← 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

What owners actually said

780 reports
40,000 miles · Mar 8, 2010
Steering

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS; PROCEEDING TO MAKE A TURN. THERE WAS EXCESSIVE FORCE APPLIED TO THE STEERING WHEEL. THE FAILURE OCCURRED WHENEVER MAKING A TURN. IN ADDITION, DURING THE WINTER MONTHS THE FAILURE PROGRESSED MORE FREQUENTLY. THE VEHICL…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH ON NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS; PROCEEDING TO MAKE A TURN. THERE WAS EXCESSIVE FORCE APPLIED TO THE STEERING WHEEL. THE FAILURE OCCURRED WHENEVER MAKING A TURN. IN ADDITION, DURING THE WINTER MONTHS THE FAILURE PROGRESSED MORE FREQUENTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS FOR THE IDENTICAL FAILURES. THE TECHNICIAN DISPENSED POWER STEERING FLUID IN THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE OCCURRED CONTINUOUS WITHOUT NO RESOLUTION. THE CONTACT IS WAITING ON A RESPONSE FOR THE CAUSE OF FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000.

NHTSA ODI #10317747

6,300 miles · Mar 8, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 2 MPH INTO THE GARAGE, WHEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO THE GARAGE WALL. THE CONTACT STATES THAT SMOKE WAS COMING FROM THE TIRES. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC AND TESTING. THE DEALER DROVE THE VEHICLE AROUND AND FOUND NO PROBLEM …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 2 MPH INTO THE GARAGE, WHEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO THE GARAGE WALL. THE CONTACT STATES THAT SMOKE WAS COMING FROM THE TIRES. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC AND TESTING. THE DEALER DROVE THE VEHICLE AROUND AND FOUND NO PROBLEM WITH THE ACCELERATOR. THE FRONT BUMPER OF THE VEHICLE WAS DAMAGED.THE CONTACT SUSTAINED INJURIES AS A RESULT OF THE CRASH. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WAS 6300. UPDATED 04/20/2010. *LJ UPDATED 07/13/10.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10317733

Mileage unknown · Mar 6, 2010
Air BagsService Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury

THE ACCIDENT OCCURRED ON THE 5 FREEWAY GOING FROM NORTHERN CALIFORNIA TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, ON THE GRAPEVINE. IT WAS RAINY OUT AND DURING THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT THE RAIN WAS JUST SOFTENING UP. IN THE FAR LEFT LANE I DRIVEN MY VEHICLE AT ABOUT 55 - 60MPH, SPEED LIMIT WAS AT 65MPH. I BEGIN TO SLOW DOWN, AND WHILE DOING SO T…

Read full complaint

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

NHTSA ODI #10317355

50,963 miles · Mar 5, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

I OWN A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY THAT EXPERIENCED THE SAME UNEXPLAINABLE ACCELERATION BEING AIRED ON TELEVISION NEWSCASTS ONLY A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. AS I WAS DRIVING IN FRONT OF A POPULAR SHOPPING AREA MY CAR ACCELERATED AT AN ALARMING SPEED. IT FELT LIKE A JET. I QUICKLY ATTEMPTED TO PRESS ON MY FOOT BRAKE AND EVEN TRIED THE HAND…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY THAT EXPERIENCED THE SAME UNEXPLAINABLE ACCELERATION BEING AIRED ON TELEVISION NEWSCASTS ONLY A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. AS I WAS DRIVING IN FRONT OF A POPULAR SHOPPING AREA MY CAR ACCELERATED AT AN ALARMING SPEED. IT FELT LIKE A JET. I QUICKLY ATTEMPTED TO PRESS ON MY FOOT BRAKE AND EVEN TRIED THE HAND BRAKE. THE CAR CEASED TO STOP. THE CAR CROSSED A MAJOR INTERSECTION AND DANGEROUSLY ENTERED A BUSY PARKING LOT AT A POPULAR MALL. I WAS BARELY ABLE TO DODGE PEDESTRIANS, MOVING AND PARKED CARS UNTIL I TURNED SUDDENLY AND CRASHED INTO THE MEDIAN THAT DIVIDED THE PARKING ROWS IN THE PARKING LOT. ON-LOOKERS CAME TO CHECK ON ME AND SPOKE OF HOW THE BACK TIRES WERE SMOKING BECAUSE MY CAR WAS GOING SO FAST. SHAKEN UP, MY PASSENGER AND I CALLED FAMILY MEMBERS WHO RUSHED TO THE SCENE AND PROCEEDED TO CALL A TOW COMPANY BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WAS CLEARLY NOT CAPABLE OF BEING DRIVEN. THE FRONT WHEEL AXLE WAS BENT, AND THERE WAS MUCH DAMAGE TO THE FRONT RIGHT WHEEL AREA DUE TO THE ANGLE OF THE CRASH. THANKFULLY, NEITHER MY PASSENGER NOR I WERE INJURED, BUT VERY SHAKEN UP. ONCE THE CAR WAS TOWED TO A NEARBY SERVICE CENTER, THEY WERE ABLE TO SURMISE THAT THE CAR WAS A BIT MANGLED AND REQUIRED PARTS NOT READILY AVAILABLE IN HILO, HAWAII. THE ESTIMATE TO REPAIR THE CAR EXCEEDED $3,000. I CONTACTED MY CAR INSURANCE CARRIER TO REPORT THE INCIDENT. NEARLY ONE MONTH LATER, THE CAR WAS REPAIRED. MY DAUGHTER TOOK THE CAR TO A TOYOTA SERVICE CENTER AND ASKED THEM TO PLEASE EXAMINE THE CAR AND EVALUATE WHETHER IT WAS SAFE FOR DRIVING. THE MICRO CHIP DID NOT INDICATE ANYTHING ABNORMAL ACCORDING TO THE SERVICE AGENT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10317286

