ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:SOFTWARE; ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING; VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:CRUISE CONTROL
2015 Dodge Durango
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 502 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2015 Dodge Durango, most frequently naming the exterior lighting, electrical and interior & seats categories. 4 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; 4 NHTSA investigations name it; and 349 manufacturer communications are on file.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Complaint activity over time
When owners filed reports about this model year
View as table
| Month | Complaints filed | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 2021 | 2 | 343 |
| Mar 2021 | 5 | 348 |
| Apr 2021 | 4 | 352 |
| May 2021 | 5 | 357 |
| Jun 2021 | 1 | 358 |
| Jul 2021 | 5 | 363 |
| Aug 2021 | 6 | 369 |
| Sep 2021 | 1 | 370 |
| Oct 2021 | 4 | 374 |
| Nov 2021 | 2 | 376 |
| Dec 2021 | 10 | 386 |
| Jan 2022 | 2 | 388 |
| Feb 2022 | 4 | 392 |
| Mar 2022 | 1 | 393 |
| Apr 2022 | 1 | 394 |
| May 2022 | 1 | 395 |
| Jun 2022 | 2 | 397 |
| Jul 2022 | 2 | 399 |
| Aug 2022 | 1 | 400 |
| Sep 2022 | 2 | 402 |
| Oct 2022 | 2 | 404 |
| Nov 2022 | 4 | 408 |
| Dec 2022 | 3 | 411 |
| Jan 2023 | 2 | 413 |
| Feb 2023 | 3 | 416 |
| Mar 2023 | 2 | 418 |
| Apr 2023 | 1 | 419 |
| May 2023 | 1 | 420 |
| Jun 2023 | 1 | 421 |
| Jul 2023 | 2 | 423 |
| Aug 2023 | 3 | 426 |
| Sep 2023 | 1 | 427 |
| Oct 2023 | 7 | 434 |
| Nov 2023 | 2 | 436 |
| Jan 2024 | 3 | 439 |
| Feb 2024 | 3 | 442 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 443 |
| Apr 2024 | 3 | 446 |
| Jun 2024 | 2 | 448 |
| Jul 2024 | 1 | 449 |
| Aug 2024 | 5 | 454 |
| Sep 2024 | 1 | 455 |
| Nov 2024 | 3 | 458 |
| Dec 2024 | 2 | 460 |
| Jan 2025 | 3 | 463 |
| Mar 2025 | 5 | 468 |
| Apr 2025 | 4 | 472 |
| May 2025 | 4 | 476 |
| Jun 2025 | 2 | 478 |
| Jul 2025 | 2 | 480 |
| Aug 2025 | 3 | 483 |
| Sep 2025 | 2 | 485 |
| Oct 2025 | 2 | 487 |
| Nov 2025 | 3 | 490 |
| Dec 2025 | 2 | 492 |
| Jan 2026 | 2 | 494 |
| Feb 2026 | 1 | 495 |
| Mar 2026 | 3 | 498 |
| Apr 2026 | 3 | 501 |
| Jun 2026 | 1 | 502 |
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Exterior lighting19531.5%
- Electrical9415.2%
- Interior & seats8613.9%
- Airbags426.8%
- Engine406.5%
- Powertrain (other)376.0%
- Seat belts233.7%
- Fuel system223.6%
Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.
Safety recalls
4 campaigns cover this model year
Recalls apply to specific vehicles, not to every vehicle of a model year. Check your VIN with NHTSA or your manufacturer's dealer to confirm whether a recall affects your vehicle.
