2004 Mazda RX-8

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE14-016 in June 2014 based on six inflator rupture incidents involving consumer owned vehicles produced by five vehicle manufacturers.All six vehicles were operated in Florida or Puerto Rico at the time of the rupture and for the majority of their service life, and were equipped with inflators produced by Takata, a tier-one supplier of automotive air bag systems.During the course of PE14-016, ODI determined that five additional vehicle manufacturers used inflators of a similar design and vintage also supplied by Takata. No evidence of field failures was found in vehicles produced by these five additional manufacturers.Nonetheless, at ODI's insistence, all 10 vehicle manufacturers initiated a regional recall within approximately two weeks of the opening of the investigation.The regions recalled initially included Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, areas with high absolute humidity and climatic conditions believed to be a significant factor in the inflator ruptures.As part of the recall actions, inflators removed from remedied vehicles are to be returned to Takata for testing.Takata's initial test results on passenger inflators from remedied vehicles indicated a much higher than anticipated rupture frequency for inflators returned from Florida.Accordingly ODI requested all 10 manufacturers expand the regional recalls for passenger inflators to include other geographic areas where high absolute humidity conditions exist, including the Gulf States and other coastal areas.Takata's testing of the passenger inflators to date continues to indicate this geographic area as having the highest risk, with no ruptures occurring from inflators returned from outside the expanded recall regions.During PE14-016 four additional passenger inflator field events occurred, all in vehicles from the same expanded geographic region.Also during PE14-016 four additional driver inflator field events occurred including two in vehicles from regions not known for high absolute humidity, specifically California and North Carolina.Accordingly, ODI requested all five of the affected vehicle manufacturers currently using the subject Takata driver inflators expand to nationwide recalls.Significantly, neither of the affected vehicle manufacturers or Takata provided any explanation to account for these two driver air bag inflator ruptures outside the area of high absolute humidity.Takata testing of returned driver inflators indicates a lower rupture frequency as compared to passenger inflator testing.All test ruptures reported by Takata to date have occurred on inflators returned from high absolute humidity areas.The investigation now includes all manufacturers and vehicles known to be affected at this time.ODI's investigation will focus on, among other things, root cause analysis, other potential defect consequences, identification of affected vehicles scope, and adequacy of the remedy.The five ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10537899, 10568848, 10585224, 10605877, 10651492

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE14-016 in June 2014 based on six inflator rupture incidents involving consumer owned vehicles produced by five vehicle manufacturers.All six vehicles were operated in Florida or Puerto Rico at the time of the rupture and for the majority of their service life, and were equipped with inflators produced by Takata, a tier-one supplier of automotive air bag systems.During the course of PE14-016, ODI determined that five additional vehicle manufacturers used inflators of a similar design and vintage also supplied by Takata. No evidence of field failures was found in vehicles produced by these five additional manufacturers.Nonetheless, at ODI's insistence, all 10 vehicle manufacturers initiated a regional recall within approximately two weeks of the opening of the investigation.The regions recalled initially included Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, areas with consistently high absolute humidity and climatic conditions believed to be a significant factor in the inflator ruptures.As part of the recall actions, inflators removed from remedied vehicles are to be returned to Takata for testing.Takata's initial test results on passenger inflators from remedied vehicles indicated a much higher than anticipated rupture frequency for inflators returned from Florida.Accordingly, ODI requested all 10 manufacturers expand the regional recalls for passenger inflators to include other geographic areas where high absolute humidity conditions exist, including the Gulf States and other coastal areas.Takata's testing of the passenger inflators to date continues to indicate this geographic area as having the highest risk, with no ruptures occurring from inflators returned from outside the expanded recall regions.During PE14-016, four additional passenger inflator field events occurred, all in vehicles from the same expanded geographic region.Also during PE14-016, four additional driver inflator field events occurred including two in vehicles from regions not known for high absolute humidity, specifically California and North Carolina.Accordingly, ODI requested all five of the affected vehicle manufacturers currently using the subject Takata driver inflators expand to nationwide recalls.Significantly, neither of the affected vehicle manufacturers or Takata provided any explanation to account for these two driver air bag inflator ruptures outside the area of high absolute humidity.Takata testing of returned driver inflators indicates a lower rupture frequency as compared to passenger inflator testing.All test ruptures reported by Takata to date have occurred on inflators returned from high absolute humidity areas.The PE is now closed/upgraded to an Engineering Evaluation (EA15-001) to include all manufacturersand vehicles known to be affected at this time.ODI's EA investigation will focus on, among other things, root cause analysis, other potential defect consequences, identification of affected vehicles scope, and adequacy of the remedy.The recalls related to this PE are: 14V343, 14V344, 14V348, 14V351, 14V353, 14V655, 14V700, 14V701, 14V752, 14V763, 14V770, 14V773, 14V787, 14V802 and 14V817.The number of vehicles affected are an estimate since some vehicles may have both the driver and passenger side inflators recalled. The five ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10537899, 10568848, 10585224, 10605877, 10651492

