The 30AE will be have it’s UK unveiling at Elvington on Sunday. Pretty sure there will be a Mazda representative there with it. I’m sure he will be reporting back to Mazda UK as to what the public reaction was.
Anybody visiting might like to use the phrase ‘It’s lovely, I might buy one if you sort out the active bonnet issue’.
So I got a step further in my investigation. I’ve got an OBD-II Tool (Vgate iCar Pro for those Interested) and download FORScan (seem like a great bit of software and free: https://forscan.org/home.html) to analyse the DTC codes from the car.
I can say that on the ND, the fault codes seem to be stored on the “Restraints Control Module” (RCM). There are three codes generated:
B1001
B1003
B1429
The first two seem to be about the left and right actuators firing. The third states “Pedestrian Impact Event Storage Full and Locked”. Now this is when things start to get interesting. Googling that sentence yields no direct match but similar ones do come up related to the Airbags. I therefore think @Ada5279/MX5 Parts are right and that this is one and the same module as that of the Airbags (and other safety related restraints). Whether or not it can simply be reset or needs replacing I do not know however, the few posts I found for similar codes (e.g. in relation to airbags having been triggered) are not encouraging - all seem to suggest replacement of the entire unit is required. This would push up parts and labour further…
I’ll keep you posted should I make and further discoveries.
MX5 Parts did seem to imply that the airbag control gubbins needs replacing if the DHS is activated - as they put it - “even more expense”.
As technical Advisor of the MX-5 Owners Club I have been in conversation with Steven Bird at Mazda Motors UK regarding the concerns raised over Mazda’s active bonnet on the ND. Although MMUK are unable to make comment themselves on the issues raised in this topic, as a representative of the MX-5 Owners Club, Steven was happy for me to provide some factual information about the system.
The system should activate at vehicle speeds of 12.5mph and above raising the rear edge of the bonnet by 123mm and therefore increasing the space between the bonnet and the engine in order to maximise pedestrian protection in the event of a collision. Owners should be aware of the pages in their Owner’s Manual which describe the features and functions of the active bonnet as well as explaining situations when the active bonnet will activate and situations when the system will not or may not deploy.
As the vehicle has been type approved with this feature installed, any attempt to disable the system would take the vehicle away from original specification and the vehicle may no longer offer the same degree of protection in the event of a frontal collision. Disabling the system could void your insurance and the Manufacturer’s Warranty due to the vehicle having been modified away from factory specification.
The number of reported cases of the system deploying without apparent due cause is extremely low so far as I am aware. The risk incurred should the system be disabled should be more of a concern than the extremely unlikely occurrence that the system could deploy without apparent cause. Ultimately the system could save a person’s life, that’s its primary purpose, please bear that in mind.
The guidance from the MX-5 Owners Club is that under no circumstances should the system be disabled for use on public roads.
I would anticipate that if an insurance claim is made for an active bonnet deployment and an insurance company believe that the active bonnet has deployed when it perhaps shouldn’t have, they themselves would investigate and contact Mazda for assistance with any claim.
As far as I’m aware, there are no known concerns or faults with this system or with its operation. However, as with any system on your MX-5, if you are concerned that something may not be working or hasn’t worked as it should, please contact your preferred Mazda dealer or one of Mazda’s own Customer Relations Executives on 03457 484848 immediately.
So Mazda uk are saying there isn’t an issue and are not aware of any/many failures…hmmmmmm
reminds me of the gearbox issue…ho wait…what gearbox issue!
In this thread:
I dare say hitting a kerb at 12.5mph would result in chassis damage.
Yep, but the difference is that the gearbox issues were resulting in warranty claims which were costing Mazda big bucks but for the active bonnet issue Mazda can absolve themselves of any responsibility and it is the customer or their insurance company that has to pay up!
Just to add to the fund of knowledge on the DHS system, my NC has had to go back to a Mazda dealer to finally have the warning light reset after the body repair shop had to concede defeat in getting it sorted. I suspect that Mazda will be replacing the control unit, as that was about the only thing that the repairer hadn’t changed. I understand that it will add about £600 to my insurer’s bill.