Check a VIN on NHTSA.govSERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS:DISC:CALIPER
SUSPENSION:REAR
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
Seat Belt Retraction
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this Preliminary Evaluation to investigate complaints alleging improper retraction of the front seat belts (driver or passenger) due to the plastic guide of the D-ring cracking in model year (MY) 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles. The purpose of the investigation was to understand the scope, frequency and safety related consequence of the alleged defect. The subject condition occurs when the plastic material encapsulating the metal substructure of the front seat belt, B-pillar mounted D-ring cracks. The structural integrity of the D-ring remains intact; however, cracking of the plastic material pinches the webbing at the D-ring, thereby preventing it from properly retracting, and leaving the belt loose on the occupant. In addition to the detectability of the loose belt, the cracks in the plastic guide are also apparent by visual inspection, and many reports indicate the webbing can be manually fed back into the B-pillar/retractor to improve seat belt fit. ODI review of the available data has not identified any injuries attributable to this failure.In its November 6, 2019 response to ODI's September 8, 2019 information request letter, which was scoped to include MY 2013 to 2015 Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango vehicles, FCA providedinformation (portions of which were submitted with a request for confidentiality) detailing several material and process changes involved in the production of the subject D-ring. Based on these changes, FCA sub-divided certain production periods into population groups representing different design levels of the D-ring. FCA's response also confirmed the same D-rings were used in Dodge Durango front seat belts. ODI notes that installation of seat belts during vehicle production involves highly controlled processes, in comparison to field service, which ensures all mechanical and electrical connections are properly secured.ODI analyzed complaints submitted directly to the agency and complaint data received from FCA. During this review, ODI identified elevated failure rates for Grand Cherokee and Durango vehicles produced from mid-June 2013 through July 2015 when compared to vehicles produced both prior to and after this period. Additionally, review of FCA warranty data indicated a similar pattern of elevated warranty claims in the suspect July 2013-July 2015 period. The primary factors for the failure rate differences appear to be a D-ring material change (from nylon to a Celcon plastic) starting in mid-June 2013 and a subsequent change (to a Delrin material) in August 2015, however other production changes occurred during the suspect period, as discussed in greater detail in FCA's November 2019 response. ODI's analysis of the various data sources showed vehicles produced in the suspect period experienced failure rates approximately 2 to 4 times higher, depending on the data source and production period evaluated. However the analysis also indicated a declining failure trend.Given the detectability of the condition, the failure frequency combined with a currently declining failure trend, and lack of injuries attributable to this condition despite significant time in service, ODI is closing this Preliminary Evaluation without further action. The closing of the investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a defect does not exist, and NHTSA will take further action if warranted by future circumstances.In the course of the investigation, FCA has informed the agency of its intention to offer an extended warranty for Grand Cherokee and Durango vehicles built during the suspect period. See the PE19-011 document repository at NHTSA.gov fo
Active Head Rest Inadvertent Deployment
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE19014 on September 9, 2019, to investigate 128 consumer complaints alleging that the Active Head Rest (AHR) inadvertently deployed without the occurrence of a crash or other rear impact event in model year (MY) 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango vehicles.When ODI opened the investigation, ODI was aware of thirteen alleged injuries.A small number of Early Warning Reports identified driver and/or passenger front seat AHR inadvertent deployments without a rear impact event.Reported safety consequences resulting from the AHR deployments include concussions, headaches, soft tissue injuries, disorientation, nausea, vomiting and/or loss of vehicle control as a result of being surprised and distracted by being struck in the head by the inadvertent