← New search

2002 Toyota Camry

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Camry years

Owner complaints for the 2002 Toyota Camry are substantially higher than the model-year median of 295.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

610 reports with mileage · 343 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.

  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 281 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 146 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 107 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

252 crash reports20 fire reports94 injury reports

Power Train complaints

68 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Sep 11, 2002
Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train

THERE IS A BAD LINKAGE BETWEEN ENGINE AND TRANSMISSION, AND THERE IS A LOUD NOISE WHILE TRAVELING ON THE HIGHWAY. DEALERSHIP IS AWARE OF PROBLEM.*AK CONSUMER STATES THERE IS SLACK IN THE DRIVETRAIN. *JB

NHTSA ODI #8018440

Mileage unknown · Sep 3, 2002
Power TrainSteering

VEHICLE GOES INTO OVERDRIVE WHEN DRIVING AT A STEADY SPEED, CAUSING VEHICLE TO LAG, GOING TOO SLOWLY IN THE APPROPRIATE GEAR CAUSES THE VEHICLE TO SUSTAIN A FOWARD AND BACKWARD ROCKING MOTION, CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLES EARLY LOCK UP INTO OVERDRIVE IS A CHARACTERISTIC, THE DEALERSHIP ADVISED CONSUMER TO REMOVE THE V…

Read full complaint

VEHICLE GOES INTO OVERDRIVE WHEN DRIVING AT A STEADY SPEED, CAUSING VEHICLE TO LAG, GOING TOO SLOWLY IN THE APPROPRIATE GEAR CAUSES THE VEHICLE TO SUSTAIN A FOWARD AND BACKWARD ROCKING MOTION, CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLES EARLY LOCK UP INTO OVERDRIVE IS A CHARACTERISTIC, THE DEALERSHIP ADVISED CONSUMER TO REMOVE THE VEHICLE FROM OVERDRIVE AT THAT SPEED AND THEN PUT THE VEHICLE BACK INTO OVERDRIVE WHEN SPEED INCREASES, THEREFORE PUTTING IT INTO 3RD GEAR INCREASES THE ENGINE NOISE, INCREASES THE RPMS AND REDUCES THE VEHICLES FUEL ECONOMY, HOWEVER THE OWNERS MANUAL STATES ALWAYS DRIVE THE VEHICLE WITH OVERDRIVE ON FOR BETTER FUEL ECONOMY.*JB

NHTSA ODI #567256

Mileage unknown · Jun 17, 2002
Power Train

WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, PASSENGER LIGHTLY TOUCHED SHIFT LEVER AS SHE TURNED ON AIR CONDITIONER, IT SHIFTED TO NEUTRAL. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES, DEALER STATED THIS WAS THE DESIGN OF THE VEHICLE. *AK THESE EVENTS WERE CAUSED BY INADVERTENT BRUSH OF THE GEAR SHIFT HANDLE WHEN REACHING ACROSS. CONSUMER DISCOVERED THAT A V…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, PASSENGER LIGHTLY TOUCHED SHIFT LEVER AS SHE TURNED ON AIR CONDITIONER, IT SHIFTED TO NEUTRAL. THIS HAS HAPPENED TWO MORE TIMES, DEALER STATED THIS WAS THE DESIGN OF THE VEHICLE. *AK THESE EVENTS WERE CAUSED BY INADVERTENT BRUSH OF THE GEAR SHIFT HANDLE WHEN REACHING ACROSS. CONSUMER DISCOVERED THAT A VERY LIGHT TAP TO THE GEAR SHIFT WHILE IN "D" CAUSES IT TO SHIFT INTO NEUTRAL AND INSTANTLY DECELERATE. *JG

NHTSA ODI #8011946

Mileage unknown · Jun 5, 2002
Power Train

CONSUMER STATES WHILE STARTING THE ENGINE, THE VEHICLE ROLLED FORWARD BY ITSELF, CONSUMER APPLIED THE BRAKE, BUT IT DID NOT WORK, CONSUMER PULLED THE TRANSMISSION SELECTOR TO REVERSE AND THEN THE PARK POSITION IT STILL DID NOT MOVE FOWARD UNTILTHE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF, ON THE SECOND OCCASION THE VEHICLE KEPT ROLLING BACKWARDS U…

