⌘K
HomeRecallsInvestigations PE14014
NHTSA defect investigation · Preliminary Evaluation

Nissan preliminary evaluation PE14014

Excessive Brake Pedal Travel. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened this preliminary evaluation about the master cylinder on 5 model years (2013–2014). Opened May 20, 2014, closed May 13, 2015 after 12 months without a recall. closed

What NHTSA says

Source: Office of Defects Investigation, as filed

On May 20, 2014, ODI opened PE14-014 based on eight complaints alleging incidents of excessive brake pedal travel in model year (MY) 2013 through 2014 Nissan Sentra, Versa Sedan and Versa Note passenger cars (Figure 1) and information in Early Warning Reporting field reports indicating issues with master cylinder internal seals. In response to an information request letter sent by ODI, Nissan identified a condition with the master cylinder in early production subject vehicles that could result in a slow internal leak past one of the recuperating seals to the brake reservoir when the brake pedal is depressed very slowly or lightly (Figure 2).The subject vehicles are equipped with fixed seal master cylinders supplied by TRW. To address concerns with water hammer noise with the standard seal design, the master cylinders in the early production subject vehicles used AWH (anti-water hammer) seals. The AWH seals are sensitive to contamination from assembly plant cleanliness issues, which can produce the internal leak condition during slow or light brake applies but perform as designed with normal or emergency brake applications. TRW indicated that the risk of contamination interacting with the subject seals is greatest after the evacuation and pressure fill process used to fill the brake system during the manufacturing process (early life issue).TRW developed a new master cylinder seal design (EVO seal) that addresses the noise concern and eliminates the internal leak concern associated with contamination by providing a secondary seal (Figure 3).Nissan implemented the new master cylinder design in vehicle production on September 23, 2013. ODI's analysis shows that the master cylinder warranty claim rate is much higher in vehicles produced before the change (Figure 4).Statistical analysis showed that the condition is an early-life problem with relatively low failure rates projected through 100,000 miles and approximately 58 percent of the failures projected to occur by that mileage have already occurred (Table 1).Warranty claims are highest (78% of claims) in vehicles with less than 10,000 miles (Figure 5) and 50 percent of claims involved vehicles with less than 90 days in service (Figure 6).ODI evaluated 22 crash claims that included allegations of master cylinder failure, sinking brake pedal or pedal to the floor (Table 2).The analysis identified only three crashes in which a brake performance issue related to the master cylinder was duplicated by post-incident inspection, including one with a different problem than the seal leak issue (a broken plunger).The two crash complaints related to a possible master cylinder concern involved 1 vehicle with the AWH seal and 1 with the EVO seal. Both were minor crashes. The remaining crashes do not appear to be related to any issues with the master cylinder or other brake system fault. In the 4 crashes with Event Data Recorderinformation available, the data indicated that the brakes were applied too late to avoid the collisions. These include 2 crashes with less than a half second of braking before impact and 2 in which brake applications lasting 1.0 to 2.5 seconds resulted in high decelerations consistent with fully functioning brake systems, but too late to avoid the collision. Overall, the rates of crashes adjusted for vehicle exposure (total vehicle years in service) do not show any correlation to the high warranty rates associated with the AWH seal leak concern (Table 3 & Figure 7).Given these circumstances, further use of the agency resources in this matter does not appear to be warranted. Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing o

Stage Preliminary Evaluation — NHTSA works to complete one within eight months Opened May 20, 2014 Closed May 13, 2015 Manufacturer Nissan North America, Inc. Components Service Brakes, Hydraulic › Foundation Components › Master Cylinder, Service Brakes, Hydraulic › Foundation Components, Service Brakes, Hydraulic, Service Brakes

A Preliminary Evaluation is the first formal stage: NHTSA has decided the complaints and other information it screened are worth a closer look, and asks the manufacturer for its own data on the condition. The summary is the agency’s own text from its investigation file, unedited; the opening and closing resumes with the full reasoning are on NHTSA’s site under this number.

What this means for an owner

Source: and what happens next

An 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 them

Also named: 2013 Nissan Sentra; 2014 Nissan Sentra; 2013 Nissan Versa; 2014 Nissan Versa; 2014 Nissan Versa Note.

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 Investigation

Is PE14014 a recall?

No. A preliminary evaluation 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 PE14014 still open?

No. It closed on May 13, 2015 without a recall.

Which vehicles does PE14014 cover?

NHTSA opened it on 5 model years: 2013 Nissan Sentra, 2014 Nissan Sentra, 2013 Nissan Versa, 2014 Nissan Versa, 2014 Nissan Versa Note. That is the scope of the inquiry, not a list of affected vehicles; a recall, if one follows, defines its own population by VIN.