← New search

2003 Toyota Camry

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Camry years

Owner complaints for the 2003 Toyota Camry are substantially higher than the model-year median of 295.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

575 reports with mileage · 205 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 259 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 112 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 91 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

228 crash reports10 fire reports71 injury reports

Engine complaints

52 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · May 5, 2013
Engine

2002-2006 TOYOTA CAMRY & OTHER MODELS WITH 4 CYLINDER ENGINES ( 2AZ) ENGINES BLOWN HEAD GASKET / STRIPPED HEAD BOLT PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10510701

120,000 miles · Apr 23, 2013
Engine

VIBRATIONS IN THE INTAKE MANIFOLD - VEHICLE BECAME SLUGGISH AND NOISY DUE TO INTAKE MANIFOLD ISSUE -IT IS BROKEN AND HAS TO BE REPLACED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10509286

114,000 miles · Mar 25, 2013
EngineStructureVehicle Speed ControlCrash

I WAS SLOWING DOWN TO MAKE A SIGNALED LEFT TURN INTO A PAKING SPACE AT CVS PHARMACY. AS I BRAKED AND TURNED, THE CAR LURCHED FORWARD HITTING A STACKED STONE PILLAR AND CAME TO A CRASHED STOP. THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY AND I HAD A SCRAPE ON MY SCALP FROM THE SUN VISOR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10504432

95,000 miles · Mar 11, 2013
Engine

WE FOUND COOLANT ON OUR GARAGE FLOOR. WE TOOK THE CAMRY TO OUR TOYOTA DEALER AND WAS INFORMED THAT CYLINDER HEAD BOLTS WERE STRIPPED AND COOLANT WAS LEAKING OUT OF THE BOLTS. WE WERE TOLD THAT A USED ENGINE REPLACEMENT WAS NEEDED TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM, AND THAT TOYOTA WOULD NOT COVER ANY OF THE COST. APPARENTLY, TOYOTA HAD ISS…

Read full complaint

WE FOUND COOLANT ON OUR GARAGE FLOOR. WE TOOK THE CAMRY TO OUR TOYOTA DEALER AND WAS INFORMED THAT CYLINDER HEAD BOLTS WERE STRIPPED AND COOLANT WAS LEAKING OUT OF THE BOLTS. WE WERE TOLD THAT A USED ENGINE REPLACEMENT WAS NEEDED TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM, AND THAT TOYOTA WOULD NOT COVER ANY OF THE COST. APPARENTLY, TOYOTA HAD ISSUED SERVICE BULLETINS TO THEIR DEALERS ABOUT THE PROBLEM SOME YEARS BEFORE, BUT WHEN I CALLED TOYOTA'S 1-800-331-4331 NUMBER I WAS INFORMED THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS OR WARRANTY EXTENSIONS FOR THIS PROBLEM. BASED ON WHAT I FOUND ON THE INTERNET, THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE 2003 CAMRY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10502308

173,000 miles · Mar 7, 2013
EngineFire

IN NOVEMBER 2012, I WAS TOLD BY MY THE DEALER THAT THERE WAS A LEAK IN MY WATER PUMP IN MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. I GOT A SECOND OPINION AND I WAS TOLD THAT MY WATER PUMP HAD A SLOW LEAK AND THAT I SHOULD GET IT REPAIRED. IN DECEMBER 2012, MY CAR RAN HOT AND WAS SMOKING REALLY BAD. DEALER STATED THAT MY I NEEDED A NEW ENGINE. I …

Read full complaint

IN NOVEMBER 2012, I WAS TOLD BY MY THE DEALER THAT THERE WAS A LEAK IN MY WATER PUMP IN MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. I GOT A SECOND OPINION AND I WAS TOLD THAT MY WATER PUMP HAD A SLOW LEAK AND THAT I SHOULD GET IT REPAIRED. IN DECEMBER 2012, MY CAR RAN HOT AND WAS SMOKING REALLY BAD. DEALER STATED THAT MY I NEEDED A NEW ENGINE. I ASKED WHAT WAS THE ISSUE AND THEY STATED THAT MY HEAD GASKETS WERE BLOWN. I ASKED THE DEALER COULD THEY REPAIR THE HEAD GASKETS AND THE ANSWER WAS I NEEDED A NEW ENGINE. GOT A SECOND OPINION WHO THEN TOLD ME THAT I HAD STRIPPED HEAD BOLTS AND CAR COULD BE REPAIRED. HAD CAR REPAIRED AND THE CAR IS RUNNING FINE 173,000. I STARTED DOING RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET AND LITERALLY I FOUND HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE WITH THIS SAME ISSUE. I PROCEEDED TO CALL TOYOTA (TWICE) AND THE SECOND CALL DID ADMIT THAT THERE WAS A SERVICE BULLETIN ISSUED IN NOV 2011 ALERTING THE DEALERS HOW TO REPAIR THE STRIPPED HEAD BOLTS. I COULD NOT BELIEVE HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE HAVING THIS ISSUE AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS A DEFECT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 2.4 ENGINE FOR THE 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. TOYOTA WILL NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE WAS A MAJOR DEFECT WITH THIS YEARS CAMRY. AND WHAT IS FURTHER MORE DISHEARTENING IS THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE AT TOYOTA SAID THAT I SHOULD EXPECT TO MAKE REPAIRS ON MY CAR WITH THE TYPE OF MILEAGE I HAVE. AND I DO AGREE BUT I SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET MORE WITHOUT THE DEFECT. IS THERE ANY WAY I CAN GET TOYOTA TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE DEFECT BY FILING THIS CLAIM AND IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER CLAIMS ON THIS WEBSITE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10501999

