NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
60 reports41,000 miles · Nov 27, 2009
Equipment Adaptive/mobilityCrash
MY WIFE HIT THE BRAKE AS SHE WAS PARKING IN FRONT OF A STRIP MALL AND THE CAR ACCELERATED INTO A STORE FRONT CAUSING MINOR DAMAGE TO BOTH THE STORE AND THE CAR. THE FLOOR MAT HAD BUNCHED UP UNDER THE BRAKE PEDAL AND ABOVE THE GAS PEDAL. THE CAR IS A 2002 TOYOTA SOLARA CONVERTIBLE. I AM REPORTING THE INCIDENT NOW BECAUSE THIS YEA…
Read full complaint
MY WIFE HIT THE BRAKE AS SHE WAS PARKING IN FRONT OF A STRIP MALL AND THE CAR ACCELERATED INTO A STORE FRONT CAUSING MINOR DAMAGE TO BOTH THE STORE AND THE CAR. THE FLOOR MAT HAD BUNCHED UP UNDER THE BRAKE PEDAL AND ABOVE THE GAS PEDAL. THE CAR IS A 2002 TOYOTA SOLARA CONVERTIBLE. I AM REPORTING THE INCIDENT NOW BECAUSE THIS YEAR AND MODEL ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOYOTA RECALL FOR THIS PROBLEM. IT SHOULD BE. I REPORTED THE INCIDENT TO TOYOTA SEVERAL MONTHS AGO AND THEY THANKED ME FOR THE INPUT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10293711
Mileage unknown · Oct 21, 2009
Tires
TIRE BLOW OUT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10289268
119,732 miles · Oct 20, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE FLOOR-MATS ARE SHIFTING UNDER THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE MATS WERE EXCHANGED TWICE. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED, AND A TECHNICIAN ADVISED HER TO REMOVE THE DRIVER-SIDE FLOOR-MAT. HER VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOYOTA FLOOR-MAT RECALL. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 119,732.
NHTSA ODI #10289099
95,900 miles · Sep 22, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT CONTROL PANEL, AND THEN THE ENGINE OVERHEATED. HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL REPAIR FACILITY. THE TECHNICIAN CONCLUDED THAT THE ENGINE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE THERE WAS LEAKAGE FROM THE ENGINE GA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENGINE WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED ON THE INSTRUMENT CONTROL PANEL, AND THEN THE ENGINE OVERHEATED. HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL REPAIR FACILITY. THE TECHNICIAN CONCLUDED THAT THE ENGINE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE THERE WAS LEAKAGE FROM THE ENGINE GASKETS DUE TO STRIPPED HEAD BOLTS. HE THEN ADDED THAT HE WAS INELIGIBLE FOR FREE REMEDY. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 95,900. UPDATED 10/21/09. *LJ UPDATED 10/20/09.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10284848
78,000 miles · Jul 12, 2009
Fuel System, Gasoline
MY CAMRY SOLARA 2004 SUDDENLY STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FREEWAY DUE TO A THROTTLE BODY FAILURE, THANKS GOD I WAS ABLE TO GET TO THE EMERGENCY LANE ON TIME AND BE ABLE TO PREVENT AN ACCIDENT, AFTER AN EXTENSIVE RESEARCH I FIND OUT THAT THIS IS A COMMON ISSUE WITH THIS VEHICLE AND TOYOTA MOTORS SO FAR HAS IGNORED THIS PROBLEM. *T…
Read full complaint
MY CAMRY SOLARA 2004 SUDDENLY STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FREEWAY DUE TO A THROTTLE BODY FAILURE, THANKS GOD I WAS ABLE TO GET TO THE EMERGENCY LANE ON TIME AND BE ABLE TO PREVENT AN ACCIDENT, AFTER AN EXTENSIVE RESEARCH I FIND OUT THAT THIS IS A COMMON ISSUE WITH THIS VEHICLE AND TOYOTA MOTORS SO FAR HAS IGNORED THIS PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10276442
Mileage unknown · Oct 13, 2008
Seat Belts
THIS COMPLAINT IS THE SAME WITH CASE #10243192 - DRIVER SIDE SEAT BELT AND BACK SEAT BELT,DO NOT RETRACT SOMETIMES. IM THE ORIGINAL OWNER AND THE MILEAGE IS CLOSE TO 95000. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10245307
94,000 miles · Sep 23, 2008
Seat Belts
ON MY 2002 TOYOTA SOLARA CONVERTIBLE THE FRONT SEAT BELTS DO NOT RETRACT. I WAS TOLD BY A TOYOTA SERVICE MANAGER THAT THE SEAT BELT RETRACTOR SPRINGS HAVE WEAKENED AND NEED TO BE REPLACED. I CALLED THE TOYOTA CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CENTER AND THEY SAY BECAUSE THE CAR IS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY THAT I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR GETTING TH…