AHR deployment. On September 24, 2019, ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA).ODI requested certain detailed information from FCA related to the following subject vehicles: MY 2010-2014 Dodge Avenger 200, MY 2010-2014 Dodge Calber, MY 2010-2014 Chrysler Sebring, MY 2013-2015 Ram Tradesman, MY 2012 Ram Van, MY 2010-2019 Dodge Grand Caravan, MY 2010-2016 Chrysler Town and Country, MY 2010-2017 Jeep Compass, MY 2011-2020 Dodge Durango, MY 2011-2020 Jeep Grand Cherokee, MY 2010-2019 Dodge Journey, MY 2010-2012 Jeep Liberty, MY 2010-2011 Jeep Nitro, and MY 2010-2011 Jeep Patriot vehicles.On December 2, 2019, ODI received a response from FCA that included vehicle production data, consumer complaints, field reports, warranty claims, manufacturer actions, production changes, and other data related to the alleged defect from the start of production (2010) through September 24, 2019.On January 27, 2020, ODI received an update to the December 2, 2019, IR response from FCA.On September 22, 2020, ODI requested additional subject vehicle AHR information from FCA.ODI received FCA's response on October 21, 2020.ODI subsequently received an update to FCA's October 21, 2020, response on February 16, 2021.During the investigation, ODI requested updates to certain IR questions on two occasions.FCA provided updates to question #2 on March 5, 2021, and questions #2 and #5 on May 26, 2023. FCA’s IR response data identified approximately 7.5 million subject vehicles (with approximately 15 million AHR assemblies).Due to the large number of vehicles and failure reports, ODI focused its analysis on the FCA vehicle model with the highest failure rate to represent the worst-case scenario.For this purpose, ODI focused on MY 2012-2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles for its analysis.This population includes 710,890 vehicles that FCA manufactured between August 19, 2011, and August 8, 2015.ODI identified 2,839 alleged AHR failures within this limited population.ODI identified 263 alleged injuries that were caused by AHR failures in MY 2012-2015 Grand Cherokees vehicles.Of these alleged injuries, ODI categorized them as eighty-two (82) soft tissue (neck/whiplash, bruise) injuries, four (4) concussions, fifty-nine (59) headaches, and one hundred eighteen (118) without a specific injury description.Although complainants have alleged injuries, ODI has been unable to obtain evidence to substantiate or validate any injuries where medical treatment was required.Consumer outreach was conducted by ODI, where sixty-three (63) FCA complainants with alleged injuries were contacted.Twelve of the sixty-three FCA consumers responded and were interviewed by ODI.ODI requested medical records, however, only one response was provided. Attorneys representing the responding complainant provided a synopsis that indicated they had experienced prior neck-related injuries dating to the mid-1990s.ODI also contacted one hundred (100) consumers who submitted Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQ) in an attempt to validate alleged injuries. Despite the efforts of ODI, the office has been unsuccessful at obtaining substantive documentation/evidence supporting complaints that allege serious injuries (where pre-existing medical conditions did not already exist). In addition to the low severity of alleged injuries caused by AHR deployments, there have been eleven alleged crashes and two alleged lane departures within the entire subject vehicle population that has been in the field up to sixteen years (with over 8,500 AHR inadvertent deployments).ODI was not able to validate that the alleged crashes were the result of inadvertent head rest deployments, and the crashes were minor in nature. ODI has conducted a thorough investigation of the alleged safety defect and with up to sixteen years of exposure for some vehicles and over 8,500 inadvertent AHR deployments, no serious crashes or injuries could be validated in the sub-population of focus.The lack of serious injuries validated by ODI with such large period of field exposure is consistent with thework done by NHTSA’s Human Injury Research Division and the Biodynamic Research Corporation, which support that an inadvertent AHR deployment is not likely to cause serious injury.In addition to the low risk of injury, FCA released an extended warranty program that covers inadvertent AHR deployment for ten years / unlimited mileage from the vehicle's in-service date. PE19014 is closed with the FCA extended warranty program.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist, and the Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by new circumstances. To review a complete closing summary, please the attached closing report. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
