2015 Honda CR-V
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Honda › CR-V › 2015
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2015 Honda CR-V. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
3 recalls name the 2015 Honda CR-V. Newest first.
Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2013-2023 Honda Accord, Civic Coupe, Civic Sedan, Civic Hatchback, Civic Type R, CR-V, HR-V, Ridgeline, Odyssey, Acura ILX, MDX, MDX Hybrid, RDX, RLX, TLX, 2019-2022 Honda Insight, Passport, 2020 Honda CR-V Hybrid, 2018-2019 Honda Clarity PHEV, Fit, and 2015-2020 Honda Accord Hybrid, Pilot, Acura NSX…
Fuel pump failure can cause an engine stall while driving, increasing the risk of a crash.
Dealers will replace the fuel pump module, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed September 6, 2024. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are KGC and KGD. This recall is an expansion of NHTSA recall numbers 21V-215 and 20V-314.
Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2015-2016 Honda CR-V vehicles that recently received a replacement engine. The replacement engine may have been built with the wrong pistons, potentially affecting the engine's performance.
The reduced performance may result in an engine stall, increasing the risk of a crash.
Honda will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the engines and replace the incorrect components, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began June 20, 2017. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's number for this recall is KF6.
American Honda Motor Co. (Honda) is recalling certain model year 2014 Accord L4 vehicles manufactured July 29, 2014, to July 31, 2014, 2015 Accord L4 vehicles manufactured August 14, 2014, to January 30, 2015, and 2015 CR-V vehicles manufactured September 9, 2014, to February 6, 2015. The affected vehicles may have been assembled with improperly torqued…
Loss of engine power may result in a vehicle stall, increasing the risk of a crash. If the engine leaks oil in the proximity of hot engine or exhaust components, there is an increased risk of a fire.
Honda will notify owners, and dealers will replace the engine short block, free of charge. The recall began on March 27, 2015. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's number for this recall is JP2 (for Accord models) and JP3 (for CR-V models).
Doors unlock when driving No apparent reason. Doors do not open and relock when I press the lock button. It's been a long time problem
I am reporting a potential safety defect involving the transmission housing of my 2015 Honda CR-V. The transmission housing has been diagnosed as porous, allowing transmission fluid to leak through the housing itself. This is not ordinary maintenance or normal wear; the transmission casing is allowing fluid to escape because of an apparent defect in the housing material. The vehicle has approximately 115,158 miles. The condition was diagnosed by a Honda dealership, JL Freed & Sons, and I was advised that the transmission housing is porous and that the transmission requires significant repair/replacement at an estimated cost of approximately $5,900. I believe this condition presents a potential safety hazard because a continuing transmission-fluid leak can result in loss of a critical vehicle fluid while the vehicle is being operated. If the leak worsens or results in a substantial loss of transmission fluid, it could affect transmission operation, potentially causing unexpected loss of power or the vehicle to become unable to move as intended. Leaked fluid may also reach the roadway and create a hazard for the vehicle and other motorists. I am requesting that NHTSA investigate whether the porous transmission housing constitutes a safety-related defect affecting 2015 Honda CR-V vehicles and whether other owners may be experiencing the same condition. I can provide the dealership diagnosis, repair estimate, photographs of the affected transmission housing/leak, invoices, and other documentation upon request.
9/18/26 During driving at city road speeds (25-40 mph) vehicle unexpectedly stalls. Vehicle does restart. Light on dash was illuminated. Code p0685 on OBD reader. Code cleared to attempt to obtain solid evidence of issue. Light again appeared 6 days later when accelerating up hill at 20mph. Taken to dealership where they confirmed same code. Vehicle repaired at dealership on 9/28/26 - Repair required new battery and complete power train control module as well as power train relay fuse to be replaced. Vehicle still has slight hesitation uphill.