Hmm…… Looks like Mazda may have an issue with some of their impact sensor initiated safety systems…
Mazda May Have An Exploding Airbag Problem On Its Hands - Mazda May Have An Exploding Airbag Problem On Its Hands | CarBuzz
Or maybe not. The source is scraping the NHTSA’s complaint database. In there, two complaints were noted, covering 2009-2013 models.
Letter to Mazda:
Reading through the complaints is pretty entertaining. This was one received about the 2004 MX5
And in 2017, someone lodged a rust complaint:
And in 2014:
And 2010:
Have fun.
Yep, but the NHTSA are asking Mazda to investigate the complaints. Regarding the other complaints they made me laugh out loud. Fancy a 9 year old car having some corrosion. Is there not an equivalent of an MOT in America? Funny and only in America!
Here’s the thing. Why should a 9 year old car have corrosion in the 21st century?
Most states have some kind of inspection; it varied. But increasingly, States are now abolishing the inspection completely, citing some pretty convincing evidence that it was a waste of time. You increase the penalties on motorists who don’t maintain their cars. I think it was New Jersey who ran a study, and found that safety issues were generally identified during garage maintenance, most owners paid a garage to maintain their cars, and therefore the State Inspection amounted to littlle more than a tax on motorists. Motorists though who insist on maintaining their cars can expect the full force of the law on them if they don’t do it right. Here, we have this misapprehension about the MOT, as if its the only time you need to have the car in a safe condition. It needs to be in a safe condition everytime you use it.
Over, the issue is generally that the rust is not spotted during a MOT unless it has reached a catastrophic stage. The rust is generally not visible during routine servicing, because the undertray needs to be removed, The rust has come about because of inadequate finishing by Mazda. Don’t understand why Mazda hasn’t been taken to task about this. As we all know, Mazda produced literature that was highly misleading, and lead to great confusion about whether the NB was galvanized or not. Mazda made great play on how the finishing was improved on the NB compared to the NA. Turned out, the longevity of these cars was worse than the NA. I would not be surprised if one of these new processes contributed to the premature failure of the NB chassis legs.
Only in America are they open about consumer complaints. Only in the UK do we get all secretive about it, and basically tell people not to complain. So I think its briliant that such a record is maintained. Also helps, because you can hold the feet of the government to the fire for not chasing up on complaints. America has much better consumer protection, and I support that.
Time alone doesn’t get the manufacturer off the hook. Look at the issue with the Japanese seatbelt latch buttons. That lead to cars over 30 years old getting recalled. And the Toyota Tacoma debacle; frame rust forced Toyota to extend their truck warranty to 15 years. Toyota have been subject to two class actions about excessive rusting on trucks aged upto 14-15 years old. Its cost them over $3 billion.
Here’s the issue, and its probably a weakness over here. It takes an injury to proovoke the authorities to compel the manufacturers to check. Someone got injured due to that CX9 airbag. No one, as far as I know, has yet been injured due to front suspension failure on a NB. So they won’t do anything.
What a Court-sanctioned frame replacement looks like:
Many thanks for checking on this; it’s very much appreciated. Just one question from me, would it be possible to get clarification from Mazda whether this system (I gather it’s the Restraint Control Module - Part Number N243-57K30) can be reset by a dealer after such an ‘event’ or whether it also needs replacing? I’m asking as it seems to me that there’s a lack of clarity on the repair procedure (probably given the relatively low amount of occurrences) and this is resulting in delayed repairs to myself and others. If we (owners) know whether the module needs replacement, we could at least let the dealers know or point them to this thread, thereby possibly ensuring that all parts are ordered the first time round and the repair is performed as indicated by Mazda.
Thanks,
Joe
The control module for the active bonnet, the SAS control module or sometimes referred to as the restraint control module, should be replaced after deployment of the active bonnet, resetting the module is not possible. When the control module is replaced the new one must be programmed using Mazda’s diagnostic equipment.
Hi All, as the original poster please see what I had to have done when my Active Bonnet System went off:
The bonnet hinges and L & R active bonnet charges where pretty easy to get hold of but they had to wait a month for the bonnet to arrive from the factory in Japan. It then additionally had to be sent to Mazda to have the front sensors and associated module in the engine bay replaced (originally I thought they were reset but in fact the module was replaced and then Mazda had to reset the warning light from when the system went off).
It took Mazda almost 3 weeks to do this. Granted it was in December coming up to Christmas but still
The final bill came out at £1627.58 so nowhere near as much as the figures suggested on this thread.
Many Thanks
Legoman
That is still a colossal amount, this is why I’m getting jittery about replacing our car where i live in the Cotswolds as it could work out to be the dearest pheasant pie in history
The cost of Legoman’s repairs to his 5 following the inappropriate deployment of the active bonnet system is what I more or less expected. As RichK pointed out though, £1600 is a colossal amount to have to fork out, through no fault of the driver. OK, so Legoman’s insurance company has probably paid, but at what cost in the rise in premiums for the next few years ? Also of course, it has taken a whole year to get fixed, and the system reset by Mazda, which to my mind is totally unacceptable.
The trouble is of course, that it is probably impossible for the sensor system to differentiate between a human body hitting your car, or in Legoman’s case, an errant wheel trim from another vehicle. Which leaves me to the conclusion that the system on the Mazda MX-5 is flawed. Inappropriate activation is probably something that is difficult to prevent, but why has the Mazda system got to be so destructive to the car it is fitted to ? I have found You Tube videos showing similar installations on other makes of vehicle, which show the driver simply pushing down on the rear of the bonnet to reset it after deployment, with no damage to the car at all.
OK, so if a human body did land on a car’s bonnet, the likelihood is that a new bonnet would be needed anyway, but the whole point of this thread is that the system has a habit of going off ‘half-cocked’, and costing a fortune to get repaired. Imagine when a late-model NC or an ND gets to around ten or twelve years old, and this occurs - in all likelihood the insurance company will write off the car as an uneconomic repair !
Personally, I wouldn’t touch a car fitted with this system - I am more than happy with my NC1 thank you very much. And if I do get another MX-5, I will certainly make sure it is no later model than an NC2.
My repair shop were initially sure that they could reset the Active Bonnet system alarm, as they had all the computer access and so on and had done the job on plenty of other makes. Eventually they had to give up on it and send it to the Mazda dealer in Bolton. I’m told that they replaced two ECUs, as well as resetting everything and the bill for that work alone was £1100. They say the typical bill on a VW Golf, for instance, would be more like £500. The car was with the repair shop for a week, then a second week with Mazda before I got it back, all this on top of the original body repair time.
Looking at MX5 Parts website, the Actuators and DHS Controller prices add up to around £750 (for an NC), before you even get into fitting them, add on new hinges, probably a new bonnet (it gets dinged by the actuators) and the total soon mounts up. All this as a result of one errant dog!
Happily the car is now as good as new and we had a nice top-down day out in the sun on Tuesday.
It took about 3-4 months to repair, yet I still think this is too long for such an occurrence. I do really enjoy my ND especially with my roof down when we are enjoying such brilliant weather.
Yet I am a more apprehensive driver now…which may in turn make me a better driver. WHo knows.
I just feel the pain for those who have been through a similar experience as me.
After 4 weeks of not driving my MX-5 ND I got it back. Here’s the bill, 4.356 euro’s like I said. Including respray (too match the color and not see color difference of the new bonnet). 3.8k GBP for hitting a curb and Mazda acts like it’s a ordinary thing.
All I can say is that I will try to enjoy the car now, but I won’t be buying a Mazda anymore in the future. The way this active bonnet goes off, the way the dealership/Mazda acts towards me as a client and the costs of the bill made me sad about the brand.