Vehicle Rollaway
Basis – On December 16, 2016, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE16-014 to investigate 43 vehicle rollaway incidents with operators alleging they had shifted to Park and then exited the vehicle prior to the rollway incidents. These complaints involved multiple Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) model and model year vehicles that share a common electronic rotary shifter design. Of the 43 consumer complaints, 25 complaints alleged crashes, and eight complaints alleged at least one injury. Subject Vehicles – When NHTSA opened the investigation, the subject vehicles were model year (MY) 2013-2016 Ram 1500 vehicles and MY 2014-2016 Dodge Durango vehicles equipped with a rotary electronic shifter. However, NHTSA expanded the scope of the investigation to include subsequent model years of the same model vehicles when the Agency learned that those new model year vehicles use the same rotary shifter. Additionally, all subject vehicles manufactured by FCA are equipped with electronic rotary shifters supplied by Kostal Automotive. Reason for closing - During the course of this investigation, ODI did not find evidence that a vehicle-based design or manufacturing defect was the cause of vehicle rollaway incidents on the subject vehicles. Nevertheless, given the risk of a vehicle rollaway, FCA’s CSN actions provide automated vehicle securement when an operator attempts to exit the vehicle without successfully achieving a Park position with the rotary shifter mechanism. ODI closely monitored the subject vehicles on which the CSN actions implement a vehicle securement strategy and found that the CSN actions were effective in reducing the frequency of vehicle rollaway incidents in the subject vehicles. ODI analyzed the incidents when a CSN had been implemented and a rollaway still occurred, and ODI was unable to find an actionable defect that caused vehicle rollaway incidents. ODI found that the failure rates on subject vehicles that received a CSN remedy were similar to the failure rates on other vehicle populations and additionally had similar mechanisms as other vehicle populations such as slippery surfaces and various mechanical failures. Furthermore, as discussed above, after FCA’s release of the CSN actions, consumer complaints have decreased significantly. Given the absence of an identified safety defect based on available information and FCA’s customer satisfaction campaign which addresses the failure mode, further action is not warranted at this time. Accordingly, this Preliminary Evaluation is closed. However, the Agency reserves the right to take further action, if warranted.Please see the attached detailed closing summary for more information. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
Software security vulnerability
On July 23, 2015, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) launched Safety Recall 15V-461 to remedy security vulnerabilities in approximately 1.4 million model year (MY) 2013 through 2015 vehicles equipped with Uconnect head units (HU) 8.4A (RA3 radio) and 8.4AN (RA4 radio) manufactured by Harman International.On July 24, 2015, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Recall Query, RQ 15-004, to investigate HU security vulnerabilities and remedy effectiveness in the recalled population and to determine whether similar units have been supplied for use in other FCA vehicles.In an August 11, 2015 letter, FCA submitted a second Part 573 safety recall report expanding the scope of the Uconnect RA4 model radio to include additional 7,810 MY 2015 Jeep Renegade vehicles manufactured from September 18, 2014 through June 25, 2015 (Recall 15V-508).Scope analysis indicated that Uconnect radios installed in FCA vehicles not included in recalls 15V-461 or 15V-508 (subject recalls) are not equipped with built-in cellular access or short range wireless communication features and, thus, do not contain the security vulnerabilities addressed by the subject recalls. SUBJECT VEHICLES: MY2014 through 2015 Dodge Durango, Jeep Grand Cherokee and Jeep Cherokee sport utility vehicles; MY2013 through 2015 Ram 1500, 2500, 3500 and 4500/5500 pickup trucks; MY2013 through 2015 Dodge Viper vehicles; and MY2015 Chrysler 200, 300, Jeep Renegade, Dodge Charger and Challenger vehicles.According to FCA, long and short range wireless vulnerabilities identified in the recalled vehicles could allow unauthorized third-party access to, and manipulation of, networked vehicle control systems.Successful exploitation of the vulnerabilities, coupled with reverse engineering of networked microprocessor control modules, could result in unauthorized manipulation of vehicle control systems. This unauthorized manipulation of vehicle