IllustrationEXITED FREEWAY AND HIT BRAKES TO SLOW AND STOP AT TRAFFIC LIGHT. THE MOTOR ACCELERATED, THE BRAKES WERE TOO WEAK TO STOP THE VEHICAL, AND I CRASHED INTO THE STOPPED CAR AT THE TRAFFIIC LIGHT. IT SEEMED THAT THE CRUISE CONTROL DID NOT TURN OFF WHEN I PRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL. THEY FAILED TO TURN THE CRUISE CONTROL OFF.
2004 Toyota Camry Solara
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2004 Toyota Camry Solara do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 83.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Camry Solara 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
420–25K
1225–50K
1950–75K
2175–100K
21100–150K
3150K+
118 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.
- Structure. Review the 36 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 30 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 27 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
24 crash reports2 fire reports11 injury reports
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
27 reportsPULLING 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.
FEBRUARY 1, 2017, TURNING INTO A PARKING LOT AT 700 E. MAIN ST., GRASS VALLEY, CA, TURNED RIGHT INTO A PARKING SPACE AND AS THE BRAKE WAS APPLIED, THE CAR SURGED FORWARD, JUMPING A CEMENT CURB, THE FENDER GRAZING A TREE ON THE LEFT, COMING TO AN ABRUPT STOP WHEN IT HIT THE CEMENT BASE OF A LIGHT POLE. FLUIDS WERE LEAKING FROM BE…
Read full complaint
FEBRUARY 1, 2017, TURNING INTO A PARKING LOT AT 700 E. MAIN ST., GRASS VALLEY, CA, TURNED RIGHT INTO A PARKING SPACE AND AS THE BRAKE WAS APPLIED, THE CAR SURGED FORWARD, JUMPING A CEMENT CURB, THE FENDER GRAZING A TREE ON THE LEFT, COMING TO AN ABRUPT STOP WHEN IT HIT THE CEMENT BASE OF A LIGHT POLE. FLUIDS WERE LEAKING FROM BENEATH THE CAR, THE FRONT BUMPER WAS HANGING OFF, THE DRIVER SIDE DOOR CAUGHT AS IT WAS OPENED. THE CAR WAS TOWED TO A BODY SHOP. THIS WAS THE SECOND INCIDENT, WITH THE SAME EVENT OCCURRING 2 YEARS PRIOR BUT WITH LESS SURGE AND NO CAR BODY DAMAGE. BOTH INCIDENTS REPORTED TO TOYOTA IMMEDIATELY. TOYOTA INVESTIGATED AND BOTH TIMES FOUND NO CAUSE FOR THE UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. SINCE THE CAR HIT A STATIONARY OBJECT I AM FOUND "AT FAULT" BY MY INSURANCE, WHICH IS ANNOYING. I DID NOT HAVE THE CAR REPAIRED SINCE IT IS CLEARLY UNSAFE. TODAY, MAY 1, 2017, A SALVAGE COMPANY PICKED UP THE CAR TO BE USED SOLELY FOR PARTS. THE CAR IS IN OTHERWISE EXCELLENT CONDITION, BUT I COULD NOT PLACE ANOTHER HUMAN BEING IN JEOPARDY BY REPAIRING AND SELLING IT, NOR COULD I EVER FEEL SAFE AGAIN DRIVING THE CAR.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. WHILE DRIVING 25 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED. AS A RESULT, THE CONTACT CASHED INTO A PALM TREE. THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER COLLISION CEN…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. WHILE DRIVING 25 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL SEIZED AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED. AS A RESULT, THE CONTACT CASHED INTO A PALM TREE. THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER COLLISION CENTER. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 140,100.
THE VEHICLE STALLS WHEN GAS IS APPLIED OR IT JERKS WHEN GOING FROM LOW SPEEDS TO HIGH SPEEDS, AFTER GAS IS APPLIED. THE VEHICLE ALSO HESITATES TO ACCELERATE AFTER FULL STOPS. I WENT TO A TOYOTA CAMRY DEALER, SANSONE TOYOTA LOCATED AT 90-100 ROUTE 1 NORTH IN AVENEL, NJ 07001. THEY FOUND THAT THE CAR IS SHIFTING ABNORMALLY AND …
Read full complaint
THE VEHICLE STALLS WHEN GAS IS APPLIED OR IT JERKS WHEN GOING FROM LOW SPEEDS TO HIGH SPEEDS, AFTER GAS IS APPLIED. THE VEHICLE ALSO HESITATES TO ACCELERATE AFTER FULL STOPS. I WENT TO A TOYOTA CAMRY DEALER, SANSONE TOYOTA LOCATED AT 90-100 ROUTE 1 NORTH IN AVENEL, NJ 07001. THEY FOUND THAT THE CAR IS SHIFTING ABNORMALLY AND SO THEY UPDATED CALIBRATION SOFTWARE IN THE VEHICLE. AFTER SERVICE AT SANSONE TOYOTA, THE CAR STILL JERKS WHEN SWITCHING FROM LOW SPEEDS (LIKE 20 MPH) TO HIGHER SPEEDS (LIKE 60 MPH). SOMETIMES IT JERKS VERY VIOLENTLY AND IT ALWAYS HESITATES WHEN GAS IS APPLIED, AFTER FULL STOPS (LIKE AT A STOP SIGN OR A RED LIGHT). IN ADDITION, THE VEHICLE SOMETIMES ACCELERATES, A LITTLE, WHEN I APPLY BREAKS WITH THE INTEND TO SLOW DOWN. A COUPLE MECHANICS I WENT TO SAY THAT THE VEHICLE MAY NEED A NEW TRANSMISSION, BUT I HAVE READ COMPLAINTS ON THIS SITE THAT A LOT OF TOYOTA VEHICLES MAY HAVE ACCELERATION PROBLEMS. SOME 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA VEHICLES HAVE BEEN RECALLED FOR SPEED CONTROL PROBLEMS. I DON'T WAN TO INVEST INTO A TRANSMISSION IF THE CAR WILL HAVE THE SAME ISSUE. MY VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. I NEED TO KNOW IF MY 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL RECALL.
