NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Structure complaints
36 reportsClear category filter80,000 miles · Sep 21, 2021
Structure
The contact owns a 2004 Toyota Camry Solara. The contact stated that the dashboard started to crack exposing the air bag. The contact stated no warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was diagnosed but not repaired. The manufacturer was informed of the failure and informed the contact that they were unable to assist. The fail…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2004 Toyota Camry Solara. The contact stated that the dashboard started to crack exposing the air bag. The contact stated no warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was diagnosed but not repaired. The manufacturer was informed of the failure and informed the contact that they were unable to assist. The failure mileage was approximately 80,000.
NHTSA ODI #11433838
177,151 miles · Jan 8, 2020
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE DASHBOARD WAS FRACTURED. PRIORITY TOYOTA HAMPTON LOCATED AT 2301 W MERCURY BOULEVARD, HAMPTON, VA 23666, (757)838-5000) WAS CONTACTED BY PHONE AND INFORMED OF THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SUBJECTED TO A RECALL HOWEVER,…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE DASHBOARD WAS FRACTURED. PRIORITY TOYOTA HAMPTON LOCATED AT 2301 W MERCURY BOULEVARD, HAMPTON, VA 23666, (757)838-5000) WAS CONTACTED BY PHONE AND INFORMED OF THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SUBJECTED TO A RECALL HOWEVER, THERE WAS A WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT FROM THE MANUFACTURER FOR THE FAILURE IN SIMILAR VEHICLES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO BE INSPECTED NOR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 177,151.
NHTSA ODI #11297979
131,838 miles · Jul 31, 2017
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DASHBOARD ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE WAS CRACKED AND THE GLOVE COMPARTMENT ALSO HAD MULTIPLE CRACKS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO CERRITOS TOYOTA IN CERRITOS, CA WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THEY COULD ONLY REPLACE THE DASHBOARD, AND NOT THE GLOVE COMPARTMENT. TH…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DASHBOARD ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE WAS CRACKED AND THE GLOVE COMPARTMENT ALSO HAD MULTIPLE CRACKS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO CERRITOS TOYOTA IN CERRITOS, CA WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THEY COULD ONLY REPLACE THE DASHBOARD, AND NOT THE GLOVE COMPARTMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 131,838. UPDATED 10/24/17*LJ *JS
NHTSA ODI #11011755
109,000 miles · Jun 9, 2017
Air BagsStructureVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
PULLING INTO A DISABLED RETAIL PARKING SPACE AT VERY LOW SPEED, CAR LURCHED FORWARD AND HIT THE METAL PARKING POLE, DAMAGING THE FRONT BUMPER AND HOOD. EYEWITNESS TO COLLISION INCIDENT CONFIRMS THIS. CAR WAS BARELY IN MOTION AND MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE. I RECEIVED WHIPLASH REQUIRING MEDICAL ATTENTION AND INJURY TO MY RIGHT KNEE…
Read full complaint
PULLING INTO A DISABLED RETAIL PARKING SPACE AT VERY LOW SPEED, CAR LURCHED FORWARD AND HIT THE METAL PARKING POLE, DAMAGING THE FRONT BUMPER AND HOOD. EYEWITNESS TO COLLISION INCIDENT CONFIRMS THIS. CAR WAS BARELY IN MOTION AND MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE. I RECEIVED WHIPLASH REQUIRING MEDICAL ATTENTION AND INJURY TO MY RIGHT KNEE. AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR COMPANY STATES IMPACT WAS SO SEVERE THAT FRAME WAS BENT, RESULTING IN THE INSURANCE COMPANY DECLARING VEHICLE A TOTAL LOSS. HOWEVER, THE AIR BAG NEVER DEPLOYED EVEN THOUGH THE BUMPER DAMAGE OCCURRED RIGHT AT THE AIR BAG LOCATION ON DRIVER SIDE. TOYOTA SOLARA AIR BAG SHOULD HAVE DEPLOYED. THE SUDDEN LURCH FORWARD SHOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED SINCE MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE AT THE TIME AND BARELY MOVING. PICTURES AVAILABLE. POLICE REPORT NOT POSSIBLE AS THEY DO NOT COME TO PRIVATE PARKING PROPERTY. VEHICLE STILL DRIVABLE, SO IT WAS TAKEN TO TOYOTA-APPROVED AUTO REPAIR SHOP.
