← 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

Tires complaints

54 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Feb 22, 2003
Tires

THE STANDARD TIRES ON THE 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY SE ARE HORRIBLE ON SNOW. WHENEVER THERE IS ANY SNOW ON THE GROUND, THE CAR HAS ABSOLUTELY NO TRACTION. IT CAN'T EVEN MAKE IT UP MY DRIVEWAY.

NHTSA ODI #10007991

8,354 miles · Feb 12, 2003
Tires

TIRE BLEW OUT AND AND COMPLETELY CAME APART.

NHTSA ODI #10005765

Mileage unknown · Feb 10, 2003
SteeringTires

REGARDING 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. STARTED EXPERIENCING PULLING AND BUMPING SENSATIONS FROM FRONT SOON AFTER 5000 MILES. HAD TIRES REBALANCED AND ROTATED, PROBLEM CONTINUED. TOOK CAR TO DEALER WHO SAID ALIGNMENT WAS OFF AND SUPPOSEDLY CORRECTED. NO CHANGE, IN FACT, STEERING WHEEL WAS STILL SLIGHTLY OFF CENTER. TOOK CAR BACK TO DE…

Read full complaint

REGARDING 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. STARTED EXPERIENCING PULLING AND BUMPING SENSATIONS FROM FRONT SOON AFTER 5000 MILES. HAD TIRES REBALANCED AND ROTATED, PROBLEM CONTINUED. TOOK CAR TO DEALER WHO SAID ALIGNMENT WAS OFF AND SUPPOSEDLY CORRECTED. NO CHANGE, IN FACT, STEERING WHEEL WAS STILL SLIGHTLY OFF CENTER. TOOK CAR BACK TO DEALER WHO SAID NOTHING WAS WRONG BUT DID ANOTHER ALIGNMENT, THIS TIME STRAIGHTENING OUT THE STEERING WHEEL. PROBLEM DID NOT GO AWAY. WE ARE NOW AT 19000 MILES HAVING JUST ROTATED THE TIRES AGAIN IN HOPES IT WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM, BUT IT HAS NOT. ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE RECENTLY NOTICED POOR BRAKING TRACTION EVEN AT SLOW SPEEDS IN WET CONDITIONS AND A SPINNING OUT OF A WHEEL GOING AROUND CORNERS AT SLOW SPEED. WE ARE FRUSTATED BY THE INABILITY OF TOYOTA NORTH OF MT. KISCO, NY TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM.

NHTSA ODI #10005649

19,500 miles · Feb 4, 2003
Tires

WHILE ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE VEHICLE SLID BACKWARD. TIRES DO NOT HAVE ANY TRACTION ON SNOW OR ICE AND FEELS THEY ARE UNSAFE. PH

NHTSA ODI #10006275

Mileage unknown · Feb 3, 2003
Tires

TOYOTA REFUSES TO SATISFY CONSUMERS COMPLAINT ON FAULTY TIRES. THE TIRES THAT WERE PURCHASED WITH THE VEHICLE HAVE INADEQUATE TRACTION ON SNOW COVERED SURFACES. CONSUMER DOESN'T' FEEL ANY ONE SHOULD HAVE TO BEAR THE COST OF REPLACING ALL FOUR TIRES FOR WINTER CONDITIONS. CONSUMER IS SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT OF MONIES PAID FOR TH…

Read full complaint

TOYOTA REFUSES TO SATISFY CONSUMERS COMPLAINT ON FAULTY TIRES. THE TIRES THAT WERE PURCHASED WITH THE VEHICLE HAVE INADEQUATE TRACTION ON SNOW COVERED SURFACES. CONSUMER DOESN'T' FEEL ANY ONE SHOULD HAVE TO BEAR THE COST OF REPLACING ALL FOUR TIRES FOR WINTER CONDITIONS. CONSUMER IS SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT OF MONIES PAID FOR THESE REPLACEMENT TIRES. *JG

