Acura Rlx 2016

No recalls could be found for this vehicle. To ensure accuracy and for your safety, do a free VIN recall check here or here [USA] - UK - Canada.

Bulletins are notices put out by manufacturers in conjunction with the NHTSA to notify the public of manufacturing issues or changes.

The following is a list of any known keyfobs for the Acura Rlx 2016 as well as their FCC IDs if available

• RSK-ACU-V1X-1: 2015-2020 Acura ILX RLX TLX / 4-Button Smart Key / PN: 72147-TX6-A22 / KR5V1X (Driver 1) (OEM Refurb)
  FCC ID: KR5V1X
• RSK-ACU-TX6A22: 2015-2020 Acura ILX RLX TLX / 4-Button Smart Key / PN: 72147-TX6-A22 / KR5V1X (OEM)
  FCC ID: KR5V1X
• RSK-ACU-V1X: 2015-2020 Acura ILX RLX TLX / 4-Button Smart Key / PN: 72147-TX6-A22 / KR5V1X (OEM Refurb)
  FCC ID: KR5V1X
• RSK-ACU-TZ3A01: 2015-2020 Acura ILX RLX TLX / 4-Button Smart Key / PN: 72147-TZ3-A01 / KR5V1X (Driver 1) (OEM)
  FCC ID: KR5V1X
• RSK-ACU-1XT: 2015-2020 Acura ILX RLX TLX / 4-Button Smart Key / PN: 72147-TZ3-A11 / KR5V1X (AFTERMARKET)
  FCC ID: KR5V1X
• RSK-ACU-TZ3A11: 2015-2020 Acura ILX RLX TLX / 4-Button Smart Key / PN: 72147-TZ3-A11 / KR5V1X (Driver 2) (OEM)
  FCC ID: KR5V1X
• RSK-ACU021: 2015-2020 Acura ILX RLX TLX / 4-Button Smart Key / PN: 72147-TZ3-A11 / KR5V1X (Driver 2) (OEM Refurb)
  FCC ID: KR5V1X
• RSK-ACU028: 2015-2020 Acura ILX TLX RLX / 5-Button Smart Key / 72147-TX6-C51 / KR580399900 (OEM Refurb)
  FCC ID: KR580399900

• Pedestrian alert sounds investigation # DP22005

  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 petitioners withdrawal, dp22-005 is closed. Closure of this dp does not represent a determination by nhtsa regarding the subject matter of the petition.
  

  Show Content

• Desiccated air bag inflator rupture investigation # EA21002

  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.
  

  Show Content

• Air bag acu electrical overstress investigation # EA19001

  The office of defects investigation (odi) is expanding the investigation to include the equipment supplier and vehicle manufacturers (oems) using this unit.The investigation focuses on acus manufactured by trw, now zf-trw (zf) , the tier-one supplier to hyundai and kia and the other affected oems.The acu senses a vehicle crash to determine whether air bag deployment is required, and if so, deploys the appropriate air bags and other supplemental restraints.Zf supplied subject acus to six oems: fca, honda, hyundai, kia, mitsubishi and toyota.Internal to the acu is an electronic component (an application specific integrated circuit, or asic) that monitors signals from crash sensors.A failure of the asic may prevent deployment of the required air bags and devices, or may otherwise affect the proper operation of the acu.The acu is located in the passenger compartment, and electrical wiring connects the asic to sensors located at the front of the vehicle.Odi’s current understanding is that a crash event may, in and of itself, produce harmful signals on the sensor wiring capable of damaging the asic, although the probability of this occurring appears to be low.While the acu incorporates electrical circuitry intended to protect the asic from harmful signals, the level and effectiveness of the protective circuitry varies by oem customer.During pe18-003, hyundai and kia filed recalls (18v-137 and 18v-363 respectively) to address a defect that could result in acu disablement and non-deployments.According to the filings, the disablement occurs in certain types of frontal crash events.Both filings discussed a condition known as electrical overstress (eos) that affected the subject asic and was likely caused by electrical signals that entered the acu via sensor wiring.The recalled vehicles used acus that had the lowest levels of asic protection while non-recalled hyundai and kia products using subject acus had higher levels of protection.Odi has not identified any eos failures in the non-recalled kia and hyundai populations.In september 2016, fca filed recall 16v-668 for certain model year (my) 2010 to 2014 chrysler, dodge and jeep products also manufactured with the subject acu.In that filing, fca also discussed an eos condition that resulted in a failure of the subject 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 not the cross-car harnessing, had not experienced eos failures, despite similar time in service. The recalled fca vehicles used a mid-level form of asic protection.Other fca vehicles that did not use cross car wiring, or used higher levels of asic protection, have not been recalled.Odi has not identified any eos failures in the non-recalled fca population.Recently, odi has identified two substantial frontal crash events (one fatal) involving toyota products where eos is suspected as the likely cause of the non-deployments.The crashes involved a my 2018 and a my 2019 corolla equipped with the subject acu that incorporated higher levels of asic protection.Additionally, both acus were found to be non-communicative (meaning the acu could not be read with an event data recorder) after the crash, a condition found in other cases where eos occurred with other oems.No other eos events have been identified for other toyota products (including corolla models that used the subject acu since my 2011), or for the honda and mitsubishi vehicles that use the subject acu.Odi plans to evaluate the susceptibility of the subject acu designs to electrical signals, as well as other vehicle factors that can either lead to, or reduce the likelihood of, an eos event.Additionally, odi will evaluate whether an unreasonable risk exists that requires further field action.
  