Read full complaint
ON MY 2002 TOYOTA SOLARA CONVERTIBLE THE FRONT SEAT BELTS DO NOT RETRACT. I WAS TOLD BY A TOYOTA SERVICE MANAGER THAT THE SEAT BELT RETRACTOR SPRINGS HAVE WEAKENED AND NEED TO BE REPLACED. I CALLED THE TOYOTA CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CENTER AND THEY SAY BECAUSE THE CAR IS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY THAT I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR GETTING THE PROBLEM FIXED. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT SOMETHING AS IMPORTANT AS SEAT BELTS SHOULD BRAKE ON A CAR. I HAVE OWNED MANY CARS AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT I HAVE SEEN THIS PROBLEM. THE CAR HAS 94,000 MILES ON IT AND WAS A ONE OWNER CAR WHEN I BOUGHT IT 2 WEEKS AGO. THE MSRP FOR THE PARTS ARE OVER $200 FOR EACH SEAT BELT. I THINK THIS IS A DESIGN FLAW AND A SAFETY HAZARD ON THESE CARS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10243192
70,000 miles · May 14, 2008
Seats
MY COMPLAINT IS THE SAME WITH CASE #10224937. THE DRIVER SEAT ADJUSTER FAILED TO FUNCTION PROPERLY. SINCE THIS IS MY WIFE'S CAR, MOST OF THE TIME SHE'S REACHING HARD THE PEDALS. I DIDNT BRING MY CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP BECAUSE MY WARRANTY IS EXPIRED. FAILURE MILEAGE IS BETWEEN 70,000 - 80,000 MILES AND UNTIL NOW. PRESENT MILEAGE …
Read full complaint
MY COMPLAINT IS THE SAME WITH CASE #10224937. THE DRIVER SEAT ADJUSTER FAILED TO FUNCTION PROPERLY. SINCE THIS IS MY WIFE'S CAR, MOST OF THE TIME SHE'S REACHING HARD THE PEDALS. I DIDNT BRING MY CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP BECAUSE MY WARRANTY IS EXPIRED. FAILURE MILEAGE IS BETWEEN 70,000 - 80,000 MILES AND UNTIL NOW. PRESENT MILEAGE IS 90,400. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10227694
91,000 miles · Apr 18, 2008
Seats
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. ON APRIL 14, 2008, THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE SEAT ADJUSTER FAILED TO FUNCTION PROPERLY. BOTH THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT HER WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER THAT TYPE OF FAILURE. SHE CURRENTLY HAS TO USE PILLOWS TO REACH BOTH THE ACCELERATOR AND BRAKE PEDALS. THE …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. ON APRIL 14, 2008, THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE SEAT ADJUSTER FAILED TO FUNCTION PROPERLY. BOTH THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT HER WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER THAT TYPE OF FAILURE. SHE CURRENTLY HAS TO USE PILLOWS TO REACH BOTH THE ACCELERATOR AND BRAKE PEDALS. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 91,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 91,010. UPDATED 05/13/08. *LJ
NHTSA ODI #10224937
40,000 miles · Nov 30, 2006
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE APPLYING BRAKE PRESSURE AT 10 MPH THROUGH A PARKING LOT, THE BRAKE PEDAL WENT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE FLOORBOARD, AND THERE WAS A LOSS OF ALL BRAKING POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED FORWARD MOTION STRIKING THREE NEARBY PEDESTRIANS WHO SUSTAINED SERIOUS INJURIES TO THE UPPER AND LOWER E…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE APPLYING BRAKE PRESSURE AT 10 MPH THROUGH A PARKING LOT, THE BRAKE PEDAL WENT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE FLOORBOARD, AND THERE WAS A LOSS OF ALL BRAKING POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED FORWARD MOTION STRIKING THREE NEARBY PEDESTRIANS WHO SUSTAINED SERIOUS INJURIES TO THE UPPER AND LOWER EXTREMITIES, AND CRASHED INTO A BUILDING. THERE WAS MODERATE DAMAGE TO THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. THE POLICE WERE ALERTED, AND A REPORT WAS TAKEN. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP, WHO WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. AFTERWARDS, THE BRAKING PROBLEM PERSISTED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY A DEALER WHO WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AS WELL. THE MANUFACTURER WAS ALERTED.
