2017 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid

NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) received a letter dated July 13, 2022, petitioning the Agency to initiate a safety defect investigation into loss of motive power allegations attributed to oil drain pan assembly failures on certain Hyundai Motor America, Inc. and Kia America, Inc. vehicles spanning Model Years (MY) 2005-2021. The Petitioners cited examples of complaints indicating that the subject vehicles were experiencing rapid loss of engine oil due to oil drain plug back outs, resulting in loss of motive power and/or catastrophic engine damage. Additional complaints were provided which alleged that the oil drain pans lack sufficient structural integrity and are susceptible to cracking. The petition itself can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI number 11481745. On September 12, 2022, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Defect Petition (DP22-003) to evaluate the Petitioners’ request. The Petitioners have provided additional complaints within four supplemental letters dated January 31, 2023, March 21, 2023, May 23, 2023, and August 4, 2023. ODI’s evaluation included the review and analysis of the complaints and supporting information submitted by the Petitioners, as well as additional complaints submitted directly to NHTSA which referenced either the oil drain plug or a crack in the oil pan. After reviewing the available data, ODI has not identified evidence that would support opening a defect investigation into the oil drain pan assemblies of the subject vehicles. Based on a review of the available information, a loss of motive power resulting from an oil drain plug back out has not occurred between the initial sale of a vehicle and the completion of its first oil change. If during an oil change service, a technician fails to remove the existing drain plug gasket before installing a new gasket, it is likely that a proper seal between the drain plug and the oil pan will not be made. An improper seal between the drain plug and oil pan could lead to the backing out on the drain plug, resulting in the sudden loss of oil while driving. Additionally, the provided examples of oil pan cracks were localized to the immediate vicinity of the oil drain plug and/or appeared to be the result of direct-contact with a tool during servicing.  There is no information to support that a vehicle-based defect exists relating to the oil pan assembly, and instead the documented incidents are related to the failure to follow the proper maintenance procedures during oil change service. In October 2023, Hyundai published a Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) that provided detailed instructions for oil change service on its gasoline powered vehicles, specifically highlighting the need to remove and replace the existing drain plug gasket prior to reinstalling the drain plug. After a thorough review of the material submitted by the petitioner, the information already in NHTSA's possession, and the potential risks to motor vehicle safety implicated by the petitioners' allegations, NHTSA does not believe that a formal investigation is warranted. Therefore, the petition is denied. A Federal Register Notice (FRN) further detailing NHTSA’s reasons for denial of the petition will be published. The reference numbers for the complaints to NHTSA cited by the petitioner can be found in the petition submission documents in the public file for DP22-003. To review those complaints and the additional complaints ODI added to its evaluation which are cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

On March 29, 2019, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened two Preliminary Evaluations (PE19-003 on Hyundai and PE19-004 on Kia) to broadly investigate incidents of non-crash fires (regardless of origin or operational status of the vehicle) on various model year Hyundai and Kia vehicles.  During the PE investigations, Hyundai and Kia issued several recalls to address vehicle fires, including those due to engine failures involving various engine types.  The remedies for the engine failure recalls typically involve engine inspection (to detect existing damage), and if necessary, engine replacement.  Additionally, both manufacturers have been installing an engine control software modification known as Knock Sensor Detection Software (KSDS) which is intended to detect impending engine failure, alert the driver, and limit engine power (to lessen likelihood of engine failure).KSDS is being installed under recalls and non-safety field actions, and both companies have extended limited engine warranties (see recall files). On December 22, 2021, ODI upgraded PE19-003 and PE19-004 to this Engineering Analysis (EA21-003, covering both Hyundai and Kia) to evaluate the scope of the prior recalls related to engine failures/fires and the efficacy of the recall remedies for the recalls, as well as the long-term viability of related programs and non-safety field actions being conducted by Hyundai and Kia.  The former issue involved approximately 550,000 MY 2013 Hyundai Elantra, MY 2011 Kia Sorento, and MY 2012-2015 Kia Rio.  The latter issue involved approximately 2.5 million recalled vehicles, which have been identified as displaying potential remedy concerns: Hyundai recalls 15V-568, 17V-226, 20V-746, and 21V-727; and Kia recalls 17V-224, 19V-120, 20V-750, and 21V-844. Regarding the recall scope issue, among all of the scope vehicles identified at EA opening, ODI found only the MY 2011 Kia Sorento vehicles equipped with both the Theta II 2.4L 4-cylinder Multi-Point Injection (MPI) and the Lambda II 3.5L 6-cylinder MPI engines experienced relatively high rates of reported fires.  In December 2023, Kia issued recall 23V-877 that will cover about 80,000 MY 2011 Kia Sorento vehicles equipped with the Theta II 2.4L MPI engines.  The remedy will involve an inspection, and if necessary, a replacement of the engine, as well as the installation of KSDS.  It should be noted that in 2021 these vehicles were included in a KSDS product improvement campaign with warranty extension.  For the MY 2011 Sorento vehicles equipped with the Lambda II 3.5L engines, ODI believes that future engine failures/fires involving these vehicles will likely be due to a lax in adhering to the proper or scheduled engine maintenance (regular engine oil changes), rather than a design or manufacturing engine issue. Regarding the issue of the efficacy of the recall remedies, ODI found the majority of the recalled Hyundai and Kia vehicles, by model, experienced lower reported fire rates after the remedies were applied.  Furthermore, ODI found that for most vehicles that did not receive the recall remedies, by model, experienced relatively high fire rates.  To address this problem, Hyundai informed ODI in December 2023, that it will renotify all of its owners covered by the Hyundai recalls of engine failures/fires every 8 months for the next 3 years.  In December 2023, Kia stated that it will renotify the majority of its owners every 8 months for the next 3 years.Several previously recalled Kia models are excluded from the renotification due to their lower reported rates of engine fires.  Overall, the renotification actions will help to increase the recall completion rates, thus reduce the frequency of engine fires in the future. In view of the recall action being taken by Kia and renotification actions being taken by both Kia and Hyundai, ODI is closing this Engineering Analysis.  Also, both companies have been released from the 2020-iniated Consent Orders (Kia since November 2022 and Hyundai since November 2023).  The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances.  To review the reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

