2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO ACCESSORY OUTLET(CIGARETTE LIGHTER) AND REAR WINDOWS NOT WORKING. *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS RETURNED TO HER, SHE WAS INFORMED THE CIGARETTE LIGHTER HAD A SHORT AND HAD BEEN FIXED. SHE WAS ALSO TOLD THE RIGHT REAR WINDOW MOTOR WAS BURNED OUT AND WOULD NEED TO B…
Read full complaint
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO ACCESSORY OUTLET(CIGARETTE LIGHTER) AND REAR WINDOWS NOT WORKING. *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS RETURNED TO HER, SHE WAS INFORMED THE CIGARETTE LIGHTER HAD A SHORT AND HAD BEEN FIXED. SHE WAS ALSO TOLD THE RIGHT REAR WINDOW MOTOR WAS BURNED OUT AND WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE TWO FRONT WINDOWS WERE WORKING. THE CONSUMER DECLINED THE REPAIRS FOR THE WINDOW. HOWEVER, THE NEXT WEEK, THE PASSENGER WINDOW STOPPED WORKING. A FEW WEEKS LATER, SHE RECEIVED A NOTICE IN THE MAIL, IN WHICH A RECALL HAD BEEN ISSUED FOR A FAULTY WINDOW CONTROL BUTTON ON THE DRIVER'S DOOR, BUT FOR THE 2006 MODELS. THE CONSUMER STATED ONE DAY IT RAINED, AND AFTER IT STOPPED, THE WINDOWS STARTED TO WORK AGAIN. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10483065
111,000 miles · Jul 8, 2012
SuspensionVisibility
I HAVE 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE.. I GOT INTO MULTIPLE ISSUES WITH THE VEHICLE. FIRST ONE IS THE SUN ROOF/MOON ROOF GETTING JAMMED AND NOT CLOSING PROPERLY RESULTING IN WATER LEAK AND AS WELL AS HIGH CABIN NOISE. DEALER TOLD IT WILL COST 2000 + TO FIX THE SUNROOM/MOON ROOF AS THIS NEED TO BE REPLACED COMPLETE. ALSO WHILE DOING THE …
Read full complaint
I HAVE 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE.. I GOT INTO MULTIPLE ISSUES WITH THE VEHICLE. FIRST ONE IS THE SUN ROOF/MOON ROOF GETTING JAMMED AND NOT CLOSING PROPERLY RESULTING IN WATER LEAK AND AS WELL AS HIGH CABIN NOISE. DEALER TOLD IT WILL COST 2000 + TO FIX THE SUNROOM/MOON ROOF AS THIS NEED TO BE REPLACED COMPLETE. ALSO WHILE DOING THE 110000 SERVICE DEALER SAID THE FRONT AND RARE SUSPENSION SYSTEM NEEDS TO BE REPLACED WHICH WILL COST 2000 + USD. I AM REQUESTING TOYOTA TO LOOK INTO THIS AND GET THIS FIXED FOR ME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10464604
110,000 miles · Jul 8, 2012
Visibility
SUN ROOF/MOON ROOF GETTING JAMMED AND NOT CLOSING PROPERLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10464603
Mileage unknown · Mar 7, 2012
Visibility
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER SIDE SUN VISOR DROPPED AND BLOCKED THE CONTACT'S VISION OF THE ROADWAY. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THE SUN VISOR WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN, BUT THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 36,000.…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER SIDE SUN VISOR DROPPED AND BLOCKED THE CONTACT'S VISION OF THE ROADWAY. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THE SUN VISOR WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN, BUT THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 36,000.