NHTSA ODI #10004553

Mileage unknown · Dec 13, 2002
Tires

I PURCHASED A TOYOTA CAMRY 2002 SE IN DECEMBER OF 2001AND DISCOVERED AFTER DRIVING TO AND FROM WORK DURING A SNOW STORM 12/5/02 THAT THE CAR WAS EQUIPED WITHOUT ALL SEASON TIRES. I NARROWLY AVOIDED SEVERAL ACCIDENTS THAT DAY, AS DID OTHERS I AM SURE. HOWEVER, I DISCOVERED WHILE SPEAKING WITH THE TIRE MANUFACTURER(TOYO) THAT TH…

Read full complaint

I PURCHASED A TOYOTA CAMRY 2002 SE IN DECEMBER OF 2001AND DISCOVERED AFTER DRIVING TO AND FROM WORK DURING A SNOW STORM 12/5/02 THAT THE CAR WAS EQUIPED WITHOUT ALL SEASON TIRES. I NARROWLY AVOIDED SEVERAL ACCIDENTS THAT DAY, AS DID OTHERS I AM SURE. HOWEVER, I DISCOVERED WHILE SPEAKING WITH THE TIRE MANUFACTURER(TOYO) THAT THE TIRES ARE CONSIDERED "SUMMER" TIRES AND ARE NOT MADE FOR SNOW AND/OR ICE. THEY STATED THE TYPE OF TIRE PLACED ON THE CAR IS DETERMINED BY THE CAR MANUFACTURER NOT TOYO. I CONTACTED THE DEALER AS I AM EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE PURCHASING CAMRYS WITHOUT KNOWING THEY NEED TO PURCHASE SNOW TIRES OR ALL SEASON TIRES. THEY APPARENTLY ARE NOT AS CONCERNED AS I AS THEY STATED THEY WOULD NOT DEBATE ON WHAT I WAS TOLD AT THE TIME OF THE SALE AND THE ONLY THING THEY COULD DO FOR ME IS TO ORDER REPLACEMENT TIRES AT A DISCOUNT. I THEN PROCEEDED TO CALL THE TIRE MANUFACTURER BACK TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN AND WAS TOLD THEY WOULD PAY 75% OF THE COST OF THE SAME TIRE (TOYO, J33, P21560R 16 94V), TO REPLACE THE EXISTING TIRES. THEY STATED I COULD REPLACE THE TIRES WITH ANY MAKE OF MY CHOICE. IT WAS THEIR PREFERENCE THAT I USE A LOCAL COMPANY THAT SELLS TOYO TIRES. I STOPPED TO ORDER REPLACEMENT TIRES AND FOUND AFTER INSPECTION, THE TIRES ARE BARE DOWN THE CENTER AND ARE WORN DOWN TO THE WEARBARS. SO NOT ONLY AM I DRIVING, WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE, A CAR THAT DOES NOT HAVE ANY TYPE OF TREAD FOR SNOW/ICE I AM DRIVING WITH MINIMAL TREAD. I UNDERSTAND THE TIRES ARE HIGH PERFORMANCE TIRES, HOWEVER I DO NOT FEEL THEY SHOULD HAVE WORN IN THE MANNER THEY DID AFTER 14000 MILES. I HAVE SEVERAL CONCERNS, ONE BEING WITH TOYOTA AND THE FACT THAT THE DEALER OR DEALERS ARE NOT INFORMING THE BUYER OF THE NEED TO PURCHASE ALL SEASON OR SNOW TIRES AT THE TIME OF THE SALE. HOW MANY CONSUMERS OR INNOCENT VICTIMS WILL BE OR HAVE BEEN INJURED IN ACCIDENTS DUE TO THIS SAME ISSUE. SECONDLY, THE TIRE MANUFACTURER FOR PROCUDING WHAT APPEARS TO ME DEFECTIVE TIRES.

