POWER TRAIN:DRIVELINE:DRIVESHAFT
2013 Honda Fit
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 176 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2013 Honda Fit, most frequently naming the airbags, electrical and driver assistance categories. 10 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; 1 NHTSA investigation names it; and 50 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2015 | 1 | 29 |
| Apr 2015 | 1 | 30 |
| May 2015 | 2 | 32 |
| Jul 2015 | 1 | 33 |
| Oct 2015 | 4 | 37 |
| Mar 2016 | 3 | 40 |
| Apr 2016 | 8 | 48 |
| May 2016 | 2 | 50 |
| Jun 2016 | 1 | 51 |
| Jul 2016 | 11 | 62 |
| Aug 2016 | 13 | 75 |
| Sep 2016 | 18 | 93 |
| Oct 2016 | 14 | 107 |
| Nov 2016 | 4 | 111 |
| Dec 2016 | 4 | 115 |
| Jan 2017 | 5 | 120 |
| Mar 2017 | 1 | 121 |
| May 2017 | 2 | 123 |
| Jun 2017 | 2 | 125 |
| Jul 2017 | 2 | 127 |
| Nov 2017 | 1 | 128 |
| Feb 2018 | 2 | 130 |
| Mar 2018 | 1 | 131 |
| Apr 2018 | 1 | 132 |
| Oct 2018 | 1 | 133 |
| Nov 2018 | 2 | 135 |
| Dec 2018 | 2 | 137 |
| Feb 2019 | 1 | 138 |
| Mar 2019 | 2 | 140 |
| Apr 2019 | 1 | 141 |
| Jun 2019 | 1 | 142 |
| Jul 2019 | 1 | 143 |
| Aug 2019 | 3 | 146 |
| Sep 2019 | 1 | 147 |
| Dec 2019 | 2 | 149 |
| Jan 2020 | 1 | 150 |
| Mar 2020 | 2 | 152 |
| Jun 2020 | 1 | 153 |
| Jul 2020 | 1 | 154 |
| Sep 2020 | 1 | 155 |
| Nov 2020 | 1 | 156 |
| Dec 2020 | 1 | 157 |
| Feb 2021 | 1 | 158 |
| Mar 2021 | 2 | 160 |
| Apr 2021 | 1 | 161 |
| Jul 2021 | 1 | 162 |
| Nov 2022 | 1 | 163 |
| Jan 2023 | 1 | 164 |
| May 2023 | 1 | 165 |
| Jun 2023 | 1 | 166 |
| Oct 2023 | 1 | 167 |
| Nov 2023 | 1 | 168 |
| Jun 2024 | 1 | 169 |
| Sep 2024 | 1 | 170 |
| Nov 2024 | 1 | 171 |
| Jan 2025 | 1 | 172 |
| Aug 2025 | 1 | 173 |
| Apr 2026 | 1 | 174 |
| Jun 2026 | 1 | 175 |
| Aug 2026 | 1 | 176 |
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Airbags9245.3%
- Electrical2210.8%
- Driver assistance178.4%
- Engine157.4%
- Powertrain (other)115.4%
- Body & structure94.4%
- Steering83.9%
- Brakes52.5%
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
10 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.govAIR BAGS:FRONTAL:DRIVER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE
AIR BAGS:FRONTAL:PASSENGER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
Electrical overstress
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.
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
I was driving and came to a four-way stop. When I accelerated from the stop, I heard a loud snapping noise and immediately lost the ability to drive the vehicle, although the engine continued to run normally. After inspecting the vehicle, it appears that the CV axle failed due to extensive rust and deterioration. While researching repair options, I discovered that a recall was issued for certain vehicles in specific states related to CV axle/driveshaft corrosion; however, Idaho was not included in the recall coverage. I am unsure why Idaho was excluded, as the apparent cause of this failure seems consistent with the recall description, which states that the driveshaft's protective coating may not have been properly applied during manufacturing, making it more susceptible to corrosion from road salt and other contaminants, potentially leading to axle failure. Idaho experiences significant winter weather, and road salt and other de-icing chemicals are commonly used on roadways throughout the state. Given these conditions and the apparent corrosion-related failure of my CV axle, I believe this issue is consistent with the corrosion concerns identified in the recall and warrants further review.
