IllustrationMileage unknown · Jan 29, 2019
Air Bags
RECALL
NHTSA ODI #11172697
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 →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Camry 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
1860–25K
11025–50K
8750–75K
8175–100K
96100–150K
50150K+
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
What owners actually said
953 reportsRECALL
RECALL AIR BAGS
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT A BOLT FRACTURED IN THE ENGINE ASSEMBLY AND ANTI-FREEZE WAS LEAKING. AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENGINE BOLT MAY NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE DEALER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE APPRO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT A BOLT FRACTURED IN THE ENGINE ASSEMBLY AND ANTI-FREEZE WAS LEAKING. AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENGINE BOLT MAY NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE DEALER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000.
EXCESSIVE OIL USAGE. CAR AT 4 YEARS OLD AND LESS THAN 40K MILES WAS REPORTED TO THE DEALER AS USING 1Q OF OIL EVERY 1500 MILES. AT 60K IT WAS USING 1Q EVERY 1000 MILES. ALL THE TIMES THIS WAS REPORTED TO THE DEALER I WAS TOLD THIS IS NORMAL OIL CONSUMPTION, NOW AT 100K IT IS USING 1Q EVERY 300 MILES AND I AM BEING TOLD I NEED N…
Read full complaint
EXCESSIVE OIL USAGE. CAR AT 4 YEARS OLD AND LESS THAN 40K MILES WAS REPORTED TO THE DEALER AS USING 1Q OF OIL EVERY 1500 MILES. AT 60K IT WAS USING 1Q EVERY 1000 MILES. ALL THE TIMES THIS WAS REPORTED TO THE DEALER I WAS TOLD THIS IS NORMAL OIL CONSUMPTION, NOW AT 100K IT IS USING 1Q EVERY 300 MILES AND I AM BEING TOLD I NEED NEW RINGS. I BELIEVE THE 02 CAMRY IS EXPERIENCING THE EXACT SAME THING THE LATER MODELS WERE RECALLED FOR AND TOYOTA WAS HIDING THE FACT THIS IS A PROBLEM WITH THEIR 4 CYL MODELS. THIS WILL EVENTUALLY BECOME A SMOG EMISSIONS ISSUE WITH THE OIL USAGE. CONTACTED THE 1-800 TOYOTA NUMBER AND THEY SAID IT ISN'T UNDER A CAMPAIGN AND WONT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE'S SPEED CONTROL MALFUNCTIONED. THE VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP ACCELERATING WHILE TURNING, EVEN WITH THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED. THE CONTACT APPROACHED A RED LIGHT AND CRASHED INTO A PARKED VEHICLE. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT W…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE VEHICLE'S SPEED CONTROL MALFUNCTIONED. THE VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP ACCELERATING WHILE TURNING, EVEN WITH THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED. THE CONTACT APPROACHED A RED LIGHT AND CRASHED INTO A PARKED VEHICLE. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED, BUT WAS NOT COMPLETED BY THE OFFICER. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE REPORT WOULD BECOME AVAILABLE WITHIN TEN DAYS. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED TWO BROKEN ARMS, A FRACTURE TO THE SECOND AND FIFTH RIBS, A DISLOCATED WRIST (SIDE UNKNOWN), A BROKEN RIGHT ANKLE, AND BRUISES TO THE RIGHT LEG. MEDICAL ATTENTION WAS REQUIRED IN THE FORM OF SURGERY (BONE RESET). THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND TOWED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE WAS SMASHED INTO THE INTERIOR OF THE OTHER VEHICLE NEAR THE PASSENGER SEAT. A DEALER AND THE MANUFACTURER WERE NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 120,000.
I HAD JUST GOTTEN IN THE CAR IN THE PARKING LOT OF A STORE. TURNED THE CAR ON, PUT MY SEATBELT ON, AND BEGAN ENTERING IN A DESTINATION INTO MY PHONE GPS WHEN BOTH THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. THE CAR WAS IN PARK WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND MY HANDS WERE NOT TOUCHING THE STEERING WHEEL. I HAD NOT LEFT THE PARKING SPACE AND NO ONE HIT …
Read full complaint
I HAD JUST GOTTEN IN THE CAR IN THE PARKING LOT OF A STORE. TURNED THE CAR ON, PUT MY SEATBELT ON, AND BEGAN ENTERING IN A DESTINATION INTO MY PHONE GPS WHEN BOTH THE AIRBAGS DEPLOYED. THE CAR WAS IN PARK WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND MY HANDS WERE NOT TOUCHING THE STEERING WHEEL. I HAD NOT LEFT THE PARKING SPACE AND NO ONE HIT OR BUMPED THE VEHICLE. THERE ARE NOT CURRENTLY ANY RECALLS ON THIS VEHICLE AND I CAN ONLY ASSUME IT WAS AN AIRBAG MALFUNCTION.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING, SMOKE COULD BE SEEN COMING FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS ILLUMINATED DURING THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE VALVE COVER FAILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE DEALER WAS NOT CO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING, SMOKE COULD BE SEEN COMING FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATORS ILLUMINATED DURING THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE VALVE COVER FAILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE DEALER WAS NOT CONTACTED FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING OR REPAIRS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL FOR THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF THE REPAIR. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 160,000.
