Volkswagen is recalling 208,724 vehicles in the US after a steering rack bolt may corrode and break, potentially causing a loss of steering control.

The Volkswagen recall covers 208,724 vehicles in the United States. The campaign involves certain 2018 Tiguan, 2018-2019 Atlas and 2019-2021 Audi Q3 vehicles.

The problem centres on one of the bolts that attaches the steering rack to the subframe. The bolt may corrode over time and eventually break.

If that happens, the steering rack housing can also break. A loss of steering control could then increase the risk of a crash.

The recall affects vehicles from different model years. Therefore, owners should check the specific vehicle rather than relying only on its year or model name.

The 2018 Volkswagen Tiguan is one of the models included in the campaign.

The issue is related to the steering assembly. It is not described as a problem with the vehicle’s engine or transmission.

According to the recall information, the affected bolt can corrode and break. The consequence can be a broken steering rack housing and possible loss of steering control.

That makes the repair important even though the defective component is relatively small.

The Volkswagen Atlas is also included

Certain 2018 and 2019 Volkswagen Atlas vehicles are also part of the recall.

The Atlas was introduced as a larger SUV for the US market. The affected vehicles are now included in the same steering-related campaign as the Tiguan and Audi Q3.

The production details are vehicle-specific. For that reason, owners should use the official recall lookup to determine whether their individual vehicle is covered.

The recall also covers certain Audi Q3 models from 2019 through 2021.

Although the Audi badge is different, the vehicles are part of the same Volkswagen Group recall campaign. The underlying issue remains the steering rack mounting bolt.

The affected bolt can corrode because of the conditions identified in the recall. If it breaks, the steering rack housing may fail.

For drivers, the potential consequence is the most important part of the campaign. Steering control is a fundamental safety function, so a failure in this area can create a serious crash risk.

Volkswagen will replace the affected bolt

The recall remedy is relatively direct.

Dealers will replace the right-side steering rack mounting bolt free of charge. The repair is therefore focused on the component identified as the source of the problem.

The campaign is listed as NHTSA 26V590000. Volkswagen’s recall numbers are 48LG and 48VT. Vehicle identification numbers covered by the campaign became searchable through NHTSA on September 16, 2026.

Owners can use the NHTSA recall lookup to check their vehicle by VIN. NHTSA states that the VIN search can show whether a specific vehicle is affected by a safety recall and needs repair.

The manufacturer has also established a customer service contact for the campaign. The recall information lists Volkswagen at 1-800-893-5298.

For affected owners, the key point is the repair itself: the right-side steering rack mounting bolt will be replaced at no cost.

The campaign covers a large number of vehicles, but it is limited to specific production configurations. That is why checking the VIN remains the most reliable way to determine whether a particular Tiguan, Atlas or Q3 is affected.

The Volkswagen recall highlights how a relatively small component can have a major safety consequence. In this case, corrosion of a steering rack bolt can lead to a structural failure that may reduce steering control.

Yuki Tsunoda has identified the setup choice that he believes hurt his difficult Red Bull season, admitting he tried too hard to replicate Max Verstappen’s car.

The Japanese driver admits that trying to copy Max Verstappen’s setup was probably his biggest mistake during his time with the team.

Tsunoda arrived at Red Bull for the Japanese Grand Prix after the team changed its driver line-up. He immediately found himself sharing a garage with Verstappen and facing the challenge of understanding the demanding RB21.

At first, following Verstappen’s direction seemed logical.

The four-time world champion had already shown that he could extract performance from the car. Tsunoda therefore looked closely at the setup used on the other side of the garage.

Over time, however, he realised that a setup that worked for Verstappen did not necessarily suit his own driving style.

The problem was not simply that Tsunoda was trying to drive like Verstappen.

He says he still had confidence in his own abilities. In fact, he did not want to completely change his driving style for another driver.

The real issue was the direction he took with the car’s setup.

When Tsunoda felt oversteer, he sometimes moved toward settings that created even more of that behaviour because those characteristics appeared to work for Verstappen.

The same happened in the opposite direction.

When Tsunoda felt understeer, he could still choose a setup that moved the car further toward the balance Verstappen preferred.

That approach made the RB21 harder for him to understand.

Tsunoda now believes he should have focused more closely on what his own car was telling him, rather than trying to reproduce the configuration of his teammate.

Verstappen could exploit behaviour Tsunoda struggled with

Tsunoda’s explanation also highlights an important difference between the two drivers.

According to the Japanese racer, Verstappen has an exceptional ability to recognise how the car behaves during each part of a corner.

That includes small changes in rotation, front-end movement and sliding.

Verstappen can detect those reactions quickly and use them to his advantage.

Tsunoda says he approached the same situations differently.

When the RB21 produced a reaction that did not match what he expected, he often tried to force the car toward the behaviour he preferred.

That created another problem.

Instead of adapting completely to the car, he was trying to make the car adapt to him.

The contrast became especially important because the RB21 had a very narrow operating window.

Tsunoda discovered that while he could make the car feel reasonably manageable, extracting its maximum performance was much harder.

That distinction became clear from his first weekends with Red Bull.

The Japanese driver had a promising start in practice at Suzuka. He was close to Verstappen and showed that he could adapt quickly. However, qualifying and the race exposed how difficult it was to extract consistent performance from the car.

