2014 Mitsubishi Lancer
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Mitsubishi › Lancer › 2014
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2014 Mitsubishi Lancer. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
The contact owns a 2014 Mitsubishi Lancer. The contact stated while driving approximately 45 MPH, there was an abnormally loud thumping sound coming from underneath the vehicle. The contact pulled over the shoulder of the roadway. Upon inspection, the contact became aware that the front driver’s side wheel had caved inward from the top. There was no warning light illuminated. The vehicle was towed to a local independent mechanic where it was determined that the cross members were rusted. The local dealer was not contacted. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 125,000.
Vehicle has aprox. 100K miles on odometer as of time of complaint. Vehicle has been repaired for transmission "slow down" message before. Vehicle hesitates for aprox. 1-2 sec. Before moving from a stop. Vehicle then proceded to completely stop and not drive while "drive" range was selected. Vehicle was stuck in traffic until driver was able to put vehicle in park, shut off, and restart engine. Similar problem with outlander vehicles of similar age and same transmission, caused by faulty tcm software. Multiple vehicles affected by similar faults.
The subframe on a 2014 Mitsubishi Lancer with 57,000 miles on it has rusted and cracked. This seems identical to NHTSA campaign number: 20V-279 but this year/make is not covered under recall. I have pictures and a video taken by Conrad's as they are doing the replacement. I attached the photos but the video is to large, so here is a link https://photos.app.goo.gl/akY1TzhF6SXRSJFs7
The contact owns a 2014 Mitsubishi Lancer. The contact stated that while the vehicle was parked, he smelled a strong gasoline odor inside and outside of the vehicle. There was no warning light illuminated. The contact was able to continually drive the vehicle. The contact referenced NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V546000 (Fuel System, Gasoline, Parking Brake). The dealer and the manufacturer were not notified of the failure. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 151,000.
TL* the contact owns a 2014 mitsubishi lancer. The contact stated that while driving at various speeds, slow down message displayed on the instrument panel as the vehicle stalled. The vehicle was pulled over and restarted and operated as designed. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic to be diagnosed. The contact was informed that the transmission was defective and needed to be repaired or replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. Neither the dealer nor the manufacturer were notified of the failure. The failure mileage was unknown.
I was hit yesterday when someone pulled out in front of me. I was going maybe 40 mph down a straight city street but my airbags did not go off when I was hit
Belt tensioner IS bad and when accelerating makes noise especially when the vehicle IS cold in the morning
The ayc pump(awd pump) keeps saying it's going out and this happens to multiple people. A lot of other owners have the exact same experience. The pump needs to be relocated and replaced at mitsubishi's cost. It's not fair to the buyers that we were paying for a car that we had to buy 1 $1700+ part and labor. It should be a safety concern because if the pump goes while driving it IS a safety hazard. in winter of 2018 was my first year in snow with it. About february whenever the weather would get above 40 degrees, the tarmac light would start to flash signaling the pump IS failing.
Warning indicator in manual and display has a seatbelt and airbag picture.
TL* takata recall. The contact owns a 2014 mitsubishi lancer. The contact received notification of nhtsa campaign number: 17v569000 (air bags). The part needed for the repair was not available. The contact stated that the manufacturer exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The contact called a unknown local mitsubishi dealer where it was confirmed that the part was not available. The manufacturer was not made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure. Parts distribution disconnect.
I bought my 2014 mitsubishi lancer in nov. 2014 at long lewis ford in florence, al, where I received all regular maintenance and service performances for it. On sept. 15, 2017, I was driving down the road in my 2014 mitsubishi lancer and experienced complete engine failure (while in motion), creating a safety hazard. Once the system failed, I could no longer accelerate and could only "coast" to try and find a safe spot to brake. When I opened the hood, the main relay had caught fire, was black, burnt up, and melted on the inside. I couldn't get my car to go in neutral or any systems to work to get it completely off the road, creating another safety hazard, and had to have it towed. A sales tech met me with a new relay that I purchased. The new relay did not get my car moving again because when the relay (that was in my car when I bought it) caught fire, it caused damage to the computer/ecm. When giving the part numbers from my relay and ecm/computer for replacements, the parts specialists and I realized that the part numbers for the computer/ecm matched only a 2015 computer/ecm, and there was not a matching part number for the relay as that exact one was unobtainable, and a different one that was compatible had to be purchased. I have recently learned that there IS a recall for the 2015-2017 mitsubishi lancer relays because there IS a defect in the relay which causes complete engine failure. I would appreciate an investigation being performed to see if the 2014 mitsubishi lancers should be included under this recall as I have experienced the same relay issue, safety hazard and concerns, and also due to the fact that my 2014 lancer has a 2015 system in it. I need to make certain whether the relay that was put in my 2014 lancer when built, and when replaced, was/is not defective. Please advise if I need to direct this safety concern to another appropriate administrator.
Vehicle has cvt transmission and when the car and engine are cold the transmission will not move the car. Car revs to 1500-2000 rpm amd will eventually begin to creep forward. Car only had 75,000 miles but as we are the 2ND owner mitsubishi will not warranty although the original owner warranty IS 100,000 miles and there IS already a tecall on this same transmission in the outlander.
After about 35,000 miles a warning light came up saying asc service required. After further inspection it turned out to be that the AWD pump was out. The light comes on meanwhile I drive around.
I was involved in a accident and the air bag exploded. my concern IS I was 47 and pretty good shape yet I had pain in my chest for over12 mo. I concerned people in less shape than me will never survice the imkpact of that airbag because I felt like I barely survived. Maybe this IS the way it works I never had one hit me before but to this day I still feel a little pain.
My car was recently wrecked going around the corner in the snow IS it slid off the road into a telephone pole and the fire hydrant the airbags did not go off when we impact we were doing about 40 miles per hour. The car also did not turn itself off like it should have. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 2014 mitsubishi lancer. The contact stated that while driving 45 mph, smoke started to emit from the engine compartment without any warning. The vehicle was towed to the authorized dealer for further inspection, diagnosis and repair. The contact stated that the failure was directly related to nhtsa campaign number: 14v281000 (steering). The manufacturer was notified of the failure and informed the contact that the vehicle identification number was not included in any recalls. The approximate failure mileage was 10,000.
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
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.