Car throws a B1018 DTC, which is for the passenger seat occupancy sensor. The seat occupancy sensor failing poses a major safety risk, as it causes the airbags to not deploy properly in the event of a crash. This is a very well known issue for the 2011-2012 LEAF, and the only option Nissan gives to fix this is a full seat replacement, which is cost prohibitive at over $3000. Previously, a recall was issued for 2013-2016 LEAFs for a similar issue, but the 2011-2012 was not included in that recall.
The worst 2011 Nissan Leaf problems
Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.
Problems by type
Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.
- Airbags35
- Electrical29
- Brakes22
- Seats7
- Acceleration5
- Fuel system5
- Body3
- Transmission3
- Engine2
- Steering1
Specific symptoms reported on the 2011 Nissan Leaf
Trouble codes owners of the 2011 Nissan Leaf mention
B1018 11
Recalls
No recalls on record for this model year.
Defect investigations
Pedestrian alert sounds
the federal safety agency received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, the federal safety agency opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified the federal safety agency he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by the federal safety agency regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP22005
Front Occupant Classification System Mat
Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 19-015 was opened as a result of Defect Petition (DP) 19-002 which alleged that model year (MY) 2011 and 2012 Nissan Leaf were affected by the same defect addressed in an earlier recall, the federal safety agency Safety Recall 16V‑244, but were not included in the scope of that recall.the federal safety agency 16V‑244 involved a defect in the Occupant Classification System, a system intended to suppress deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag under certain specific conditions. Although the DP19-002 analysis determined the allegation that earlier MY Leaf vehicles should have been included in 16V‑244 was not founded, the Office of Defects Investigation nonetheless granted the petition and commenced this investigation into the 2011 and 2012 Leaf since OCS failures were reportedly occurring in these vehicles. Further details on DP19-002 can be found at October 25, 2019, ODI sent an information request letter to Nissan North America (Nissan) requesting pertinent information on the subject 2011 and 2012 Leaf. Nissan provided its response on December 13, 2019. ODI has reviewed the information Nissan provided as well as new reports submitted to the federal safety agency's Vehicle Owner Questionnaire database. Based on review of all available information, and at this time, ODI has identified evidence supporting that a total of 76 subject vehicles likely experienced a failure of the subject passenger seat OCS mat. The count represents an incidence rate of about 0.4% on subject vehicles that average 8 to 9 years in service.Consistent with Nissan's explanation of how the subject OCS was intended to function, ODI's review of the reports indicates that when an OCS mat failure occurs, two different warning indicators appear on the instrument panel. The warnings provide clear and unambiguous notice to occupants that an OCS problem has been detected, and the owner's manual provides further information regarding the meaning and consequences of the detected failure, as well as advice to seek service. Additionally the OCS will store a diagnostic trouble code to aid service technician diagnosis, and the occupant warnings remain present until the underlying failure has been corrected.In its responses to ODI, Nissan also provided its assessment of the alleged defect in the subject vehicles, stating that it does not believe that an unreasonable risk to safety exists. Nissan states that its assessment of failed OCS mats recently collected from the field showed that external factors (e.g., damage from foreign objects) were responsible for the failures, rather than a design or manufacturing defect. Nissan also cited clear visual warnings and low incidence rates occurring in comparatively older vehicles as factors in its determination that a recall was not warranted. Lastly Nissan noted that most of the complaints received for this issue involved a high customer expense for the cost of repair for the OCS system, which is consistent with ODI's observations. Nissan is apparently considering a reduction in repair part cost as a means to address the customer satisfaction aspect of these complaints.Based on the analysis conducted, this investigation will be closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist. the federal safety agency reserves the right take additional actions if warranted by future circumstances.The 20 ODI numbers cited above can be reviewed at under the following identification (ODI) numbers:11176324, 11193091, 11286687, 11290303, 11152569, 11207486, 11180021(duplicate of 11103556), 11103556, 11196006, 11287002, 11101830, 11193208, 11256669, 11172159, 11282156, 11102456, 11123812,
PE19015
Front Occupant Classification System Mat
