2015 Toyota Avalon

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 contact owns a 2015 Toyota Avalon. The contact stated that while driving at 35 MPH, the accelerator pedal was depressed, but the vehicle failed to accelerate as intended. The contact stated that the transmission shuddered. No warning lights illuminated. The contact stated that the failure did not occur once the vehicle speed exceeded 45 MPH. The contact stated that the failure was persistent. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or the dealer. The contact stated that the failure was common with the vehicle model year. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 165,000.

NHTSA ID

11749514

Incident

May 10, 2026

Mileage

165,000 mi

Odometer Fraud. The contact purchased a 2015 Toyota Avalon. The contact stated that while attempting to register the vehicle, the contact noticed that the title listed the mileage at 133,510, with the note " Not the Actual Mileage" next to the mileage. It was later discovered that there was a mileage discrepancy. The vehicle was a private sale. At the time of the purchase, the vehicle mileage was 133,510, and it was later discovered that the Carfax report listed the mileage at 251,617. The Carfax report also displayed that the vehicle was sold at an auto auction on 11/25/2025. Additionally, the contact stated that while his daughter was driving the vehicle on the same day of purchase, the vehicle shuddered and hesitated to respond. The contact stated that the check engine warning light and the traction control warning light illuminated, and the vehicle was shifting significantly hard. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed and determined that the transmission had failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired.

NHTSA ID

11709132

Incident

Jan 5, 2026

Mileage

251,617 mi

The contact owns a 2015 Toyota Avalon. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, there was an abnormal grinding sound coming from the brakes. The contact stated that the brake warning light illuminated, and the brake independently activated. The vehicle was taken to a specialty brake shop, where it was diagnosed that the brake actuator had failed, causing the ABS system to activate independently. The vehicle was repaired. On the drive back to the residence, the failure recurred. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where it was diagnosed with brake master cylinder failure. The brake booster, gasket, and brake actuator were replaced. The contact stated that two weeks later, the failure reoccurred. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where it was diagnosed and DTC: C1441 and C1431 were retrieved, indicating an issue with the ABS system lateral acceleration sensor circuit or the brake booster. The dealer became aware that the front bumper bracket had paint on the part that did not allow for the vehicle to brake correctly. The brake pedal support assembly with sensor was replaced, and the paint was removed. The vehicle was repaired. The contact related the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V728000 (FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE). The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 83,829.

NHTSA ID

11680608

Incident

Apr 14, 2025

Mileage

83,829 mi

Accident June 12, 2024 air bag did not deploy. hit on passenger side no air bags deployed. Air bag not able to be reset

NHTSA ID

11661245

Incident

Jun 12, 2024

05/04/2025 First of all, we love our Avalon. However, for the last 6 months or so, water is getting in the car and ends up soaking the carpet on the left front floorboard carpet. We have checked everything we can think of to find the source of the leak but was uneasily. We had to have some scratches fixed and took the car to a body shop to see if they could find the source of the leak. They sprayed water on the sunroof for about an hour but no water leaked inside. We have also taken the car to the local Toyota Dealership (Sheehy Toyota in the Fredericksburg area, they could not find the source of the leak. It rained here (Fredericksburg, VA last night and the left front floorboard was soaked. I need help finding the source of the leak(s) so we can continue enjoying our Avalon. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you, [XXX] [XXX] Phone number [XXX] (cell phone) INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ID

11658794

Incident

Jun 1, 2023

I have tire size P225 / 45 R 18. Michelin Primacy mxm4. The compalint tire exploded at 65 MPH (the speed limit). The falure caused the car to swerve into the next lane which was occupied by another car at the time. My safety was at risk when I momemtarily lost control of the vehicle and others were at risk when I enetred an occupied lane. Problem was inspected and confirmed by Mavis (formerly NTB) in Keller TX. The only warning was that a couple of weeks prior to the incident while rotating my tires the Mavis location found a bubble in the sidewall of another tire (not the one that exploded) that was in the same lot as the one that exploded. It was replaced under the warranty. I now beleive that the entire lot of tires are defective and have asked for a completely new set of tires.

NHTSA ID

11548028

Incident

Sep 29, 2023

The contact owns a 2015 Toyota Avalon. The contact stated while pulling into a parking space, the vehicle accelerated unintendedly, drove over the curb, and crashed into bushes. The air bags did not deploy. The contact did not sustain any injuries. There was no police report filed. The contact was able to drive the vehicle to the residence. The vehicle was then taken to the dealer, where she informed that the VIN was not included in a recall related to the failure. The vehicle was not diagnosed nor repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 109,400.

NHTSA ID

11543398

Incident

Aug 17, 2023

Mileage

109,400 mi

While driving the pre-collision system (PCS) turns on unexpectedly, without any warning lights or sounds, and applies the brakes. This happens when I am driving in traffic with plenty of space between the car in front of me. I typically drive between 3-6 seconds behind the car in front of me to allow for at least 300 feet in space when driving at highway speeds. Despite leaving plenty of room for cars in front of me, on multiple occasions the car has started braking abruptly while going anywhere between 50, 40, 30, or 20 miles per hour. This can be verified for inspection upon request. Despite there being a recall for my specific year, make, and model car (2015 Toyota Avalon) for this exact issue my VIN number is not covered. Toyota is requiring me to pay out of pocket for them to 1) determine if its malfunctioning and 2) replace the system, which is a huge conflict of interest. Even though the Driver's Manual says that I can disable the PCS by clicking on the PCS on/off button within the driver's glovebox, there is no such button, only a blank button cover. Not having the ability to disable the PCS system, or worse, allowing it to continue braking while I'm driving is a serious hazard. The car can start braking while I am accelerating to merge onto expressway on-ramps, or while changing lanes at the same speed of traffic. The car can also unexpectedly brake while cars are traveling too close behind me. I want to know why my VIN was not included in the initial recall and why I now have to pay to have it looked at or repaired when its clearly malfunctioning and can't be turned off as the Driver's Manual says it can. I should not have to pay $175 an hour for several hours for a Toyota dealership to diagnosis it and then another $175 an hour for 2.5 hours for them to install the fix and whatever the new component costs. I recently bought this car at 35,500 miles and the issue immediately started occurring just as the warranty expired at 36,000 miles.

NHTSA ID

11518883

Incident

Apr 17, 2023

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.

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.

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.

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.

The condition known as acid rain is caused by airborne chemicals or particles in the atmosphere, which mix with rainwater, nighttime dew, or high humidity to form acidic compounds. If these contaminants settle and remain on a painted vehicle surface, especially the horizonal areas of the hood, roof, and decklid, significant damage can occur. This damage is the result of actual etching of the paint and appears as pitting or water spots. As acid rain droplets on the vehicle surface evaporate, the concentration strength of the acid increases, causing deeper and more rapid damage. This evaporation and corrosive action also occur more rapidly on dark colored cars as direct sun heat increases. 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. In areas known for high frequency and/or concentration of acid rain, frequent vehicle washing during high heat or humidity periods will minimize the potential for paint damage caused by acid rain. It is further recommended that either reverse osmosis or deionized water be used to prevent water spotting.

Toyota vehicles are currently protected with RapgardTM protective film designed to protect the horizontal painted surfaces. This material protects from acid rain, environmental fallout, and rail contamination. Follow the Removal Procedure in this bulletin to remove the RapgardTM protective film within 90 days from initial application.