- NHTSA ID
- 11754744
- Incident
- Aug 4, 2026
Electrical Fire.Happened Friday 6/5/26 sometime after I parked for the night. Vehicle was parked for the night. I went out the next day and the key fob nor the key would open the door. To try and see what might be jammed, I went and looked in the passenger side window and saw the damage.
- NHTSA ID
- 11742578
- Incident
- Jun 5, 2026
The coil component for the spark plug melted completely which caused the vehicle to stop working leaving me stranded on the side of the road.
- NHTSA ID
- 11734977
- Incident
- Apr 30, 2026
Paint has peeled extensively allowing for rust to form to roof and hood, which I suspect is a defect as opposed to natural wear. Similar Fits of white color have an existing class action lawsuit. This is for blue color.
- NHTSA ID
- 11679440
- Incident
- Aug 8, 2025
The fuse block became defective, thereby the brake lights, horn, tail lights, and blinkers stopped working.
- NHTSA ID
- 11637322
- Incident
- Dec 30, 2024
The power steering goes out while driving randomly and has been happening every drive for at least a year and 6 months. It passes car inspections because the situation is restarted when you turn the car off and turn it on. There is no indication when it will go out and it’s not correlated with another condition. It seems to be totally random. If I turn the car off and restart it, it works again. It could be for another half mile, 30 miles or 1 mile, then it will go out again. When I take it to a garage and get diagnostic testing it comes up with nothing being wrong because it resets when the car is started. It’s extremely frustrating and dangerous because I’ll be driving and without warning power steering shuts down. I have been reading online that Honda has a recall on its electric power steering system, on my model and year however it doesn’t cover my Vin number. Why is that? I can’t even find, a fix for the problem. Please advise as to what to do.
- NHTSA ID
- 11626741
- Incident
- Nov 21, 2024
See attached document for complaint.
- NHTSA ID
- 11615624
- Incident
- Aug 12, 2024
IT WAS AN 185/55R16 VENTUS V2 CONCEPT2 H457 AND I HAD BLOWOUTS TWO TIMES, BOTH OF THE BLOWOUTS WERE ON THE BACK TIRE ON THE PASSENGER SIDE, THE FIRST BLOWOUT HAPPENED A DAY AFTER IT WAS PUT ON TO MY VEHICLE, THE SECOND BLOWOUT WAS ABOUT 2 DAYS AFTER IT WAS PUT ON TO MY VEHICLE. THE SIDEWALL IS TOO THIN AND THATS WHERE THE DAMAGE TO THE TIRE CAN BE SEEN
- NHTSA ID
- 11593242
- Incident
- Jun 8, 2024
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
AIR BAGS
Service Bulletin - Warranty Extension: Customer Support Program For Driver's Airbag Inflator for 2007-11 CR-V and Other Listed Years and Models.
EQUIPMENT:APPLIANCE:AIR CONDITIONER
"Service Bulletin - There are several A/C leak detection tools available. -Refrigerant Gas Leak Detector -Ultrasonic Leak Detector -Leak Dye"
AIR BAGS
Service Bulletin - This bulletin is a notification of a class action settlement relating to airbag inflators. American Honda is offering a Customer Support Program (Warranty Extension) to cover any manufacturing defects in the replacement driver's airbag inflator only.
AIR BAGS
Service Bulletin - This bulletin is a notification of a class action settlement relating to airbag inflators. American Honda is offering a Customer Support Program (Warranty Extension) to cover any manufacturing defects in the replacement front passenger's airbag inflator only.
AIR BAGS:FRONTAL:PASSENGER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE
Warranty Extension: Customer Support Program For Front Passenger's Airbag Inflator for 2010-12 Accord and Other Listed Years and Models (Expires September 30, 2028)
AIR BAGS
Service Bulletin - American Honda is conducting an inspection of certain vehicles that have previously had the passenger's airbag inflator replaced as part of the Takata Passsenger's Airbag Inflator recall. If you completed the repair described by this service bulletin on or before May 10, 2019, make sure to use the Warranty Claim Information provided below.
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
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.