NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
192 reports160,000 miles · Mar 10, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA 4RUNNER. WHILE TRAVELING AT A SPEED OF 5 MPH ATTEMPTING TO PARK, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED, CAUSING THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO A NEARBY VEHICLE AND THEN INTO A BUILDING. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED FOR THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS REPAIRED FOR THE …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA 4RUNNER. WHILE TRAVELING AT A SPEED OF 5 MPH ATTEMPTING TO PARK, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED, CAUSING THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO A NEARBY VEHICLE AND THEN INTO A BUILDING. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED FOR THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS REPAIRED FOR THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER HAD NOT BEEN CONTACTED, THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS AT 160000, THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 185000. UPDATED 05/07/2010. *LJ THE DRIVER OF THE OTHER VEHICLE WAS INJURED. UPDATED 09/13/10
NHTSA ODI #10318528
Mileage unknown · Feb 4, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
READING ABOUT THE PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEMS OF THE TOYOTA PRIUS, I LEARNED THAT THE BRAKING SYSTEM MIGHT NOT WORK WHEN THE VEHICLE HITS A POTHOLE, UNEVEN PAVEMENT, OR BUMP. I'VE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM IN MY '02 4RUNNER. IF THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE HITS A BUMP, THE BRAKES FEEL AS IF THEY ARE NOT WORKING, (BRAKE…
Read full complaint
READING ABOUT THE PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEMS OF THE TOYOTA PRIUS, I LEARNED THAT THE BRAKING SYSTEM MIGHT NOT WORK WHEN THE VEHICLE HITS A POTHOLE, UNEVEN PAVEMENT, OR BUMP. I'VE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM IN MY '02 4RUNNER. IF THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE HITS A BUMP, THE BRAKES FEEL AS IF THEY ARE NOT WORKING, (BRAKE PEDAL GOES STRAIGHT TO THE FLOOR W/NO PRESSURE). THIS ISSUE GOES AWAY IF YOU RELEASE THE BRAKE PEDAL AND REAPPLY PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE, (PUMP). I ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS WAS "NORMAL" UNTIL I READ ABOUT THE PRIUS ISSUES WITH IT'S BRAKING SYSTEM. THE ISSUES WITH THE PRIUS SOUND TOO SIMILAR TO DISMISS THE ISSUE AS JUST A PROBLEM WITH THE CAR'S ELECTRIC ENGINE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10305211
74,600 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Power Train
I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF A 2002 TOYOTA 4RUNNER-SR5, SPORT EDITION WITH 74,600K MILES. IN NOVEMBER 2009, I EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM THAT'S BEING REPORTED BY OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS WHOSE VEHICLES ARE BEING RECALLED. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL STUCK IN A PARTIALLY DEPRESSED POSITION ON ITS OWN AND QUITE SUDDENLY. THIS OCCURRENCE ON…
Read full complaint
I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF A 2002 TOYOTA 4RUNNER-SR5, SPORT EDITION WITH 74,600K MILES. IN NOVEMBER 2009, I EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM THAT'S BEING REPORTED BY OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS WHOSE VEHICLES ARE BEING RECALLED. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL STUCK IN A PARTIALLY DEPRESSED POSITION ON ITS OWN AND QUITE SUDDENLY. THIS OCCURRENCE ONLY HAPPENED ONCE. THE ENGINE WAS RACING AT A VERY HIGH RPM AND MY REAR TIRES WERE SQUEALING LOUD ENOUGH TO DRAW ATTENTION FROM PASSERSBY. LUCKILY FOR ME I WAS SLOWLY PULLING INTO A PARKING SLOT. MY REACTION TO THIS SITUATION WAS TO PUT THE GEAR IN NEUTRAL AND APPLIED THE BRAKES. MY MAIN CONCERN IS IF THE ONGOING INVESTIGATION BY THE NHTSA AND TOYOTA WILL INCLUDE A LOOK-BACK AT EARLIER MODELS FOR THESE KNOWN PROBLEMS? AND, IF SO, WHAT IS THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATION TO OWNERS' WITH EARLIER MODELS? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304936
113,000 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I OWN A TOYOTA 4 RUNNER. WHILE DRIVING ACROSS COUNTRY LAST FALL I NOTICED THAT THE TRUCK WOULD ACCELERATE RAPIDLY WHEN I HAD CRUISE CONTROL ON. THE CRUISE CONTROL WOULD KICK IN AS IT SHOULD HAVE BUT IT WOULD ACCELERATE VERY RAPIDLY AND FELT OUT OF CONTROL. ONCE IT BEGAN THE ACCELERATION, IT WOULD NEVER STOP AND LEVEL OUT TO THE …