As the season progressed, Tsunoda continued searching for confidence.

He eventually realised that his biggest problem was not necessarily a lack of speed. Instead, he had not fully understood how to work with the behaviour of the RB21.

That realisation came with hindsight.

Tsunoda had spent four seasons developing his own understanding of how to work with a Formula 1 car. At Red Bull, he moved away from that process by placing too much emphasis on what Verstappen was doing.

The Red Bull RB21 remained difficult to understand

The Japanese driver has described the RB21 as a completely different challenge from the car he had driven previously.

His promotion to the senior Red Bull team came suddenly. He had already been familiar with the Racing Bulls environment. Then, from Suzuka onward, he had to adapt to a far more demanding machine.

The pressure was also different.

Tsunoda was now competing alongside Verstappen. That made every comparison more visible.

Instead of only focusing on his own progress, he found himself looking at the setup and driving approach used by the benchmark on the other side of the garage.

That comparison became counterproductive.

Tsunoda now believes that confidence should have come from understanding his own relationship with the car.

The more he tried to reproduce Verstappen’s configuration, the harder that process became.

The most striking part of Tsunoda’s reflection is how long the problem lasted.

He says that even after the 2025 season ended in Abu Dhabi, he still did not completely understand the RB21.

That was unusual for him.

Tsunoda had previously been able to develop a relationship with his cars over time. With Red Bull, that process never reached the same level.

The experience left him with a clear lesson.

A Formula 1 setup is not a universal formula. A configuration that allows one driver to extract the strengths of a car can create problems for another.

That lesson is especially relevant when the reference point is Verstappen.

Tsunoda did not need to make his Red Bull behave exactly like Verstappen’s Red Bull. He needed to find the configuration that allowed him to exploit the car in his own way.

That is the conclusion he has reached after looking back on the season.

His time with Red Bull therefore became more than a difficult chapter. It also showed him how important it is for a driver to trust his own feedback and understand the characteristics of the machine underneath him.

The key lesson from Tsunoda’s experience is clear: copying the fastest driver’s setup does not automatically make another driver faster.

For Tsunoda, understanding that difference came only after a full season of trying to make the RB21 work.

George Russell is waiting for Mercedes’ upgraded power unit before taking his 2026 engine penalty, with the change expected around Austin or Mexico City.

Both Mercedes drivers have already reached, or are expected to exceed, their permitted power-unit allocation. Kimi Antonelli already took a penalty at Monza after using additional components.

Antonelli started the Italian Grand Prix from 19th place. He then recovered through the field and won the race.

Russell was also expected to take a penalty in Baku. However, Mercedes chose a different approach.

The team is now waiting for its new power unit. The upgrade should arrive in late October, with Austin or Mexico City currently expected to be the key opportunities.

Russell explained why Mercedes decided to wait.

The driver does not want to take a penalty with one engine and then face another penalty when the upgraded unit arrives.

The plan is to make the change once and combine it with the new specification.

That gives Mercedes a more efficient way to manage its power-unit allocation during the final part of the season.

It also means Russell can introduce the upgraded hardware at the same time as the required penalty.

Why Mercedes can introduce another engine upgrade

Mercedes has been allowed an additional development opportunity under the ADUO system. The system is linked to the performance of the internal-combustion engine.

That opportunity allows Mercedes to introduce another power-unit development during the season.

The team is expected to use that opportunity later in 2026. According to the information provided, the new specification could arrive at Austin or Mexico City.

Mercedes therefore has to decide when the timing is most suitable.

Russell believes waiting makes more sense than taking the penalty earlier.

He explained that an earlier engine change could create another problem. If Mercedes later fitted the upgraded power unit, Russell could have been forced to take another penalty.

Waiting allows the team to align the penalty with the new engine specification.

That decision also gives Mercedes more flexibility when planning the final races.

The 2026 regulations have created a new technical environment for Formula 1. Power units now have a much closer balance between combustion and electrical power.

Mercedes’ W17 was designed for those new regulations. The car uses a new power unit, new chassis and active aerodynamic technology.

Antonelli will face a similar situation

Russell is not the only Mercedes driver affected by the power-unit allocation.

Antonelli will also receive a penalty when Mercedes introduces its new power unit. However, his situation is different because he has already exceeded his allocation.

As a result, his penalty will be five grid places for each new component, rather than ten places.

Antonelli already faced a major penalty at Monza. Mercedes therefore knows how important the timing of these changes can be.

The decision also affects Mercedes’ strategy for the rest of the season.

Ferrari has already introduced two upgrades during the campaign, while Mercedes has one additional opportunity under the ADUO system.

Russell expects the competitive picture to change when Mercedes finally introduces its update.

For now, however, the team is focused on choosing the right moment.

Austin and Mexico City are the two locations identified as possible debut points for the upgraded power unit. The final decision will depend on Mercedes’ preparation and the timing of the new components.

Russell’s penalty is therefore being delayed rather than avoided.

Mercedes wants to fit the upgraded power unit and accept the associated grid penalty at the same time.

That approach could prevent Russell from having to repeat the process later in the season.

The same principle applies to Antonelli, although his grid penalty will be calculated differently because of his current allocation.

The next major step will come when Mercedes confirms exactly when its upgraded power unit will enter competition.

Until then, George Russell F1 2026 plans remain focused on waiting for the new engine before serving his penalty.