Structure. Review the 309 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Suspension. Review the 108 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Service Brakes. Review the 57 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

23 crash reports3 fire reports14 injury reports

Visibility complaints

8 reports

Clear category filter

97,000 miles · Mar 9, 2012

Visibility

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA 4 RUNNER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PARKED, THE DEFROSTER WAS ACTIVATED WHEN THE REAR WINDOW EXPLODED. THE VEHICLE WAS THEN TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THEY ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE FAILURE WAS CAUSED BY AN ELECTRICAL MALFUNCTION IN THE DEFROSTER. THE VEHICLE WAS THEN REPAIRED …

Read full complaint

NHTSA ODI #10450998

75,000 miles · Aug 10, 2010

Visibility

BOTH SUNVISORS HAVE FAILED, THEY DO NOT STAY UP OR ALL THE WAY DOWN ,THEY MUST BE HELD UP WITH VELCRO STRAPS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10348417

Mileage unknown · Jun 14, 2010

Visibility

2004 TOY 4RUNNER. DRIVERS SIDE SUN VISOR IS LOOSE AND "DROPS" INTO THE DRIVERS FILED OF VIEW, ESPECIALLY FOR A TALL DRIVER LIKE ME... LEANING FORWARD WILL ALLOW THE DRIVER TO HIT HEAD AGAINST IT. THIS STARTED A LITTLE WHILE AGO, AND IS NOW JUST ONGOING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10336275

75,000 miles · Jul 23, 2009

Visibility

I HAVE A 2004 TOYOTA 4 RUNNER THAT HAS A PROBLEM WITH ITS REAR WIPER BLADE NOT WORKING AND REAR DEFROST. I HAD TO BRING IT IN FOR THEM TO RESET IT AFTER THE RESET IT WORKED FOR ABOUT A WEEK THEN STOPPED WORKING AGAIN. I WAS TOLD THAT THERE'S A GLITCH IN THE WIPER AND REAR DEFROST COMPUTER THAT NEEDS REPLACEMENT BUT WAS NOT RECAL…

Read full complaint

NHTSA ODI #10278044

15,000 miles · Apr 16, 2009

Visibility

AFTER ABOUT 12MONTHS OF NORMAL/ TYPICAL USE, THE SUN VISOR (ON THE DRIVER SIDE) WILL NO LONGER STAY UP; IT CONSTANTLY DROPS. THIS IS A HUGE DISTRACTION AND OBSTRUCTS THE FIELD OF VIEW. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10265623

89,500 miles · Mar 28, 2009

Visibility

THE MOON ROOF WOULD NOT RETURN TO ORIGINAL POSITION, HAD TO BUY A REPAIR KIT FROM TOYOTA, THEY KNOW OF THIS PROBLEM BUT WOULD NOT FIX IT. HAD TO BRING REPAIR KIT TO A LOCAL BODY SHOP. TOYOTA KNOWS OF THIS PROBLEM, BUT DOES NOT THINK IT DANGEROUS ENOUGH TO FIX AT THEIR COST. LAID OUT 225.00 TO FIX. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10263520

45,000 miles · Jan 13, 2009

Visibility

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA 4RUNNER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BLOWER MOTOR THAT PRODUCES THE HEAT IS FROZEN. WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS, HE CANNOT DEFROST THE WINDOW. THE DEALER STATED THAT THERE WAS A SAFETY BULLETIN FOR THIS FAILURE, BUT THE CONTACT WOULD HAVE TO PAY $600 FOR THE REPAIR. HE LEFT THE VEHICLE AT T…

Read full complaint

NHTSA ODI #10254825

Mileage unknown · May 8, 2008

StructureVisibility

Read full complaint

-HATCHBACK ELECTRONIC CLOSURE FAILS FOR THE SECOND TIME WITHIN A ONE YEAR PERIOD -REPLACED MOTOR ONCE BECAUSE VEHICLE DOES NOT OPERATE WITHOUT--EXHAUST FUMES COME THROUGH THE HATCHBACK, UNABLE TO LOCK VEHICLE, LIGHTS DON'T AUTOMATICALLY SHUT OFF, WATER DURING RAIN OR SNOW GETS INSIDE VEHICLE, ETC THERE IS NO MANUAL OVER-RIDE TO ENABLE CLOSING THE HATCHBACK THERE IS NO PURPOSE FOR AN ELECTRONIC CLOSING DEVICE--YOU STILL MANUALLY PULL DOWN THE HATCH, AND ONCE CLOSED, THE MOTOR ENGAGES TO LATCH IT SHUT! THE PART WASN'T COVERED UNDER WARRANTY, DESPITE OTHER HATCHBACK COMPLAINTS (POOR AERODYNAMIC DESIGN WITH LOTS OF DIRT THROWN UP ON HATCHBACK), SO THERE HAVE BEEN ISSUES WITH USING THE KEY LOCK, BEING UNABLE TO ROLL DOWN THE WINDOW, AND NOW THE VEHICLE IS RUSTING AROUND THE WINDOW. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10227060