I WAS IN THE PROCESS OF PARKING MY CAR IN A PARKING GARAGE WHEN IT SUDDENLY STARTED ACCELERATING AND HIT THE CONCRETE WALL OF THE GARAGE. THE CAR WAS DRIVABLE, BUT AFTER GETTING IT INSPECTED, IT WAS FOUND TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT FRAME DAMAGE AND WAS TOTALED BY MY INSURANCE COMPANY.
WHILE PULLING LEFT INTO A PARKING PLACE THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND VIOLENTLY SLAMMED INTO A PARKED CAR OPPOSITE ME. THE POLICE SAID MY FOOT PROBABLY SLIPPED OFF THE BRAKE AND HIT THE GAS PEDAL. IT WAS A VERY VIOLENT HIT AND I WAS VERY SHAKEN. NOT HAVING A RECALL ON MY CAR, I WENT ALONG WITH THE POLICE UNTIL THE SAME TH…
Read full complaint
WHILE PULLING LEFT INTO A PARKING PLACE THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND VIOLENTLY SLAMMED INTO A PARKED CAR OPPOSITE ME. THE POLICE SAID MY FOOT PROBABLY SLIPPED OFF THE BRAKE AND HIT THE GAS PEDAL. IT WAS A VERY VIOLENT HIT AND I WAS VERY SHAKEN. NOT HAVING A RECALL ON MY CAR, I WENT ALONG WITH THE POLICE UNTIL THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN ON FEBRUARY 7, 2014. LUCKILY, THIS SECOND INCIDENT ONLY THREW THE CAR INTO A PLOWED SNOW BANK. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE UNEXPECTEDLY INCREASED ACCELERATION. THE BRAKE PEDAL TRAVELED TO THE FLOORBOARD UPON BEING DEPRESSED AND FAILED TO RESPOND AFTER REPEATED ATTEMPTS MADE BY THE CONTACT. THE CONTACT THEN CRASHED INTO A TREE AND A…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE UNEXPECTEDLY INCREASED ACCELERATION. THE BRAKE PEDAL TRAVELED TO THE FLOORBOARD UPON BEING DEPRESSED AND FAILED TO RESPOND AFTER REPEATED ATTEMPTS MADE BY THE CONTACT. THE CONTACT THEN CRASHED INTO A TREE AND A ROW OF BUSHES. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE AND THEN CRASHED INTO A BRICK HOUSE. THE AIR BAGS FILED TO DEPLOY WITH THE IMPACT. THE FRONT SEAT PASSENGER SUFFERED INJURIES TO THE LEFT SIDE OF HER BODY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR INVESTIGATION. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 33,265. UPDATED 12/04/13*LJ UPDATED 12/9/2013 *JS
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKES AND THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE, CRASHING INTO A FENCE AND THEN A HOUSE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED FOR T…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT LOW SPEEDS, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKES AND THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE, CRASHING INTO A FENCE AND THEN A HOUSE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED FOR THE FRONT BUMPER AND THE RADIATOR WAS REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND A CLAIM WAS FILED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 26,000.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE PARKING THE VEHICLE IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED, AS A RESULT THE VEHICLE FELL MORE THAN 20 FEET DOWN A CLIFF AND NONE OF THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED MINOR BRUISES AND LACERATIONS ON BOTH HANDS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAK…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE PARKING THE VEHICLE IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED, AS A RESULT THE VEHICLE FELL MORE THAN 20 FEET DOWN A CLIFF AND NONE OF THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED MINOR BRUISES AND LACERATIONS ON BOTH HANDS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 84,000.
Official recalls
111V539000 · Engine And Engine Cooling
Nov 9, 2011
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AVALON VEHICLES; 2004 AND 2005 CAMRY, CAMRY SOLARA, HIGHLANDER, AND SIENNA VEHICLES, 2006 HIGHLANDER HYBRID; 2004 AND 2005 LEXUS ES330 AND RX330; AND 2006 LEXUS RX400H VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 2004 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2005, EQUIPPED WITH THE 1MZ-FE OR 3MZ-FE ENGINE. THE AMOUNT OF ADHESIVE AGENT APPLIED BETWEEN THE OUTER RING AND THE TORSIONAL RUBBER DAMPER (INNER RING) IN THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY MAY BE INADEQUATE. IF THE ADHESIVE IS INSUFFICIENT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE OUTER RING MAY BECOME MISALIGNED AND IT MAY NOT PROPERLY ROTATE WITH THE INNER RING, CAUSING NOISE AND/OR ILLUMINATION OF THE BATTERY DISCHARGE INDICATOR LIGHT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN SOME CASES, THE BELT FOR THE POWER STEERING PUMP MAY BECOME DETACHED FROM THE PULLEY WHICH COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF POWER STEERING AND A SUDDEN INCREASE IN STEERING EFFORT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL CHECK THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY TO IDENTIFY WHETHER IT WAS PRODUCED BY THE U.S. SUPPLIER. IF SO, THE DEALER WILL REPLACE THE PULLEY WITH A NEW ONE AT NO CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING EARLY JANUARY 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
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
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