IllustrationCalled Nissan to advise them of how dangerous it was to drive my car because the transmission was not responding. All they read to me was it is your problem Nissan cannot repair your vehicle. I advice them of this problem way before my vehicle had 100k miles.
2017 Nissan Altima
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2017 Nissan Altima do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 231.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Altima 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
380–25K
3325–50K
4950–75K
2775–100K
14100–150K
4150K+
165 reports with mileage · 226 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.
- Power Train. Review the 133 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Air Bags. Review the 73 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 41 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
24 crash reports7 fire reports19 injury reports
Power Train complaints
133 reportsMy car only has about 113,000 miles and the CVT transmission is completely ruined. It’ll cost me over $3,200 to repair, and this is a very common and known issue to Nissan. See other Class Action Lawsuits.
I changed the transmission fluid at 60K on my 2017 Nissan Altima SV. At 70,500 miles while driving on the highway my car started slipping, jerking off wears. I had no warning lights or signs that it was overheating. We pulled over for 30 minutes and continued. We were 45 minutes from home. It didn’t take long before it started a…
Read full complaint
I changed the transmission fluid at 60K on my 2017 Nissan Altima SV. At 70,500 miles while driving on the highway my car started slipping, jerking off wears. I had no warning lights or signs that it was overheating. We pulled over for 30 minutes and continued. We were 45 minutes from home. It didn’t take long before it started again. The car would come out of wear and it would only run at 40mph going up hills. Once we got off the highway, the car wouldn’t go into gear. We didn’t make it home. I called my local Nissan dealership and they informed me I had no warranty at all. We had the car towed to a local transmission repair shop. My transmission was done. I put in a used transmission in for $3,300. 2 months later I get a notification from Nissan that the cvt transmission warranty has been extended to 84000 miles or 84 months, whichever came first. I called Nissan consumer affairs and they basically said, you repaired your car on your own there’s nothing we can do. Nissan has class action lawsuit which the time limit that has already expired. I still filled my paperwork proof with no answer what so ever. I can assure you I will not buy another Nissan vehicle again!
I was driving on the freeway 8/1/23. There was a bit of traffic so my speed varied. I was attempting to accelerate at one point and the car wouldn't go any faster than about 60 mph. I started hearing a sqealing / screeching noise too. I was scared my car was about to stop. I didn't know if I should pull to the shoulder or j…
Read full complaint
I was driving on the freeway 8/1/23. There was a bit of traffic so my speed varied. I was attempting to accelerate at one point and the car wouldn't go any faster than about 60 mph. I started hearing a sqealing / screeching noise too. I was scared my car was about to stop. I didn't know if I should pull to the shoulder or just continue to my offramp. I managed to get off the fwy and make it home a few miles away with some lurching / jerking. On 8/3/23, the next time I drove the car, I was trying to pull my car out of my garage for a mobile mechanic to look at. It wouldn't reverse, and was just still when I pressed the gas. It wouldn't do anything in drive but rev. The mobile mechanic got there and managed to drive it a bit and I heard it making a super load noise and saw the car lurching and jerking He told me the transmission was bad. The car is not safe to drive. It has 52,000 miles on it and I have barely drove in the 4 years I've had it. I spoke to Nissan Consumer affairs and they told me to take it to the dealer for a diagnosis. The car got towed to the dealer to see if it qualifies for the Nissan extended warranty for CVT transmissions. I am afraid to drive the car now. I thought I was buying a solid car. I didn't think I could go wrong with Nissan mechanically at such an early stage in the car's life.
Was driving and came to a stop. Went to accelerate and car stuttered and acted like it didn’t want to accelerate. This is not the first time, but it was about a month ago when it last did it and almost caused me to wreck. Car is only at 99k miles.
Driving down the highway at 12AM the vehicle lost power and slowed immediately to 20MPH. I pulled over, shut off the engine and waited 5 minutes. Restarted the engine and the vehicle ran fine. Recently while driving the vehicle I have noticed delays of 2-3 seconds in throttle engagement before acceleration. My son, Preston Ho…
Read full complaint
Driving down the highway at 12AM the vehicle lost power and slowed immediately to 20MPH. I pulled over, shut off the engine and waited 5 minutes. Restarted the engine and the vehicle ran fine. Recently while driving the vehicle I have noticed delays of 2-3 seconds in throttle engagement before acceleration. My son, Preston Hodnett was on the freeway and the vehicle slowed down to 10MPH. He pulled over, turned the vehicle off and restarted the vehicle and was able to return to normal freeway speeds. This occurred with no check engine light at the time. The vehicle is a 2017 with 65.4K miles. The manufacture is saying it is a transmission issue and will take $6.2K to repair. I cannot afford the replacement cost and this is a continued known issue with Nissan vehicles and the Nissan representative advised a transmission shop separate from Nissan that they cannot replace my transmission due to a current lawsuit with consumers in the state of California. In my opinion, this vehicle is endangering me and my family and this appears to be a class issue. The first issue occurred over two years ago and then went away entirely. Recent issues have arisen that resemble or exceed the first incident which are causing severe safety concerns. No warning lights were present during these issues.