NHTSA ODI #10450662
22,714 miles · Oct 5, 2009
Visibility
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2009 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING HE HEARD A LOUD NOISE, AND THEN THE SUN ROOF SHATTERED. HE SWERVED INTO ANOTHER LANE, BUT QUICKLY REGAINED CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND WAS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING INSPECTED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 22,714. THE VEHICLE ID…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2009 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING HE HEARD A LOUD NOISE, AND THEN THE SUN ROOF SHATTERED. HE SWERVED INTO ANOTHER LANE, BUT QUICKLY REGAINED CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND WAS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING INSPECTED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 22,714. THE VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WAS UNAVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10286310
Mileage unknown · Aug 6, 2008
Visibility
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE; SUN VISOR AND CUP HOLDER BROKE, REAR CAR STEREO SPEAKERS HAVE BECOME SO BRITTLE, THEY CRACK AT THE TOUCH. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE QUALITY OF EVERYTHING IS SO BAD AND THE CONSUMER SUFFERS AS A RESULT OF IT. A TOYOTA DEALER GAVE ME A PRICE OVER $900 FOR ALL REPAIRS, BUT OVER $400 FOR THE SPEAKER COVERS…
Read full complaint
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE; SUN VISOR AND CUP HOLDER BROKE, REAR CAR STEREO SPEAKERS HAVE BECOME SO BRITTLE, THEY CRACK AT THE TOUCH. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE QUALITY OF EVERYTHING IS SO BAD AND THE CONSUMER SUFFERS AS A RESULT OF IT. A TOYOTA DEALER GAVE ME A PRICE OVER $900 FOR ALL REPAIRS, BUT OVER $400 FOR THE SPEAKER COVERS, THEY SAID THEY HAD TO REPLACE THE WHOLE BACK PANEL. I WENT TO AN AUTO ACCESSORY SHOP, HE CAN BUY THE COVERS FROM A TOYOTA DEALER FOR $40, PUT THEM ON FOR $65, TOTAL $105. WHEN I CONTACTED TOYOTA I WAS TOLD THE WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED AND THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO. PRIOR TO THIS, THE UPHOLSTERY IN THE ROOF OF MY CAR CAME APART AT THE REAR WINDOW. TOYOTA REPAIRED THIS PROBLEM, BUT THEY NEVER EXPLAINED TO ME WHY I HAD TO REPLACE MY TIRES BEFORE I HAD 10, 000 MILES ON THEM, I THINK THEY WERE JUST BAD TIRES. IF ANY OF THESE ISSUES CAN BE ADDRESSED I WOULD APPRECIATE IT. I'M SURE I'M NOT THE ONLY PERSON HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE NEWER CARS. THIS IS MY THIRD TOYOTA, BUT I NEVER HAD THESE PROBLEMS WHEN THEY BELIEVED IN QUALITY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10237245
37,926 miles · Dec 12, 2005
Latches/locks/linkagesVisibility
DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE AUTOMATIC DOOR LOCKS WERE DEFECTIVE. THE DEALER REPLACED BOTH FRONT DOOR LOCK ACTUATORS, WHICH CORRECTED THE PROBLEM WITH THE DOOR LOCKS. AFTER A WHILE, BOTH REAR DOOR LOCKS FAILED. THE DEALER HAS NOT INSPECTED THE VEHICLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM. *AK THE POWER WINDOW WAS INOPER…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE AUTOMATIC DOOR LOCKS WERE DEFECTIVE. THE DEALER REPLACED BOTH FRONT DOOR LOCK ACTUATORS, WHICH CORRECTED THE PROBLEM WITH THE DOOR LOCKS. AFTER A WHILE, BOTH REAR DOOR LOCKS FAILED. THE DEALER HAS NOT INSPECTED THE VEHICLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM. *AK THE POWER WINDOW WAS INOPERATIVE. UPDATED 01/11/06. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10144952
51,400 miles · Nov 3, 2005
Visibility
GLASS IN SUNROOF UNEXPLAINABLY "EXPLODED" WHILE DRIVING.
NHTSA ODI #10141683
47,800 miles · Jul 8, 2005
Visibility
WINDOW MOTOR BROKE WITHOUT WARNING. MECHANIC SAYS NO WAY SHOULD A MOTOR BREAK ON A 2 YEAR OLD CAR. INTERNET BLOGS FULL OF STORIES OF WINDOW MOTORS BREAKING ON TOYOTA VEHICLES. REPLACEMENT COST IS $700 WHICH IS RIDICULOUS.
NHTSA ODI #10127875
900 miles · Nov 22, 2004
Visibility
THERE IS A CRACKING SOUND COMING FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE DRIVER SIDE WINDSHIELD. THE DEALER CHECK THE VEHICLE AND STATED THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE CONSUMER FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE MANUFACTURER ONE YEAR AGO AND THEY STATED THEY HAD NO RECORD. *JB. NOISE WAS CAUSED BY OOSE MOLDING, WHICH IS COSMETIC AND NOT …
Read full complaint
THERE IS A CRACKING SOUND COMING FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE DRIVER SIDE WINDSHIELD. THE DEALER CHECK THE VEHICLE AND STATED THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. THE CONSUMER FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE MANUFACTURER ONE YEAR AGO AND THEY STATED THEY HAD NO RECORD. *JB. NOISE WAS CAUSED BY OOSE MOLDING, WHICH IS COSMETIC AND NOT SAFETY RELATED. *AK
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 ↗
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.