← 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

Fuel/propulsion System complaints

8 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Jun 14, 2022
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

I was going 45 to 50 mph and my car shut off in middle of highway and we barely got out of highway before getting hit there is recall on same kind of car for throttle body and that's what's wrong with mine so it has too be that they missed my car

NHTSA ODI #11469268

Mileage unknown · Sep 13, 2021
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemUnknown Or Other

After oxygen sensors were changed the VSC and track off lights came on and wouldn't turn off and it's using a lot of fuel consumption and it takes a second for the car to pick up after stepping on the gas pedal

NHTSA ODI #11432702

Mileage unknown · Apr 21, 2017
Air BagsElectrical SystemEngineCrash

TAKATA INFLATORS: EVERY TIME I FIX MY VEHICLE INDIVIDUALS CAUSE HATE CRIMES DAMAGING MY VEHICLE AS I GO TO SLEEP OR WHEN I AM NOT VIEWING MY VEHICLE THEY MUST KNOW EXACTLY WHEN I GO TO SLEEP BECAUSE I CANT CATCH THEM EVEN THOUGH I THINK I KNOW WHO IT IS I CAN NOT PROVE IT SO THIS IS WHY I AM COMPLAINING I REMEMBER CHECKING MY T…

Read full complaint

TAKATA INFLATORS: EVERY TIME I FIX MY VEHICLE INDIVIDUALS CAUSE HATE CRIMES DAMAGING MY VEHICLE AS I GO TO SLEEP OR WHEN I AM NOT VIEWING MY VEHICLE THEY MUST KNOW EXACTLY WHEN I GO TO SLEEP BECAUSE I CANT CATCH THEM EVEN THOUGH I THINK I KNOW WHO IT IS I CAN NOT PROVE IT SO THIS IS WHY I AM COMPLAINING I REMEMBER CHECKING MY TIRES IN THE NIGHT NOTICING NOTHING WRONG WITH THEM THEN CHECKED IN THE MOURNING AND NOTICED NAILS NAILED IN THE TIRES THEN I NOTICED DRIED TURTLE WAX ALL OVER THE BODY OF THE CAR MESSING UP THE PAINT WHEEL ALIGNMENT OUT OF LINE RIGHT DOOR POWER WINDOW MALFUNCTION TRUNK OPEN POWER SWITCH BROKEN POWER SUN ROOF SLIDING WINDOW BROKEN VEHICLE WAS STATIONARY THIS HAPPENED ON DIFFERENT DATE IN COMBINATION TO THE DAMAGE BETWEEN 06/16/06 TO 04/21/17.

NHTSA ODI #10979713

Mileage unknown · Mar 11, 2017
Air BagsFuel/propulsion SystemSeat Belts

CAN'T TAKE MY KIDS ANYWHERE BECAUSE IT NOT SAFE CAN'T GAVE FRIEND RIDE .CAUSE IT UN SAFE THIS CAR IS UN SAFE PLEASE CAN FIT MY CAR WHEN I GOT CAR DID NO IT HAD PROBLEMS WITH BAGS..MY RIGHT SIDE DASH HAS LINE ACROSS IT BUST OPEN. C

NHTSA ODI #10960157

190,000 miles · Nov 30, 2014
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed ControlCrash

DRIVING WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL SET TO APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH. CARS AHEAD WERE STOPPING, SO THE CRUISE CONTROL CANCEL BUTTON WAS PRESSED. INSTEAD OF THE CAR DECELERATING, IT QUICKLY ACCELERATED AS IF THE GAS PEDAL HAD BEEN PRESSED TO THE FLOOR. THE BRAKES WERE QUICKLY PRESSED, BUT BEFORE THE CAR CAME TO A STOP, IT HIT THE REAR …

