NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
112 reportsClear category filter140,000 miles · Feb 14, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
I WAS NOT GETTING HEAT IF MY CAR WAS STOPPED AT A LIGHT. UPON EXAMINATION BY MY MECHANIC HE FOUND THERE WAS A GAP BETWEEN THE HEAD AND THE ENGINE BLOCK. IT BECAME APPARENT THAT THE SCREWS THAT HOLD THE HEAD TO THE ALUMINUM ENGINE BLOCK HAD STRIPPED AND THE HEAD WAS SEPARATING FROM THE BLOCK. . FIRST THE MECHANIC TRIED TO DRILL …
Read full complaint
I WAS NOT GETTING HEAT IF MY CAR WAS STOPPED AT A LIGHT. UPON EXAMINATION BY MY MECHANIC HE FOUND THERE WAS A GAP BETWEEN THE HEAD AND THE ENGINE BLOCK. IT BECAME APPARENT THAT THE SCREWS THAT HOLD THE HEAD TO THE ALUMINUM ENGINE BLOCK HAD STRIPPED AND THE HEAD WAS SEPARATING FROM THE BLOCK. . FIRST THE MECHANIC TRIED TO DRILL NEW HOLES WITH NEW BOLTS. HE DIDN'T FEEL THAT IT WOULD HOLD IN THE OBVIOUSLY DEFECTIVE BLOCK SO I HAD TO GET ANOTHER ENGINE WHICH COSTS ME $3215.78. I HAD NO CAR FOR OVER A MONTH. I AM VERY UPSET WITH THIS ISSUE. IF THE HEAD DETACHED, THE CAR WOULD HAVE LOST POWER. WHAT IF I WAS TRAVELING AT HIGH SPEED AND GOT HIT FROM BEHIND. ALSO WITH THE HEAD SEPARATED THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE FUEL COULD HAVE EXPLODED OR STARTED A FIRE WHILE DRIVING. PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF THERE ARE OTHERS WITH THIS PROBLEM. THERE ARE A LOT OF 2003 TOYOTA CAMRYS ON THE ROAD TODAY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10310305
147,000 miles · Feb 12, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
TOYOTA CAMRY 2003 4 CYLINDER. RATTLING NOISE FROM THE INTAKE MANIFOLD. MY MECHANIC SAID THAT THIS NOISE OCCURS DUE TO PLASTIC MATERIAL OF WHICH THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS MADE OF. MY MECHANIC HAS SEEN THIS PROBLEM WITH OTHER 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY AND IS VERY COMMON. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10310107
85,089 miles · Feb 4, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
OIL LIGHT CAME ON. TOOK TO TOYOTA DEALER TO CHECK. WITHIN MINUTES SAID IT WAS SLUDGE AND NEEDED A NEW ENGINE BLOCK. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10305708
85,000 miles · Feb 2, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHENEVER THE CONTACT STARTED THE VEHICLE SHE NOTICED A RATTLING SOUND IN THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS SERVICED FOR THE FAILURE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 8500…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHENEVER THE CONTACT STARTED THE VEHICLE SHE NOTICED A RATTLING SOUND IN THE ENGINE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS SERVICED FOR THE FAILURE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 85000.
