SUSPENSION:FRONT
2015 Volvo Vnl
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 5 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2015 Volvo Vnl, most frequently naming the suspension, body & structure and steering categories. 9 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; 2 NHTSA investigations name it; and 162 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
View as table
| Month | Complaints filed | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2015 | 1 | 1 |
| Aug 2015 | 1 | 2 |
| Mar 2016 | 1 | 3 |
| Aug 2016 | 1 | 4 |
| Feb 2018 | 1 | 5 |
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Suspension360.0%
- Body & structure120.0%
- Steering120.0%
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
9 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.govSERVICE BRAKES, AIR
SERVICE BRAKES
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
Discrepancies in Required CFR Reporting
On October 22, 2018, an Audit Query (AQ18-005) was opened to assess the completeness and timeliness of Volvo Group's early warning reporting, safety recalls, and communications submissions to the agency.NHTSA's investigation determined that Volvo Group failed to recall vehicles in a timely fashion and to comply with other recall and reporting requirements, including notifying owners of recalls and reporting death and injury incidents.NHTSA and Volvo Group entered into a Consent Order on January 27, 2023 to resolve AQ18-005.As part of the Consent Order, Volvo Group agreed to a total civil penalty of one-hundred and thirty million dollars ($130,000,000), of which, sixty-five million dollars ($65,000,000) was paid on February 21, 2023.Also, of that total civil penalty, Volvo Group agreed to spend twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) on the specific performance obligation to create a safety data analytics infrastructure to detect and study emerging safety-related defect trends on its vehicles. The Consent Order also holds forty-five million dollars ($45,000,000) of the civil penalty in abeyance pending Volvo Group's satisfactory completion of the requirements of this Consent Order, and its compliance with the Safety Act, and regulations thereunder.The Consent Order is for a three-year term and may be extended by up to two years if NHTSA reasonably finds that an extension is warranted.In the Consent Order, Volvo Group agreed to several performance obligations, including enhanced oversight of its compliance with the Safety Act and the terms of the Consent Order through a third-party auditor and regular meetings with NHTSA.The third-party auditor will recommend and oversee implementation of process improvements to enhance Volvo Group's safety compliance processes and oversee the company's review of past recalls and submissions to NHTSA for accuracy and completeness.Also, via the Consent Order, Volvo Group agreed to create updated written policies, procedures, and training to ensure that its employees understand the requirements of the Safety Act, the regulations thereunder, and this Consent Order.Volvo Group further agreed to launch a user interface on its websites to allow users to search vehicle identification numbers (VINs) for open recalls and implement a system to support NHTSA's VIN lookup tool.Based on the Consent Order, this audit query investigation, AQ18-005, is closed.Closure of this AQ has no bearing on the terms of the Consent Order, including Volvo Group's ongoing performance obligations or legal obligations, and does not represent a determination by NHTSA as to Volvo Group's performance under the Consent Order to date.
