← New search

2008 Pontiac Vibe

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2008 Pontiac Vibe do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 116.5.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Vibe years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

20 reports with mileage · 43 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Air Bags. Review the 48 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 4 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 3 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

3 crash reports0 fire reports3 injury reports

Engine And Engine Cooling complaints

3 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Nov 3, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling

2008 PONTIAC VIBE. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO SAFETY RECALL CONCERNING ENGINE STALLING WHILE DRIVING *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY THINKING THE VEHICLE WOULD BE REPAIRED. HOWEVER, THEY INFORMED HIM, THE VEHICLE NEEDED A NEW PART AND THEY WOULD CALL HIM ONCE THE PART ARRIVED. THE CONSUMER S…

Read full complaint

2008 PONTIAC VIBE. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO SAFETY RECALL CONCERNING ENGINE STALLING WHILE DRIVING *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A REPAIR FACILITY THINKING THE VEHICLE WOULD BE REPAIRED. HOWEVER, THEY INFORMED HIM, THE VEHICLE NEEDED A NEW PART AND THEY WOULD CALL HIM ONCE THE PART ARRIVED. THE CONSUMER STATED HE NEVER HEARD FROM THEM AGAIN. THE CONSUMER STATED HE CALLED FOR OVER A MONTH, ONLY TO BE TRANSFERRED SEVERAL TIMES TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE WITHIN THE COMPANY. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10434592

30,000 miles · Jun 30, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 PONTIAC VIBE. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, AND SUDDENLY THERE WAS A REDUCTION IN THE ENGINE POWER. WHEN AT A COMPLETE STOP THE ENGINE WOULD STALL WHILE THE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND WITHIN A FEW MINUTES THE ENGINE WOULD RESTART. NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN I…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 PONTIAC VIBE. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, AND SUDDENLY THERE WAS A REDUCTION IN THE ENGINE POWER. WHEN AT A COMPLETE STOP THE ENGINE WOULD STALL WHILE THE WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND WITHIN A FEW MINUTES THE ENGINE WOULD RESTART. NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 10V387000 (ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING) WAS RELATED TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THEY STATED THE PART DID NOT REQUIRE REPLACEMENT AND REFUSED TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE, EVEN THOUGH THE CONTACT EXPERIENCED THE CONSEQUENCE MENTIONED IN THE RECALL. THE CONTACT WILL NOTIFY THE MANUFACTURER OF THE DEFECT. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 30,000.

NHTSA ODI #10410044

3,000 miles · Apr 3, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling

DESCRIPTION OF MALFUNCTION: ENGINE ACCELERATED WHEN BRAKE WAS APPLIED. THIS CONDITION OCCURRED ONCE, BUT COULD HAVE CAUSE AN ACCIDENT. ON SATURDAY 3/29/08 (NO RAIN; TEMP 35 DEG F) , I WAS DRIVING ON A WINDING RURAL ROAD AND GOING AROUND 30 MPH. THE CRUISE CONTROL WAS OFF. I STARTED BRAKING SINCE I WAS GOING DOWN A SLIGHT GR…

Read full complaint

DESCRIPTION OF MALFUNCTION: ENGINE ACCELERATED WHEN BRAKE WAS APPLIED. THIS CONDITION OCCURRED ONCE, BUT COULD HAVE CAUSE AN ACCIDENT. ON SATURDAY 3/29/08 (NO RAIN; TEMP 35 DEG F) , I WAS DRIVING ON A WINDING RURAL ROAD AND GOING AROUND 30 MPH. THE CRUISE CONTROL WAS OFF. I STARTED BRAKING SINCE I WAS GOING DOWN A SLIGHT GRADE AND GETTING CLOSE TO A RED TRAFFIC LIGHT. SUDDENLY THE CAR STARTED SPEEDING UP, EVEN WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE. I NOTICED THAT THE IDLE WAS AROUND 3,000 RPM. I MANUALLY THREW THE AUTOMATIC GEAR SHIFT INTO NEUTRAL AND THE CAR STARTED RACING TO AROUND 4500 RPM. I STOPPED THE VEHICLE, TURNED OFF THE KEY, PUT THE CAR INTO PARK, AND APPLIED THE PARKING BRAKE. I PUT MY 4 WAYS ON AND CHECKED UNDER THE HOOD. OF COURSE, EVERYTHING LOOKED IN ORDER AND I COULD NOT LOCATE THE THROTTLE. I SHUT THE HOOD AND GOT BACK INTO THE CAR. I PUSHED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL THREE TIMES DOWN TO THE FLOOR. I WAITED A MINUTE AND THEN STARTED THE CAR. THE IDLE WAS BACK TO NORMAL AND THE CAR RAN NORMAL. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER TO GET CHECKED OUT ON WEDNESDAY 4/2/08. NO TROUBLE FOUND. NO OTHER OCCURRENCES OF THIS NATURE TO REPORT. THIS CONDITION IS EXTREMELY UNSAFE; NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED ASAP. MY VIBE ONLY HAS 3,000 MILES AND WAS PURCHASED NEW FROM A DEALER IN DECEMBER, 2007. BASED UPON YOUR SITE'S COMPLAINTS THAT I HAVE REVIEWED, THERE ARE OTHER PONTIAC VIBES, TOYOTA MATRIXS AND TOYOTA COROLLAS THAT HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION. FORTUNATELY THERE AREN'T THAT MANY THAT HAVE REPORTED THIS CONDITION, THERE ARE ENOUGH THAT SUPPORT THE FACT THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG AND NEEDS TO BE FIXED BEFORE SOMEONE GETS HURT. I UNDERSTAND THAT THESE MODELS DO NOT HAVE A CABLE THAT CONNECTS THE GAS PEDAL TO THE THROTTLE. THESE CARS HAVE AN ELECTRONIC THROTTLE. THERE APPEARS TO BE AN ELECTRICAL MALFUNCTION THAT IS OCCURRING. THERE MUST BE A COMPUTER MALFUNCTION, WIRING CONNECTOR PROBLEM, A SENSOR OR THROTTLE ACTUATOR THAT IS MALFUNCTIONING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10223277