NHTSA ODI #10303975
80,000 miles · Jan 28, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY CAMRY HAS A BLOW GASKET. I FOUND OUT BECAUSE MY MECHANIC DID THE EXAM HE PRESSURIZED THE COOLING SYSTEM AND PUT THE CAR UP ON THE LIFT. HE IMMEDIATELY NOTICED COOLANT LEAKING FROM UNDERNEATH THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD IN THE REAR OF THE ENGINE. HE ALSO NOTICED A LARGE PIECE OF FOAM RUBBER BETWEEN THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND THE …
Read full complaint
MY CAMRY HAS A BLOW GASKET. I FOUND OUT BECAUSE MY MECHANIC DID THE EXAM HE PRESSURIZED THE COOLING SYSTEM AND PUT THE CAR UP ON THE LIFT. HE IMMEDIATELY NOTICED COOLANT LEAKING FROM UNDERNEATH THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD IN THE REAR OF THE ENGINE. HE ALSO NOTICED A LARGE PIECE OF FOAM RUBBER BETWEEN THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND THE ENGINE BLOCK AND HEAD. THIS WAS BLOCKING OUR VIEW OF THE LEAK. WE COULD ONLY SEE THAT THE LEAK WAS BEHIND THE FOAM PIECE. THE ONLY OPTION TO DISCOVER THE SOURCE OF THIS LEAK WAS TO REMOVE THE PLASTIC INTAKE MANIFOLD, WHICH I DID. AFTER THIS WAS REMOVED, IT BECAME OBVIOUS THAT COOLANT HAD BEEN LEAKING A MINOR AMOUNT FOR QUITE SOME TIME DUE TO BUILD UP BETWEEN THE CYLINDER HEAD AND BLOCK. THE ONLY OPTION LEFT IS TO REMOVE THE HEAD, WHICH REQUIRES AN EXTENSIVE DISASSEMBLY (R AND R CYLINDER HEAD). AFTER LOOSENING THE BOLTS IN SEQUENCE, HE NOTICED THE HEAD BOLTS IN THE BACK OF THE ENGINE WERE LOOSE. FROM HIS EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD, HE CAN CONFIDENTLY CONCLUDE THAT THIS ONLY MEANS ONE OF TWO THINGS: THE BOLTS WERE LEFT LOOSE AT THE FACTORY, OR THE BOLTS ARE STRIPPED. ( HE COMMONLY HAS SEEN STRIPPED BOLTS IN THE ALUMINUM CADILLAC NORTH STAR BLOCK DISCOVERED THROUGH LEAKING COOLANT.)NEXT, HE REMOVED THE HEAD AND SURE ENOUGH, ONE BOLT CAME OUT WITH ALUMINUM IN THE THREAD...THUS INDICATING A STRIPPED BOLT. THE PLACEMENT OF THE (INSULATION) FOAM RUBBER PIECE BETWEEN THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND THE ENGINE BLOCK CREATED AN UNEVEN DISPERSION OF HEAT, CREATING "METAL FATIGUE" IN THE ALUMINUM BLOCK ALLOWING THE HEADBOLT TO STRIP. IF TOYOTA HAD OUT AN ALUMINUM MANIFOLD INSTEAD OF PLASTIC, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO NEED TO INSULATE (W/ FOAM PIECE), THUS ELIMINATING THE PROBLEM. THE ONLY SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM IS TO UNFORTUNATELY REPLACE THE ENGINE. THE COST TO REPAIR IT OTHERWISE WOULD BE SUBSTANTIAL. THIS IS AN ENGINE DEFECT AND WE WILL BE SEEING MORE OF THIS. *TW
NHTSA ODI #10302903
Mileage unknown · Jan 9, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
I OWN A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY 4CYN AND NOTICED BROWNISH OIL SUBSTANCE LEAKING FROM THE CAR. I TOOK IT TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP THAT HAS BEEN SERVICING MY CAR FOR YEARS ONLY FOR THEM TO TELL ME THAT I HAVE A BLOWN HEAD GASKET. WHEN I ASKED THEM TO EXPLAIN HOW THIS HAPPENED AND INFORM THEM THE CAR GAVE ME NO WARNING THEY INDICATED THA…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY 4CYN AND NOTICED BROWNISH OIL SUBSTANCE LEAKING FROM THE CAR. I TOOK IT TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP THAT HAS BEEN SERVICING MY CAR FOR YEARS ONLY FOR THEM TO TELL ME THAT I HAVE A BLOWN HEAD GASKET. WHEN I ASKED THEM TO EXPLAIN HOW THIS HAPPENED AND INFORM THEM THE CAR GAVE ME NO WARNING THEY INDICATED THAT THE HEAD BOLTS WERE STRIPPED AND THIS CAUSED THE COOLANT TO LEAK WHICH IN TURN IS WHY THE ENGINE HAS TO BE REPLACED. OF COURSE THE QUOTE WAS STARTING AT $3000. AFTER RESEARCHING THIS PROBLEM AND NOTICING THAT THIS IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN OCCURRING OVER SOME TIME AND TOYOTA IS AWARE OF IT BASED ON THE SERVICE BULLETIN 01507 NHTSA#10021542 DATED APRIL 6,2007,TOYOTA SHOULD BE PURSUED WITH A CLASS ACTION SUIT. THERE ARE MANY CAMRY OWNERS (RANGING IN YEARS 2002-2006) WITH THIS PROBLEM THAT SHOULD BE HELPED IN SOME KIND OF WAY FROM THE TOYOTA CORPORATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10298806
115,000 miles · Jan 5, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
I OWN A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 2.4 4 CYL. 2AZ-FE MOTOR. AND HAVE AN ISSUE WHERE THE HEADBOLTS PULL OUT OF THE BLOCK, CAUSING A COOLANT LEAK. THIS PARTICULAR PROBLEM IS KNOWN TO TOYOTA, AS DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA SERVICE BULLETIN 01507, NHTSA #10021542, DATED APRIL 6 2007. EVEN THOUGH TOYOTA AND YOUR OFFICE IS AWARE THIS ISSUE AFFE…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 2.4 4 CYL. 2AZ-FE MOTOR. AND HAVE AN ISSUE WHERE THE HEADBOLTS PULL OUT OF THE BLOCK, CAUSING A COOLANT LEAK. THIS PARTICULAR PROBLEM IS KNOWN TO TOYOTA, AS DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA SERVICE BULLETIN 01507, NHTSA #10021542, DATED APRIL 6 2007. EVEN THOUGH TOYOTA AND YOUR OFFICE IS AWARE THIS ISSUE AFFECTS HUNDREDS OF CONSUMERS, CAUSING REPAIRS ANYWHERE FROM $2000 TO $6000, NOTHING IS BEING DONE TO CORRECT THIS OBVIOUS DESIGN FLAW. TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE, THE ENGINE BLOCK NEEDS TO BE DRILLED AND TAPPED TO ACCOMMODATE INSERTS TO ALLOW THE HEADS TO BE TORQUED TO THE REQUIRED SPECS, OR IN SOME CASES, THE ENGINE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10298311
85,089 miles · Dec 26, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
ENGINE OIL LIGHT CAME ON WITH NO WARNING. WENT TO TOYOTA DEALER IMMEDIATELY AND SAID I HAD SLUDGE BUILD UP AND NEEDED A NEW ENGINE BLOCK - QUOTE $6200. THIS HAPPENED 2 DAYS BEFORE XMAS. I WAS STUNNED AND ASKED TO SPEAK TO MANAGEMENT. TOYOTA DENIED ANY SLUDGE PROBLEMS AND FAILED TO MENTION THAT A CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT WAS M…
Read full complaint
ENGINE OIL LIGHT CAME ON WITH NO WARNING. WENT TO TOYOTA DEALER IMMEDIATELY AND SAID I HAD SLUDGE BUILD UP AND NEEDED A NEW ENGINE BLOCK - QUOTE $6200. THIS HAPPENED 2 DAYS BEFORE XMAS. I WAS STUNNED AND ASKED TO SPEAK TO MANAGEMENT. TOYOTA DENIED ANY SLUDGE PROBLEMS AND FAILED TO MENTION THAT A CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT WAS MADE FOR MODELS UP TO 2002 FOR THIS PROBLEM. I HAVE A 2003 WITH THE SAME ENGINE SPECS.*TR
NHTSA ODI #10296977
111,125 miles · Oct 17, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