  Show Content

The vehicle is equipped with 4 wheel steering. The rear wheels are controled by the computer. While maneuvering in a parking lot or after sharp turns the rear wheels do not respond to driver input. The wheels get stuck in the wrong direction and the driver must correct direction of travel to compensate. The steering actuators were replaced by dealership and the issues is still happening

The vehicle is equipped with 4 wheel steering. The rear wheels are controled by the computer. While maneuvering in a parking lot or after sharp turns the rear wheels do not respond to driver input. The wheels get stuck in the wrong direction and the driver must correct direction of travel to compensate. The steering actuators were replaced by dealership and the issues is still happening

Tl* the contact owns a 2016 acura rlx. The contact stated that after loading groceries into the trunk of the vehicle, the trunk to was manually closed however, the trunk unlocked independently. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and informed the contact that there was no fix for the failure. The contact stated that the manufacturer admitted that the failure was due to a design flaw. A case number was provided. The vehicle was taken to vern eide acura (4030 s grange ave, sioux falls, sd 57105, where the dealer replaced two new antennas for the remote used to unlocked the trunk, and a new battery in the key fob. The antenna and battery replacement failed to fix the issue. The failure mileage was 19,700.*dt consumer was told nothing could be done about it by customer service.*jb*dt *tr

Tl* the contact owns a 2016 acura rlx. The contact stated that after loading groceries into the trunk of the vehicle, the trunk to was manually closed however, the trunk unlocked independently. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and informed the contact that there was no fix for the failure. The contact stated that the manufacturer admitted that the failure was due to a design flaw. A case number was provided. The vehicle was taken to vern eide acura (4030 s grange ave, sioux falls, sd 57105, where the dealer replaced two new antennas for the remote used to unlocked the trunk, and a new battery in the key fob. The antenna and battery replacement failed to fix the issue. The failure mileage was 19,700.*dt consumer was told nothing could be done about it by customer service.*jb*dt *tr

Tl* the contact owns a 2016 acura rlx. When making a turn, the rear of the vehicle lost traction intermittently. There were no warning indicators illuminated. The vehicle was taken to columbia acura inc (10979 montgomery rd, cincinnati, oh 45249, (513) 530-0100) where it was diagnosed and repaired. The contact was unaware of the diagnosis and repair specifics. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 15,000.

3 sidewall separations on 3 different wheel locations in normal driving after hitting moderate potholes at between 30-40 mph. The mid profile michelin primacy oem tires, 19 inch wheels, and suspension do not function safely on this heavy sedan. The risk of even a small pothole, expansion joint, or manhole is a danger since the sidewalls get cut without actually blowing out, so a blowout could happen at any time. It is noteworthy that i have never had this issue with a tire in a million miles of driving over 35+ years. To have 3 in 5 months screams of a safety issue which michelin denies and acura won't address. 1. Turning right on an entrance ramp at about 35mph, separated driver front tire when i hit a pothole in the dark. 8,000 miles on tire. (feb 2016) 2. Slowing for a traffic light at about 20mph, separated passenger rear tire when i hit a pothole in the driving lane. 15,000 miles on tire. (june 2016) 3. Just after turning right onto an entrance ramp to a highway, hit a pothole at 15-20mph. Passenger front tire separated. 15,400 miles on tire. (june 2016)

I was involved in a moderate to severe frontal crash driving down a road and a left turning driver struck my car the knee airbag was the only airbag to deploy causing leg.Pain due to the air bag in the steering wheel not going off caused neck, back pain with headaches along with pain going into my legs. The car is showing two air bag codes car is a 2016 acura rlx

Common OBD-II Error Codes

• C1600 [2] C1600
• P0171 [1] System too Lean (Bank 1)
• P0174 [1] System too Lean (Bank 2)
• P073F [1] Unable to Engage Gear 1
• P074B [1] Unable To Engage Gear 3
• P074D [1] Unable To Engage Gear 5
• P0430 [5] Catalyst System Efficiency Below Threshold (Bank 2)
• P26C3 [2] P26C3