Read full complaint

CONSUMER STATES WHILE STARTING THE ENGINE, THE VEHICLE ROLLED FORWARD BY ITSELF, CONSUMER APPLIED THE BRAKE, BUT IT DID NOT WORK, CONSUMER PULLED THE TRANSMISSION SELECTOR TO REVERSE AND THEN THE PARK POSITION IT STILL DID NOT MOVE FOWARD UNTILTHE ENGINE WAS TURNED OFF, ON THE SECOND OCCASION THE VEHICLE KEPT ROLLING BACKWARDS UNTIL IT HIT A PARK CAR ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD.*YD

NHTSA ODI #565971

Mileage unknown · May 30, 2002
Power Train

I ALSO HAVE ANOTHER ISSUE WITH MY NEW CAMRY THAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING. WHILE DECENDING DOWN A HILL ( BETWEEN 40 AND 45) AND WHEN I APPLY THE BRAKES THE CAR WILL DOWN SHIFT VERY (CAN EVEN HEAR/FEEL A CLUCK) HARD. THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING QUITE OFTEN AND IS NOT NORMAL. *AK

NHTSA ODI #762486

Mileage unknown · May 29, 2002
Power Train

I HAVE JUST PURCHASED A 2002 CAMRY LE V6 AUTOMATIC (WITH OVERDRIVE). I HAVE 450 MILES ON THE VEHICLE AT THIS TIME. I AM NOT VERY HAPPY WITH THE WAY THE CAR SHIFTS WHEN LEFT IN OVERDRIVE. I TRAVEL 25 MILES ONE WAY ON BACK ROADS AT WHICH I CAN MAINTAIN SPEEDS BETWEEN 40 AND 55. MOVING ALONG BETWEEN THESE SPEEDS I FEEL THE CAR INTE…

Read full complaint

I HAVE JUST PURCHASED A 2002 CAMRY LE V6 AUTOMATIC (WITH OVERDRIVE). I HAVE 450 MILES ON THE VEHICLE AT THIS TIME. I AM NOT VERY HAPPY WITH THE WAY THE CAR SHIFTS WHEN LEFT IN OVERDRIVE. I TRAVEL 25 MILES ONE WAY ON BACK ROADS AT WHICH I CAN MAINTAIN SPEEDS BETWEEN 40 AND 55. MOVING ALONG BETWEEN THESE SPEEDS I FEEL THE CAR INTERMITTENTLY HOLDING BACK AND LETTING GO (I CAN SEE THE RPM'S DROP BY 500 RPM AND THEN GO BACK UP AGAIN WHEN THIS HAPPENS). THIS IS VERY ANNOYING TO ME. THIS DOES THIS QUITE OFTEN ON MY COMMUTE TO AND FROM WORK. THE OWNERS MANUAL SAYS TO LEAVE THE CAR IN OVERDRIVE AND I ONLY NEED TO TAKE IT OUT WHEN CLIMBING HILLS AT LOWER SPEEDS AND WHEN HAULING A TRAILER. I FEEL THAT THIS SHOULD NOT BE DOING THIS IN THE MANNER I AM DRIVING THE CAR. I HAVE A 1999 TOYOTA COROLLA WITH OVERDRIVE WHICH I LEAVE IN OVERDRIVE ALL THE TIME AND DO NOT NOTICE THIS TYPE OF PROBLEM. *AK

NHTSA ODI #762410

Mileage unknown · Apr 27, 2002
Power TrainService Brakes, Hydraulic

AT A CONSTANT CRUISING SPEED, THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION ABRUPTLY JERKS (PRESUMABLY SHIFTS) WHEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS RELEASED SLIGHTLY. A CLUNKING NOISE CAN ALSO BE HEARD AT THIS TIME. THE ABS ACTUATOR ALSO HAD TO BE REPLACED EARLIER AS IT WAS PRODUCING A CLUNKING NOISE AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND THE STEERING WHEEL WAS …

Read full complaint

AT A CONSTANT CRUISING SPEED, THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION ABRUPTLY JERKS (PRESUMABLY SHIFTS) WHEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS RELEASED SLIGHTLY. A CLUNKING NOISE CAN ALSO BE HEARD AT THIS TIME. THE ABS ACTUATOR ALSO HAD TO BE REPLACED EARLIER AS IT WAS PRODUCING A CLUNKING NOISE AFTER THE ENGINE WAS STARTED AND THE STEERING WHEEL WAS TURNED SHARPLY AT LOW SPEEDS.