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.

The Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) system in my 2017 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid Limited malfunctioned. On three separate occasions, the HEV warning light illuminated while I was driving on the highway, followed by a sudden loss of power. The vehicle stalled and stopped running, leaving it inoperable. The incidents occurred in approximately August 2022, November 2023, and February 2026. The vehicle is available for inspection upon request. Each incident occurred while driving on a highway. The vehicle suddenly lost power and stalled in moving traffic, creating a significant safety hazard. I was forced to attempt to move the vehicle out of active traffic lanes while other vehicles were traveling at highway speeds. The unexpected loss of propulsion increased the risk of a crash, serious injury, or death to myself, my passengers, and other motorists. The vehicle was taken to a Hyundai dealership after each incident. However, the dealership did not provide an explanation for the HEV warning light, loss of power, or stalling condition. To my knowledge, no permanent repair was identified, and the problem recurred on multiple occasions. The vehicle was inspected by a Hyundai dealership following each towing event. The vehicle was towed after each incident because it was not safe to drive. To my knowledge, Hyundai did not provide a definitive cause for the failures. The vehicle has not been inspected by police or insurance representatives in connection with

NHTSA ID

11743355

Incident

Jul 23, 2022

2/25/2026 vehicle was put in service for a safety warranty recall. 2/26/2026 Hyundai approved the replacement of the engine, but there were costs involved that I was responsible for (approx. $800). 3/9/2026 I was informed by Hyundai the vehicle was complete, and would now last "for another 200,000 miles". I picked up the vehicle and only drove 5+ miles from the dealership when the vehicle’s motor completely shut down, putting me in a VERY UNSAFE driving condition, almost causing a serious accident. Vehicle was returned to Hyundai the same day and I was informed they were still figuring out the failure and to be patient. 3/11/2026 Hyundai informed the vehicle would now need a new catalytic converter and O2 sensor, and that it would all be covered under warranty. On 3/12/2026 Hyundai informed me that they would not fully cover the cost of the new parts and I ended up paying another $1300. 3/19/2026 Hyundai notified me that the vehicle service was complete, and the vehicle was ready for pick-up. I picked up the vehicle that day and again only drove 5+ miles when the vehicle repeated the same failure with the motor completely shutting down and again putting me in a VERY UNSAFE driving condition and almost causing a serious accident. Vehicle returned to Hyundai the same day. 3/23/2026 was told I would receive update once technician gets to the vehicle. 3/26/2026 informed that the vehicles Brake Booster Actuator needed replaced, and I have to cover the almost $4000 to replace this part and later informed Dealerships GM was covering cost. 4/8/2026 vehicle being worked on and completed by the end of that day. 4/9/2026 vehicle failed a 3rd time with same codes and limp mode. Tech line stating to replace EGR valve and Intake Manifold. 4/13/2026 informed that Hyundai refused to pay total amount, but were going to re-submit to not be completely out of pocket. 4/15/2026 vehicle has now been in Service for 7 weeks for a Safety Warranty recall.

NHTSA ID

11731393

Incident

Feb 25, 2026

While traveling 40 mph, car flashes a warning, "Check Hybrid System", and then the car shuts off. No power steering and brakes are difficult. The warning is only 3-5 seconds before everything shuts down. This is definitely a hazard to myself and others. If in traffic at higher speeds, there would certainly be an accident with devastating results.

NHTSA ID

11702030

Incident

Nov 26, 2025

The engine shut off on the highway on two different days. Vehicle was going between 65 and 70 mph. The vehicle engine shut down and all the warning lights came on. Every one. The vehicle still moved but nothing inside worked, it ran on battery mode for the 17 miles to the dealership with a maximum speed of 60 mph. The risk was the immediate unresponsiveness of the vehicle and the sudden and immediate reduction in speed and power. It presented itself twice in about 2,000 miles. The dealership charged a 491$ diagnostic and found all the warnings and reset it, not reason for it happening and sent me on my way. Then it happened again. Brought back to the dealership and they tried to say they did another diagnostic and called the tech helpline. It took hours and they still don’t have a definitive answer, wanted to try almost 2k in repairs to see if it would fix the issue without any guarantees it would. Warning lights, all of them came on, cruise control, abs, engine light blinking, steering, literally everything and messages started running through the information center.