controls and systems could expose the driver, vehicle occupants or other highway users to an increased risk of injury.FCA and its network provider, Sprint, conducted a nationwide campaign to block access to a radio communications port that was unintentionally left open.On July 27, 2015, short range wireless vulnerabilities were also blocked.Finally, third party security evaluation and regression testing identified vulnerabilities that were either remedied by Sprint or through updates to the FCA Uconnect software.ODI identified a total of 30 complaints or field reports on unique vehicles submitted by FCA (29) or received by NHTSA (1) alleging incidents of theft from a vehicle or anomalous performance that the owner alleged were caused by, or may have been caused by, remote hacking.Twenty-six (87%) of these reports were submitted after a magazine article was published on July 21, 2015, describing the remote hacking of an FCA vehicle by researchers who were able to affect the operation of various vehicle control systems, including the service brakes, steering, throttle and ignition.Most of the complaints involved vehicle systems that were not safety critical (e.g., complaints related to radio, navigation system, or air-conditioning control) and did not affect vehicle control.Three complaints reported engine stalls.One owner reported sudden unintended acceleration allegedly related to hacking.None of the complaints or field reports reviewed involved the steering and braking vehicle control effects demonstrated by the research hackers prior to the recall.There were no confirmed incidents of hacking in any of the records reviewed by ODI.The remedies completed by Sprint and FCA appear to have eliminated vulnerabilities that mi
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
Driver headrest deployed without any accident. I was sitting in my car and the headrest made a loud bang and hit the back of my head causing me whiplash
- NHTSA ID
- 11747251
- Incident
- Jun 26, 2026
03/27/2026 Driver headrest popped open while I was sitting in the driver's seat in my driveway for no reason. Other than a very load bang and a headache from being struck in the head, nothing else was damaged.
- NHTSA ID
- 11732800
- Incident
- Mar 27, 2026
Engine light came on, no warning. Took to garage to check diagnostic system, went through system, did some work and light went off. Week later, light back on..took back to garage - they documented all they saw within diagnostic system and sent me to dealer. There was no indication of failure, drove fine but dealer made appt. Did some research and found out this year/make/model had complete engine failure at low mileage. No recall ever made. 3.6L Pentastar V6. Dealer took apart manifold, ran compression test, intake/exhaust valves leaking, engine block flatness - had to replace engine block. No precipitation of this issue other than engine light. A complete engine failure without an accident, at low mileage and a known issue without a recall on a specific engine is quite concerning. I basically paid $14, 400 for a new engine where I could have bought a used Durango . My 2000 Durango had well over 100k miles when I donated to charity and purchased this 2015 in 2016 off lot as used with 22 miles on it. I am not sure how to reconcile this damage and out-of-pocket expense for a known issue when no recall was made. Did I buy a lemon? Given the same engine was put back in, will I have to replace again in another 50k miles? I feel like I am due some type of refund given this problem is a known problem but no recall was issued. Thankfully it did not overheat, blow the engine while driving or cause an accident given this issue was a ticking time bomb.
- NHTSA ID
- 11731627
- Incident
- Jan 12, 2026
What component or system failed or malfunctioned, and is it available for inspection upon request? Passenger and driver seat caught on fire spontaneously, engine or battery has also been dying/ malfunctioning, touch screen also has issues. Yes available for inspection. How was your safety or the safety of others put at risk? Almost burned by seat of if I didn’t smell a burning smell. Has the problem been reproduced or confirmed by a dealer or independent service center? Not yet. Has the vehicle or component been inspected by the manufacturer, police, insurance representatives or others? Not yet. Were there any warning lamps, messages or other symptoms of the problem prior to the failure, and when did they first appear? No.
- NHTSA ID
- 11729015
- Incident
- Mar 31, 2026
- Mileage
- 117,322 mi
The fuel pump system has failed. The vehicle will turn over but will not start, it tries to start but keeps dying out as it’s cranking over. My vehicle is the only means of transportation for myself and kids.