A defect petition (see DP19-002) was received July 23, 2019 alleging that the occupant classification system (OCS) sensor (mat) in model year (MY) 2011 Nissan Leaf vehicles is defective and affects the proper deployment of the passenger front air bag. The petitioner provided a list of potentially related the federal safety agency reports and noted a Nissan recall involving later MY Leaf vehicles with OCS defect. the federal safety agency is granting the petition and opening a preliminary evaluation in response, please see PE19-015.Since receiving the defect petition, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has determined that the MY 2011 and 2012 Leaf share a common OCS design, both using the same sensor mat for passenger presence sensing. Starting in MY 2013, Leaf OCS was changed to a design using a different sensing system, one that did not use the mat present in prior model year, Nissan Leaf. While MY 2013-2016 Leaf vehicles were recalled for an OCS defect under recall 16V‑244, a recall influenced by ODI investigation EA15-004, earlier MY Leaf vehicles were not included because they were not affected by the particular defect involved in that recall.ODI identified and reviewed 13 vehicle owner questionnaire (VOQ) reports in its database, one of which is a duplicate, involving MY 2011 and 2012 Leaf vehicles that allege a problem with the OCS. The VOQs indicate that an OCS warning light illuminated at which point the vehicle was diagnosed and it was determined the sensor mat was the cause of the OCS problem. Most of the VOQs also noted the high cost of repair, which apparently involves replacement of the passenger front seat, according to complainants. None of the VOQs allege a problem with the performance of the passenger air bag, an injury, or a fatality due to the failure of the OCS.During the evaluation of this petition, ODI did not request information from Nissan regarding the complaint data in its possession, and accordingly the manufacturer complaint counts shown above are marked as not applicable. ODI will request this information during the upcoming investigation.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at under the following identification (VOQ) numbers: 11234415, 11207486, 11196006, 11193208, 11180021, 11176324, 11172159, 11152569, 11123812, 11103556 (duplicate of 11180021), 11102456, 11101830, 11052546.
DP19002
Technical service bulletins for the 2011 Nissan Leaf 132
Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.
- Wiring harness repair information
- Certification label and VIN plate replacement service information
- DTC B00A0-00 stored
- CAN communication codes – diagnostic tips and guidelines
- CAN communication – network diagnostic flow chart
- Vehicle key not detected / authenticated, engine will not start
- Windshield cracking
- Removing foreign material from the window glass
- Window glass warranty information
- Diagnosis of vehicle pull (drift) and/or steering wheel off-center
2011 Nissan Leaf fuel economy
Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.
| Engine | Drive | City | Highway | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Electric motor Electric 73 mi range | FWD | 106 | 92 | 99 MPGe |
What 2011 Nissan Leaf owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
Air bag sensor fault, passenger seat warning on dashboard. Confirmed sensor failure at repair shop. Notified by Nissan that sensors are DISCONTINUED parts. No alternative solution suggested. This means all airbags in this vehicle are disabled. Car has less than 40,000 miles and has years of service life left. How is Nissan allowed to discontinue supply of an essential safety component?
Please see thread: [XXX] My 2011 Nissan Leaf's OCS has failed randomly. I pulled the code via an Bluetooth OBD reader and the LeafSpy Pro app installed on my phone: B1018-00 09 AIR BAG Occupant Sens [Unit Fail] SRC-41. I took the car to a local dealership and was quoted over $4k for a full seat replacement with no ETA as the part is on back order. There is no option to simply replace the OCS alone and there is no workaround from Nissan to re-enable the passenger airbag without paying the $4k for the new seat. Opened a case with Nissan Consumer Affairs who advised they could do nothing for me. The repair is more expensive than the value of the vehicle. Because Nissan offers no workaround other than paying $4k for a new seat, consumers are incentivized to bypass the airbag sensor using a 3rd-party box (see here [XXX] rather than properly repair it. This is a safety issue and Nissan should do the right thing in making the repair affordable or making an official way to bypass the sensor/enable the airbags. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
When applying brakes, at a point in the pedal travel the vehicle deceleration goes from too little to vastly too much. This makes the vehicle challenging to drive in traffic without colliding into the vehicle in front and not stopping so quickly as to cause the trailing vehicle to collide. The dealer has confirmed the behavior. There is a TSB to supposedly address the problem, and a receipt is attached of that TSB software update being applied. However, this has not changed the behavior. This is at least partially a software issue, since the vehicle blends physical brakes with EV regenerative braking.