NHTSA ID

11688690

Incident

Sep 16, 2025

Vehicle: 2017 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid – 131,700 miles – Maryland registered While driving, my vehicle displayed the warning “Check Hybrid System. Turn off engine.” The dealer diagnosed a failure of the Hydraulic Control Assembly (ABS/Brake Control Unit). This is a safety-critical braking system. The vehicle is unsafe to drive until repaired. Hyundai previously issued recalls for this same component on earlier Sonata Hybrid models (2011–2015), due to risk of brake failure and fire. My 2017 vehicle is experiencing the exact same failure, yet is not currently included in the recall. This defect should be investigated as it compromises safe braking performance and puts drivers and passengers at risk. I am requesting that NHTSA review this issue and consider expanding Hyundai’s recall coverage to include later model years like mine.

NHTSA ID

11686888

Incident

Sep 4, 2025

I was drying my car after washing it(I only use products approved for washing and drying vehicles) when a piece of paint on the hood just peeled off. It has not been wrecked or damaged in any way on the hood so I feel it must be a defective paint job from the factory.

NHTSA ID

11682841

Incident

Aug 25, 2025

Odometer Fraud. The contact stated that while attempting to purchase a 2017 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid, it was later discovered that there was a mileage discrepancy. The vehicle was not yet purchased. The vehicle mileage was 87,000, but the contact later discovered that the mileage was 105,000.

NHTSA ID

11667237

Incident

Jun 14, 2025

Mileage

105,000 mi

The contact owns a 2017 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, the contact noticed an abnormal ticking sound coming from the engine. There was no warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed with engine failure due to the rod bearings failure. The dealer determined that the engine needed to be replaced and informed the contact that the repair was not covered under an unknown recall due to the mileage. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 183,000.

NHTSA ID

11666119

Incident

May 16, 2025

Mileage

183,000 mi

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has issued an urgent safety advisory regarding dangerous, counterfeit driver‑side airbag inflators manufactured by Jilin Province Detiannuo Automobile Safety System Co., Ltd. (DTN), that have been identified in U.S. vehicles following prior crashes, theft, or non‑certified airbag replacements. These inflators are not approved for use, may rupture during deployment, and have caused serious injuries and fatalities. Please see attached announcement, provided by NHTSA, for more details.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has identified the presence of substandard and dangerous driver’s-side airbag inflators manufactured by Jilin Province Detiannuo Automobile Safety System Co., Ltd. (DTN). These inflators were not supplied, approved, or authorized by the vehicle manufacturers and have primarily been found in vehicles that previously experienced a crash and underwent airbag replacement using non-genuine parts. These dangerous inflators have ruptured during deployment, posing a serious risk of injury or death due to metal fragments entering the vehicle cabin. To date, Hyundai is aware of three people who have died while driving a Hyundai vehicle with one of these substandard replacement airbag inflators that deployed in what likely would have been a survivable crash. NHTSA has issued a public advisory urging vehicle owners and service professionals to have vehicles inspected if there is reason to believe that a non-genuine replacement airbag may have been installed. Vehicles with salvage or rebuilt titles, prior airbag deployments, or unknown repair histories may present a higher risk. NHTSA strongly cautions against self-inspection by vehicle owners and recommends inspection by trained technicians.

Hyundai has settled a class action lawsuit that alleges that certain Hyundai and Kia Class Vehicles (defined below) contain defective ZF-TRW airbag control units (“ZF-TRW ACUs”) that are vulnerable to a condition called electrical overstress, which may cause the vehicles’ airbags and other safety features to fail during a collision. Hyundai has not been found liable for any claims alleged in the lawsuit. Instead, Hyundai reached a voluntary settlement (referred as “the Settlement” or “the proposed Settlement”) to avoid lengthy litigation and provide relief to people who own ed or leased Class Vehicles in the United States and U.S. Territories. Class Members may be entitled to compensation if they submit valid and timely Claims.

A Class Action settlement regarding the TRW Airbag was recently decided. Based on the Class Action, customers are eligible for certain settlement benefits. Impacted vehicles are also noted below. For further information regarding settlement benefits and contacts, please review the corresponding dealer notification. It is available on Hyundaidealer.com under Hyundai Tech Info > Service News.

A Class Action settlement regarding the TRW Airbag was recently decided. Based on the Class Action, customers are eligible for certain settlement benefits. Please see attached for details. Impacted vehicles are also noted below. For further information regarding settlement benefits and contacts, please review the dealer notification per the attached. It is also available on Hyundaidealer.com under Hyundai Tech Info > Service News.

This bulletin provides information regarding condensation related to the accumulated moisture in the headlamp, rear combination lamp, daytime running lamp (DRL), or fog lamp. This TSB illustrates the various causes of condensation inside the lamp assembly. Lamp assembly replacement is NOT necessary in most cases. This condition can be eliminated by turning on the lamps with the engine running for several minutes or during normal driving operation.