Vehicle stalls when it sits overnight and is put in reverse. Stalk happens after going in reverse for a few feet such as backing out of the driveway or parking space
On XXX, I had an accident where I rear-ended a vehicle stopped at an intersection, when I simultaneously pressed my brake and accelerator pedal due to a hazardous brake pedal/accelerator pedal positioning. Only one week prior I had described/argued the exact accident scenario with the service mgr of First Texas Honda Svc Ctr ([XXX]) after taking my CR-V in for brake evaluation/servicing. He said nothing’s wrong with my brake pedal. I’ve owned my car for 10 yrs and have experienced these situations numerous (<20+X) times, as one of two scenarios: In a slow stop and an emergency stop, WHERE THE BRAKE PEDAL DOES NOT STOP AT A REASONABLE DISTANCE ABOVE THE LEVEL OF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. The 1st scenario involves slow braking at low speeds (<25mph) where I’m simply slowing/flowing with traffic, as was the case with the accident I’m reporting. Here, I’m using a simple toe-heel pivot to move from accelerator to cover the brake. With a steady slow pressure, the brake pedal sinks to the level of the accelerator without fully stopping the vehicle. At that point, the brake pedal sinks below the accelerator pedal, resulting in my foot pressing both the brake and accelerator simultaneously, causing my CR-V to surge forward. Of course, I can’t physically see how low the brake pedal has dipped, and I’m relying solely on the car’s response (movement) when suddenly the accelerator engages. While I take full responsibility, I believe the brake pedal is more the problem than me/my foot. In the Emergency braking episodes, the scenario begins with a quick response braking requiring steady braking pressure (not fast/abrupt); then traffic stops abruptly, requiring a hard, urgent braking to stop completely—but the already depressed brake pedal sinks to the floorboard rather than delivering a hard deceleration before the pedal bottoms out. It’s a panic moment that triggers an emergency evasive maneuver into to an adjacent lane. The CR-V’s brake pedal creates dangerous incidents. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATIO
I was hit on 5/29/26. I was going 40mph or so and a car turned left into the front and side of my vehicle. My airbags did not deploy and was wondering why? I got whiplash bad and hurt myself as well as slamming into steering wheel.
High pressure fuel pump failure cost $1400
Fuel pump failure around 101000 needed to be replaced $1400
CHRONOLOGY OF CASCADING VEHICLE SAFETY FAILURES VIN [XXX] Vehicle 2015 Honda CR-V. 1 STRUCTURAL BODY FRAME DEFECT. Vehicle has a chronic upper body structural alignment defect allowing massive water intrusion to bypass factory headliner and moonroof seals. Multiple consecutive factory OEM headliners have been destroyed by water logging, proving the upper tracking architecture is permanently warped and cannot maintain an environmental seal. 2 ELECTRICAL FAILURE ENGINE STALL HAZARD. Saturated water tracking through the upper frame has migrated into primary engine bay electrical lines. This chronic moisture caused a severe short circuit that fried the vehicle alternator, voltage regulator, and primary battery requiring emergency replacement. This infrastructure breakdown creates an imminent safety risk of sudden loss of vehicle charging power and dangerous engine stalling while operating at highway speeds. 3 ADAS INFRASTRUCTURE FAILURES. Moisture migration has breached the primary dashboard wire harnesses causing active continuous power dropouts and glitching across the center infotainment screen and main driver instrument display interface, blinding the operator to speedometers and critical crash avoidance alerts. 4 AIRBAG HAZARDS ACTIVE BIOHAZARD. Saturated water tracking down internal pillars runs directly over Side Curtain Airbag modules and electronic connectors, risking sensor corrosion. Cabin flooding has saturated seating foam, endangering electronic Occupant Classification Sensors OCS that regulate passenger airbag deployment forces. Unremediated moisture left toxic mold spores festering beneath the seating infrastructure, causing severe respiratory irritation to occupants. REPAIR STATUS. Unresolved safety defect. Repair networks failed to remediate structural hazards. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
See attached document for complaint.
Systematic safety opponent failure - passenger side air bag. It deployed into my daughter's face. I took it to Hayward Honda for repair. No police, no insurance as of yet. The dealership is claiming that the impact occurred in the undercarriage, but no report, no pictures, no EDR data provided. This was simply a spontaneous, non-impact, faulty airbag deployment. I was able to continue to drive my vehicle with no problems. They had suggested I file a claim with my insurance, but I requested the information. I want to report this, for they still have my vehicle with no resolution.
The contact’s daughter owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle lost motive power with no warning lights illuminated. The vehicle was able to restart. The contact also stated that the vehicle would not accelerate over 80 MPH. The dealer was not contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 169,893.
Horn randomly beeps. Horn cover is loose.
Odometer Fraud. The contact purchased a 2015 Honda CR-V. It was discovered that there was a mileage discrepancy. The vehicle was a dealer sale. At the time of purchase, the vehicle mileage was 150,000, and at the time of registration, it was discovered that the mileage was 203,000. The contact stated that the dealer stated the mileage was altered to provide a better discount. A Carfax report was not obtained. No other agency was contacted regarding the issue.
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at various speeds, the vehicle stalled unexpectedly. The failure also occurred several times while stopped at a stoplight. The vehicle was taken to the local mechanic and a dealer; however, neither was able to determine the cause of the failure. The contact was informed that no fault codes were retrieved. The cause of the failure was not determined. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not yet contacted. The failure mileage was approximately 175,000. The VIN was not available.