I HAD TO DO A HEAD GASKET REPAIR AND REPLACE THE THERMOSTAT ON MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY DUE TO MALFUNCTIONING THREADS FOR THE BOLTS ON THE HEAD GASKET. WHEN THE MECHANIC TOOK THE HEAD OFF HE REALIZED THE 3 BACK BOLTS WERE LOOSE. WHEN HE TRIED TO REPLACE THE HEAD, THE 3 BACK BOLTS WOULD NOT TORQUE TO PROPER PRESSURE. REALIZING TH…
Read full complaint
I HAD TO DO A HEAD GASKET REPAIR AND REPLACE THE THERMOSTAT ON MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY DUE TO MALFUNCTIONING THREADS FOR THE BOLTS ON THE HEAD GASKET. WHEN THE MECHANIC TOOK THE HEAD OFF HE REALIZED THE 3 BACK BOLTS WERE LOOSE. WHEN HE TRIED TO REPLACE THE HEAD, THE 3 BACK BOLTS WOULD NOT TORQUE TO PROPER PRESSURE. REALIZING THAT THE THREADS WERE STRIPPED IT WAS DISCUSSED ABOUT REPLACING THE ENGINE OR HAVING THE HOLES DRILLED OUT AND FIXED WITH TIMESERTS. I WENT WITH THE TIMESERTS REALIZING THAT IF I REPLACED THE ENGINE WITH THE SAME TYPE I'D BE FACING THIS PROBLEM AGAIN. I BELIEVE THAT THE ENGINE WOULD NOT HAVE OVERHEATED IN THE FIRST PLACE IF THE 3 BACK BOLTS WERE NOT ALREADY LOOSE. THE MACHINE SHOP OPERATOR STATED THIS WAS HIS 59TH TOYOTA THIS YEAR HE HAD TO DO THE TIME-SERTS ON THE ENGINE. I HAD ALL 10 OF THE HOLES RE DONE AT A COSTLY PRICE TO MAKE SURE THIS WOULD NOT HAPPEN TO THE OTHER BOLTS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10288775
99,427 miles · Aug 12, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE 4 CYL. WITH LESS THAN 100K OVERHEATED. TOOK VEHICLE TO INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO ADVISED ME OF A COOLANT LEAK AT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND TO TAKE THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER. DEALER HAS VEHICLE, REPORTS IT IS NOT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD THAT IS LEAKING BUT 3 REAR STEEL BOLTS THAT GO INTO ALUMINUM ARE STRIPPED.…
Read full complaint
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE 4 CYL. WITH LESS THAN 100K OVERHEATED. TOOK VEHICLE TO INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO ADVISED ME OF A COOLANT LEAK AT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD AND TO TAKE THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER. DEALER HAS VEHICLE, REPORTS IT IS NOT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD THAT IS LEAKING BUT 3 REAR STEEL BOLTS THAT GO INTO ALUMINUM ARE STRIPPED. TOYOTA IS "UNWILLING TO PARTICIPATE" IN THE REPAIR WITH AN ESTIMATE OF $6900.00 WHICH INCLUDES PURCHASING A NEW BLOCK. THIS SAME ISSUE IS ALL OVER THE TOYOTA FORUMS, USUALLY THIS ISSUE APPEARS AS A PROBABLE BLOWN HEAD GASKET. THIS IS NOT THE CASE IN MY VEHICLE. TOYOTA IS AWARE OF THIS DEFECT BUT IS DOING NOTHING TO STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCTS. THIS IS NOT AN UNCOMMON OCCURRENCE AND AS MORE VEHICLES ATTAIN APPROXIMATELY THE SAME MILEAGE, MORE REPORTS ARE BEING MADE OF THIS FAULT. THIS TYPE OF REPAIR SHOULD NOT BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONSUMER WHEN THE MANUFACTURER IS AWARE OF THE DEFECT. THIS MOST CERTAINLY SHOULD PROMPT A RECALL. PERHAPS A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT IS IN ORDER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10280274
NHTSA investigations
3DP06003 · 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.