160,000 miles · Jan 4, 2013
Engine

IT WAS AN UNUSUALLY COLD DAY FOR OCTOBER AND I WAS DRIVING MY SON TO SCHOOL WITH MY THREE YEAR OLD DAUGHTER IN HER CAR SEAT WHEN THE HEAT WOULD NOT WORK. ONLY COLD AIR CAME OUT OF THE VENTS. THE WINDOWS WERE FOGGED UP AND WOULD NOT DEFROST. I THEN NOTICED THAT THE TEMPERATURE GAGE WAS IN THE RED ZONE. IT KEPT CLIMBING UP AND DOW…

Read full complaint

IT WAS AN UNUSUALLY COLD DAY FOR OCTOBER AND I WAS DRIVING MY SON TO SCHOOL WITH MY THREE YEAR OLD DAUGHTER IN HER CAR SEAT WHEN THE HEAT WOULD NOT WORK. ONLY COLD AIR CAME OUT OF THE VENTS. THE WINDOWS WERE FOGGED UP AND WOULD NOT DEFROST. I THEN NOTICED THAT THE TEMPERATURE GAGE WAS IN THE RED ZONE. IT KEPT CLIMBING UP AND DOWN. I COULD NOT SEE OUT OF THE WINDSHIELD AT ALL AND HAD TO PULL OVER FOR SAFETY REASONS. THANK GOD I WAS NOT ON THE HIGHWAY AS USUAL, BUT ON A LOCAL ROAD. I STOPPED AND I WIPED OFF THE WINDSHIELD AND WINDOWS MANUALLY. THIS WAS A TERRIFYING ORDEAL. THE NEXT MORNING I TOOK THE CAMRY TO THE COOPER TIRE GARAGE HERE IN FINDLAY. AFTER INSPECTION I WAS TOLD THAT THE HEAD GASKET PULLED OUT OF THE BLOCK AND THAT IT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS AN ALUMINUM BLOCK. THEY ARE NOT MADE OUT OF STEEL ANYMORE. PREVIOUS TO THIS INCIDENT, I EXPERIENCED ABSOLUTELY NO SYMPTOMS THAT MY TOYOTA'S ENGINE WAS GOING TO MALFUNCTION. MY CAMRY'S ENGINE IS SHOT. I CONTACTED TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER AND WAS TOLD THERE IS NOTHING THEY COULD HELP ME WITH. I WAS ACTUALLY CRYING WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE. I HAVE BEEN A PROUD OWNER OF TWO CAMRYS. MY DAUGHTER DRIVES A 1995 CAMRY THAT IS STILL RUNNING VERY WELL AND MY MOTHER IS DRIVING A 1999 CAMRY THAT SHE HAS HAD NO ENGINE ISSUES WITH. APPARENTLY, THIS IS A NEWER MODEL DEFECT. MY CAMRY HAS BEEN PAID OFF SINCE NOVEMBER OF 2011. I WAS LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING ANOTHER 100,000 MILES OF USE OUT OF IT. THE REPUTATION THAT TOYOTA CAMRY'S HAVE STATES THAT IF I REGULARLY MAINTAIN MY CAMRY I SHOULD HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. I NOW HAVE THE URGE TO WARN ALL CAMRY DRIVERS TO BE AWARE THAT THEY COULD VERY WELL EXPERIENCE ENGINE FAILURE WITH NO SYMPTOMS AT ALL AND EVEN IF THEY REGULARLY MAINTAIN THEIR CAMRY. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS ISSUE. MY CAMRY STILL LOOKS AND DID RUN LIKE NEW. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10491442

80,000 miles · Dec 6, 2012
Engine

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TEMPERATURE GAUGE WARNING LAMP ILLUMINATED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE, SHE NOTICED THAT ALL OF THE COOLANT FLUID HAD LEAKED OUT OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THAT THE BOLT…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TEMPERATURE GAUGE WARNING LAMP ILLUMINATED. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE, SHE NOTICED THAT ALL OF THE COOLANT FLUID HAD LEAKED OUT OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC. THE MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THAT THE BOLTS BECAME DETACHED FROM THE ENGINE BASE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE BUT DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 80,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 86,000.

NHTSA ODI #10487605

130,000 miles · Nov 25, 2012
Engine

INTAKE MANIFOLD NOISE. DOCUMENTED PROBLEM. NO RECALL AVAILABLE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10485937

135,000 miles · Sep 11, 2012
Engine

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE MAKING A LEFT OR RIGHT TURN THERE WAS A NOISE COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD. ALSO, THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS LEAKING COOLANT FLUID. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO INSPECTED THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THE ENGINE HEAD BOLT …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE MAKING A LEFT OR RIGHT TURN THERE WAS A NOISE COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD. ALSO, THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS LEAKING COOLANT FLUID. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO INSPECTED THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THE ENGINE HEAD BOLT STRIPS ITSELF CAUSING THE COOLANT TO LEAK OUT AND BLEW THE HEAD GASKET. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 135,000.

NHTSA ODI #10475008

136,000 miles · Sep 2, 2012
Engine

CAR SMOKES DURING START UP. STARTED LAST WINTER. RESEARCH INDICATES STRIPPED HEAD BOLTS. PULL AND CLEAN THE PLUGS ABOUT ONCE A MONTH DUE TO FOULING. WAITING FOR IT TO BLOW. WILL NOT TAKE IT OUT OF TOWN OR THE HIGHWAY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10473315

Official recalls

1

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.

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

3

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.

Go deeper into Toyota Camry problems