NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
161 reports103,000 miles · Mar 19, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT OPERATE IN DRIVE OR REVERSE. HE CONTACTED THE DEALER AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THEY WERE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND ADVISED HIM TO HAVE THE VEHICLE TOWED INTO THE DEALER. THEY STATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD AN ELECTRICAL SHORT GOING TO TH…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT OPERATE IN DRIVE OR REVERSE. HE CONTACTED THE DEALER AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THEY WERE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND ADVISED HIM TO HAVE THE VEHICLE TOWED INTO THE DEALER. THEY STATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD AN ELECTRICAL SHORT GOING TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THE DEALER REPLACED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THE FAILURE MILEAGE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 103000.
NHTSA ODI #10321014
13,400 miles · Mar 17, 2010
Structure
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA. THE DRIVER STATED THE DASHBOARD HAD BEGUN TO EXHIBIT SEVERE CRACKING. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND PICTURES WERE TAKEN TO SUBMIT TO THE MANUFACTURER FOR EVALUATION. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED THAT THE MANUFACTURER WAS AWARE OF THE FAILURE BUT HAD NOT PROPERLY ADDRESSED THE ISSUE. THE FAI…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA. THE DRIVER STATED THE DASHBOARD HAD BEGUN TO EXHIBIT SEVERE CRACKING. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND PICTURES WERE TAKEN TO SUBMIT TO THE MANUFACTURER FOR EVALUATION. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED THAT THE MANUFACTURER WAS AWARE OF THE FAILURE BUT HAD NOT PROPERLY ADDRESSED THE ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 13,400 AND THE CURRENT WAS 14,260. UPDATED 05/06/10. *LJ UPDATED 07/14/10*JB
NHTSA ODI #10320408
75,000 miles · Mar 16, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, AN UNEXPECTED INCREASE IN ACCELERATION OCCURRED. THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS ENGAGED WITH NO RESPONSE. THE VEHICLE DECREASED IN SPEED AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS OF BRAKING. IMMEDIATELY, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER. THE TECHNICIAN…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, AN UNEXPECTED INCREASE IN ACCELERATION OCCURRED. THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS ENGAGED WITH NO RESPONSE. THE VEHICLE DECREASED IN SPEED AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS OF BRAKING. IMMEDIATELY, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER. THE TECHNICIAN WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 75,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 87,000
NHTSA ODI #10320135
12,500 miles · Mar 11, 2010
Structure
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA. THE CONTACT OBSERVED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED; THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE DASHBOARD SUSTAINED MULTIPLE HAIRLINE CRACKS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT COVERED UNDER THE SERVICE WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED AT THIS TIME. THE FAILURE MILE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA. THE CONTACT OBSERVED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED; THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE DASHBOARD SUSTAINED MULTIPLE HAIRLINE CRACKS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT COVERED UNDER THE SERVICE WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED AT THIS TIME. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 12,500. UPDATED 04/16/10. *LJ UPDATED 07/13/10.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10318949
54,000 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA. WHILE DRIVING 5 MPH THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A BUILDING. THE CONTACT SUFFERED BACK AND NECK INJURIES DURING THE CRASH. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALER TO FIND OUT WHAT CAUSED THE SUDDEN ACCELERATION AND THE DEALER COULD NOT DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE F…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA. WHILE DRIVING 5 MPH THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A BUILDING. THE CONTACT SUFFERED BACK AND NECK INJURIES DURING THE CRASH. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALER TO FIND OUT WHAT CAUSED THE SUDDEN ACCELERATION AND THE DEALER COULD NOT DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 50,000. UPDATED 04/12/10. *LJ UPDATED 09/21/10*JB
NHTSA ODI #10315474
7,500 miles · Feb 26, 2010
Latches/locks/linkagesStructure
