NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
780 reports69,700 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
Mileage unknown · Sep 2, 2014
Equipment
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. ATTORNEY REPRESENTING CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO AIR CONDITIONER PROBLEMS,VEHICLE SHUTS OFF WHEN SWITCHED IN REVERSE AND OTHER MECHANICAL PROBLEMS. *SMD THE CONSUMER HAD ANOTHER MECHANIC CHECKED THE VEHICLE, AND HE DETERMINED THE MOTOR MOUNTS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. WHEN THE CONSUMER RETURNED TO THE SELLI…
Read full complaint
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. ATTORNEY REPRESENTING CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO AIR CONDITIONER PROBLEMS,VEHICLE SHUTS OFF WHEN SWITCHED IN REVERSE AND OTHER MECHANICAL PROBLEMS. *SMD THE CONSUMER HAD ANOTHER MECHANIC CHECKED THE VEHICLE, AND HE DETERMINED THE MOTOR MOUNTS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. WHEN THE CONSUMER RETURNED TO THE SELLING DEALER, THEY INFORMED HER THE MOTOR MOUNTS WERE ONLY WEAK. WHILE STOPPED AT A LIGHT, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY SHUT OFF.
NHTSA ODI #10626706
146,000 miles · Aug 26, 2014
Engine
MY FAMILY AND I WERE OUT OF STATE ON A TRIP FOR A FUNERAL IN FEBRUARY. IT WAS VERY COLD WHERE WE WERE, SO I STARTED OUR CAMRY TO WARM UP THE CAR. HOWEVER, INSTEAD OF WARMING UP, IT ACTUALLY STARTED TO OVERHEAT DUE TO LOW COOLANT. SUSPECTING A CRACKED HOSE OR A RADIATOR ISSUE, I SEARCHED FOR THE LEAK, BUT COULD NOT FIND ONE. …
Read full complaint
MY FAMILY AND I WERE OUT OF STATE ON A TRIP FOR A FUNERAL IN FEBRUARY. IT WAS VERY COLD WHERE WE WERE, SO I STARTED OUR CAMRY TO WARM UP THE CAR. HOWEVER, INSTEAD OF WARMING UP, IT ACTUALLY STARTED TO OVERHEAT DUE TO LOW COOLANT. SUSPECTING A CRACKED HOSE OR A RADIATOR ISSUE, I SEARCHED FOR THE LEAK, BUT COULD NOT FIND ONE. WE KEPT THE CAR FILLED WITH FLUID, WATCHED THE TEMP GAUGE LIKE A HAWK, AND LIMPED THE CAR HOME TO OUR MECHANIC. THANKFULLY, IT DIDN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO OVERHEATING AGAIN THE ENTIRE TRIP HOME. WHEN I TOOK IT INTO THE SHOP, THEY SAID THAT IT WAS LEAKING FROM THE HEAD GASKET. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION, THE MECHANIC FOUND THAT THREE BOLTS NEAR THE HEAT SHIELD WERE NOT ONLY LOOSE, BUT ACTUALLY STRIPPED. THIS SOUNDED ODD TO ME. I HAVE AN 89 TOYOTA PICKUP THAT I BOUGHT BRAND NEW, AND IT IS STILL RUNNING LIKE A CHAMP 25 YEARS AND 250,000+ MILES LATER. I EXPECTED THE SAME KIND OF SERVICE LIFE FROM OUR WELL MAINTAINED CAMRY WITH LESS THAN 150,000. STRIPPED HEAD BOLTS JUST SOUNDED OFF TO ME FOR A TOYOTA, SO I DID AN ONLINE SEARCH. IMAGINE MY SURPRISE WHEN I FOUND WEB PAGE AND FORUM AFTER WEB PAGE AND FORUM DEDICATED TO THIS ISSUE ALONE. ONE SITE - CARCOMPLAINTS.COM - HAS 36 COMPLAINTS FILED ALREADY FOR JUST THE 2002 AND 2003 MODEL YEARS, AND THIS PROBLEM EXTEND TO ENGINES UP TO THE 2007 MODEL YEAR. ANOTHER WEB SITE - CAMRYFORUMS.COM - HAS 6 PAGES OF FORUMS DEDICATED TO THIS ISSUE. SIX PAGES. ALL OF THEM WITH THE SAME EXACT ISSUE - COOLANT LEAKS FROM THE STRIPPED HEAD BOLTS NEXT TO THE INSULATION. AND THERE ARE MORE SITES AND MORE FORUMS THAN JUST THOSE. CONSIDERING THAT ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FILE THESE KINDS OF COMPLAINTS OR POST ON AN ONLINE FORUM, THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM WITH THESE CARS. THEY SHOULD BE RECALLED AND REPAIRED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10628377