Read full complaint

DRIVING WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL SET TO APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH. CARS AHEAD WERE STOPPING, SO THE CRUISE CONTROL CANCEL BUTTON WAS PRESSED. INSTEAD OF THE CAR DECELERATING, IT QUICKLY ACCELERATED AS IF THE GAS PEDAL HAD BEEN PRESSED TO THE FLOOR. THE BRAKES WERE QUICKLY PRESSED, BUT BEFORE THE CAR CAME TO A STOP, IT HIT THE REAR END OF THE CAR AHEAD. THE PERSON IN THE OTHER CAR HAD A PRECAUTIONARY MEDICAL EXAM A FEW DAYS LATER, BUT NO INJURY WAS REPORTED. THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER OF THE CAMRY WERE NOT INJURED AND AIR BAGS WERE NOT DEPLOYED. THE CAMRY WAS DECLARED TOTALED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY. THE OTHER CAR WAS REPAIRED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10661321

129,600 miles · Oct 25, 2014
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control

I EXPERIENCED UNINTENDED ACCELERATION OF MY VEHICLE WHILE DRIVING SLOWLY IN A PARKING LOT. THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO A HIGH SPEED AND REVVED TO VERY HIGH RPM'S. I MANAGED TO SLAM ON THE BRAKES AND FINALLY SHIFT THE CONTROLS TO NEUTRAL. THE CAR IMMEDIATELY RETURNED TO NORMAL RPM'S AND I TURNED OFF THE KEY. TOYOTA FIRST CLAIME…

Read full complaint

I EXPERIENCED UNINTENDED ACCELERATION OF MY VEHICLE WHILE DRIVING SLOWLY IN A PARKING LOT. THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO A HIGH SPEED AND REVVED TO VERY HIGH RPM'S. I MANAGED TO SLAM ON THE BRAKES AND FINALLY SHIFT THE CONTROLS TO NEUTRAL. THE CAR IMMEDIATELY RETURNED TO NORMAL RPM'S AND I TURNED OFF THE KEY. TOYOTA FIRST CLAIMED "DRIVER ERROR", THEN ENTRAPMENT OF THE GAS PETAL BY A FLOOR MAT, THEN "DRIVER ERROR" AGAIN, ALLEGING I HAD "BRAKED INCORRECTLY AND MUST HAVE HIT THE GAS BY MISTAKE"!! I WAS SIMPLY LOW-SPEED DRIVING WITH MY FOOT ON THE GAS, WHEN THEIR CAR RACED SUDDENLY ON ITS OWN ACCORD. I HAD NOT HIT THE BRAKES UNTIL I HAD TO EMERGENCY-STOP A RUNAWAY CAR! DEALER SAYS THEY "CHECKED THE COMPUTER" AND THERE ARE "NO ISSUES" TO RESOLVE! THIS IS A BLATANT, LETHAL DEFECT IN THEIR PRODUCT! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10649913

69,700 miles · Sep 10, 2014
Fuel/propulsion SystemCrashInjury

ON SUNDAY, AUGUST 31, 2014, AT ABOUT 1:00 PM, I WAS LEAVING THE CHURCH PARKING LOT AFTER THE SERVICE AT SAN MARTIN DE PORRES CATHOLIC CHURCH. I WAS IN MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH MY FRIEND (NAME PROVIDED ON REQUEST). I DROVE FROM THE LOWER LEVEL PARKING TO THE UPPER LEVEL PARKING LOT WHERE THE EXIT IS LOCATED. I WAS GOING APPRO…