April-May, Key fob not being recognized so changed the battery in key fob 4 times. May, Driving at 55MPH on I495 beltway, pushed on gas and did not get gas. Immediately put on flasher and drifted to right curb. Dashboard was still lit. Turned the car off. Within minutes restarted the car and went where I was going. I had AutoZon…
Read full complaint
April-May, Key fob not being recognized so changed the battery in key fob 4 times. May, Driving at 55MPH on I495 beltway, pushed on gas and did not get gas. Immediately put on flasher and drifted to right curb. Dashboard was still lit. Turned the car off. Within minutes restarted the car and went where I was going. I had AutoZone run a diagnostic and they said the car was fine. Drove another couple of weeks before it happened again. This time the car would not restart and I was stopped in a very dangerous location so I had AAA tow it to my residence. The next day the car started. I drove another two weeks before reoccurring. I was able to drive it home and it has been parked. There are never any warning, check engine light, etc. A Nissan mechanic told me the symptoms I told him sounds like an issue with the sensor mobilizer. I Google searched and found a recall for the Nissan Rogue but not the Nissan Altima. I did a VIN report and it showed 0 recalls. I definitely have a serious safety issue. Without warning the car gets no response from the gas pedal.
The contact owns a 2017 Nissan Altima. The contact stated that while stopped at a traffic light, the accelerator pedal was depressed; however, the vehicle failed to accelerate. Additionally, while driving at an undisclosed speed, the contact smelled an abnormal odor. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, who informed the contact …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Nissan Altima. The contact stated that while stopped at a traffic light, the accelerator pedal was depressed; however, the vehicle failed to accelerate. Additionally, while driving at an undisclosed speed, the contact smelled an abnormal odor. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, who informed the contact that the transmission had a defective solenoid. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 137,000.
CVT Transmission issues The car looses power starts high RPM and will not shift then accelerator fails to respond altogether causing car to suddenly slowdown in traffic. This is second time this has happened; first occurrence was on 3/27/22. the dealership reprogramed the cars computer that time. 4/23/23 This time I had to hav…
Read full complaint
CVT Transmission issues The car looses power starts high RPM and will not shift then accelerator fails to respond altogether causing car to suddenly slowdown in traffic. This is second time this has happened; first occurrence was on 3/27/22. the dealership reprogramed the cars computer that time. 4/23/23 This time I had to have the car towed back to the dealership.
Transmission jerk and stalling
Official recalls
320V315000 · Latches/locks/linkages:hood:latch
May 28, 2020
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain model year 2013-2018 Nissan Altima vehicles. If the primary hood latch is inadvertently released, there is an increased likelihood that the secondary hood latch may corrode over time.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Corrosion to the secondary latch may cause it to bind and remain in the unlatched position when the hood is closed. If the primary latch is inadvertently released again and the secondary latch is not engaged, the hood could unexpectedly open while driving, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will install a stronger release spring in the hood release lever, a warning label near the secondary hood latch, and an Owners Manual addendum card with instructions on how to lubricate and maintain the secondary hood latch mechanism, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed June 30, 2021. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-867-7669. Note: Recall 16V-029 remains open for any unremedied 2013-2015 Altimas and this recall applies to all vehicles covered by 16V-029 even if those repairs have already been performed.
18V915000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch; Structure:emergency:escape/egress/exit
Dec 19, 2018
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Altima vehicles, previously remedied under recall number 17V-040. The door latch-lock cable may not have been routed properly in the rear door when the remedy was applied. As a result, the cable may interfere with the window regulator causing the rear passenger door to unlatch and inadvertently open without warning when the window is lowered.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the rear passenger door opens while the vehicle is moving, the rear passengers have an increased risk of injury.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will secure the latch-lock cables in the correct position using the new remedy procedure, free of charge. The recall began February 5, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7669.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Structure:emergency:escape/egress/exit
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Altima vehicles, previously remedied under recall number 17V-040. The door latch-lock cable may not have been routed properly in the rear door when the remedy was applied. As a result, the cable may interfere with the window regulator causing the rear passenger door to unlatch and inadvertently open without warning when the window is lowered.
Consequence: If the rear passenger door opens while the vehicle is moving, the rear passengers have an increased risk of injury.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will secure the latch-lock cables in the correct position using the new remedy procedure, free of charge. The recall began February 5, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7669.
Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Altima vehicles, previously remedied under recall number 17V-040. The door latch-lock cable may not have been routed properly in the rear door when the remedy was applied. As a result, the cable may interfere with the window regulator causing the rear passenger door to unlatch and inadvertently open without warning when the window is lowered.
Consequence: If the rear passenger door opens while the vehicle is moving, the rear passengers have an increased risk of injury.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will secure the latch-lock cables in the correct position using the new remedy procedure, free of charge. The recall began February 5, 2019. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7669.
17V040000 · Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch
Jan 18, 2017
Nissan North America, Inc. (Nissan) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Altima vehicles. The rear door latch/lock cable on the vehicles may have been improperly routed. As a result, lowering a rear window may inadvertently cause that door to unlatch and open.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the rear passenger doors inadvertently open while the vehicle is in motion, it may increase the risk of injury to the rear passengers.
