2016 Hyundai Sonata

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 Office of Defects Investigation opened this investigation on September 3, 2016 based on four reports alleging the rear brakes locked or applied while driving without brake pedal application. One of the reports alleged a fire in the right rear wheel area.The vehicles subject to the investigation are equipped with an optional Electronic Parking Brake (EPB). In this system, an electric motor applies the parking brake by moving the rear brake pads (pads) against the brake rotors (rotors) when activated by the EPB control switch. The EPB is released by the control switch or by selecting a drive gear with the transmission shifter when the ignition is on.If the EPB has not been used within 1000 kilometers (621 miles) the system is designed to perform an Automatic Adjustment Function (AAF) of the pads to check for proper clearance. This function is a pad adjustment only and is preformed with the vehicle in park with the ignition off. It does not set the parking brake or turn the brake indicator light on. Hyundai has identified an error within the EPB control logic that can cause the pads to remain in contact with the rotors at various levels of force after the AAF is completed. This condition could cause the rear brakes to drag at the next drive cycle and may generate some levels of heat and smoke. The EPB control logic error affects model year 2016 vehicles produced from the start of production through March 16, 2016.Vehicles produced from March 17, 2016 incorporate an updated EPB control logic to prevent brake pad drag. On May 11, 2016 Hyundai notified its dealer network of Service Campaign TFF to update the EPB control logic in the affected vehicle population. Dealers will reflash the EPB software to prevent brake pad drag.There are no reports of accidents or injuries as a result of this issue. The incident that alleged fire could not be confirmed as there were no repairs to the vehicle other than replacement of the rear brake rotors and pads.ODI is closing this investigation based on the manufacturer's Service Campaign of the affected vehicles and in consideration that the the effect of brake drag in this instance does not appear to present an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety. The ODI reports cited above can be viewed at www-odi.nhtsa/complaints under the following identification (ODI)numbers: 10820359, 10854476, 10875764, 10892736, and 10928478

My Sonata 2016 suddenly lit up the Check Engine icon, which was blinking. It is available for inspection request, as it's in the shop right now. Added 2 qts of oil just to be safe. Was hoping the light would go away in the morning. It didn't. The car was sputtering and jerking while I was attempting to get where I was going, so I drove a little slower so it wouldn't stall out, which would have caused someone behind me to crash into me if it stopped suddenly. My mechanic said it was engine failure, possibly due to oil burning. Hyundai Dealer told me there is no recall for this issue, but my mechanic said there had been. I was never notified of such, and when I called them, they said that there was no recall, and she acted like she had never heard of the problem. I find that amazing, since on your website, there are some 717 claims of the same problem.

NHTSA ID

11756308

Incident

Aug 10, 2026

My 2016 Hyundai Sonata (VIN: [XXX]) has a serious safety issue involving excessive engine oil consumption. The vehicle loses oil rapidly between changes and requires frequent top‑offs to avoid engine damage. This creates a risk of sudden engine failure while driving. The dealership, South Charlotte Hyundai (10518 Cadillac Street, Pineville, NC 28134), refused to perform Hyundai’s official oil‑consumption test. Instead, they told me to pay $750 for a combustion cleaning and stated it would not fix the underlying problem. They would not document the refusal or provide any testing. I contacted Hyundai Corporate multiple times: • May 21, 2026 – Executive Office complaint submitted • June 3, 2026 – Follow‑up sent • June 29, 2026 – Regional escalation sent My Hyundai case number is XXX. As of XXX Hyundai has not responded to any of my Executive Office or Regional escalations. Only Customer Care replied with a template denial and no investigation. I have been waiting over two months with no action from Hyundai Corporate. I am reporting this because the manufacturer has not addressed a safety‑related defect, the dealership refused required testing, and the vehicle continues to consume oil abnormally. I am requesting NHTSA’s assistance in documenting this defect and Hyundai’s lack of response. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11755304

Incident

Feb 27, 2026

Cylinder 3 misfire code and rough idle/driving car tries to stall out, engine is consuming a quart of oil every 500 miles and has 30psi compression in cylinder 3. Car only has 129k miles

NHTSA ID

11750150

Incident

Jul 6, 2026

My 2016 Hyundai Sonata 2.4L suffered an in-transit engine failure and entered emergency limp mode with an active P1326 rod bearing defect code, which is a recognized fire and safety hazard under NHTSA mandates. Service Campaign 953 was successfully completed on August 12, 2019, qualifying the vehicle for a lifetime settlement engine replacement. Walser Hyundai Brooklyn Park (RO #257457) has issued an administrative denial based solely on a prior-salvage title flag from a cosmetic theft recovery. The manufacturer is actively stalling a court-ordered federal safety recall remedy based on an administrative title brand, despite the engine compartment being structurally original and undamaged. Hyundai Corporate Case #42869828 is open but unresolved.

