2024 Nissan Pathfinder

The vehicle surges and revs when in park or drive. This is the similar problem that the Nissan rogue is having

Vehicle: 2024 Nissan Pathfinder Rock Creek 4WD VIN: [XXX] Mileage at failure: approximately 26,000 miles Component: Service brakes Description: Rear brake pads completely worn at 26,000 miles. Front brake pads remain in good condition with normal wear. Vehicle is driven under normal conditions — no towing, no off-road use, no aggressive driving. Rear brake pad part number D4060-6TA5B is the same part used across 2022-2025 Pathfinders. This pad cross-references to the Nissan Altima, a sedan weighing approximately 3,400 lbs. The 2024 Pathfinder Rock Creek weighs over 4,600 lbs and is rated to tow 6,000 lbs. The pad is not engineered for this vehicle’s weight or intended use. The fact that front brakes show normal wear while rears are completely gone proves this is not a driving behavior issue. The rear brake system is receiving disproportionate braking force relative to the capacity of the pads installed. This is a known pattern across the 2022-2024 Pathfinder lineup. A class action lawsuit has been filed: [XXX] v. Nissan North America, Inc., Case No. 3:25-cv-01183, [XXX] , filed 10/13/2025. NHTSA has received multiple prior complaints documenting identical rear brake failure on 2022-2024 Pathfinders at mileages as low as 12,000 miles. Dealer (Peters Nissan of Nashua, [XXX] ) declined warranty repair. Nissan Consumer Affairs notified, Case #XXX. Nissan classifies this as “normal wear and tear” despite failure occurring well within the 3-year/36,000-mile warranty period and despite front brakes showing no comparable wear. This is a safety defect. Premature rear brake failure without warning reduces stopping ability and puts the driver, passengers, and other motorists at risk.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

I was driving the vehicle and it just stopped on the highway, no warning no kickback no precursor that something was wrong with the vehicle, and it stopped, the warning sign: Not available System malfunction came on and then the entire electrical system shut down. I had to have the car towed home because it would not start. I went to the dealer on several attempts and no help was rendered. I was told to either come back or there are too many cars, just really getting the run around for a matter that is fatal. I was driving with my family in the car and it just stopped. I almost had an accident, it could have been fatal. This is unacceptable.

On two separate occasions I placed my child in the car and then placed my bag in the front passenger seat of the car with my key fob in the bag. After closing the door, the car would automatically lock as if I had walked away from it with my keys. But the key fob was in the car. My car was not turned on and on one occasion it was 70 degrees outside. I had no way of accessing my car and my child was locked inside it. Luckily things turned out okay, but now I can never trust my keys or my car. I always have my keys on me and never leave them in the car. I know it’s a safety feature for these cars to stay unlocked whenever keys are in the car. My car however, seems to have an issue with this feature. It’s impossible to duplicate so I’m not sure taking it into the shop would make a difference.

I own/lease a Nissan Pathfinder that currently has approximately 27,000 miles. At approximately 19,000 miles, the dealership resurfaced the brake rotors. The service department stated only that “sometimes it happens” and did not provide a diagnosis or explanation for the premature wear. Now, at approximately 27,000 miles, the dealership has informed me that the rear brake rotors and pads must be replaced due to excessive wear. This appears to be premature brake component failure on a relatively new vehicle. The vehicle is driven primarily on highways and is not used for towing or heavy loads. The early rotor resurfacing followed by rotor and pad replacement shortly afterward raises concerns about potential premature brake system wear or a possible defect in the braking system. Because brakes are a critical safety component, I am submitting this report so the issue can be reviewed to determine whether similar premature brake wear is occurring on other vehicles of this model.

I own a 2024 Nissan Pathfinder with approximately 24,000 miles. During a recent inspection, the rear brake pads were found to be completely worn while the front brake pads still have significant remaining life. This uneven wear pattern suggests the rear braking system may be performing a disproportionate amount of braking or may not be fully releasing. Premature rear brake wear at this mileage appears abnormal for a vehicle of this type and raises concerns about possible issues with brake force distribution, rear calipers, or electronic brake system operation. The dealership stated that the rear brake wear is “normal” and declined to repair it under warranty or goodwill. However, premature brake wear can present a safety concern if the braking system is not functioning as intended. I am submitting this complaint so the issue can be reviewed to determine whether other vehicles of the same model may experience similar premature rear brake wear or potential braking system defects.

