Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Owner complaintsComplaints are reports submitted to NHTSA by owners and drivers. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a complaint does not establish that a defect exists. Volume is influenced by how many of a vehicle were sold, how long it has been on the road, and how much attention an issue has received.
13
Latest Sep 29, 2026
Safety recallsA safety recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle has a safety-related defect or does not comply with a federal motor vehicle safety standard. Recall repairs are free. Whether a specific vehicle is covered depends on its VIN — a recall listed for a model year does not necessarily apply to every vehicle of that year.
0
InvestigationsNHTSA opens an investigation to examine whether a safety defect may exist. An open investigation is not a determination that a defect exists, and many investigations close without a recall. Investigations can, however, lead to one.
0
Crash or fire reportedComplaints whose submitter recorded that a crash or a fire occurred. These are the reporter's own answers on the NHTSA form, not verified findings.
3
1 injuries, 0 deaths reported
Overview
Our database contains 13 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2023 Mazda CX-9, most frequently naming the other / unspecified, steering and driver assistance categories. 223 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
Monthly complaints peaked at 2 in Jun 2026. Most recent month: 1.View as table
Monthly owner complaints for the 2023 Mazda CX-9
Month
Complaints filed
Cumulative
Feb 2023
1
1
Apr 2023
1
2
Aug 2023
1
3
Dec 2023
1
4
Jan 2024
1
5
May 2025
1
6
Jun 2025
1
7
Aug 2025
1
8
Nov 2025
1
9
Feb 2026
1
10
Jun 2026
2
12
Sep 2026
1
13
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
Other / unspecified215.4%
Steering215.4%
Driver assistance215.4%
Brakes215.4%
Airbags17.7%
Tires & wheels17.7%
Body & structure17.7%
Electrical17.7%
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
No recalls in our database for this model year
That does not guarantee a specific vehicle is unaffected — recalls are issued against VINs, and new campaigns are announced regularly. Check a VIN on NHTSA.gov.
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
Structural bolt (p#: 9-YA01-1401-A) connecting the lower control arm assembly to subframe has rusted apart. The head of the bolt was found in my driveway, otherwise there would be no indication of this potentially catastrophic failure. Vehicle is only 3 years old, was a cpo purchase, and has just 55k miles. Underbody is clean of rust. This is 100% a defect. This is a safety issue. Old bolt will need to be extracted and replaced. Not confident in other bolts so will need to at least inspect those. Hopefully, I can update this will the repair estimate from manufacturer.
NHTSA ID
11767718
Incident
Sep 28, 2026
Other / unspecified
Filed Jun 8, 2026
I am reporting a critical mechanical restraint failure regarding the 5-point harness crotch buckles on the Graco TrioGrow and the Graco TriRide car seats. The red button-release tension on both of these models is engineered with insufficient physical resistance. My toddler is capable of physically depressing the lower crotch buckle and completely freeing themselves while the vehicle is traveling at highway speeds. The harness was explicitly verified as tight via the pinch test and the chest clip was at armpit level, proving the failure is strictly the low force required to disengage the buckle.I contacted the manufacturer (Graco), and their customer support agents dismissed this hardware failure by suggesting 'behavior modification' instead of addressing the mechanical vulnerability. A child restraint system must physically restrain the occupant regardless of behavioral variance. This is an active, ongoing safety hazard for young children traveling in these specific models.
NHTSA ID
11742663
Incident
Jun 8, 2026
Other / unspecified
Filed Jun 8, 2026
I am reporting a critical mechanical restraint failure regarding the 5-point harness crotch buckles on the Graco TrioGrow and the Graco TriRide car seats. The red button-release tension on both of these models is engineered with insufficient physical resistance. My toddler is capable of physically depressing the lower crotch buckle and completely freeing themselves while the vehicle is traveling at highway speeds. The harness was explicitly verified as tight via the pinch test and the chest clip was at armpit level, proving the failure is strictly the low force required to disengage the buckle.I contacted the manufacturer (Graco), and their customer support agents dismissed this hardware failure by suggesting 'behavior modification' instead of addressing the mechanical vulnerability. A child restraint system must physically restrain the occupant regardless of behavioral variance. This is an active, ongoing safety hazard for young children traveling in these specific models
NHTSA ID
11742662
Incident
Jun 8, 2026
Driver assistance
Filed Feb 11, 2026
Crash reported1 injury reported
On February 9, 2026, our 2023 Mazda CX‑9 experienced a sudden and complete system malfunction while being driven. Multiple system failures began approximately six minutes before the crash. During this time, the driver reported: • Total loss of steering • Complete brake failure • No response to acceleration or driver input • No ability to slow, stop, or maneuver the vehicle • No meaningful warnings that allowed corrective action The vehicle became completely uncontrollable. At the crash site, there were no skid marks, no braking evidence, and no signs of evasive action, consistent with a full loss of vehicle control. The vehicle only stopped after entering approximately two feet of water and striking a tree. The vehicle was declared a total loss. This incident represents a severe safety defect involving critical electronic and mechanical systems. A modern vehicle should not lose all steering, braking, and control functions under any circumstances. We are requesting a full investigation into the cause of this failure and whether similar incidents have occurred in other Mazda vehicles. We can provide photos, crash documentation, diagnostic information, and driver statements upon request.