NHTSA ID

11749029

Incident

Jun 20, 2026

The contact owns a 2016 Hyundai Sonata. The contact stated that while driving approximately 60 MPH, the vehicle suddenly shut off with the message "HEV System Failure" displayed. The driver safely pulled over to the side of the road and restarted the vehicle. A towing truck arrived on the scene and reset the diagnostic codes before towing the vehicle. The vehicle was towed to the local dealer. The dealer retrieved several diagnostic trouble codes; however, the dealer was unable to determine the cause of the failure. The vehicle was test-driven but the failure was not duplicated. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 149,000.

NHTSA ID

11744248

Incident

May 15, 2026

Mileage

149,000 mi

After the emissions 9c2 recall car hesitant when changing an Hyundai has knowledgement of the problem but don’t have a fix

NHTSA ID

11743836

Incident

Jun 2, 2026

I was driving at night and my passenger headlights went out. About 2 years prior the same thing happened but it was the driver side headlight that went out. It was $1100 to get the driver side replaced and now here i am having to pay the same amount to replace the passenger side headlights. It was not a simple replacing the bulb. Something inside went broke causing the dealership to have to install a whole new headlight set.

NHTSA ID

11741649

Incident

Apr 15, 2026

Went from 65 and dropped down to 40 going up grades on the freeway. Started shaking, check engine light went on and electric battery disappeared from dash. Got to top of grade, went back to normal. Problem repeated on next grades. Car had just left dealership lot an hour prior where it was safety inspected and they said all was fine. Took back to dealership for inspection and they said that there were no codes showing for what happened and all was well with the vehicle, when obviously it was not.

NHTSA ID

11741506

Incident

May 16, 2026

Certain Santa Fe (TMA), Santa Fe Sport (AN), Sonata (LFA), and Tucson (TL) vehicles equipped with Theta II engines may exhibit elevated engine-out emissions. The California Air Resources Board has determined that these vehicles may be releasing air pollutants which exceed Federal and California standards.

Certain Santa Fe (TMA), Santa Fe Sport (AN), Sonata (LFA), and Tucson (TL) vehicles equipped with Theta II engines may exhibit elevated engine-out emissions. This bulletin provides instructions for updating the Engine Control Module (ECM) to address this condition.

Following completion of Service Campaign 9C2 (Theta II Emissions Improvement), certain vehicles may exhibit a brief hesitation or rough shifting condition during cold start operation. If present, this condition is expected to occur only within approximately the first 1-3 minutes after engine start, while the catalyst is reaching its normal operating temperature.

Following completion of Service Campaign 9C2 (Theta II Emissions Improvement), certain vehicles may exhibit a brief hesitation or rough shifting condition during cold start operation. If present, this condition is expected to occur only within approximately the first 1-3 minutes after engine start, while the catalyst is reaching its normal operating temperature.

Certain Hyundai vehicles with exterior white paint may exhibit peeling or bubbling on metal body panels: hood, fender(s), roof, door(s), quarter panel(s), and tailgate/trunk. The paint warranty coverage for affected vehicles has been extended to 10 years/unlimited miles from the date of original retail delivery or date of first use and is valid for original and subsequent owners. The warranty extension does not apply to any vehicle that has ever been declared a total loss or sold for salvage by a financial institution or insurer or has a branded or similar title under any state’s law.

Some Hyundai vehicles with exterior white paint may exhibit peeling or bubbling on metal body panels: hood, fender(s), roof, door(s), quarter panel(s), and tailgate/trunk. The paint warranty coverage for affected vehicles has been extended to 10 years/unlimited miles from the date of original retail delivery or date of first use and is valid for original and subsequent owners.