NHTSA ODI #10174816
NHTSA investigations
3DP06003 · Engine Surging
Opened Sep 14, 2006 · Closed Apr 3, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Vehicle Speed Control
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
DP05002 · Vehicle Speed Control
Opened Aug 5, 2005 · Closed Jan 5, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
IN A LETTER DATED JULY 8, 2005, AND AFTER EXPERIENCING TWO INCIDENTS (AND ONE CRASH) WHERE HE ALLEGES HIS MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002 CAMRY ACCELERATED WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT, MR. JORDAN ZIPRIN PETITIONED THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION?S (NHTSA) OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) TO COMMENCE A PROCEEDING TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF A DEFECT WITHIN THE ETC SYSTEM IN MY 2002 TO 2005 TOYOTA AND LEXUS VEHICLES, OR TO REOPEN A PRIOR INVESTIGATION PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE) 04-021.IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 18, 2005, MR. ZIPRIN AMENDED HIS PETITION TO INCLUDE ALLEGATIONS OF INTERRELATED BRAKE AND ACCELERATION PROBLEMS THAT ALLEGEDLY RESULT IN INAPPROPRIATE AND UNCONTROLLABLE VEHICLE ACCELERATIONS.THE 1172 VEHICLE OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE REPORTS CITED BY THE PETITIONER INVOLVE 4 LEXUS AND 15 TOYOTA MODELS DEFINING A POPULATION OF 7 MILLION VEHICLES.THE REPORTS TYPICALLY ALLEGED A DEFECT IN THE BRAKE SYSTEM, THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH SYSTEMS.IN ITS REVIEW OF THE REPORTS, ODI A) FAILED TO FIND EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A BRAKE RELATED DEFECT IN THE CITED MODELS, AND B) DETERMINED THAT MANY CITED PRODUCTS WERE NOT EQUIPPED WITH ETC.ACCORDINGLY, ODI RESTRICTED ITS ANALYSIS TO THE 432 PETITIONER REPORTS INVOLVING MY 2002 TO 2005 CAMRY, SOLARA, AND ES MODELS (ALL EQUIPPED WITH ETC) THAT ALLEGED AN ABNORMAL THROTTLE CONTROL EVENT (SEE THE JANUARY 3, 2006 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS).ABOUT 40% OF THE 432 REPORTS INVOLVE A DRIVEABILITY CONCERN WHERE THE OPERATOR INTENTIONALLY APPLIES THE THROTTLE PEDAL, IN EXPECTATION THAT THE VEHICLE WILL ACCELERATE, AND THEN EXPERIENCES A DELAY OR HESITATION IN VEHICLE RESPONSE.THESE REPORTS INVOLVE VEHICLE RESPONSE TO INTENTIONAL DRIVER COMMANDS WHICH ODI CONSIDERS UNRELATED TO THE ALLEGATIONS RAISED BY THE PETITIONER.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED.ABOUT 20% OF THE REPORTS INVOLVE INCIDENTS WHERE OPERATORS ALLEGE VEHICLE ACCELERATION WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND AN INABILITY OF THE BRAKE SYSTEM TO CONTROL THE VEHICLE WHEN APPLIED.NEITHER THE REPORTS, NOR THE INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED BY ODI, IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE INCIDENTS OR DISCLOSED EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT A FAILURE OF THE BRAKE OR THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM HAD OCCURRED.BECAUSE THESE REPORTS DO NOT INDICATE A DISTINCT SAFETY DEFECT FOR INVESTIGATION, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONERTHE REMAINING REPORTS (~ 40%, SIMILAR TO THE PETITIONER?S AND THOSE OF PE04-021) TYPICALLY DESCRIBE INCIDENTS WHERE A VEHICLE IS BEING MANEUVERED AT SLOW SPEED IN A CLOSE QUARTER SITUATION AT WHICH POINT THE OPERATOR ALLEGES THAT THE VEHICLE ACCELERATES WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND CRASHES.IN THE AFTERMATH, OPERATORS ARE UNSURE OF WHETHER THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED OR NOT, SOMETIMES STATING THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT TIME TO USE THE BRAKE; A CRASH OCCURRED AND THE OPERATOR BELIEVES AN UNCOMMANDED ACCELERATION CAUSED IT.IN SPITE OF THE EFFORT EXPENDED DURING PE04-021 AND DURING THIS ANALYSIS, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE REPORTS, OR UNCOVERED ANY EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT A THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM FAILURE OCCURRED.