AIR BAGS: AIR BAG/RESTRAINT CONTROL MODULE
2016 Toyota Avalon Hybrid
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 2 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2016 Toyota Avalon Hybrid, most frequently naming the powertrain (other), steering and suspension categories. 2 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; 2 NHTSA investigations name it; and 158 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
Not enough dated records to plot a meaningful trend — 2 months of data.
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Powertrain (other)133.3%
- Steering133.3%
- Suspension133.3%
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
2 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.govPOWER TRAIN:DRIVELINE:DRIVESHAFT
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
Pedestrian alert sounds
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.
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
SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR THERE IS A PULL TO THE LEFT,,I WENT BACK TO THE DEALER AND BROUGHT THE PROBLEM TO HIS ATTENTION, ,, OHH ,,,DRIVE THE CAR FOR A WHILE ,,SOMETIMES THE TIRES MIGHT NEED TO WEAR A BIT AND EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE FINE,,,I DID THAT BUT THE PROBLEM IS STILL THERE, ,,ASKED AGAIN ,,,,,,OHHHH ,, MAYBE YOU DRIVE THE CAR ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE ROAD AND THAT'S WHY YOU FEEL THE PULL TO THE LEFT ,,,,,I WENT TO WHEEL ALIGNMENT SPECIALIST AND ASKED FOR A WHEEL ALIGNMENT WHILE I HAD ONLY DRIVEN 170 MILES, ,,,THE ALIGNMENT WAS SLIGHTLY OFF, ,,,WAS CORRECTED BUT THE PULL WAS STILL THERE,,,,,,I REPEATED THE ALIGNMENT MORE THAN 5 TIMES SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR ALMOST 6 MONTHS AGO BUT THE PROBLEM STILL PERSISTS, ,,,AFTER GETTING MORE TESTS AND ASKING ADVICE FROM PROFESSIONALS WITH EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE, EVERYONE IS POINTING THE PROBLEM TO THE **** RACK AND PINION ****...I WENT BACK TO THE DEALER AND I ASKED FOR THE RACK AND PINION TO BE SPECIFICALLY TESTED BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE DEFECTIVE, ,,,,,NO RESPONSE, BUT A REFUSAL TO EVEN ADDRESS THE ISSUE, ,,,,,,ALTHOUGH IT IS STILL UNDER WARRANTY, ,,,SUPPOSEDLY DID A CHECK UP NOT REALLY DIRECTLY RELATED,,,,AND ALSO I MENTIONED THAT THE SHOCKS MAKE A SQUICKING NOISE WHEN WET HE COMPLETELY IGNORED IT,,,,,AND ALSO A NOISE IN THE STEERING WHEEL AREA,,SOMETHING IS LOOSE BUT I CANNOT PINPOINT IT,,,,,THE OLD THING HE ASKED ME THE CHANGE ONE TIRE FOR $235,, $99 FOR BALANCING THE WHEELS, ,, $99 FOR WHEEL ALIGNMENT, ,,WHEN I TOLD HIM THAT THIS DOESN'T ADDRESS OR SOLVE THE PROBLEM HE JUST SHRUGGED HIS SHOULDER, ,,*** THEN I ASKED HIM SINCE THE PROBLEM IS NOT SOLVED THEN YOU ARE TO GOING TO ASK ME TO CHANGE THE AND PAY FOR A NEW CAR ****HIS RESPONSE ***MAYBE THAT'S THE BEST THING TO DO!!**I LEFT NOT WANTING TO PAY $500 FOR NOT GETTING THE PROBLEM SOLVED. ..I'LL CHANGE THE RACK AND PINION AND PAY FROM MY POCKET BUT ISN'T RIGHT!!!
- NHTSA ID
- 10995452
- Incident
- Jun 14, 2017
- Mileage
- 32,000 mi
TRANSMISSION SLIPS UNDER NORMAL ACCELERATION BUCKING VIBRATION VERY HIGH RPM(4500-5500) JERKS NOT PICK UP ENGINE POWER PROPERLY .VEHICLE NOT ACCELERATING PROPERLY
- NHTSA ID
- 10837276
- Incident
- Jan 16, 2016
- Mileage
- 200 mi
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
ENGINE
OBSOLETE NOTICE February 13, 2026: This bulletin is now obsolete. Please see T-SB-0009-26.
ENGINE
This bulletin includes basic procedures for performing a rescue charge on Ni-MH high voltage (HV) batteries. This bulletin should be used in conjunction with the applicable model and model year Repair Manual while performing a rescue charge. The GRX-5100 should be used wherever the Repair Manual references the Toyota Hybrid System (THS) charger.
Some 2005 – 2026 Toyota vehicles that have undergone water intrusion may exhibit a condition in which a musty odor is present. Follow the procedures in this bulletin to remediate the odor and address this condition. The purpose of this Service Bulletin is to provide general guidelines and procedures for odor remediation. This Service Bulletin provides a guide on how to prepare and treat the interior of the vehicle for odor remediation. Refer to the applicable model and model year Repair Manual and the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) website for the most up-to-date safety and precautionary guidelines.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The air conditioning dye injection tool kit has been developed to aid in identifying the location of air conditioning refrigerant leaks. The procedures outlined in this Service Bulletin aid in locating, inspecting, and repairing refrigerant leaks.
STRUCTURE:BODY
Acid rain results from rainwater or other airborne moisture that become acidic due to industrial chemical impurities in the atmosphere. If these acidic compounds settle on an exposed vehicle, especially the horizontal areas such as the hood, roof, and decklid, significant damage to the painted surfaces can occur. Acid rain damage can typically be identified on vehicles by the presence of stains on the paint surface that resemble hard water spots. Unlike water spots however, acid rain damage cannot be removed by regular washing procedures. Also, because acid rain can etch and soften the paint, normal buffing or polishing repair procedures should not be attempted. This can cause further damage and result in visible depressions in the paint surface. The following are the three major categories of acid rain damage: •Minor damage: requires only buffing to repair. •Moderate damage: usually requires neutralizing, color sanding, and buffing. •Severe damage: extending beyond 1/2 mil of clearcoat on a pearl, metallic, or solid color, requires neutralization, sanding, and repainting. In cases where acid rain damage is minor, neutralization and buffing with a liquid-type paint finessing product may provide an adequate repair. Only specially formulated products outlined in this bulletin should be used for that purpose. Unfortunately, other than minor damage, there is no simple method of determining the actual extent (depth) of acid penetration other than color sanding a representative affected area until there is no visible etching or depressions, followed by measuring the amount of paint removed with either a magnetic or digital-type film thickness gauge. The procedures in this bulletin are intended for use by qualified body/paint technicians and should not be attempted by inexperienced personnel. It is the dealer’s responsibility to protect and maintain the quality of the vehicle’s paint finish after receipt at the dealership prior to the first sale. Perform frequent vehicle washing, as often as daily, during high heat and humidity periods to minimize the potential for paint damage due to acid rain exposure. This is especially important in geographical areas known for high frequency and concentration of acid rain and industrial fallout.
STRUCTURE:BODY
To prevent brake rotor rust from forming during transportation and storage, wheel film will be used instead of a cardboard type of anti-rust cover. The purpose of the wheel film is to shield the disc brake rotor from weather elements and initial rust before the vehicle is delivered to the customer. Consequently, the film should remain on the wheel for as long as possible.
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.