Nissan engineering analysis EA19002
Rear Suspension Control Arm Failure. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened this engineering analysis about the rear on 9 model years (2013–2018). Opened Jul 29, 2019, closed Jun 16, 2025 after 5.9 years without a recall. closed
What NHTSA says
Source: Office of Defects Investigation, as filedOn July 29, 2019, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened EA19002 to investigate instances of alleged rear lower control arm failures in 2013-2018 Nissan Altima and 2016-2018 Nissan Maxima vehicles. At the time the investigation was opened ODI had 91 consumer complaints alleging rear lower control arm failures in the subject vehicles. ODI was concerned about these complaints because many of them alleged an increased steering effort or loss of vehicle control. At the time these complaints were received, ODI was also aware of a proactive service campaign addressing 2013 Nissan Altima in salt-belt states for a similar concern. Since opening the investigation, ODI has confirmed, based on consumer complaints, warranty data, and testing conducted by Nissan and ODI, that owners of the subject vehicles are experiencing a corroded bushing at one of three mounting points of the control arm to the rear subframe. ODI has also confirmed that drivers become aware of the problem because of sound and abnormal vibrations. In addition, the failure mileage is typically over 113,000 miles at the time of failure. In conjunction with Nissan and VRTC, ODI participated in testing to assess the potential safety consequence of a bushing failure. It was found the Vehicle Dynamic Control system allows the driver to maintain vehicle control in the event of a bushing failure. With between 7 to 13 years of field exposure, ODI is aware of only one low speed crash allegation describing minor contact with another vehicle’s trailer hitch. Nissan acknowledges that a crack can develop in affected control arms due to stress loading from normal use and that salts commonly used for roadway snow and ice treatment may result in corrosion that exacerbates the progression of the crack. Nissan implemented a design change in January of 2018 to improve the durability of the lower control arm. Affected vehicles have either been repaired with the countermeasure part under a customer satisfaction campaign or been provided a warranty extension from 3 years/36,000 miles to 10 year/unlimited mileage. Through testing and analysis of the information obtained to date, ODI has not identified a defect representing an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety involving corrosion of the subject rear lower control arm at this time. With a declining trend of reports and Nissan’s actions to implement a countermeasure and extended warranty coverage, further investigation of the issue does not appear to be warranted at this time. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov. A detailed discussion of the investigation and related complaint numbers can be viewed in the attached closing report.
A Engineering Analysis is the deeper stage, usually upgraded from a Preliminary Evaluation: NHTSA tests, requests engineering documents and decides whether a safety defect exists. The summary is the agency’s own text from its investigation file, unedited; the resumes carrying the full reasoning are linked below.
The paperwork NHTSA filed
Source: every document on this action, at nhtsa.gov- Opening resume — ODI’s own summary of why it opened this — the subject, what prompted it, and the vehicles in scope.
- Closing resume — ODI’s own summary of why it closed this, and what it concluded.
| Document | Code | Filed | At NHTSA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opening resume | INOA | 2019 | |
| Closing resume | INCLA | 2019 | |
| Information request to the manufacturer | INIM | 2019 | |
| Manufacturer's response — data | INRD | 2019 | 10 files 12345678910 |
| Memo to the investigation file | INME | 2019 | |
| Filed document | INCR | 2019 | |
| Filed document | INCV | 2019 |
These are NHTSA’s own files, served from the agency’s site — the resumes are what ODI wrote when it opened and closed the action, and the rest is the correspondence behind them, including what the manufacturer sent when the agency asked. They are linked, not copied: where a document names the people who wrote in, that redaction is the agency’s to make and its copy is the one you should read.
What owners had already reported
Source: complaints on file the day it openedWhen NHTSA opened this on Jul 29, 2019, owners had filed 452 complaints with the agency about the model years above, of which 8 named the suspension NHTSA went on to investigate. Owner complaints are the agency’s main early signal: ODI screens them, and a Preliminary Evaluation is usually where a pattern in them ends up.
This is what the complaint file held on that date, not a claim about which reports prompted the investigation — NHTSA’s complaint records carry no investigation number, so nobody can make that link from the data alone. The opening resume linked above names the reports ODI itself cited. Complaint records on this site begin with 2016.
What this means for an owner
Source: and what happens nextAn investigation is not a finding that a defect exists, and it puts no duty on anyone. NHTSA opens a Preliminary Evaluation when complaints and other reports suggest a condition worth asking the manufacturer about; it upgrades to an Engineering Analysis when the answers warrant testing; it closes either when it recommends a recall, when the manufacturer recalls on its own, or when no defect trend is found. The agency’s own goals are about four months for a petition, eight for a Preliminary Evaluation or a Recall Query and eighteen for an Engineering Analysis; many run longer.
This one closed without a recall. That means NHTSA found no defect trend it chose to act on at the time, or the manufacturer addressed the condition another way (a service campaign or a bulletin, which have their own pages). A closed file can be reopened if new reports arrive.
Model years it names
Source: as NHTSA filed themAlso named on model years this site has no page for: 2013 Nissan Altima; 2014 Nissan Altima; 2015 Nissan Altima.
A vehicle page’s investigation list carries the same action; a name here is the scope NHTSA opened, not a list of affected VINs.
Common questions
Source: NHTSA Office of Defects InvestigationIs EA19002 a recall?
No. A engineering analysis is NHTSA asking questions, not a recall. A safety recall carries an NHTSA campaign number and a duty to repair for free; this one closed without one. Whether one particular vehicle has an open recall is a VIN question at nhtsa.gov/recalls.
Is EA19002 still open?
No. It closed on Jun 16, 2025 without a recall.
Which vehicles does EA19002 cover?
NHTSA opened it on 9 model years: 2018 Nissan Altima, 2017 Nissan Altima, 2016 Nissan Altima, 2018 Nissan Maxima, 2017 Nissan Maxima, 2016 Nissan Maxima and more. That is the scope of the inquiry, not a list of affected vehicles; a recall, if one follows, defines its own population by VIN.