NHTSA ODI #10000007

Mileage unknown · Dec 6, 2002
Tires

ON HWY CAR PULLED LEFT. AFTER CANADIAN TRIP BROUGHT CAR TO DEALER WHO ROTATED TIRES & DID ALIGNMENT. CAR STILL PULLED LEFT. RETURNED TO DEALER WHO ROTATED LEFT FRON TIRE. CAR STILL PULLED LEFT. BROUGHT TO DEALER 3RD. TIME AND SHOP FOREMAN SAID IT WAS "TIRE KINETICISM". DEALER REMOVED TIRE FROM RIM, INVERTED TIRE, AND REMOU…

Read full complaint

ON HWY CAR PULLED LEFT. AFTER CANADIAN TRIP BROUGHT CAR TO DEALER WHO ROTATED TIRES & DID ALIGNMENT. CAR STILL PULLED LEFT. RETURNED TO DEALER WHO ROTATED LEFT FRON TIRE. CAR STILL PULLED LEFT. BROUGHT TO DEALER 3RD. TIME AND SHOP FOREMAN SAID IT WAS "TIRE KINETICISM". DEALER REMOVED TIRE FROM RIM, INVERTED TIRE, AND REMOUNTED AND BALANCED TIRE. DEALER TEST DROVE AND SAID NO MORE PULL. WHEN ASKED WHO WOULD PAY FOR FUTURE INVERTING OF TIRE DURING 5 WHEEL ROTATION DEALER COULD NOT ANSWER. SPOKE TO TOYOTA REGINAL SPERVISOR WHO TEST DROVE CAR AND SAID RIGHT REAR OUT OF ALIGNMENT. I REQUESTED MICHELIN TIRE UPGRADE AND WOULD SPLIT DIFFERENCE IN COST WITH TOYOTA. TOYOTA SAID ALIGNMENT AND INVERTING TIRE WOULD SOLVE PROBLEM. TOYOTA NEVER RESPONDED TO QUERY RE: WHO PAYS COST OF RE- INVERTING ONE TIRE AND INVERTING ANOTHER TIRE DURING ROTATION. I'M CONCERNED FOR MY SAFETY & FUTURE ROTATION COSTS WITH THESE BRIDGESTONES. WANT UPGRADED TIRE REPLACEMENT & THESE TIRES SENT BACK TO BRIDGESTONE FOR ANALYSIS. I ALSO WENT TO A BRIDGESTONE DEALER IN FRAMINGHAM AND THEY SAID THEY NEVER HEARD OF "KINTETICISM" AND TIRE INVERTING TO RESOLVE ALIGNMENT PROBLEM. I SUSPECT A WEAK SIDEWALL CAUSING CAR TO PULL LEFT AND WORRY ABOUT SAFETY. REQUEST DOT TAKE PROMPT INVESTIGATIVE ACTION. SO FAR TOTAL OF 4 VISITS TO DEALER WHO HAS ACKNOWLEGED THE PROBLEM BUT DENIES IT IS A PROBLEM. IN OTHER WORDS LIVE WITH IT. DT

NHTSA ODI #770556

Mileage unknown · Sep 24, 2002
Tires

THE TIRES WERE ON THE TOYOTA WHEN PURCHASED. THE DRIVER'S FRONT TIRE FAILED AS MY WIFE WAS DRIVING ON THE 101 NORTHBOUND FOR SUN CITY. THERE WERE SEVERAL LARGE HOLES IN THE SIDE WALL. THE DEALER STATED THAT THIS COULD BE DUE TO LOW TIRE PRESSURE. HOWEVER, THE PRESSURE IN THE TIRES WERE CHECKED WITHIN THE SEVEN DAYS OF THE TI…