Windshield camera and all its functions does not work. The following systems do not work. LKAS ACC CMBS LDW I drive 3 hours to work and back and not having these safety features is dangerous for me because my foot and ankle hurts to keep a consistent speed, and when I am drowsy the LKAS helps me stay in my lane. All of these warning lights are on my dash. I bought this vehicle in 2018 and the lights have been on since 2024. I am just now learning that I could report this.
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at 70 MPH, the vehicle stalled, and the vehicle decelerated unintendedly. There was no warning light illuminated. The vehicle was towed to the in-law's residence. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The contact related the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 17V305000 (Engine); however, the VIN was not associated with the recall. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and advised the contact to report the failure to the NHTSA Hotline. The failure mileage was 92,876.
I was slowly driving into a parking spot, perhaps half way into the spot when the car suddenly accelerated forward, went over the cement wheel stops and hit a cement wall. It resulted in me suffering a fractured sternum. I am absolutely sure I did not press down hard on the accelerator to cause this. I recall being slightly jerked back into my seat and then hitting the wall. I have no idea what system failed, but the car is available for inspection. I am unable to drive the car until repairs to the front end are done, which I am told will take a few weeks. Thus, the car has not been inspected by anyone as yet, but I most certainly want it thoroughly checked. It should be noted that the police report was taken in the emergency room while I was in pain and in total shock at what happened. That report was only my guess as to what might have happened.
Aug 1, 2021: On rural highway at approx 50-55 mph, all dashboard warning lights came on as engine power was cut drasticly, (over 50%). Minimal traffic, so was able to continue cautiously at very low speed with warning flashers to nearby service station, called local Honda dealer who towed in the CRV. Dealer said the high pressure fuel pump had failed, which they replaced at my cost. No mention by the Honda dealer of any recall campaign, or report to Honda USA or NHTSA
Case #16014967 Topic: Recalls/Campaigns VIN: [XXX] Vehicle Mileage: 64,935 Description: Subject: Transmission Recall Concern – 2015 Honda CR-V CVT Dear American Honda Customer Service / NHTSA, I am reporting transmission problems with my 2015 Honda CR-V that appear directly related to the CVT transmission recall and service bulletin for 2015–2016 models. Timeline of Events: • Aug 25, 2025: Vehicle lost battery charge despite a new battery; AAA confirmed battery was good but required a jump. • Oct 29, 2025: Battery failed again; required another jump. • Nov 30, 2025: Battery dead once more; AAA again confirmed battery was good but not charging. After replacement, the car stalled mid-road, “D” light disappeared, and only restarting allowed me to move briefly. • Dec 1, 2025: Mechanic confirmed transmission fluid was fine. Shortly after, vehicle experienced jolts, “D” light disappeared, and car stalled completely near home. It would only move in reverse and had to be rolled back to the mechanic. Diagnostic Results: • P0741 – Torque Converter Clutch Circuit Performance/Stuck Off • P0780 – Shift Malfunction • P0746 – Pressure Control Solenoid A Performance/Stuck Off • P1898 – CVT Drive Pulley Pressure Control Valve Stuck ON/OFF These codes match known CVT transmission issues documented by Honda, including hydraulic pressure regulation failures and belt slippage. My vehicle has never received recall updates or PCM reprogramming, yet it is now showing the exact failures described in Honda’s bulletin. Although my VIN does not currently appear in Honda’s recall database, I request that Honda review my case and extend recall or goodwill coverage, as the defect is clearly present and poses a serious safety risk. I also ask NHTSA to record this complaint since my vehicle is excluded despite being the same year/model with identical failures. Please confirm recall eligibility and advise on next steps for repair. I INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6
Vehicle unlocks if you approach it, all doors unlock without using the keyfob or putting your hand into the drivers or front passengers door handle. This happens with both keyfobs. Fresh batteries are in both keyfobs.
The contact purchased a 2015 Honda CR-V. The vehicle was a private sale. At the time of purchase, the vehicle mileage was 82,564. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where the contact was informed that the engine mileage was 224,000.
The frame on my Wisconsin-owned vehicle has rotted out to the point I am unable to safely have it repaired. The control arm simple pulled out of the frame as the frame was so rusted. The shop says they cannot in good conscience repair it. The manufacturer has recalled frames for this issue, but mine is apparently not included. Honda has refused to help.
The contact owns a 2015 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving at various speeds, the vehicle hesitated to respond while depressing the accelerator pedal. The contact stated that while making a turn from a complete stop, the vehicle temporarily stalled. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact attempted to contact the local dealer several times, but the dealer was unreachable. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 147,000.
My crv honda 2015 is stalling and Honda is not associating any recalls to the car.
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
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 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.
Technical service bulletins and other communications the manufacturer sent dealers about this vehicle. Ask a dealer for the full document by its number.
Bars are owner complaints, dots mark years with recalls. Select a year to open its report.