NHTSA ID
11717365
Incident
Feb 9, 2026
Brakes
Filed Nov 15, 2025
If you press both the brake and gas at the same time (even if accidental), the onboard computer apparently thinks that the driver is confused, and it sets the gas flow to “idle”. The first time this happened was on the freeway, and I was very lucky to be able to coast into a gas station (thinking that I simply running out of gas - even though the gas gauge showed plenty of gas remaining). And so, I took it to Christian Brothers automotive the next day, and they ran extensive (and expensive) diagnostics. They found (to their surprise!) that this is the way the latest CX-9 works! The computer sees that you are on the gas and brakes, and so it “thinks” that you must be confused. And so, it sets the gas to “idle”. I believe this is an extremely dangerous action for the computer to take, and this behavior needs to be removed from all CX-9's IMMEDIATELY! And please don't just say (as others have) that the driver "shouldn't press both the brake and accelerator at the same". One might use the brake and accelerator at the same time for good reason, such as an icy road. But the computer SHOULD NOT DECIDE ON ITS' OWN TO SET THE THROTTLE TO IDLE!
NHTSA ID
11699571
Incident
Nov 12, 2025
Tires & wheels
Filed Aug 9, 2025
I recently purchased a 2023 Mazda CX9 with factory installed tires, Falken Ziex CT50 A/S p255/50R20 104V M+S. I was driving on the freeway on Tuesday [XXX] going around 65-70MPH. My tire pressure light came on all of a sudden, I started to slow down and make my way over to the right lane and then shoulder to check it out and all of a sudden the tire tread completely ripped away from the rest of the tire. Some of the sidewalls stayed intact, which ultimately protected my wheel from damage. But other than the tire pressure light coming on 30 seconds before the failure, there was no warning, no obvious defect or anything in the tire. Had it been one of my front tires it potentially could have been way worse of an outcome as I was driving on a bridge and next to a semi. The shop where I ended up replacing all 4 tires because I did not feel safe using this brand any longer said he has never seen the tread just rip right off of the sidewalls. I searched the tire make and model and there was an open recall on this specific brand and size tire, but my date stamp did not match. However, it was the same exact reason for the recall in the first place. So clearly this company has not changed their manufacturing methods and is putting people's lives in danger with these tires spontaneously detaching from the wheel. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA ID
11679527
Incident
Aug 5, 2025
Brakes
Filed Jun 9, 2025
I brought my vehicle in on 2/22/25 for a brake issue. I had to pump the brakes every time before I stopped to get the brake pedal to work. If I just hit the brakes the pedal would go almost to the floor. Greico Mazda has attempted 4 times to fix this issue with no success and has had my car in their shop for 4 months. I am now waiting for a Mazda rep to "fly in" to look at the car. They have replaced multiple parts on the car. I no longer feel safe driving this vehicle and have limited faith in Mazda to correct the problem.