NHTSA ODI #761268

Mileage unknown · Apr 15, 2002
Engine And Engine CoolingPower Train

WHILE DRIVING, VEHICLE INTERMITTENTLY PULLS BACK AND SHIFTS TO A LOWER GEAR. AND THE RPM ABRUPTLY GOES FROM 2100 RPM TO 1900 RPM AND BACK AGAIN. DEALER COULD NOT FIND A PROBLEM. *TT

NHTSA ODI #565206

Official recalls

4

04V346000 · Air Bags:side/window

Jul 13, 2004

ON CERTAIN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAGS (CSA), ONE OR BOTH OF THE CURTAIN AIR BAGS MAY BE TWISTED NEAR THE INFLATOR DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS, THE CSA MAY NOT DEPLOY RAPIDLY ENOUGH WHEN ACTIVATED IN A SIDE IMPACT COLLISION. THIS MAY RESULT IN FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE INTENDED HEAD PROTECTION, INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE CSAS AND REPLACE THE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 6, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.

01V372000 · Air Bags:frontal

Dec 11, 2001

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A THREE-SPOKE STYLE STEERING WHEEL. DURING AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE BOTTOM SEAM OF THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE AIR BAG MODULE COVER (HORN PAD) COULD BE TORN AWAY ALLOWING THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THE COVER TO COMPLETELY DETACH FROM THE AIR BAG MODULE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: IF THIS SHOULD OCCUR, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE DETACHED BOTTOM PORTION MAY STRIKE THE DRIVER CAUSING PERSONAL INJURY.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE DRIVER'S SIDE AIR BAG MODULE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN DECEMBER 28, 2001. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331 OR LEXUS AT 1-888-333-9376.

01V302000 · Tires

Oct 1, 2001

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH CONTINENTAL TOURING TIRES, P205-65R15 92S, INSTALLED AT THE PORTS IN JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. THE INCORRECT TIRES WERE INSTALLED ON VEHICLES THAT HAD DAMAGED TIRES. THE TIRES WERE DAMAGED DURING A PORT UPGRADE TO ALUMINUM WHEELS.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THE TIRES DO NOT CONFORM TO THE SPEED RATING FOR THE VEHICLE. IF THE VEHICLE EXCEEDED THE MAXIMUM SPEED RATING (112 MPH), POSSIBLE TIRE FAILURE COULD OCCUR.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE ALL FIVE TIRES. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN SEPTEMBER 13, 2001. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.

01V306000 · Air Bags:frontal

Sep 25, 2001

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. INCOMPLETE DEPLOYMENT OF THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG COULD OCCUR IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: UNEXPECTED AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT CAN RESULT IN OCCUPANT INJURY.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY. BOTH OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED BY TELEPHONE AND ARRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM. THIS CAMPAIGN IS 100% COMPLETED. BOTH OWNERS HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED AND THEIR VEHICLES REPAIRED.

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

4

DP06003 · 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.

PE02079 · Engine Compartment Fire

Opened Oct 22, 2002 · Closed Mar 18, 2003

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling

ODI'S DATA ANALYSIS FOUND THE FIRES RATES TO BE CONSISTENTLY LOW AND EVENLY DISTRIBUTED AMONG SIX MODEL YEARS AND SIX DIFFERENT ENGINE CONFIGURATIONS.ODI EXAMINED A VARIETY OF ROOT CAUSES, THOSE BEING DETONATION (RESULTING IN OIL PAN PUNCTURE FROM CONNECTING ROD), STARTER FIRES, VARIOUS FUEL RELATED FIRES, LEAKING OIL FILTERS, WIRING ISSUES, IMPROPER REPAIRS AND BRAKE FLUID LEAKS.NONE OF THE ISSUES EXAMINED HAD REPORTS THAT INDICATED A TREND WHEN NORMALIZED FOR POPULATON AND EXPOSURE.SEE ATTACHED REPORT FOR FULL DETAILS.

Go deeper into Toyota Camry problems