Read full complaint

THE TIRES WERE ON THE TOYOTA WHEN PURCHASED. THE DRIVER'S FRONT TIRE FAILED AS MY WIFE WAS DRIVING ON THE 101 NORTHBOUND FOR SUN CITY. THERE WERE SEVERAL LARGE HOLES IN THE SIDE WALL. THE DEALER STATED THAT THIS COULD BE DUE TO LOW TIRE PRESSURE. HOWEVER, THE PRESSURE IN THE TIRES WERE CHECKED WITHIN THE SEVEN DAYS OF THE TIRE FAILURE---AT LEAST WE WERE TOLD THAT THEY HAD BEEN CHECKED AS PART OF THE SERVICE WE PAID FOR. THE FULL TIRE SIZE NUMBER WAS P205/65/R15 92T---MORE NUMBERS THAN ALLOWED IN THE PREVIOUS BLANK. IF LOW AIR PRESSURE COULD CAUSE THIS TYPE OF DAMAGE ON A TIRE, THEN IT SEEMS TO ME THAT REGULATIONS SHOULD REQUIRE GREATER TOLERANCE IN TIRE PRESSURE. NLM

NHTSA ODI #767664

Mileage unknown · Aug 27, 2002
Tires

THERE IS A BUBBLE ON OUTSIDE OF THE LEFT FRONT TIRE. ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT, 10000 MILES, MOUNTED ON A TOYOTA CAMRY 2002.*AKTHE DEALER REFUSED TO REPLACE THE TIRE. *JG

NHTSA ODI #8017271

Mileage unknown · Jul 12, 2002
TiresCrashInjury

THE CAMRY SE MODEL EQUIPPED WITH SPORT TIRES(BRIDGESTONE TURANZA IN THIS CASE) WILL NOT FUNCTION IN ANY LEVEL OF SNOWFALL. I HAVE HAD EASILY OVER 10 INCIDENTS OF NOT BEING ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE...MORE INCIDENTS OF NOT BEING ABLE TO GET STARTED IN RIDICULOUSLY LIGHT SNOW CONDITIONS. I HAD AN ACCIDENT WHERE I REAR-ENDED A CAR …

Read full complaint

THE CAMRY SE MODEL EQUIPPED WITH SPORT TIRES(BRIDGESTONE TURANZA IN THIS CASE) WILL NOT FUNCTION IN ANY LEVEL OF SNOWFALL. I HAVE HAD EASILY OVER 10 INCIDENTS OF NOT BEING ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE...MORE INCIDENTS OF NOT BEING ABLE TO GET STARTED IN RIDICULOUSLY LIGHT SNOW CONDITIONS. I HAD AN ACCIDENT WHERE I REAR-ENDED A CAR WHILE DOING 10 MPH BECAUSE I COMPLETELY LOST ANY CAPABILITY OF STOPPING. I HAVE HAD 5 OTHER PEOPLE DRIVE THE CAR AND EVERY ONE OF THEM COULD NOT BELIEVE THE LACK OF TRACTION. MY INSURANCE AGENT OWNS A CAMRY LE WITH COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TIRES AND CLAIMS THE CAR IS EXCELLENT IN THE SNOW. I CALLED TOYOTA AND THEY SAID THAT THERE ARE NO OTHER COMPLAINTS ON THIS...BULL!!! ...THE DEALER WHERE I TAKE THIS CAR FOR SERVICE SAID THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS IN REGARD TO THIS SE SITUATION BUT THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT'S A MANUFACTURER / TIRE ISSUE. THEY TELL YOU TO CALL TOYOTA ONLY TO HAVE CORPORATE TELL YOU TO GET LOST. I FEEL THAT YOU NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS NOW!...THERE ARE MANY MANY SE OWNERS HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM .. IT IS DANGEROUS! SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET KILLED! ...I NOW HAVE 2 CHOICES ...SPEND 500.00 ON NEW TIRES SO MY FAMILY CAN BE SAFE OR TRADE THIS IN AND TAKE A HUGE MONETARY HIT. HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT TOYOTA IS NOT REQUIRED TO TEST THIS CAR WITH THESE TIRES IN SNOW CONDITIONS BEFORE PUTTING PEOPLE IN HARM'S WAY? THEIR SERVICE PEOPLE ADMIT THAT THESE TIRES ARE TOO HARD AND THE CAR IS TOO LIGHT ....A RECALL SHOULD BE MANDATED TO HAVE TOYOTA REPLACE THESE TIRES NOW!*AK

NHTSA ODI #764124

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