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY/SOLORA TECHNICAL PROBLEM PASSENGER DOOR OR TRUNK WILL NOT OPEN. THERE IS NO KEY LATCH TO ENTER CAR FROM OUTSIDE OF CAR ON PASSENGER SIDE DOOR OR TO OPEN TRUNK. KEY REMOTE DOES NOT WORK , I'VE TAKEN CAR TO TOYOTA DEAL…
Read full complaint
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY/SOLORA TECHNICAL PROBLEM PASSENGER DOOR OR TRUNK WILL NOT OPEN. THERE IS NO KEY LATCH TO ENTER CAR FROM OUTSIDE OF CAR ON PASSENGER SIDE DOOR OR TO OPEN TRUNK. KEY REMOTE DOES NOT WORK , I'VE TAKEN CAR TO TOYOTA DEALER AND REPLACED BATTERY, BUT STILL WILL NOT OPEN CAR DOOR OR TRUNK. I'VE TRIED REPORT THIS PROBLEM WITHIN THE LAST PAST 2 YEARS TO THE TOYOTA DEALER W/ NO HELP. THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME FOR DIOAGNOSTIC CHECK. I FEEL THIS IS THE DEALERS RESPONSIBILIY BECAUSE THE PASSENGER DOOR OR TRUNK DOES NOT HAVE A KEY LATCH ON OUTSIDE OF THE DOOR OR TRUNK . I HAVE A DAUGHTER WHO HAS TO RIDE IN THE BACK SEAT FOR SAFTEY PURPOSES; I FEEL THAT IN CASE OF ACCIDENT OR EMERGENCY SHE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET OUT OF / OR SOMEONE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OPEN DOOR FROM OUTSIDE OR SHE CANNOT GET OUT OF CAR FROM INSIDE. PLEASE ADVISE. [XXX] *TR
NHTSA ODI #10314714
7,500 miles · Feb 26, 2010
Latches/locks/linkagesStructure
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY/SOLARA TECHNICAL PROBLEM PASSENGER DOOR OR TRUNK WILL NOT OPEN. THERE IS NO KEY LATCH TO ENTER CAR FROM OUTSIDE OF CAR ON PASSENGER SIDE OR TO OPEN TRUNK. KEY REMOTE DOES NOT WORK , I'VE TAKEN CAR TO TOYOTA DEALER AN…
Read full complaint
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY/SOLARA TECHNICAL PROBLEM PASSENGER DOOR OR TRUNK WILL NOT OPEN. THERE IS NO KEY LATCH TO ENTER CAR FROM OUTSIDE OF CAR ON PASSENGER SIDE OR TO OPEN TRUNK. KEY REMOTE DOES NOT WORK , I'VE TAKEN CAR TO TOYOTA DEALER AND REPLACED BATTERY, BUT STILL WILL NOT OPEN CAR DOOR OR TRUNK. I'VE TRIED REPORT THIS PROBLEM WITHIN THE LAST PAST 2 YEARS TO THE TOYOTA DEALER W/ NO HELP. THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME FOR DIAGNOSTIC CHECK. I FEEL THIS IS THE DEALERS RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE THE PASSENGER DOOR OR TRUNK DOES NOT HAVE A KEY LATCH ON OUTSIDE OF THE DOOR OR TRUNK . I HAVE A DAUGHTER WHO HAS TO RIDE IN THE BACK SEAT FOR SAFETY PURPOSES; I FEEL THAT IN CASE OF ACCIDENT OR EMERGENCY SHE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET OUT OF / OR SOMEONE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OPEN DOOR FROM OUTSIDE OR SHE CANNOT GET OUT OF CAR FROM INSIDE. PLEASE ADVISE. [XXX] *TR
NHTSA ODI #10314713
65,000 miles · Feb 24, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I HAVE A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA, LIKE A CAMRY, I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE FROM THE ST. CLOUD, MN TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN THE SUMMER OF 2009. I COMPLAINED OF AN OCCASIONAL SUDDEN ACCELERATION WHEN I WOULD SHIFT INTO DRIVE. THEY SAID TO BRING IT IN, I DID, THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG. THIS HAS HAPPENED FOUR TO FIVE TIMES TO…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2004 TOYOTA SOLARA, LIKE A CAMRY, I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE FROM THE ST. CLOUD, MN TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN THE SUMMER OF 2009. I COMPLAINED OF AN OCCASIONAL SUDDEN ACCELERATION WHEN I WOULD SHIFT INTO DRIVE. THEY SAID TO BRING IT IN, I DID, THEY SAID THEY COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG. THIS HAS HAPPENED FOUR TO FIVE TIMES TOTAL SINCE I HAVE OWNED THE CAR. I HAVE NOT HAD ANY ACCIDENTS TO DATE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10313983
1 miles · Feb 17, 2010
Steering
WELL ITS ABOUT TIME NHTSA IS DOING SOMETHING ABOUT TOYOTA. I'VE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT UNSAFE STEERING PULL ON MY 2004 CAMERY SOLARA SINCE I BOUGHT IT AND SO HAVE LOTS OF OTHER FOLKS. TOYOTA HAS REFUSED TO DO A THING ABOUT IT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10311481
62,000 miles · Feb 10, 2010
Service Brakes, Air
I HAVE A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA AND THE BRAKES ON MY CAR ARE NOT AS ACCURATE AS THEY SHOULD BE. I RECENTLY HAD MY BRAKES REPAIRED IN DEC. 2009 AT SANDY SPRINGS TOYOTA IN ATLANTA AND WAS STILL NOT PLEASED WITH THE RESISTANCE OF THE BRAKES. I AM CONCERNED THAT THE 2004 CAMRY SOLARA SHOULD BE RESEARCHED FURTHER DUE TO THE BRAKES.…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA AND THE BRAKES ON MY CAR ARE NOT AS ACCURATE AS THEY SHOULD BE. I RECENTLY HAD MY BRAKES REPAIRED IN DEC. 2009 AT SANDY SPRINGS TOYOTA IN ATLANTA AND WAS STILL NOT PLEASED WITH THE RESISTANCE OF THE BRAKES. I AM CONCERNED THAT THE 2004 CAMRY SOLARA SHOULD BE RESEARCHED FURTHER DUE TO THE BRAKES. OFTEN TIMES I HAVE TO PRESS MY BRAKES TO THE FLOOR BEFORE THEY STOP COMPLETELY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10308470
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