Very unusual and excessive rear brake pads and rotor decay, I was asked by dealership to replace brake pads and rotor just at 22000 miles, and then after replacing again they are asking to replace just after another 19000 miles. And the automatic brake sometimes gets scary, get too close to the front vehicle without reducing speed while driving in cruise control mode.

Rear break pads and tires required to be replaced with 20k miles on the odometer. The vehicle is serviced regularly and well maintained. It is a very known issue that the vehicles weight causes abnormal and quick wear for the rear break pads. This is a major safety concern and needs to be addressed by Nissan as they do not provide a standard lifespan for these components that you would normally expect. This issue poises a higher risk of accidents, injuries, or death. Especially for someone that doesn’t know vehicles well

I am filing a safety complaint regarding a Chicco NextFit car seat. The anchor tab on my child’s car seat has become visibly stressed and appears to be failing after only two years of normal use. This is extremely concerning as this component is critical to properly securing the seat and ensuring my child’s safety in the event of a crash. I contacted the manufacturer and provided photos. They confirmed that the tab is stressed but did not offer an explanation for how this could happen or provide any investigation or corrective action. The product is discontinued, and I was told I am outside of the warranty period, which does not address the safety concern. This appears to be a potential structural or material failure and could put children at risk if the seat does not perform as intended during a collision. I believe this issue should be investigated to determine whether this is an isolated defect or a broader safety problem affecting other consumers. I am requesting that this issue be reviewed for possible defect or recall to protect child passenger safety.

8/28/23: fuel pump replacement at just 16 miles, 10/12/23: check engine light with no documented repair, only that the code was cleared and the vehicle test driven, 12/18/25: pre-delivery inspection revealed clicking noise while turning and a leaking oil pressure switch requiring replacement parts and realignment, 1/19/26: check engine light on - battery replaced, 1/20/26: check engine light on - AF sensor bank 1 replaced, 1/22/26: check engine light on - fuel injector / lines replaced, 2/2/26: check engine light on - O2 sensor replaced, 2/5/26: failure to accelerate while driving - towed home due to dealership being closed, towed to dealership first thing the next morning and is currently under further investigation. Please see attached letter. Also, the dates reflected on the Carfax report are inaccurate.

My 2024 Nissan had a malfunction light of my auto on/off come on and then a malfunction of the traction control. I turned the car on and off which cleared the lights. I then began driving again and those came on as well as check engine light and reduced power came on while on the highway. The code was the camshaft sensor. I replaced this and codes still appear. Another mechanic put my car back on the computer and it is showing my timing chain at a 7. This is very disappointing considering car has less than 86000 miles on it. It isnt under warranty anymore as I do drive a lot. Oil changes were down regularly and this was a cash purchase. I loved my car up until this point. But at this point once I spend the extremely high amount to get this fixed I will be leaving nissan behind.

The Original Equipment (OE) Bridgestone Alenza Sport A/S 255/50R20 105H M+S tires on my brand new 2024 Nissan Pathfinder suffer from groove wander on roads in which grooves are cut into them to mitigate hydroplaning in rainy conditions. The geometric design, tread design incompatibility, or structural irregularities of these tires cause severe groove wander and impair safe handling. Groove wander causes the vehicle to follow road grooves involuntarily, which is a handling defect that compromise driver control. Groove wander causes the vehicle to rapidly swerve from side to side, and in the case of my vehicle, feel as if the rear end is "fishtailing" and raising off the pavement. This condition is a safety hazard, especially at highway and interstate speeds or in inclement weather. Groove wander does not allow the vehicle to operate safely, causing the driver to constantly correct the involuntary path of the vehicle on such roads. The driver's and others' safety are at risk if the driver is unable to quickly correct the path of the vehicle and keep the vehicle in the lane of traffic to avoid lane departure into another vehicle or object. The problem has not been reproduced or confirmed by both the Nissan dealer from I bought the vehicle and a local Bridgestone/Firestone service center because both are unwilling to do so. Both have refused to accompany me on a test drive on Interstate 90 where this occurs because this road is approximately 12 miles one way from their locations (their claim it is too far away; if it was only 5 miles, they would be willing to do this). The tires have been visually inspected by both companies, and naturally both have found nothing wrong with the tires (normal wear at this time). Visually inspecting he tires will not diagnose the issue, and a test ride needs to be completed to document this issue - again both Nissan and Bridgestone refuse to do this. Other brand tires on other vehicles I own do not suffer groove wander.