Built from NHTSA complaints and recalls collected for this model, generated September 21, 2026. Totals reflect what has been collected, not every complaint ever filed.

Recalls

0 total

Safety issues the manufacturer must repair for free. A recall means confirm the fix was done, not walk away.

No recalls on record for this model

No safety recalls were found in this dataset. It is still worth entering the exact VIN on NHTSA before purchase, since recalls can be added at any time.

Owner complaints by system

1 total

Unverified reports owners filed with NHTSA, grouped by the part of the car. Useful for spotting patterns. Open a group to read recent examples.

Brakes

Worth reading
1

Most reports here involve software faults. Of these, 1 mention an injury.

software faults 1
A recent report: The contact was the operator of a 2026 Peterbilt 579 for an employer. The contact stated that whether driving 30 MPH or 65 MPH, after another vehicle entered the lane in front of the vehicle, the…
Read full complaint

The contact was the operator of a 2026 Peterbilt 579 for an employer. The contact stated that whether driving 30 MPH or 65 MPH, after another vehicle entered the lane in front of the vehicle, the Forward Collision Avoidance: AEB and Lane Keep Assist systems erroneously activated and brought the vehicle to an unsafe and abrupt stop. The contact stated that the RADAR system had experienced a False Positive alert of a possible crash, even though the vehicle was at a safe driving distance ahead. The contact stated that the failure caused other driver’s behind the vehicle to run off the road or skid to a stop to avoid crashing into the rear of the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure also occurred with another vehicle approximately 100-feet ahead coming over into the lane, and the AEB activated, causing the wheels to lock up, bringing the vehicle to an abrupt stop. The contact stated that other drivers angrily honked at him. On one occasion, the contact was followed by an irate driver for ten minutes after the failure had occurred. The contact was concerned for his safety and the safety of the public because the system could not be overridden. The contact stated that on one occasion while his brother was driving the vehicle at a moderate speed, while the contact was asleep in the sleeping netting which the contact believes was not DOT approved, the AEB system activated and sent the contact’s body forward, causing his rib cage to strike a cabinet inside the sleeper berth, causing an injury. The contact had not sought medical attention. The contact stated that the employer was notified of the failures with the vehicle, and the contact was informed to keep driving the vehicle as-is or seek other employment. The contact stated that the RADAR system also experienced False Positive alerts and inadvertent AEB activation while driving and approaching bridges or structures that cast shadows onto the roadway bringing the vehicle to an abrupt stop. The contact stated that prior to the abrupt stop, there was a picture of the hood on the instrument panel in RED, and instantly the vehicle came to a complete stop. The contact stated that the messages: “Auto-Electric Brakes – Disabled; Auto Lane – Defective; Lane Assist – Defective; and Lane Assist – Disabled” were displayed. The contact stated that after turning off and restarting the vehicle, all the messages were cleared from the system. The vehicle was not taken to be diagnosed or repaired. Neither the local dealer nor the manufacturer was notified of the failures. The approximate failure mileage was 200.

Source: NHTSA complaint ODI #11682362 · view all complaints for this vehicle at nhtsa.gov

Is 1 complaints a lot? They were filed between 2025 and 2025, roughly 1 a year, which is fewer than the typical model in this dataset. We do not have sales figures for this model, so treat this as a rough volume, not a rate per car on the road. Popular, high-volume models naturally collect more complaints over time.