NHTSA ID
11665696
Incident
Feb 11, 2025
ElectricalSteering
Filed May 14, 2025
Starting [XXX], through [XXX], we began receiving multiple "Critical Vehicle Malfunction" alerts (46 alert messages)via the Mazda app, including "Parking Brake Malfunction" and "Electric Parking Brake Malfunction." During this time, the vehicle experienced delayed starts and eventually required a jump-start. We brought it to the dealership multiple times to show the messages, before our 3-year/36,000-mile B2B warranty expired, but the issues were dismissed until the battery was finally replaced. At just over 36,000 miles (currently 39,646), a new issue emerged a “thud” sound from the steering wheel. The dealer diagnosed it as a failed u-joint shaft, which was deemed non-serviceable and not covered under warranty. I inquired about potential causes or prevention—no clear answer was known. I found relevant NHTSA TSBs (06-001/20 & 06-001/24) related to steering issues and escalated to Mazda USA. Mazda agreed to cover 50% as a goodwill gesture, leaving me to pay about $500. Two weeks later, the part arrived and was installed—but it did not fix the issue. The dealership now says it’s a failed bearing within the Electric Power Steering (EPS) unit, which requires complete replacement at a cost of over $2,000. Only one part is available in the U.S., with another two-week wait. The original (misdiagnosed) part was already sent back to Mazda. My out-of-pocket cost is now $1,151 and rising. Given the early warning alerts, misdiagnoses, and the fact that EPS controls several safety-critical functions (steering, cruise, lane assist, etc.), I believe this is a fundamental system failure that should be fully covered under warranty or as a safety-related goodwill repair. I respectfully request that Mazda assume full financial responsibility for the replacement and any related work. Thank you for your consideration. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA ID
11661072
Incident
Mar 30, 2025
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
Dlr Claim Resp
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Subject: Update – Campaign Warranty Claim Response Enhancements – Modules Not Repaired for Certain Campaigns Dear Mazda Dealer Colleagues, On October 28, 2026, a change was implemented in the warranty claim response screen to provide precise information for all campaigns requiring module programming or module replacement subject to the LECS system software checks. As previously announced, some claims were automatically rejected with the Edit code JN1 – One or More Modules Are Not Updated when submitting a campaign warranty claim. This response was based on the session file received from MDARS or MDARS II at the dealership and the VIN on the claim submitted. This change provides additional Related Information which enhances the edit code information. This information allows the dealer to correct the error without contacting Warranty or Hotline. Edit code JN1 now contains the actual module name and the software version that was collected from the car and what the minimum required software needed to be for the claim. Using this information, the technician can now identify the exact error or errors and correct the concern.
SA-038-26c
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Some customers may complain about any of the following 1. Infotainment Center Display does not provide the Authorization Code (OTP) during the MyMazda App Connected Vehicle enrollment. 2. Remote function(s) inoperative.
09-028-26
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
This bulletin supersedes the previously issued bulletin(s) listed below. The changes are noted below in Red. 09-038/24 08/08/24 NOTE: This service information is NOT applicable to 7th generation Mazda vehicles because the odometer data is stored in the BCM. DESCRIPTION In accordance with Federal regulations, follow the procedure listed below when replacing a speedometer. NOTE: Tampering with a motor vehicle odometer is strictly prohibited by Federal, and State laws. It is the dealer’s responsibility to comply with Federal, State, and local laws concerning odometer and related documentation requirements when providing a repair or replacement. Mazda vehicles are manufactured with tamper-proof speedometers.
SA-042-26a
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Mazda Connected Services - Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) This Service Alert supersedes the previously issued SAs listed below. The changes are noted in Red text. SA-042/26 06/30/26 DESCRIPTION Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Index General Questions MAZDA CONNECT Indication Setup and Getting Started Dealer Processes Registration / Enrollment / Take-Over Customer Subscription Status WI-FI General Informatio Opening the TCU Communication Line WI-FI How-To Conditions for Remote Engine Start Will Not Function WI-FI Trial Period Conditions for Remote Engine Start Function Will turn engine OFF Interacting With The App TCU Communication Line Status Service Issues Educational Videos Troubleshooting Resources MyMazda App Error Codes Customer Opt-Out
SA-041-26a
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION If you encounter any type of electrical concern (e.g, dead battery, engine no start, DTC(s) stored...), interview the customer before proceeding with normal MGSS diagnosis by asking if any aftermarket devices have been installed. Aftermarket devices may be the cause of the electrical concern. Below are a few examples of unusual electrical concerns caused by aftermarket devices. Examples: 1. Devices connected to the DLC-2 (battery discharge/DTC stored) 2. Devices plugged into the 12V outlet 3. GPS tracking device (engine no start/battery discharge) 4. Dash cam (DTC stored) 5. Non-certified USB cable (Apple Carplay™/ Android Auto™ will not connect) 6. Over-sized wheels/tires (incorrect GPS location) 7. DTC C0023:14 8. Decorative trim and/or cover on the START/STOP ENGINE button
SA-038-26b
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
This Service Alert supersedes the previously issued service alert listed below. The changes are noted in Red text. SA-038/26 08/18/26 and 06/15/26 DESCRIPTION Some customers may complain about any of the following: 1. Infotainment Center Display does not provide the Authorization Code (OTP) during the MyMazda App
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.