Remedy: Nissan will notify owners, and dealers will correct the rear door latch/lock cable routing, free of charge. The recall began on February 16, 2017. Owners may contact Nissan customer service at 1-800-647-7261.
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
3EA21002 · 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.
EA19002 · Rear Suspension Control Arm Failure
Opened Jul 29, 2019 · Closed Jun 16, 2025
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:rear
On July 29, 2019, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened EA19002 to investigate instances of alleged rear lower control arm failures in 2013-2018 Nissan Altima and 2016-2018 Nissan Maxima vehicles. At the time the investigation was opened ODI had 91 consumer complaints alleging rear lower control arm failures in the subject vehicles.ODI was concerned about these complaints because many of them alleged an increased steering effort or loss of vehicle control.At the time these complaints were received, ODI was also aware of a proactive service campaign addressing 2013 Nissan Altima in salt-belt states for a similar concern. Since opening the investigation, ODI has confirmed, based on consumer complaints, warranty data, and testing conducted by Nissan and ODI, that owners of the subject vehicles are experiencing a corroded bushing at one of three mounting points of the control arm to the rear subframe.ODI has also confirmed that drivers become aware of the problem because of sound and abnormal vibrations. In addition, the failure mileage is typically over 113,000 miles at the time of failure.In conjunction with Nissan and VRTC, ODI participated in testing to assess the potential safety consequence of a bushing failure.It was found the Vehicle Dynamic Control system allows the driver to maintain vehicle control in the event of a bushing failure.With between 7 to 13 years of field exposure, ODI is aware of only one low speed crash allegation describing minor contact with another vehicle’s trailer hitch. Nissan acknowledges that a crack can develop in affected control arms due to stress loading from normal use and that salts commonly used for roadway snow and ice treatment may result in corrosion that exacerbates the progression of the crack.Nissan implemented a design change in January of 2018 to improve the durability of the lower control arm.Affected vehicles have either been repaired with the countermeasure part under a customer satisfaction campaign or been provided a warranty extension from 3 years/36,000 miles to 10 year/unlimited mileage. Through testing and analysis of the information obtained to date, ODI has not identified a defect representing an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety involving corrosion of the subject rear lower control arm at this time.With a declining trend of reports and Nissan’s actions to implement a countermeasure and extended warranty coverage, further investigation of the issue does not appear to be warranted at this time.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov. A detailed discussion of the investigation and related complaint numbers can be viewed in the attached closing report.
PE18013 · Rear Suspension Control Arm Failure
Opened Dec 1, 2018 · Closed Aug 21, 2019
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension:rear
PE18-013 was opened on December 1, 2018, with 4 complaints to ODI alleging incidents of the lower control arm fracturing at a connection point to the vehicle chassis due to corrosion. ODI has received an additional 87 complaints since the PE was opened. During PE18-013, Nissan indicated model years 2013-2018 shared a common rear lower control arm design. Nissan provided complaint and warranty data regarding 48 incidents of the subject failure. The majority of the complaints are from vehicles registered in salt belt states. There have been no crashes, injuries, or fatalities confirmed as of this date. Nissan advised that it has conducted testing to assess safety risk. Nissan states that due to low incident rate, high detectability, and low risk of adverse vehicle dynamics, it does not believe the subject lower control arm failure poses an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.This preliminary evaluation has been upgraded to Engineering Analysis (EA) 19-002. During the EA, ODI will continue to collect and analyze complaint and field data in its efforts to fully assess the scope and frequency of the alleged defect. More importantly, ODI will also seek additional information and data regarding the potential safety consequences of rear lower control arm failure, both from evidence collected from field failures and through more rigorous and comprehensive vehicle testing to be conducted by either Nissan and/or NHTSA.The ODI reports (VOQs) cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers: 11234334, 11234232, 11234189, 11233771, 11233234, 11232381, 11231589, 11230323, 11230184, 11229023, 11229003, 11228730, 11228651, 11228631, 11228625, 11223086, 11222602, 11222427, 11222303, 11221802, 11219943, 11217980, 11217542, 11217505, 11217290, 11210699, 11209647, 11208580, 11208274, 11207545, 11206310, 11205711, 11205461, 11203864, 11203005, 11195416, 11193545, 11193020, 11192269, 11192066, 11191270, 11191207, 11191185, 11191042, 11190360, 11190323, 11187334, 11187157, 11186747, 11186195, 11185664, 11185632, 11185589, 11183799, 11183295, 11183198, 11182705,11182528, 11182265, 11182137, 11182088, 11181373, 11181223, 11181155, 11181009, 11180126, 11176565, 11176261, 11176135, 11175821, 11172604, 11172200, 11172065, 11170019, 11169930, 11165194, 11163833, 11163489, 11162559, 11162195, 11161956, 11161497, 11161117, 11157323, 11157234, 11156772, 11141169, 11139516, 11129476, 11122829, 11114374.