Read full complaint
I OWN A TOYOTA 4 RUNNER. WHILE DRIVING ACROSS COUNTRY LAST FALL I NOTICED THAT THE TRUCK WOULD ACCELERATE RAPIDLY WHEN I HAD CRUISE CONTROL ON. THE CRUISE CONTROL WOULD KICK IN AS IT SHOULD HAVE BUT IT WOULD ACCELERATE VERY RAPIDLY AND FELT OUT OF CONTROL. ONCE IT BEGAN THE ACCELERATION, IT WOULD NEVER STOP AND LEVEL OUT TO THE APPROPRIATE SPEED AS IT SHOULD HAVE. IT WOULD CONTINUE TO ACCELERATE. BRAKING WORKED IN SLOWING THE VEHICLE DOWN, BUT IT FRIGHTENED ME WHILE I WAS DRIVING. I DO NOT USE THE CRUISE CONTROL NOW AS A RESULT OF THIS. I WAS DRIVING R/T FROM CA TO DENVER, CO AND IT HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES DURING THIS TRIP. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304212
39,000 miles · Oct 15, 2009
Structure
LARGE AMOUNT OF RUST ON THE UNDERBODY, GAS TANK SHIELD AND FRONT BRAKES. JUST PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE USED WITH 39K MILES AND HAVE BEEN FINDING LOST OF CORROSION. TRIED TO USE RUST REMOVER AND NEUTRALIZER AND WIRE BRUSH. HOPE I CAN GET IT UNDER CONTROL BEFORE THE ENTIRE THING FALLS APART. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10288606
Mileage unknown · Oct 15, 2009
Structure
I HAVE A 2002 TOYOTA 4RUNNER. IT'S UNDER MY WIFE'S NAME BUT I AM THE ONE THAT'S IN CHARGE OF AUTOMOTIVE ISSUES. THE BUMPERS HAVE BEEN HANGING DOWN ON THE FRONT AND REAR. AS I DRIVE AROUND THE CITY, I'VE STARTED TO NOTICE MAJORITY OF THE 4RUNNERS IN THE SAME MODEL HAVING THE SAME ISSUE. THIS MAKES ME THINK THAT THERE IS A DEF…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2002 TOYOTA 4RUNNER. IT'S UNDER MY WIFE'S NAME BUT I AM THE ONE THAT'S IN CHARGE OF AUTOMOTIVE ISSUES. THE BUMPERS HAVE BEEN HANGING DOWN ON THE FRONT AND REAR. AS I DRIVE AROUND THE CITY, I'VE STARTED TO NOTICE MAJORITY OF THE 4RUNNERS IN THE SAME MODEL HAVING THE SAME ISSUE. THIS MAKES ME THINK THAT THERE IS A DEFECT. I BELIEVE IT'S A SAFETY DEFECT ESPECIALLY SINCE BUMPERS ARE NOT JUST FOR COSMETIC REASONS, ITS HIGHLY EFFECTIVE IN A CRASH SITUATION. IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE BECAUSE IT IS ALSO LINKED TO THE AIRBAG SENSORS AND I AM AFRAID THAT IT MAY GO OFF AT ANY TIME. I'VE GONE ON FORUMS AND FOUND THAT OTHERS TALK ABOUT THIS ALSO. THEY ALSO TALK ABOUT RUSTING AROUND THE BUMPER AREA WHICH IS SOMETHING I HAVE ON MY 4RUNNER ALSO. I HOPE YOUR DEPARTMENT LOOKS INTO THIS MATTER THOROUGHLY AND GET BACK TO ME ABOUT IT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10287464
90,000 miles · May 11, 2009
Power Train
I HAVE A 2002 TOYOTA 4 RUNNER WITH RUST OUT OF THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING. I TOOK THE VEHICLE IN FOR REPAIRS ONLY TO DISCOVER THAT METAL WAS QUITE RUSTED AT THE REAR HOUSING AND INSTEAD OF A SIMPLE PART REPLACEMENT, THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY HAS TO BE REPLACED, A COSTLY REPAIR. I FOUND OTHER OWNERS WITH SIMILAR STORIES ONLINE. IS TH…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2002 TOYOTA 4 RUNNER WITH RUST OUT OF THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING. I TOOK THE VEHICLE IN FOR REPAIRS ONLY TO DISCOVER THAT METAL WAS QUITE RUSTED AT THE REAR HOUSING AND INSTEAD OF A SIMPLE PART REPLACEMENT, THE WHOLE ASSEMBLY HAS TO BE REPLACED, A COSTLY REPAIR. I FOUND OTHER OWNERS WITH SIMILAR STORIES ONLINE. IS THIS A DEFECTIVE PART? I HAD TEMPORARY REPAIR WITH GRINDING, WELDING AND EPOXY WHICH FOR THE TIME BEING HAS CORRECTED THE LEAK BUT EVENTUALLY IT WILL REAPPEAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10268349
127,000 miles · Dec 2, 2008
Engine And Engine CoolingFire
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA 4RUNNER. WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD THE PISTON CONNECTING ROD POP WHEN HE SWITCHED LANES. AS A RESULT, OIL LEAKED OUT OF THE ENGINE MANIFOLD AND CAUSED A FIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THERE WAS CATASTROPHIC FAILURE TO THE ENGINE. THE DEALER NOTIF…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA 4RUNNER. WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD THE PISTON CONNECTING ROD POP WHEN HE SWITCHED LANES. AS A RESULT, OIL LEAKED OUT OF THE ENGINE MANIFOLD AND CAUSED A FIRE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THERE WAS CATASTROPHIC FAILURE TO THE ENGINE. THE DEALER NOTIFIED THE MANUFACTURER TO REPAIR THE ENGINE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 127,000.