On September 23, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation to investigate allegations of the clutch pedal bracket failures in MY 2004 - 2006 Mazda RX8 vehicles.In response to an information request letter sent by ODI, Mazda stated that the failure mechanism may be related to an improper fastener attachment sequence to the body.The improper sequence may create a distortion of the pedal bracket and create a stress amplitude during pedal usage that may go beyond the wear out limit of the bracket.Mazda stated that the percentages of vehicles experiencing the defect is low at approximately 1% of the vehicle population projected to 10 years in service based on analysis of warranty claim data that best represented the alleged defect.In terms of risk to motor vehicle safety, Mazda stated that the failure is progressive with warning manifested in noise and difficulty in shifting gears prior to complete failure of the bracket.Mazda also stated that when a bracket fracture occurs the clutch pedal may lean towards the brake pedal however gear shifting becomes impossible prior to any contact of the clutch pedal to the brake pedal. ODI is not aware of any crashes associated with a clutch pedal bracket failure in the subject vehicles.ODI's analysis of warranty claim data provided by Mazda yielded failure rates of approximately 3% projected over 10 years in service. ODI's analysis of Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) data complaint indicates that approximately 5% of the VOQ complainants allege they were unable to get out of the roadway as a result of a clutch pedal bracket failure.None of these incidents occurred on a highway. Approximately 7% of the complainants alleged a contact condition after a clutch pedal bracket failure of the clutch pedal to the brake pedal. None of these complaints noted difficulty in getting the vehicle stopped.Mazda has informed ODI that it will conducted an Owner Notification of an extended warranty coverage program increasing the clutch pedal assembly warranty to 8 years and limited at 100K miles for model years 2004 through 2009 RX8 vehicles.A safety-related defect trend has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will continue to monitor this issue and will take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

No worries — here it is trimmed to under 2,000 characters: I am reporting a recurring safety defect on my 2004 Mazda RX-8 (VIN: [XXX] a repair under NHTSA Recall 1017E (Fuel Pump Ring / Discharge Pipe). Recall 1017E was completed on my vehicle on September 19, 2017. The same fuel leak has since recurred, with fuel vapor now entering the passenger cabin. Only a few thousand miles have been driven since the recall repair. The vehicle is currently at Della Mazda, Queensbury, NY at approximately 72,000 miles. On May 8, 2026, I contacted Mazda Customer Experience Center. Mazda confirmed the dealer submitted a pre-authorization request for recall coverage, which Mazda corporate denied, stating the recall was previously completed and further repairs are my responsibility. I have a chat transcript documenting this. A recall remedy that fails to correct the covered defect should not be considered complete. I am requesting NHTSA review whether Recall 1017E has produced recurring failures, direct Mazda to honor the recall remedy, and advise on available consumer reimbursement. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11736604

Incident

May 8, 2026

For a year I have responded to every notice for a recall repair (7 total) Mazda has not repaired my vehicle or scheduled its repair. My recall ID is 016742248 and my Campaign Number is 100409. My car has a DO NOT DRIVE status and Mazda tells me I MUST drive the car 2 hours to get it repaired each way. And they refuse to transport y vehicle even thought I have told them in phone conversations about my cars do not drive status. The latest attempt for filing for a repay was 7-21-25 at 9:40am central time.

NHTSA ID

11675012

Incident

Jul 21, 2025

The contact owns a 2004 Mazda RX-8. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle inadvertently lost motive power. The contact was able to pull to the shoulder of the roadway, where the vehicle failed to restart. The check engine warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was towed to the dealer, who diagnosed a failure with the engine. The dealer determined that the engine had no compression. The vehicle was repaired, but the failure reoccurred. The manufacturer was notified of the failure but provided no assistance. The failure mileage was 60,000.

NHTSA ID

11590479

Incident

May 23, 2024

Mileage

60,000 mi

The electric power steering randomly pulls hard to one side while driving. There are brief spasms of forceful jerks each jerk is 1-2 seconds the series of jerks lasts 10-20 seconds and usually stops with power steering failure all while driving.