NHTSA ODI #10994160
110,000 miles · Jun 24, 2015
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DASHBOARD DEVELOPED A CRACK ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, BUT WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 110,000. UPDATED 09/03/15*LJ UPDATED 10/26/2017*CN
NHTSA ODI #10730113
21,100 miles · Feb 3, 2015
Structure
I PURCHASED MY CAR IN 2004, NEW FROM LIPTON TOYOTA. AFTER THE WARRANTY EXPIRED, THE DASHBOARD KEEPS MELTING AND PEELING AND CRACKING. I COMPLAINED TO LIPTON TOYOTA TO NO AVAIL. IT IS REALLY UNFAIR TO PAY SO MUCH FOR SOMETHING AND HAVE IT FALLING APART IN A MATTER OF YEARS. I THINK TOYOTA SHOULD OWN THIS CLAIM AND FIX MY CAR. …
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED MY CAR IN 2004, NEW FROM LIPTON TOYOTA. AFTER THE WARRANTY EXPIRED, THE DASHBOARD KEEPS MELTING AND PEELING AND CRACKING. I COMPLAINED TO LIPTON TOYOTA TO NO AVAIL. IT IS REALLY UNFAIR TO PAY SO MUCH FOR SOMETHING AND HAVE IT FALLING APART IN A MATTER OF YEARS. I THINK TOYOTA SHOULD OWN THIS CLAIM AND FIX MY CAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10680765
Mileage unknown · Nov 19, 2014
Structure
THE DASHBOARD IS SEVERELY CRACKED ON BOTH THE PASSENGER SIDE AND DRIVER SIDE. THE CRACKS HAVE BEEN REPAIRED, BUT THEN HAVE RE-OPENED AGAIN. THEY ARE UNSIGHTLY AND I HAVE FURTHER CONCERNS THAT THEY MAY INTERFERE WITH ELECTRICAL FUNCTIONS AND OTHER PARTS UNDER THE DASHBOARD SHOULD THE CRACKS CONTINUE TO GROW. I HAVE ADDITIONAL CON…
Read full complaint
THE DASHBOARD IS SEVERELY CRACKED ON BOTH THE PASSENGER SIDE AND DRIVER SIDE. THE CRACKS HAVE BEEN REPAIRED, BUT THEN HAVE RE-OPENED AGAIN. THEY ARE UNSIGHTLY AND I HAVE FURTHER CONCERNS THAT THEY MAY INTERFERE WITH ELECTRICAL FUNCTIONS AND OTHER PARTS UNDER THE DASHBOARD SHOULD THE CRACKS CONTINUE TO GROW. I HAVE ADDITIONAL CONCERNS THAT THE CRACKS MAY RESULT IN AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT ISSUES. THE CRACKS HAVE BEEN EVIDENT SINCE APPROXIMATELY 2006. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10659346
52,000 miles · Oct 16, 2014
Structure
ALTHOUGH CAR HAS ALWAYS BEEN GARAGED THE DASHBOARD IS CRACKED AND MELTING AND EVERY DAY THE MATERIAL CRACKS ARE GETTING WIDER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10645039
75,000 miles · Sep 22, 2014
Structure
THE DASHBOARD IS CRACKING AND MELTING--IT HAS AFFECTED THE GPS AND I AM AFRAID OTHER INSTRUMENTS MAY BE AFFECTED AS WELL-- THE MELTING CAUSES A TERRIBLE GLARE IN THE WINDSHIELD MAKING DRIVING IT SAFELY IALMOST IMPOSSIBLE--THIS IS A ONE OWNER-WELL MAINTAINED AUTO--I CONTACTED THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD THIS IS A RELATIVELY COMMON P…
Read full complaint
THE DASHBOARD IS CRACKING AND MELTING--IT HAS AFFECTED THE GPS AND I AM AFRAID OTHER INSTRUMENTS MAY BE AFFECTED AS WELL-- THE MELTING CAUSES A TERRIBLE GLARE IN THE WINDSHIELD MAKING DRIVING IT SAFELY IALMOST IMPOSSIBLE--THIS IS A ONE OWNER-WELL MAINTAINED AUTO--I CONTACTED THE DEALER AND WAS TOLD THIS IS A RELATIVELY COMMON PROBLEM WITH '04 SOLARAS AND A REPAIR WAS OFFERED FOR ABOUT $3,000. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10638002
3,000 miles · Aug 30, 2014
Structure
A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AFTER I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE NEW, I NOTICED A SMALL CRACK IN THE DASHBOARD AND STICKINESS OF THE DASHBOARD. I ASKED AT HOLLYWOOD TOYOTA AND GOT NO SATISFACTION AND THINK I CALLED THE 800 NUMBER TOO. OVER THE YEARS, ONE HALF OF THE ENTIRE DASHBOARD HAS BECOME VERY NOTICEABLY CRACKED AND DAMAGED AND NOW THE C…
Read full complaint
A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AFTER I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE NEW, I NOTICED A SMALL CRACK IN THE DASHBOARD AND STICKINESS OF THE DASHBOARD. I ASKED AT HOLLYWOOD TOYOTA AND GOT NO SATISFACTION AND THINK I CALLED THE 800 NUMBER TOO. OVER THE YEARS, ONE HALF OF THE ENTIRE DASHBOARD HAS BECOME VERY NOTICEABLY CRACKED AND DAMAGED AND NOW THE COVERING AT THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDOWS IS PEELING OFF THE DOORS. THE REST OF THE INTERIOR LOOKS PRISTINE. THE DASHBOARD CRACKED IN MY PREVIOUS CAMRY TOO BUT NOT TO THIS DEGREE; TO ADD INSULT TO INJURY, TOYOTA PAID ME $1000 LESS THAT I WOULD HAVE GOTTEN FOR THE TURN-IN PRICE BECAUSE OF THE DASHBOARD OF THE OLD CAMRY CAR WHEN I SOLD IT BACK TO THEM WHEN I BOUGHT MY CURRENT SOLARA IN 2004. AT LEAST A DOZEN PEOPLE HAVE COME UP TO ME AND TOLD ME THEY ALSO EXPERIENCED SIMILAR PROBLEMS WITH THEIR SOLARAS. ONE PERSON SAID THEY HAD 2 SOLARAS; ONE KEPT IN THE GARAGE AND ON THE STREET, AND BOTH DASHBOARDS CRACKED. I HAVE MADE AN EFFORT ALL THE TIME TO COVER THE WINDSHIELD FROM THE SUN INSIDE BUT IT HASN'T HELPED. I HOPE TOYOTA ISSUES A RECALL, AS I THINK THEY SHOULD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10629538
NHTSA investigations
2DP06003 · 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
Illustration