Official recalls

4

19V627000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Aug 28, 2019

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2003-2008 Corolla, 2005-2008 Corolla Matrix, and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with a front passenger air bag assembly replaced under a prior recall. The air bag may not unfold as designed during inflation under high temperature conditions, possibly resulting in the air bag not inflating properly.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An improperly inflated air bag increases the risk of injury during a crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify their owners. Pontiac Vibe owners will be notified by GM. Dealers will replace the front passenger air bag assembly or sub-assembly, free of charge. Toyota owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are K1Q and K0Q. Pontiac owners may contact GM customer service at 1-800-762-2737. GM's number for this recall is N192273760.

16V127000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Mar 3, 2016

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2008-2010 Lexus SC vehicles manufactured August 3, 2007, to July 30, 2010, 2008 Toyota Corolla vehicles manufactured May 25, 2007, to December 21, 2007, 2008 Toyota Corolla Matrix vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to December 18, 2007, and 2008 Pontiac Vibe vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to January 2, 2008. This is to address a safety defect in the passenger side frontal air bag inflator which may produce excessive internal pressure causing the inflator to rupture upon deployment of the air bag. This recall addresses both the passenger side frontal air bags that were originally installed in the vehicles, as well as replacement air bags that may have been installed as replacement service parts. A replacement air bag may have been installed, as one example, if a vehicle had been in a crash necessitating the replacement of the passenger side frontal air bag.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants potentially resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: The recall began on March 25, 2016 for Toyota and Lexus vehicle owners. The recall began on June 23, 2016 for GM owners. The respective dealers will either replace the front passenger air bag inflator or the entire front passenger air bag assembly depending on the model. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331, or Pontiac customer service at 1-800-762-2737. This recall expands recall 15V-285.

16V128000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Mar 2, 2016

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2008-2010 Lexus SC vehicles manufactured August 3, 2007, to July 30, 2010, 2008 Toyota Corolla vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to December 21, 2007, 2008 Toyota Corolla Matrix vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to December 18, 2007, and 2008 Pontiac Vibe vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to January 2, 2008 that were originally sold, or ever registered, in Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, Saipan, American Samoa, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. The affected vehicles have a passenger side frontal air bag that may be susceptible to moisture intrusion which, over time, could cause the inflator to rupture upon its deployment.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants potentially resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: The recall began on March 25, 2016 for Toyota and Lexus vehicle owners. The recall began on June 8, 2016 for GM owners. The respective dealers will either replace the front passenger air bag inflator or the entire front passenger air bag assembly depending on the model. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331, or Pontiac customer service at 1-800-762-2737. This recall expands recall 15V-286.

10V387000 · Engine And Engine Cooling

Aug 26, 2010

GM IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2008 PONTIAC VIBE VEHICLES. THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE (ECM) FOR THE SUBJECT MODELS EQUIPPED WITH THE 1ZZ-FE (LV6) ENGINE AND TWO-WHEEL DRIVE MAY HAVE BEEN IMPROPERLY MANUFACTURED. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT A CRACK MAY DEVELOP AT CERTAIN SOLDER POINTS OR ON VARISTORS ON THE CIRCUIT BOARD.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THERE ARE A VARIETY OF WARNINGS AND CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEFECT. THE ENGINE WARNING LAMP COULD BE ILLUMINATED, HARSH SHIFTING COULD RESULT, THE ENGINE MAY NOT START, OR THE ENGINE COULD SHUT OFF WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN. AN ENGINE SHUTOFF WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN INCREASES THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE PRODUCTION NUMBER OF THE ECM AND REPLACE THE ECM IF NECESSARY. THIS SERVICE WILL BE PERFORMED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON FEBRUARY 8, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT GM AT 1-800-620-7668.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

2

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

EA10006 · Engine Stall

Opened Aug 18, 2010 · Closed Sep 16, 2010

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling

On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Engine And Engine Cooling

On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.

Engine And Engine Cooling

On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.