Ride Quality
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this Defect Petition (DP) assessment in response to a defect petition received from owners of a 2015 Volvo VNL 780 tractor.Prior to submitting the letter the owners had submitted two Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQ).Their concerns included: cab sway, cab alignment , and loss of control.The petitioners further allege that due to a failure of the suspension system caused by cab misalignment one of them sustained a back injury while seated at the work station in the sleeper berth while traveling.The office received a total of six (6) complaints (1 via telephone) related to ride quality on 2013 -2016 Volvo VNL vehicles.Two (2) of the complaints were filed by the petitioners.Of the five (5) unique complaints, three (3) were received during the course of this evaluation.During this evaluation, the Owner/Operators Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) published an article in their magazine, Land Line, prompting the additional two reports.One owner reported owning three Volvo trucks, all of which had a tendency to sway and lean, yet he preferred the ride over other manufacturers peer vehicles.ODI sent an Information Request (IR) letter to Volvo asking about the three concerns identified in the petition.The response indicated Volvo's cab air ride design has been in use since 2005.When evaluating each of the three concerns raised by the petitioners, ODI found that the complaint and warranty data did not establish existence of a defect trend for cab sway or loss of control.There were no reported injuries or loss of control events and less than 0.02% of the population had a cab sway concern.The majority of claims and complaints received involved cab alignment.The 2015 MY did stand out from the other MYs with over 1% of the 2015 population reporting cab alignment issues.This may indicate there is a defect in the design or production of the cab mounting, however there was no indication it created a safety risk.ODI test drove the petitioners' vehicle, employing an investigator with significant experience driving similar vehicles.This test drive revealed a degree of cab sway that appeared to exceed that of peer vehicles.Nonetheless, the ODI driver did not experience any difficulty controlling the vehicle.For additional details see the attached Evaluation Report.This defect petition is denied. The agency has not identified an actionable trend or unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.Should new information become available the agency will take whatever further action is appropriate.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following complaint identification numbers:10747593, 10715844, 10701592, 10781242, and 10822454
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
THE CAB SUSPENSION IS AFFECTED BY SOME TYPE OF MANUFACTURE FAULT, THE CAB IS TWISTED 3 INCHS TO THE LEFT. I HAVE SEEN THE SAME COMPLAINT OF OTHER VOLVO'S VNL MODEL OWNERS. THIS IS A SAFETY CONCERN AND REALLY NEED A ATTENTION.
- NHTSA ID
- 11066571
- Incident
- Dec 18, 2017
HTTPS://YOUTU.BE/EU119G9VYCU THIS NEW TRUCK BOUGHT MID MARCH 29K MILES PARTS R COMING LOSE DEALER AND VOLVO GIVING ME THE RUN AROUND ON FIXING IT ?????? CAN U HELP
- NHTSA ID
- 10897323
- Incident
- Aug 11, 2016
- Mileage
- 12,000 mi