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS HAVE AMBIGUOUS SIGNIFICANCE AND DO NOT CONSTITUTE A BASIS ON WHICH ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATIVE ACTION IS WARRANTED.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES T
PE04021 · Throttle Control System
Opened Mar 3, 2004 · Closed Jul 22, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
THE LEXUS MODELS WERE THE SUBJECT OF DEFECT PETITION (DP) 04-003.TWELVE ODI COMPLAINTS ARE DUPLICATIVE TO TOYOTA REPORTS, INCLUDING THE TWO MINOR CRASHES.THE V6 EQUIPPED SOLARA MODELS HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED BECAUSE THEY DO NOT CONTAIN THE SUBJECT THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM.TOYOTA INTRODUCED ELECTRONIC THROTTLE CONTROL (ETC) ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES BEGINNING IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002.ODI OPENED THE INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE IF THE SYSTEM COULD BE THE CAUSE OF COMPLAINTS ALLEGING THE ENGINE SPEED INCREASED, OR FAILED TO DECREASE, (FOR A SHORT DURATION) WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS NOT DEPRESSED (THE ALLEGED DEFECT).DURING THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION, ODI ANALYZED AGENCY DATA AND REVIEWED VEHICLE OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE (VOQ) REPORTS, CONDUCTED INTERVIEWS INVOLVING 113 VOQ AND 36 TOYOTA REPORTS, INSPECTED TWO COMPLAINANT VEHICLES, REVIEWED RELEVANT TOYOTA SERVICE AND NEW CAR FEATURE DOCUMENTATION, REVIEWED AND ANALYZED TOYOTA?S RESPONSES TO ODI?S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER, CONDUCTED A LIMITED CONTROL PEDAL ASSESSMENT, AND ATTENDED A TOYOTA TECHNICAL PRESENTATION THAT INCLUDED THE ASSESSMENT OF TWO DEMONSTRATION VEHICLES.THROUGH INTERVIEWS, ODI IDENTIFIED 14 VOQ AND 6 TOYOTA REPORTS (20 UNIQUE VEHICLES) WHERE COMPLAINANTS REPORT MULTIPLE OCCURRENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.IN SOME CASES THE CONDITION WAS EXPERIENCED BY DIFFERENT VEHICLE OPERATORS OR WAS WITNESSED BY OTHER OCCUPANTS.ODI WAS UNABLE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO THE CAUSE OF 9 TOYOTA AND AN ADDITIONAL 37 VOQ REPORTS (WHICH DESCRIBE 28 UNIQUE INCIDENTS) DUE TO INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION.THE REMAINING COMPLAINANTS INTERVIEWED (62 VOQ, 21 TOYOTA) DESCRIBED CONDITIONS NOT CAUSED BY A FAILURE OF THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM AND WERE THUS CONSIDERED UNRELATED TO THE INVESTIGATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS INTERVIEWED REPORTED A COMPONENT FAILURE (OR OTHER INDICATOR OF A SYSTEM FAILURE) AS THE POTENTIAL CAUSE OF INCIDENTS RELEVANT TO THIS INVESTIGATION.IN MANY CASES, THE COMPLAINT VEHICLES WERE SUBSEQUENTLY INSPECTED BY DEALERSHIP OR MANUFACTURER REPRESENTATIVES WHO ALSO FAILED TO IDENTIFY A FAULT WITHIN THE VEHICLE.TOYOTA IDENTIFIED 43 RELATED WARRANTY CLAIMS, 24 OF WHICH WERE FOR DIAGNOSTIC PURPOSES ONLY (NO REPAIRS PERFORMED).ODI FOUND NOTHING ABNORMAL IN THE CONTROL PEDAL CONFIGURATION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.A DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE THE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR FURTHER DETAIL.
Illustration