15,200 miles · Aug 21, 2014
EngineVehicle Speed Control
AS WE WERE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT, LIT UP AND THE CAR STARTED MAKING ODD NOISES WHEN THE ACCELERATION PEDAL WAS PRESSED, WE QUICKLY PULLED OVER TO THE SHOULDER OF THE HIGHWAY. WHEN WE OPENED THE FRONT THE ENGINE AND COOLANT WERE SMOKING. THERE WAS NO INDICATION BEFORE THIS THAT ANYTHING WAS WRONG, APPARENT…
Read full complaint
AS WE WERE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT, LIT UP AND THE CAR STARTED MAKING ODD NOISES WHEN THE ACCELERATION PEDAL WAS PRESSED, WE QUICKLY PULLED OVER TO THE SHOULDER OF THE HIGHWAY. WHEN WE OPENED THE FRONT THE ENGINE AND COOLANT WERE SMOKING. THERE WAS NO INDICATION BEFORE THIS THAT ANYTHING WAS WRONG, APPARENTLY THE OIL HAD BEEN LEAKING AND THE ENGINE HAD OVERHEATED, EVEN THOUGH THE CAR GAVE NO INDICATION OF THIS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10627000
185,000 miles · Aug 21, 2014
Engine
MY CAR WAS LEAKING OIL AND WHEN I HAD IT DIAGNOSED, THERE WAS NO MORE THREAD ON THE SCREWS TO HOLD THE MOTOR ON CORRECTLY, AFTER A MONTH OF THE RETHREADING, MY HEAD GASKET/MOTOR BOTH STOPPED WORKING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10626957
80,000 miles · Aug 20, 2014
Air BagsStructureCrash
I WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH WHERE I WAS HIT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. ALTHOUGH THE IMPACT WAS SEVERE ENOUGH TO CAUSE DAMAGE TO THE FRAME OF THE CAR, NONE OF THE SIX (6) AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. AS MENTIONED IN A PREVIOUS COMPLAINT, THERE IS NOW A GAP ON THE DASHBOARD AROUND THE AREA FOR THE PASSENGER AIR BAG. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10626599
Mileage unknown · Jul 14, 2014
Air Bags
SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I WENT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ABOUT A CONCERN WITH MY PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG. I WAS TOLD WITHOUT THEM TOUCHING MY VEHICLE THAT I NEEDED A NEW DASHBOARD WHICH IS OVER $2000.00. I LEFT BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE $2000.00 PLUS TO PURCHASE A DASHBOARD. I WENT ONLINE TO TOYOTA.COM AND SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT ON 6/…
Read full complaint
SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I WENT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ABOUT A CONCERN WITH MY PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG. I WAS TOLD WITHOUT THEM TOUCHING MY VEHICLE THAT I NEEDED A NEW DASHBOARD WHICH IS OVER $2000.00. I LEFT BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE $2000.00 PLUS TO PURCHASE A DASHBOARD. I WENT ONLINE TO TOYOTA.COM AND SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT ON 6/24/2014. I SPOKE WITH [XXX], A DAY OR SO LATER AND SHE ADVISED ME TO GO BACK AND HAVE THEM CHECK IT, WHICH I DID AND I WAS TOLD WHEN I GOT THERE IT WOULD BE AN HOUR/HOUR AND A HALF BEFORE THEY GET TO MY CAR. I TOLD[XXX] (ADVISOR) THAT I'LL WAIT IN THE LOUNGE AREA, IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 2:01PM, AT 2:30PM HE TOLD ME MY CAR WAS READY. I WAS GIVEN A COUPLE OF PRINT OUTS AND WAS TOLD ONCE AGAIN I NEEDED A NEW DASHBOARD BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WAS OLD, PER [XXX]. HE ALSO ASKED ME IF I COULD READ WHEN I