NHTSA ID

11571290

Incident

Feb 1, 2024

Engine naturally wears out especially after 200k miles due to friction in the natural design of the Rotary engine, resulting in losing its overall function such as turning off in the middle of a drive due to loss of compression from worn Apex Seals of the Rotary. The rotary engine requires a replacement of the Apex Seals to continue functioning normally to avoid any unpredictable accidents due to engine failure. An event occurred where my RX-8 went into limp mode in the middle of the freeway as i was commuting due a misfire from poor compression, this is more then likely a common event nowadays for RX-8 owners starting at the S1 2004 models with newer models soon to follow the same incident as me. This is completely unsafe especially traveling at 65 MPH

NHTSA ID

11514483

Incident

Mar 9, 2023

The contact owns a 2004 Mazda RX-8. The contact stated that while the vehicle was parked, he noticed a strong gasoline odor originating from the vehicle. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact stated that the failure persisted. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where it was diagnosed that the fuel pump was fractured and needed to be replaced. The contact stated that the vehicle was previously repaired under NHTSA Campaign Number: 17V354000 (Fuel System, Gasoline); however, the recall repair failed to fix the vehicle. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and informed the contact that they would follow up with him. The failure mileage was approximately 86,000.

NHTSA ID

11498663

Incident

Dec 9, 2022

Mileage

86,000 mi

Fuel fumes are leaking into passenger compartment and leaking from tank. Previous recall failed to fix

NHTSA ID

11427511

Incident

Aug 2, 2020

FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG CRACKED DASH AND PUSHED OUT GLOVE BOX.

NHTSA ID

11414240

Incident

Dec 21, 2020

Mileage

62,000 mi

This bulletin supersedes the previously issued bulletin(s) listed below. The changes are noted in Red text. 09-042/04 12/10/04 DESCRIPTION Some vehicles may exhibit inoperative electric rear window defroster grid lines, integral antenna concerns causing radio reception issues or terminal tabs pulled from the rear window glass. Follow the diagnostic and repair procedures included in this service information to inspect and service rear defroster grid lines, integral antenna concerns or broken terminal tabs.

This Service Alert supersedes the previously issued SA listed below: The changes are noted in Red. SA-011/24 02/12/24, 06/06/24, 07/29/24 DESCRIPTION Mazda has developed factory recommended scheduled maintenance services that support all major vehicle systems. Mazda recommends dealers follow the scheduled maintenance tables as cited in the vehicle-specific workshop manual or owner's manual. Services performed outside of Mazda's factory scheduled maintenance are not recommended. These services are unnecessary and create unneeded expenses for your customers. SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE Refer to the applicable Workshop Manual or Owner's Manual for vehicle -specific manufacturer scheduled maintenance. Workshop Manual - Refer to section 00-00 SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE. Owner's Manual - Refer to section 8 Maintenance and Care. b. Note: Please refer to the information below outlining the services not included in Mazda's Factory Scheduled Maintenance: IMPORTANT: Recommending fluid flushes when not necessary can lead to customer confusion and dissatisfaction. Fluid flushing for preventive maintenance purposes is strongly discouraged, unless otherwise specified in a published procedure (Owner’s Manual, Workshop Manual, Technical Service Bulletin, etc.).

Some vehicles may experience exterior trim heat damage such (melted, separating, etc.) when parked near a glass building or Low-E windows. This may be caused by the sun's reflection. If a structure's windows create enough of a curve, the concave glass can focus the sun's rays onto a small area and acting like magnifiying glass direct the sunbeams into a hot pinpoint of light. This magnifcation of the sun's rays can cause damage to vehicle trim (see examples). Additional information and exemplar images regarding this phenomenon can be found by performing a google search.

Some customers may complain about a noisy HVAC blower motor or odor after a cabin air filter replacement. Foreign debris on the blower motor after servicing the cabin air filter may be the cause. During the removal of the cabin air filter, foreign debris (leaves, dust, dirt....ect.) may fall on the blower motor causing a fluttering type noise or odor.

Some vehicles may experience exterior trim heat damage such (melted, separating, etc.) when parked near a glass building or Low-E windows. This may be caused by the sun's reflection.

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. When a speedometer is replaced, the new speedometer will read zero (0) miles. This procedure is extremely important to accurately represent actual vehicle mileage. Prior to speedometer removal, complete the information required on the “Speedometer Replacement Label”. Labels can only be ordered through Mazda eStore. In an effort to achieve a higher level of Customer Experience and retain the value of Mazda’s vehicles, MNAO Warranty Operations is allowing all Mazda dealers to utilize a third party, SPECMO Enterprises, Inc., for Instrument Panel Cluster (IPC) odometer setting service. With the use of SPECMO’s services, it is possible that the odometer will be set between 10 to 31 miles over the odometer mileage at the time of replacement for both warranty and customer pay repairs. Please make sure that the customer is aware that there may be a slight variance to the odometer, in which case the customer may have to accept the slightly higher mileage. Since odometer setting service is not part of the warranty repair, it is not warrantable nor required, but optional. However, Mazda Warranty policy provides after- warranty assistance (AWA) or DSA that can be utilized to cover this service expense.