMP" IN THE HIGHWAY UPON MERGING INTO ANOTHER LANE IT IS UNSTEADY AND THE WHOLE CAR "JERKS",(FEELS LIKE IT COULD ROLLOVER EASILY)YOU NEED TO HAVE A FIRM HOLD ON THE STEERING WHEEL OR YOU COULD LOSE CONTROL. GLARE ON WINDSHIELD AT NIGHT PRESENTS A SAFETY CONCERN WITH NIGHT DRIVING. THE HEADRESTS ARE A HINDER TO BEING ABLE TO EFFECTIVELY SEE YOUR BLIND SPOT AND THE CAR WITH ITS HORRIBLE STEERING CONTROL PRESENTS ANOTHER AREA OF CONCERN, YOU WILL BE IN THE OTHER LANE TRYING TO LOOK OVER YOUR SHOULDER MORE THAN ONCE! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10507359
Official recalls
3Nov 21, 2012
Honda is recalling certain model year 2012 Civic passenger vehicles, manufactured from October 26, 2012, through October 30, 2012. These vehicles were assembled with the incorrect steering column assembly.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The steering column may not have proper energy absorbing characteristics, which could increase the risk of injury during a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect and replace the steering column, as necessary, free of charge. The safety recall began on December 10, 2012. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009.
Jun 4, 2012
HONDA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2012 HONDA CIVIC VEHICLES. DURING ASSEMBLY, THE PROCESS REQUIRED TO SEAT THE DRIVERS SIDE DRIVESHAFT AND SET THE RETAINING CLIP WAS NOT COMPLETED. AS A RESULT, THE DRIVESHAFT MAY SEPARATE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS, THE VEHICLE WILL HAVE A LOSS OF DRIVE POWER AND MAY ROLL AWAY IF THE PARKING BRAKE HAS NOT BEEN SET WHEN THE GEAR SELECTOR HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE PARK POSITION, INCREASING THE RISK OF CRASH OR PEDESTRIAN INJURY.
Remedy: Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver's side driveshaft and install a new driveshaft as needed, free of charge. The safety recall began on June 21. 2012. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-800-999-1009.
May 18, 2011
HONDA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2012 CIVIC 2-DOOR AND 4-DOOR VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM APRIL 21, 2011, THROUGH MAY 2, 2011. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT AN O-RING, WHICH SEALS A CONNECTION IN THE FUEL FEED LINE, IS MISALIGNED. IF THE O-RING IS MISALIGNED, A SMALL FUEL LEAK MAY OCCUR.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE, IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FUEL FEED LINE ASSEMBLY FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT HONDA AT 1-800-999-1009.
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
2EA21002 · 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.