I BOUGHT MY 2002 CAMRY NEW. I MAINTAINED IT PROPERLY EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. AT 107K MILES A GURGLING SOUND BEGAN IN THE ENGINE AND ROUGH IDLING, AND THE TEMPERATURE WENT STRAIGHT TO H, TOOK IMMEDIATELY TO MY EXPERIENCED AUTO MECHANIC, HE PUT IN A NEW RADIATOR. WITHIN DAYS THE GURGLING AND ROUGH IDLING BEGAN AGAIN. ONCE AGAIN I T…
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT MY 2002 CAMRY NEW. I MAINTAINED IT PROPERLY EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. AT 107K MILES A GURGLING SOUND BEGAN IN THE ENGINE AND ROUGH IDLING, AND THE TEMPERATURE WENT STRAIGHT TO H, TOOK IMMEDIATELY TO MY EXPERIENCED AUTO MECHANIC, HE PUT IN A NEW RADIATOR. WITHIN DAYS THE GURGLING AND ROUGH IDLING BEGAN AGAIN. ONCE AGAIN I TOOK IT TO MY MECHANIC. AFTER THOROUGHLY CHECKING THE ENGINE (HE EVEN CALLED IN ANOTHER TOP MECHANIC FOR A SECOND OPINION) AND THEN TOLD ME THE BAD NEWS. 2002-06 TOYOTA CAMRY'S HAVE A FLAW IN THE BOLT DESIGN THAT CAUSES THE CYLINDER HEAD TO SEPARATE FROM THE ENGINE BLOCK RESULTING IN THE COOLANT LEAKING TO THE ENGINE. WHEN I BOUGHT THE CAR THE SALESMAN SAID CAMRY'S RUN FOR 300K MILES, WELL HE NEGLECTED TO TELL ME THAT AFTER ONLY 107K MILES BECAUSE OF THIS FLAW IN THE ENGINE YOU WILL HAVE A BLOWN HEAD GASKET AND STRIPPED HEAD BOLTS SO THE SEAL IS NOT TIGHT -- SO YOU NEED TO REPLACE THE ENGINE!!!! AFTER LOOKING ONLINE, I SEE THIS IS FAR FROM AN ISOLATED CASE!!! TOYOTA IS WELL AWARE OF THIS ENGINE FLAW. THEY NEED TO PAY FOR THESE VERY EXPENSIVE ENGINE REPLACEMENTS!!!! MY MECHANIC SAID TOYOTA USED STEEL HEAD BOLTS IN AN ALUMINUM ENGINE. VERY BAD! STEEL AND ALUMINUM EXPAND AND CONTRACT AT DIFFERENT RATES, WHICH CAUSES THE PROBLEM!
AT 145,000 MILES THE HEAD GASKET FAILED DUE TO 3 STRIPPED HEAD BOLT.
TWO SEPARATE EPISODES OF RAPID UNCONTROLLED ACCELERATION ON 27JAN2018 AND 09FEB2018 RESULTING IN VEHICLE MOVING FORWARD AND ENGINE RUNNING RAPIDLY. FIRST EPISODE OCCURRED WHILE MOVING INTO MY GARAGE CAUSING CAR TO KNOCK DOWN THREE CASES OF WATER AND HITTING STORAGE AREA; SECOND EPISODE OCCURRED WHILE PULLING OUT OF ATM AREA THE …
Read full complaint
TWO SEPARATE EPISODES OF RAPID UNCONTROLLED ACCELERATION ON 27JAN2018 AND 09FEB2018 RESULTING IN VEHICLE MOVING FORWARD AND ENGINE RUNNING RAPIDLY. FIRST EPISODE OCCURRED WHILE MOVING INTO MY GARAGE CAUSING CAR TO KNOCK DOWN THREE CASES OF WATER AND HITTING STORAGE AREA; SECOND EPISODE OCCURRED WHILE PULLING OUT OF ATM AREA THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED, HAD TO SWEAR LEFT NOT TO HIT ANOTHER CAR, HITTING BANK STOP SIGN. HAD TO PLACE CAR IN NEUTRAL, BRAKES DID NOT SLOW VEHICLE. SECOND EPISODE WITNESSED BY PASSAGE IN FRONT SEAT. AFTER FIRST EPISODE DROVE CARE CAREFULLY LOCALLY AND IT DID NOT REOCCUR, UNTIL APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS LATER WHEN SECOND EPISODE OCCURRED AT ATM SITE. WHEN GETTING CAR HOME PLACED CAR IN NEUTRAL BEFORE STOPPING, MADE APPOINTMENT FOR DEALERSHIP SERVICE DEPARTMENT TO CHECK CARE ON 12FEB2018. ABLE TO DRIVE TO DEALERSHIP, SLOWLY AND USING NEUTRAL GEAR PRIOR TO BREAKING. DEALERSHIP, AFTER EXAMINING FOR APPROXIMATELY AN HOUR SAID CAR WAS FINE. NOT HAPPY WITH THIS RESULT SINCE THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG TO CREATE SUCH A FRIGHTENING ACCELERATION. AT DEALERSHIP CALLED TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE TO START REVIEW PROCESS OF THESE EVENTS. IN PROGRESS NOW. TOYOTA HAS SAID CAR WAS INSPECTED (NO ROAD TEST) AND CAR IS SAFE TO DRIVE. I DO NOT FEEL CAR IS SAFE TO DRIVE. I AM COMPLETING THIS COMPLAINT TO MAKE SURE THE ISSUE IS ADDRESSED. I AM THE ONLY OWNER OF THIS CAR SINCE IT WAS NEW AND KNOW THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG THAT EITHER IS UNDISCOVERED OR UNREVEALED. THANK YOU FOR REVIEWING THIS FORM.
Official recalls
404V346000 · 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
4DP06003 · 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.