Official recalls

16V065000 · Air Bags:side/window

Feb 5, 2016

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2003-2006 Toyota Land Cruiser and Lexus LX470, 2005-2006 Toyota Tundra and Sequoia, 2004-2006 Toyota 4Runner and Lexus GX470 vehicles equipped with side curtain-shield-air bags. The affected vehicles have an air bag control module that may be improperly programmed, causing the side curtain-shield-air bags to deploy inadvertently.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: If the side curtain-shield-air bags deploy unexpectedly, it can increase the risk of occupant injury.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will replace the air bag control module with one that has improved programming, free of charge. The recall began on December 1, 2016. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-271-9371. Toyota's number for this recall is G0C and GLB.

11V113000 · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

Feb 24, 2011

TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2008 THROUGH 2011 LEXUS LX570, 2003 THROUGH 2009 TOYOTA 4RUNNER, AND 2006 THROUGH 2010 RAV4 VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.

Remedy: THE REMEDY IS NOW AVAILABLE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN EARLY APRIL 2011. THE REMEDY WILL INVOLVE MODIFICATION OR REPLACEMENT OF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND REPLACEMENT OF ANY TOYOTA ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MAT. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331 OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.

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

DP18002 · 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

RQ10003 · Unintended And Uncontrolled Acceleration

Opened Feb 16, 2010 · Closed Mar 1, 2011

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:software; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

On February 16, 2010, NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened RQ10-003 to determine whether the scope of prior Toyota recalls relating to potential unintended acceleration were sufficiently broad, including, among others, Toyota recalls 07E-082, 09V-388, 10V-017, and 10V-023.NHTSA also requested information regarding potential electronic causes of unintended acceleration in Toyota and Lexus vehicles.I. Pedal Interference from Floor mats, Carpet Covers and Plastic Pads in Carpets.During the RQ10-003 investigation, ODI reviewed a large volume of documents to assess whether additional vehicles should be recalled.Following the agency's analysis, NHTSA requested that Toyota recall additional vehicles.Toyota complied with the agency's request.The details of these recalls are set forth more fully in Toyota's reports to NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573.These recalls are as follows:Recall 11V-112: (1) model year (MY) 2004-2006 Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid; and, (2) MY 2004-2007 Lexus RX330,RX350, and RX400h (hybrid model). The total estimated population under this recall is 769,379 vehicles.This recall remedies potential accelerator pedal entrapment caused by a loose floor carpet cover (trim panel). Recall 11V-113: (1) MY 2003-2009 through 2009 Toyota 4Runner; (2) MY 2006-2010 Toyota RAV4; and, (3) MY 2008-2011 Lexus LX570.The total estimated population under this recall is 1,381,000 vehicles.This recall supplements recall 09V-388 and remedies potential accelerator pedal entrapment by an unsecured floor mat.Recall 11V-115: (1) MY 2006-2007 Lexus GS300 (all wheel drive vehicles); and, (2) MY 2006-2007 Lexus GS350 (all wheel drive vehicles). The total estimated population under this recall is 19,647 vehicles.This recall remedies potential accelerator pedal entrapment caused by inadequate clearance between the pedal linkage and a plastic pad embedded in the vehicle's carpet.II. Potential Electronic Causes of Unintended Acceleration.After NHTSA opened RQ10-003, NHTSA launched a ten-month study of potential electronic causes of unintended acceleration in Toyota vehicles.NHTSA launched the study in the spring of 2010 in light of concerns aired in Congressional hearings.NHTSA enlisted engineers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) with expertise in areas such as computer controlled electronic systems, electromagnetic interference and software integrity to assess whether electronic systems or electromagnetic interference played a role in incidents of unintended acceleration in Toyota vehicles.That study has concluded.Two reports are associated with the study and are available on NHTSA's website.NASA's report is entitled Technical Support to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) on the Reported Toyota Motor Corporation (TMC) Unintended Acceleration (UA) Investigation, NESC Assessment No. TI-10-00618 (Jan. 18, 2011).NHTSA's report is entitled Technical Assessment of Toyota Electronic Throttle Control (ETC) Systems (Feb. 2011).Both reports should be read in conjunction with each other. As stated in its report, NASA did not find an electronic cause of large throttle openings that can result in unintended acceleration incidents. NHTSA did not find a vehicle-based cause of unintended acceleration incidents other than the physical pedal interference causes that are being addressed by Toyota's recalls. This RQ is closed.

Additional source detail variants (6)

Electrical System:software

Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal