Fuel system, brake & collision avoidance issues are among the top complaints received by the NHTSA from vehicle owners
The Infiniti QX50, manufactured by Nissan’s luxury vehicle division, has been sold in the U.S. since 2016. Its sales have been reasonably consistent, but understandably low since it is marketed as a luxury vehicle.
According to public sales figures for the U.S., they peaked in 2018 at 25,389, dropping to 19,196 in 2021.
Predictably, the numbers of complaints are also relatively low. For example, the most complaints the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has listed relate to the 2019 model. Other years have attracted only 6-7 complaints each. And there are currently just 5 complaints on file for the 2021 model.
But NHTSA isn’t the only complaints platform, and consumer reviews on cars.com suggest that only 77% of drivers recommend the 2021 QX50. Ratings range from 5 stars from those who love the model to 1.9 stars for an owner who claims they bought a lemon.
Also, in addition to complaints to NHTSA, their safety ratings, which are based on crash testing, show that this compact luxury SUV isn’t 100% safe.
While the side crash tests result in 5 stars for all 5 tests, both the front driver and front passenger side frontal crash tests resulted in 4 stars each. The rollover resistance test, which measures the risks of rollover if the driver loses control of the car, also resulted in only 4 stars. According to NHTSA, there is a rollover risk of 15.50%.
Click on other model year to view more problems: 2019
The 8 complaints to NHTSA about the 2021 Infiniti QX50 are varied and report problems with a range of components and systems. Forward-collision avoidance and brake problems top the list followed by fuel system, powertrain, engine and steering issues. Several complaints mention problems in more than one area.
For the record, there are also 100+ manufacturer communications on file with NHTSA that have been sent to dealers. These relate to possible or known faults and malfunctions. Manufacturers are required by law to share these with NHTSA.
| Complaint Category | Number of Complaints |
|---|---|
| Engine | |
| Forward Collision Avoidance: Automatic Emergency Braking | |
| Power Train | |
| Service Brakes | |
| Forward Collision Avoidance: Warnings | |
| Fuel System, Gasoline | |
| Power Train:axle Assembly | |
| Steering | |
| Unknown Or Other | |
| Wheels |
Two complaints specify brake problems. One says that forward-collision avoidance is also affected.
The driver of the car was stationary at a red light when the forward-collision warning and lane assist malfunctions were displayed on the dashboard. The malfunctions recurred the day after the dealer assessed the vehicle.
“I called and said I don’t have time out of my day to drive back and forth for you to not fix my car. He told me to go somewhere else.”
The second dealer said the vehicle needed a new camera. But it wasn’t available and there was no indication of when it would be.
About a month later, the car braked “with nothing in the way on a clear sunny day.” This time, the complainant was told that “this happens all the time, just accelerate. The engineers know it’s a problem. There’s no current fix and you can’t turn it off.” She was told to call customer assurance to open a claim, which she did.
The next day she was told the camera part was in stock. In the meantime, driving home, “the forward-collision sensor blinked” all the way back to her home.
The second complaint was a less usual one and relates to the push-button engine start-stop being close to the driver. It states that it is a safety issue.
“Twice now, while traveling at highway speeds, the vehicle engine has stopped when my dog taps on the switch. I usually secure my dog while traveling with him, but there are occasions when his seat belt needs to be released, usually due to him getting tangled up.”
The dealer’s agent told her she must “fashion some sort of cover for the button.”
We've fixed thousands of lemon problems. Message or call 877-795-3666 today.
We’ve already mentioned one of the two forward-collision avoidance problems. The second one also seems to involve a brake problem. It may also be a software issue.
The first incident happened on a clear day. There was no traffic and no debris on the road. The car was traveling at approximately 45 mph when a master warning light appeared on the dashboard with an accompanying warning signal. At the same time, the emergency braking system stopped the car.
“As quickly as it started, the warning and braking ceased and left me stunned and terrified. Had I been in traffic or on a highway, I am quite certain that I would have been rear-ended. Luckily, that was not my fate yesterday but this defect is serious and dangerous. I have contacted the dealer and dealer service department. The service department informed me that they could inspect the vehicle in 4 weeks.
“The dealer said that there are multiple computers in the vehicle and that computers can be glitchy. This vehicle has had multiple computer issues since I first leased the car starting approximately 5 months into my lease. I have received a malfunction warning on numerous occasions and have had it in for service where they told me that they inspected the vehicle and all systems seemed to be working fine even though I showed them multiple pictures of the warning. The dealer told me that I should disregard the warning and that customers complain about it often but that it just indicates that there is snow, ice, or debris covering the sensors. This is not consistent with my experience.”
The complaint that focuses on the “fuel system, gasoline” refers to a malfunction that the manufacturer was aware of but was unable to remedy. The problem started with “an abnormal gasoline odor” in the garage where an SUV with about 4,000 miles on the clock was parked. The dealer diagnosed “that the vacuum lines which drained the fumes were designed incorrectly.”
The vehicle owner reports that “the manufacturer was aware of the issue and the engineers were working on a remedy.” Dealers would be notified when a remedy was available.
This complaint was made in April 2021. Five months later, in September 2021, Nissan notified dealers about the issue. It advises what to do if a “fuel and/or oil smell is present when the vehicle is parked in a closed garage.” It also states that there may not be any fuel, oil, or EVAP (evaporative emissions control systems) leaks evident.
Dealers must, “Replace the rocker cover assembly and the PCV separator with those listed in the PARTS INFORMATION, and eliminate PCV hose 2.”
Presumably, there were other complaints about this issue. There is no indication in the NHTSA file whether the complainant’s problem was rectified or resolved.
If you have problems that recur, this may indicate that you bought a lemon. Your problems may be the same or similar to those described here, but they may be completely different.
If you think that you have a lemon, call the Lemberg Law Helpline and we’ll assess how we can help. We are lemon law experts and have negotiated many deals for clients who want to get rid of their lemons. These range from refunds, trade-ins, and replacement vehicles to buy-backs and simple cash settlements.
The law says Nissan must pay the legal fees of lemon law cases, not you. So you have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
Brian Jones spent more than 30 years working as an ASE Certified Master Tech and Parts Specialist at multiple dealerships. Brian has become an authority in the industry, traveling across the country to consult for car dealerships and contributing his expertise as a writer for several major automotive publications. In his spare time, Brian enjoys working on pickup trucks, muscle cars, Jeeps and anything related to motorsports.
See more posts from Brian Jones