Read full complaint

ON SUNDAY, AUGUST 31, 2014, AT ABOUT 1:00 PM, I WAS LEAVING THE CHURCH PARKING LOT AFTER THE SERVICE AT SAN MARTIN DE PORRES CATHOLIC CHURCH. I WAS IN MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH MY FRIEND (NAME PROVIDED ON REQUEST). I DROVE FROM THE LOWER LEVEL PARKING TO THE UPPER LEVEL PARKING LOT WHERE THE EXIT IS LOCATED. I WAS GOING APPROXIMATELY 5-10 MILES PER HOUR. WE WERE COASTING TOWARD THE EXIT WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR REVVED UP REALLY LOUD AND ACCELERATED/SPED THROUGH A SHORT STREET THAT FEEDS THE PARKING LOT. A WITNESS TOLD ME HE THOUGHT THE CAR WAS GOING ABOUT 40 MILES PER HOUR. THE CAR CONTINUED ON AT A HIGH SPEED ON THE DIRT PARKING LOT ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF THE CHURCH. IT WAS BURROWING THROUGH THE DIRT AND SPEWING OUT DIRT LIKE WE WERE IN A TORNADO. I STEERED THE CAR ALONG THE CHURCH FENCE TO PREVENT IT FROM GOING INTO THE STREET. AFTER A WHILE IT CRASHED INTO THE CHURCH'S FENCE AND SLOWED FOR A FEW SECONDS. (A WITNESS REPORTED HE RAN AFTER THE CAR TO GET THE LICENSE PLATE.) THEN THE CAR REVVED UP AGAIN AND SPUN TO THE LEFT AND PROCEEDED FORWARD A SHORT DISTANCE AND THEN PLOWED INTO THE BLOCK WALL GOING DOWN TO THE LOWER PARKING LOT. AT THIS POINT, THE CAR GOT STUCK ON THE BLOCK WALL AND DIED OUT. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY IN THE CRASH. SOMEONE HAD CALLED 911 AND THE AMBULANCE, PARAMEDICS, AND POLICE ARRIVED. THEY ADVISED US TO GO TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM FOR CARE. WE DID GO TO THE ER AND WERE EVALUATED. MY FRIEND HAD MUSCLE SORENESS FOR SEVERAL DAYS. I CONTINUE TO HAVE MUSCLE SORENESS, AND MY WRIST AND RIGHT ELBOW WERE BRUISED AND HURT. I WAS VERY CONCERNED BECAUSE SOMEONE COULD HAVE BEEN STRUCK AND KILLED IN THE PARKING LOT IF I HAD LEFT RIGHT AFTER THE SERVICE. THE INSURANCE COMPANY HAS CONSIDERED MY CAR A COMPLETE LOSS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10632047

127,470 miles · Oct 25, 2012
Fuel/propulsion SystemPower TrainCrash

ON OCTOBER 24, 2012, I PARALLEL PARKED MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY ON THE STREET. THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME WAS LEAVING, SO HE ASKED ME TO MOVE BACK A FEW INCHES SO HE COULD GET OUT. MY CAR WAS STILL RUNNING SO I SHIFTED THE CAR INTO REVERSE, AND AS I BEGAN TO TAKE MY FOOT OFF THE BRAKE PEDAL, MY CAR ACCELERATED BACKWARDS AT A VERY FAST…

Read full complaint

ON OCTOBER 24, 2012, I PARALLEL PARKED MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY ON THE STREET. THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME WAS LEAVING, SO HE ASKED ME TO MOVE BACK A FEW INCHES SO HE COULD GET OUT. MY CAR WAS STILL RUNNING SO I SHIFTED THE CAR INTO REVERSE, AND AS I BEGAN TO TAKE MY FOOT OFF THE BRAKE PEDAL, MY CAR ACCELERATED BACKWARDS AT A VERY FAST SPEED INTO THE CAR BEHIND ME. WANTING TO PULL UP A FEW INCHES TO GET OUT AND ASSESS THE DAMAGE, I SHIFTED THE CAR INTO DRIVE AND AS I DID, MY CAR ACCELERATED FORWARDS INTO THE PARKED CAR IN FRONT OF ME. IT ACCELERATED AT SUCH A HIGH SPEED THAT IT PUSHED THE THREE CARS IN FRONT OF ME TOGETHER. AT NO POINT DURING THESE TWO RAPID ACCELERATIONS DID I EVER APPLY MY FOOT TO THE GAS PEDAL. THIS INCIDENT CAUSED DAMAGE TO SEVERAL CARS AND COULD HAVE ENDED UP WITH MUCH MORE SEVERE CONSEQUENCES HAD I NOT BEEN IN THAT LOCATION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10482281

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