Supplemental air bag warning light started blinking on 9/24/2023. It blinks regardless of whether the front passenger seat is occupied. The OCS sensor for the passenger seat failed. This should have been covered by a recall. The dealer wants over $3,000.00 to replace the seat cushion. I declined the repair. Dealer assured me that driver air bag isn't affected, so I'll operate the car without a front passenger. Dealer Estimate: Denied Repair Step Step Total: $3,687.14 Correction: inspected system, dtc b1018 for occupant sensor unit failure is present. Cleared dtc, when sitting in passenger seat, dtc came back on. Inspected continuity to passenger seat occupant sensor and found ok at this time. Diagnosis says replacement of passenger occupant sensor assembly (lower seat assembly) Labor: $588.00
Vehicle doesn't slow down when taking foot of the acceleration pedal. Same both power settings. It will continue to move at slow speed on level ground. It behaves as though the minimum pedal.motor speed is too fast. My concern.is that it might get very fast without any pedal. Thank you.
My airbag sensor light went off for no reason. I took it into the dealership and was told that it would cost $3,700 to get it repaired/replaced since the seat needs to be removed. I am concerned that this safety issue is not taken care of and have read that many 2011 Leaf's are having this same issue.
On 05/28/23 while i was trying to park my 2011 Nissan Leaf in a parking lot, the car accelerated unexpectedly and hit a pole and fence and scratched an already parked car. Applying break did not slow down my car. I own this car since 2011 and never had an experience like this.
The airbag warning light has come on. An independent shop and the dealer say the repair is $4500 or more -- greater than the value of the vehicle, because Nissan only sells the complete passenger seat as a repair part, and requires the airbag be paired with the car at the dealer. I ask that this situation be resolved by Nissan making just the seat cushion available as a repair part, as they have for recalls of airbags on other model year cars. The SAFETY problem is that Nissan's refusal to sell a repair part, leads to a FISCAL INCENTIVE TO BYPASS THE AIRBAG. See also the federal safety agency #: 08V‑521
Air bag occupant sensor in front passenger seat failure causing air bag system shut off. DTC Code: B 1018 Description: Air Bag Occupant Sensor (Unit Fail). Well documented common failure of this critical safety component on the Nissan Leaf Forum. Sensor is not available to replace the defective part and a recall campaign was issued by Nissan, but doesn't cover 2011-2012 models. The vehicle is available for inspection upon request. The system scan revealed the DTC Code. Code returns after code clearing. Component has not been inspected by manufacturer. Air Bag Warning indicator lamp and Air Bag Off X 2 lamp illuminated.
Compare the 2011 Nissan Leaf
Leaf vs Tesla Model 3Leaf vs Tesla Model YLeaf vs Hyundai Ioniq 5Leaf vs Volkswagen ID.4Leaf vs Chevrolet Bolt EVLeaf vs Ford Mustang Mach ELeaf vs Kia EV6
Other model years
20102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Questions about the 2011 Nissan Leaf
Is the 2011 Nissan Leaf reliable?
Owners have filed 95 complaints about the 2011 Nissan Leaf, 1.4 times a typical Leaf model year.
What is the 2011 Nissan Leaf year score?
The 2011 Nissan Leaf scores 63 out of 100 (average). The score compares it with the other model years of the Nissan Leaf: 75 is a typical year, 50 means twice the usual complaints, and serious complaints and recalls lower it.
What is the most common problem with the 2011 Nissan Leaf?
Airbags, with 35 complaints, typically around 59,400 miles. Next is electrical (29).
How many recalls does the 2011 Nissan Leaf have?
No recalls on record.
What gas mileage does the 2011 Nissan Leaf get?
The 2011 Nissan Leaf is rated at 99 MPGe combined, with up to 73 miles of range.
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2011 Nissan Leaf?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history