- NHTSA ID
- 11727199
- Incident
- Mar 20, 2026
I have not had an issue as of yet...but my insurance company has warned me of 4 recalls that are apparently active on my vehicle and told me to come to your site to verify, but it says there are zero recalls on my vehicle, so I am wary of what to do. I was told by a local mechanic that one of the things listed in the recalls was potentially a issue for me but I would need to take my vehicle to the dealership to have it rectified. I do not want to have to pay for something if it is truly on a recall! I have children and I want my vehicle to be safe not only for them, but for myself and all those on the road around me, please help me verify these recalls are not just unfounded! I will attach a screen shot of what my insurance says is being and needed recalled below!
- NHTSA ID
- 11726600
- Incident
- Mar 24, 2026
On Saturday, March 7, 2026 my husband was driving our 2015 Dodge Durango when the driver seat head rest popped out unexpectedly. There was no accident, no sudden breaking, no impact of any kind, no hitting bump in the road, etc. There was no serious injury or accident caused by this happening, however the sudden and unexpected occurrence caught my husband by surprise as he was driving and startled him. There were no warning lights or sounds. This was completely unexpected. The disengaged head rest is still in on the driver seat. This makes for a very uncomfortable position for the driver and should there be an accident, it could cause injury to the driver.
- NHTSA ID
- 11723877
- Incident
- Mar 7, 2026
Driving down the road on 2 different instances and the head rest deployed on its own fist the driver side next the passenger side. Can’t be reset the clip inside broke. Do accident at all.
- NHTSA ID
- 11718446
- Incident
- Feb 2, 2026
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM; STRUCTURE:BODY
Outside Power Fold Rearview Mirror Noise Or Loose At Pivot. Mirror Contacts Door Window Glass In The Folded Position.
STRUCTURE:BODY
Outside Power Fold Rearview Mirror Noise Or Loose At Pivot. Mirror Contacts Door Window Glass In The Folded Position.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM; STRUCTURE:BODY
Outside Power Fold Rearview Mirror Noise Or Loose At Pivot. Mirror Contacts Door Window Glass In The Folded Position.
ENGINE
COOLER - ENGINE OIL
ENGINE
COOLER - ENGINE OIL
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM; POWER TRAIN
Power Liftgate Inoperative.
Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.
Compare model years
Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model
| Year | Complaints | Recalls | Investigations | Issue Index |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2027 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2026 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 44.2 |
| 2025 | 7 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2024 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 38.4 |
| 2023 | 27 | 1 | 0 | 56.6 |
| 2022 | 55 | 6 | 0 | 60.1 |
| 2021 | 187 | 7 | 0 | 61.4 |
| 2020 | 54 | 2 | 1 | 65.3 |
| 2019 | 141 | 4 | 1 | 61.2 |
| 2018 | 229 | 5 | 2 | 61.0 |
| 2017 | 210 | 2 | 2 | 60.3 |
| 2016 | 160 | 3 | 2 | 62.6 |
| 2015Viewing | 502 | 4 | 4 | 65.1 |
| 2014 | 781 | 11 | 7 | 65.3 |
| 2013 | 640 | 11 | 5 | 65.8 |
| 2012 | 637 | 10 | 5 | 62.2 |
| 2011 | 797 | 8 | 5 | 64.2 |
| 2010 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2009 | 12 | 4 | 1 | 56.2 |
| 2008 | 97 | 2 | 1 | 50.2 |
| 2007 | 191 | 4 | 4 | 60.1 |
| 2006 | 851 | 10 | 7 | 61.1 |
| 2005 | 1,567 | 9 | 10 | 60.0 |
| 2004 | 1,114 | 9 | 9 | 65.8 |
| 2003 | 339 | 6 | 5 | 64.1 |
| 2002 | 423 | 6 | 5 | 64.0 |
| 2001 | 665 | 7 | 5 | 64.9 |
| 2000 | 1,075 | 4 | 4 | 64.0 |
| 1999 | 1,967 | 5 | 3 | 59.3 |
| 1998 | 965 | 6 | 3 | 59.7 |
| 1997 | 4 | 2 | 2 | — |
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.