MY 2015 VOLVO SEMI HAS BEEN THE ROUGHEST RIDING TRUCK I HAVE BEEN IN. IT HAS FRONT AIR RIDE SUSPENSION, AND EXHIBITS UNUSUALLY HEAVY CAB SWAY, AND TAKES A LOT OF ATTENTION AND STEERING INPUT TO STAY IN ITS OWN LANE. I HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT IT NUMEROUS TIMES TO.THE DEALER I BOUGHT IT NEW FROM, AND DISCUSS IT WITH OTHER VOLVO DEALERS AROUND THE COUNTRY. I AM NOT NEW TO VOLVO. I DROVE 8 DIFFERENT ONES FROM 2006 THRU 2008 WHILE EMPLOYED AT KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION. SINCE BUYING IT BRAND NEW I HAVE: 1. REPLACED LEAKING CAB SHOCK ON DRIVERS SIDE 2. TAKEN TRUCK BACK TO SAME SHOP TO HAVE SSME NEW SHOCK RETIGHTENED. 3. PURCHASED EXTRA THICK.$800.00 TEMPURPEDIC MATTRESS TO TRY AND RESOLVE CO DRIVERS COMPLAINT ABOUT BEING UNABLE TO SLEEP 4. HAD CHASSIS AIR RIDE HEIGHT ADJUSTED 3 DIFFERENT TIMES TRYING TO IMPROVE ROUGH RIDE. 5. .REPLACED FACTORY CHASSIS SHOCKS WITH EXPENSIVE ROADKING AFTERMARKET SHOCKS 6. REPLACED CAB SHOCKS AND LEVELING VALVE TRYING TO ALLEVIATE ROUGH RIDE AND CAB SWAY 7. 30 DAYS AFTER NEW CABSHOCKS WERE INSTALLED, CAB ACTUALLY TWISTED ON.ITS MOUNTS OVER 1.5 INCHES. LOOKING FROM BEHIND, THE DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG WAS LEANING TO THE LEFT. VOLVO DEALER REPOSITIONED CAB AND MODIFIED REAR CAB BUSHING.MOUNTS. 8. BOUGHT NEW DRIVE TIRES, AS ONE VOLVO DEALER CLAIMED THAT THE HANDLING AND SWAY PROBLEMS WERE DUE TO BRIDGESTONE M710 SERIES DRIVE TIRES THAT HAD DEEP AND SOFT TREAD LUGS THAT CAUSED THE REAR SUSPENSION TO PULL IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS 9. VISITED AND PURCHASED SPECIAL INLINE AIR METERING VALVES FROM DON VEL ENGINEERING IN CLEARWATER TEXAS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO CONTROL CAB SWAY. NOT MUCH HAS IMPROVED. I BELIEVE THE CAB SUSPENSION DESIGN HAS FLAWED ENGINEERING WITH THE GEOMETRY ANGLES OF FRONT MOUNTS AND SHOCK MOUNT ANGLES ON THE REAR. ALL VOLVO OWNERS HAVE RESIGNED THEMSELVES TO.PUT UP WITH WEEBLE WOBBLE HANDLING
- NHTSA ID
- 10852592
- Incident
- Oct 1, 2015
- Mileage
- 50,000 mi
WE HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS WITH OUR VEHICLE FROM THE BEGINNING. WE FILED AN EARLIER COMPLAINT. WE HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING COMING FROM THAT COMPLAINT, BUT HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH AN ODI INVESTIGATOR. WHEN TRAVELING DOWN THE ROAD, OUR TRUCK HIT A BRIDGE ABUTMENT AND THE CAB BOTTOMED OUT HARD ON THE CHASSIS AND THE CAB SWAYED AGGRESSIVELY TO THE POINT THE DRIVER LOST CONTROL. I WAS IN THE BACK OF THE VEHICLE WHEN IT BOTTOMED OUT AND FELT AN INTENSE PAIN GO FROM MY LOWER BACK AND UP THROUGH MY SPINE TO MY HEAD. THE TRUCK SWAYED AND JERKED AND MY NECK WAS SLAPPED BACK AND FORTH AND I COULD FEEL AND HEAR MY SPINE SNAP IN MY NECK. I HAD AN INSTANT AND INTENSE HEADACHE. I THOUGHT IT WOULD GO AWAY, BUT IT DID NOT. I SAW A DOCTOR AND HE DIAGNOSED INJURY FROM THAT INCIDENT. I HAVE BEEN OUT OF WORK FOR OVER A MONTH NOW FROM THIS INCIDENT. VOLVO HAS MADE NUMEROUS AND UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPTS TO FIX MY TRUCK. THE TRUCK IS GETTING WORSE AND IT IS GETTING HARDER TO CONTROL THIS VEHICLE WHEN ON UNEVEN ROAD SURFACES. IT SWAYS SO BAD, PASSING VEHICLES ARE AFRAID TO PASS US AND SLAM ON THEIR BRAKES. I AM AFRAID THAT WHEN I RETURN TO WORK, I WILL JUST GET INJURED AGAIN. DRIVING THIS VEHICLE CAUSES AN EXTREME AMOUNT OF FATIGUE WHICH IS REALLY AFFECTING MY HEALTH. I REALLY NEED THE ODI TO LOOK INTO THIS MATTER.