NHTSA ODI #10250532
50,000 miles · Aug 11, 2008
Engine And Engine Cooling
BURNING TOO MUCH OIL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10237778
95,500 miles · Aug 2, 2008
Power Train
CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME IN, IT WAS DIAGNOSED AS A 770 SHIFT SOLENOID-E AND I WAS TOLD BY TWO DIFFERENT EXPERTS THAT MY TRANSMISSION WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE TOYOTA 4-RUNNER WAS PURCHASED IN JANUARY 2008 FROM FOLSOM LAKE TOYOTA WITH 89,000 MILES AND CURRENTLY HAS 95,500 MILES ON IT. THE ESTIMATE FOR REPAIR WAS $2,300.00. …
Read full complaint
CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME IN, IT WAS DIAGNOSED AS A 770 SHIFT SOLENOID-E AND I WAS TOLD BY TWO DIFFERENT EXPERTS THAT MY TRANSMISSION WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE TOYOTA 4-RUNNER WAS PURCHASED IN JANUARY 2008 FROM FOLSOM LAKE TOYOTA WITH 89,000 MILES AND CURRENTLY HAS 95,500 MILES ON IT. THE ESTIMATE FOR REPAIR WAS $2,300.00. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10236742
NHTSA investigations
1DP18002 · Frame Corrosion
Opened Aug 17, 2018 · Closed Mar 18, 2022
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:frame And Members
On August 7, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a defect petition from Mr. Gary Weinreich alleging premature frame corrosion failure in model year (MY) 2002 - 2006 Toyota 4Runner vehicles. The petitioner based his request upon a corrosion-related front suspension failure he experienced in his MY 2005 Toyota 4Runner, a class action lawsuit settlement involving other Toyota products, and other complaints of underbody corrosion in Toyota 4Runner vehicles that he found in NHTSA?s online complaint database. The petitioner submitted a complaint to NHTSA documenting his experience (NHTSA ID 11098055). On August 17, 2018, ODI opened DP18-002 to evaluate the petitioner?s request. ODI?s evaluation included information provided by the petitioner regarding his vehicle, facts related to the class action lawsuit cited by the petitioner, and consumer complaint data received by NHTSA regarding underbody corrosion in third and fourth-generation Toyota 4Runner vehicles.The undercarriage of the petitioner?s vehicle exhibited severe corrosion damage indicative of seawater immersion. The vehicle?s service history shows that concerns with underbody corrosion were first noted by a Toyota dealer in a multi-point vehicle inspection performed on April 28, 2011. The invoice for that inspection noted ?severe and excessive amount of rust on the undercarriage and on the drive shaft transmission.? Two years later, on October 21, 2013, another multi-point inspection by a Toyota dealer observed further progression of underbody corrosion damage, noting: ?rust on shocks/struts and other components,? ?rust on exhaust system,? ?both splash shields severely rusted,? and ?undercarriage very rusty.? On July 17, 2017, approximately 10 months prior to experiencing the suspension failure incident, an independent repair facility performing routine oil change and brake maintenance informed the Petitioner of a concern with ?excessive frame corrosion? on his vehicle. The service history, severe general corrosion damage, failure age, and environment do not support the petitioner?s allegation of premature corrosion failure.ODI?s analysis of NHTSA complaint data identified fifteen incidents of front lower control arm failure in fourth-generation Toyota 4Runner sport utility vehicles. Two of the failures, including the petitioner?s vehicle, involve vehicles operated in ocean front communities with continuous exposure to aerosolized marine salts and potential exposure to seawater immersion. The remaining thirteen failures all involved vehicles owned or previously registered in states with the greatest use of deicing salts to treat road surfaces in winter months (?Salt states?). On average, the front lower control arm failures occurred after 13.1 years in service in highly corrosive environments. The failure ages and environments do not support the petitioner?s allegation of premature corrosion failure. NHTSA is authorized to issue an order requiring notification and remedy of a defect if the Agency?s investigation shows a defect in design, construction, or performance of a motor vehicle that presents an unreasonable risk to safety. 49 U.S.C. ?? 30102(a)(9), 30118. Since the information before the Agency is not indicative of a vehicle-based defect, it is unlikely that any investigation opened because of granting this petition would result in an order concerning the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect. Therefore, upon full consideration of the information presented in the petition and the potential risks to safety, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not foreclose the Agency from taking further action if warranted or the p