ASKED IF IT WAS STATED ON THE PRINT OUTS, VERY RUDE! I SPOKE WITH [XXX] AGAIN AND SHE SAID SHE WOULD HAVE TO SPEAK WITH MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP FIRST AND SHE'D CONTACT ME IN A FEW DAYS, WHICH SHE DID AND SAID THE SERVICE MANAGER NAMED [XXX] SAID HE TOLD ME IT WAS A COSMETIC ISSUE. I NEVER SPOKE WITH A TIM. SHE ALSO TOLD ME THAT TOYOTA WILL NOT HELP ME BECAUSE IT'S A COSMETIC ISSUE, PER [XXX] AT BEV SMITH TOYOTA. I ATTACHED PHOTOS WITH MY COMPLAINT TO TOYOTA. I WENT ONLINE AND FOUND A COMPLAINT SITE AND POSTED MY COMPLAINT ON THERE AND FOUND OUT I COULD CONTACT NHTSA. AS I STATED TO TOYOTA CORPORATION, I'M NOT SEEKING A NEW VEHICLE OR MONEY, I JUST WANT THIS PROBLEM FIXED. I WOULD HATE FOR SOMETHING TRAGIC TO HAPPEN WHEN THE ISSUE COULD'VE BEEN RESOLVED! BASICALLY, TOYOTA IS SAYING THAT THEIR DASHBOARDS DON'T LAST OVER TEN YEARS. VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH THEM AND I WAS CONSIDERING PURCHASING ANOTHER CAMRY, NOT AFTER THIS!! MY COMPLAINT ISN'T THE ONLY ONE FOR THAT PARTICULAR VEHICLE. SHAMEFUL!! INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10610366
82,400 miles · Jun 24, 2014
Air Bags
I HAVE A 2003 CAMRY LE, AND I AM CONCERNED THE AIRBAG ON THE PASSENGER SIDE IS SHOWING GAPS AROUND THE CAVITY ON THE DASHBOARD. I USE THE CAR FOR DAILY TRANSPORTATION FOR PERSONAL USE, AND I'M AFRAID IT MIGHT EXPLODE FROM THE HIGH HEAT. I RESIDE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. WHAT IS MY RECOURSE TO SOLVE THIS MATTER? I HEARD AND R…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2003 CAMRY LE, AND I AM CONCERNED THE AIRBAG ON THE PASSENGER SIDE IS SHOWING GAPS AROUND THE CAVITY ON THE DASHBOARD. I USE THE CAR FOR DAILY TRANSPORTATION FOR PERSONAL USE, AND I'M AFRAID IT MIGHT EXPLODE FROM THE HIGH HEAT. I RESIDE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. WHAT IS MY RECOURSE TO SOLVE THIS MATTER? I HEARD AND READ THAT THERE IS A RECALL FOR TOYOTA VEHICLE OF THAT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE AIRBAG PROBLEM IN FLORIDA. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10605764
188,000 miles · May 21, 2014
Engine
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS OIL LEAKING FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER, WHO INDICATED THAT THE HEAD GASKET NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 188,000. THE …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS OIL LEAKING FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER, WHO INDICATED THAT THE HEAD GASKET NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 188,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10593001
345,754 miles · May 15, 2014
Seat Belts
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER SEAT BELT BUCKLES FAILED AND PREVENTED THE SEAT BELT FROM PROPERLY SECURING THE PASSENGER IN THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT BOTH THE PASSENGER AND DRIVERS SEAT BELT BUCKLE NEEDED TO BE REPL…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER SEAT BELT BUCKLES FAILED AND PREVENTED THE SEAT BELT FROM PROPERLY SECURING THE PASSENGER IN THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT BOTH THE PASSENGER AND DRIVERS SEAT BELT BUCKLE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 345,754. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 345,800. RK
NHTSA ODI #10588562
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.