- NHTSA ID
- 10747593
- Incident
- Jun 23, 2015
- Mileage
- 79,800 mi
FROM RECEIPT OF THIS VEHICLE, AND ESPECIALLY SINCE PLACED INTO SERVICE, WE HAVE COMPLAINED TO VOLVO ABOUT THE RIDE OF THE TRUCK. INITIALLY, THE CAB WOULD BOTTOM OUT AND IT SWAYED EXCESSIVELY FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. WE CONSULTED WITH VOLVO TECHS, WITH REGARDS TO WHAT THIS MIGHT BE, AND WERE TOLD THAT THEY HAD BEEN SEEING THIS IN NUMEROUS OTHER VOLVO 780'S AND WERE UNSURE THE CAUSE OR THE CURE. AS TIME PROGRESSED, THE PROBLEMS BECAME WORSE. IT BECAME HARD TO RIDE IN THE CAB, AS IT BEGAN TO BOTTOM OUT AT THE LEAST OF ROAD CONDITIONS. THIS WAS CAUSING THE OCCUPANTS SEVERE MIGRAINES AND MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO ENGAGE IN TEAM LOADS, AS THE TEAM DRIVER WAS BEING FORCED TO SLEEP ON CUSHIONS ON THE CAB FLOOR BETWEEN THE TWO FORWARD SEATS. NOT ONLY DID THIS PRODUCE AND ILLEGAL SITUATION, BUT THE DRIVER THAT WAS TRYING TO SLEEP, WAS NOT SECURED IN THE CAB WHILE IN TRANSIT. HOWEVER, THERE WAS NO OTHER OPTIONS, AS THE DRIVER SLEEPING IN THE BERTH WAS SUSTAINING PHYSICAL INJURY BY WAY OF THE TRAUMATIC CAB 'SLAPPING' OR 'BOTTOMING OUT'. UPDATED 08/13/15 *BF UPDATED 12/10/15 *JS
- NHTSA ID
- 10701592
- Incident
- Apr 17, 2014
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM; EQUIPMENT:ELECTRICAL:INFOTAINMENT
CBR - Telematics Gateway (TGW) Connect Ability Issues.
SUSPENSION
CBR - Driveline Noise, Suspension Ride Height Too High, Suspension Will Not Exhaust - Chassis Built 2016w01 And Newer
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM; ELECTRICAL SYSTEM: INSTRUMENT CLUSTER/PANEL; PARKING BRAKE
CBR - Active "Set Park Brake" Message On Drivers Information Display (DID)
FUEL SYSTEM, OTHER:KINETIC:FLYWHEEL,BEARINGS; POWER TRAIN
CBR - Automated Manual Transmission ( AMT ) Flywheel Pilot Bearing Wear On Input Shaft.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
CBR: TGW Will Not Connect After SIM Card Replacement
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING; VISIBILITY:DEFROSTER/DEFOGGER/HVAC SYSTEM
CBR: 11L Engine - Air Conditioner (A/C) Line Damaged At Bracket - Model Year 2007 to Present.
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
| Year | Complaints | Recalls | Investigations | Issue Index |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2024 | 0 | 7 | 0 | — |
| 2023 | 1 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 2022 | 2 | 7 | 0 | — |
| 2021 | 0 | 7 | 0 | — |
| 2020 | 0 | 9 | 0 | — |
| 2019 | 4 | 8 | 0 | — |
| 2018 | 8 | 5 | 0 | — |
| 2017 | 0 | 5 | 1 | — |
| 2016 | 12 | 6 | 2 | 60.8 |
| 2015Viewing | 5 | 9 | 2 | — |
| 2014 | 8 | 12 | 3 | — |
| 2013 | 7 | 14 | 3 | — |
| 2012 | 5 | 14 | 4 | — |
| 2011 | 4 | 12 | 4 | — |
| 2010 | 0 | 4 | 3 | — |
| 2009 | 2 | 4 | 4 | — |
| 2008 | 3 | 12 | 3 | — |
| 2007 | 15 | 9 | 3 | 64.2 |
| 2006 | 7 | 7 | 1 | — |
| 2005 | 6 | 6 | 3 | — |
| 2004 | 5 | 6 | 2 | — |
| 2003 | 2 | 9 | 2 | — |
| 2002 | 1 | 7 | 3 | — |
| 2001 | 1 | 8 | 2 | — |
| 2000 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 59.4 |
| 1999 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 51.6 |
| 1998 | 8 | 5 | 3 | — |
| 1997 | 0 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1996 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1995 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1994 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1993 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1992 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1991 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1990 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
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.