29,126 miles · Mar 5, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

MY WIFE WAS INVOLVED IN A TRAFFIC ACCIDENT IN HER 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY ON 10/05/04. WHILE PASSING ANOTHER VEHICLE SHE STATED THAT THE CAR ACCELERATED AND THAT SHE COULD NOT GET IT TO STOP. THE TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REPORT QUOTES HER AS SAYING "SHE HAD NO CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE, AND SAID THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE MECHA…

Read full complaint

MY WIFE WAS INVOLVED IN A TRAFFIC ACCIDENT IN HER 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY ON 10/05/04. WHILE PASSING ANOTHER VEHICLE SHE STATED THAT THE CAR ACCELERATED AND THAT SHE COULD NOT GET IT TO STOP. THE TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REPORT QUOTES HER AS SAYING "SHE HAD NO CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE, AND SAID THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE MECHANICALLY. THE DEALERSHIP REPAIRED THE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE BUT I DO NOT FIND ANY INDICATION THAT THE PROBLEM OF THE ACCELERATOR WAS ADDRESSED. WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT COURSE OF ACTION WE SHOULD TAKE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10317113

70,000 miles · Mar 5, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

TL* CONTACT OWNED A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED SHE HAD SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH THIS VEHICLE WHEN SHE HAD IT. SHE ALMOST RAN THREW HER WINDOW WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS IN PARK. SHE NO LONGER HAS THE VEHICLE BUT THOUGHT THAT FILING A COMPLAINT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. THE FAILURE MILEAGE 70,000.

NHTSA ODI #10317048

88,000 miles · Mar 5, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

TWICE LAST YEAR THE CAR JUST TOOK OFF ACCELERATING ON ITS OWN AND WHEN I TRIED TO USE THE BRAKE TO STOP THE CAR IT JUST KEPT GOING. THE FIRST TIME I COULD NOT CONTROL THE CAR BY USING THE BRAKES AND IT FINALLY STOPPED AFTER IT WENT DOWN THE STREET A WAYS AND OVER A CURB. THE CAR HAD BEEN PARKED AND I HAD JUST STARTED UP THE CAR…

Read full complaint

TWICE LAST YEAR THE CAR JUST TOOK OFF ACCELERATING ON ITS OWN AND WHEN I TRIED TO USE THE BRAKE TO STOP THE CAR IT JUST KEPT GOING. THE FIRST TIME I COULD NOT CONTROL THE CAR BY USING THE BRAKES AND IT FINALLY STOPPED AFTER IT WENT DOWN THE STREET A WAYS AND OVER A CURB. THE CAR HAD BEEN PARKED AND I HAD JUST STARTED UP THE CAR PUTTING MY FOOT ON THE GAS PEDAL WHEN THE CAR WENT OUT OF CONTROL. THE SECOND TIME I HAD ENTERED A PARKING GARAGE, STOPPED TO TAKE A TICKET FROM A MACHINE AND WHEN I APPLIED THE GAS IT TOOK OFF. I APPLIED THE BRAKE AND TRIED TO STEER THE CAR OUT OF DANGER. IT FINALLY HIT A CEMENT BLOCK, BOUNCING BACK GOING FORWARD AGAIN BEFORE IT STOPPED. BOTH TIMES I TOOK IT TO THE TOYOTA DEALER AND THEY CHECKED IT OUT AND COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG. THE SECOND TIME IN DECEMBER 2009 THEY TOLD ME OF THE PROBLEM REGARDING THE GAS PEDAL AND THE CARPET, WHICH THEY SAID WAS OK ON MY CAR AND TOLD ME IF IT HAPPENED AGAIN TO PUT THE CAR IN NEUTRAL AND THE WHEELS WOULD STOP TURNING. THEY ALSO SAID THEY WERE WORKING ON A RECALL BUT THAT MY CAR WOULD NOT BE A PART OF IT AS THE PROBLEM DID NOT EXIST UNTIL 2005 ON CAMRYS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10316960

Mileage unknown · Mar 4, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

I HAVE EXPERIENCED SEVERAL INCIDENTS OF SUDDEN ACCELERATION IN MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. I TOOK IT INTO A TOYOTA DEALER WHEN IT FIRST HAPPENED, BUT THEY DID NOTHING. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10316909

20,000 miles · Mar 4, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

8/4/2000 MY TOYOTA CAMRY LE HAS SUDDEN ACCELERATION AT OAKLAND MALL PARKING LOT INTROY MICHIGAN AND I WAS INVOLVE IN ACCIDENT, TRIED EXTREMELY HARD ON BRAKE BUT COULDN'T CONTROL THE VEHICLE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10316888

75,000 miles · Mar 4, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

I PULLED INTO MY BROTHER'S DRIVEWAY AND WAS GETTING READY TO PARK WHEN MY CAR SUDDENLY TOOK OFF AS IF I HAD THE GAS TO THE FLOOR(WHICH I DIDN'T). I CRASHED INTO MY BROTHER'S TRUCK KNOCKING IT INTO HIS HOUSE, STILL COULDN'T STOP THE CAR, IT ACTED LIKE IT WAS GOING TO CLIMB HIS TRUCK. IT THEN VEERED TO THE LEFT AND SIDE SWIPED H…

Read full complaint

I PULLED INTO MY BROTHER'S DRIVEWAY AND WAS GETTING READY TO PARK WHEN MY CAR SUDDENLY TOOK OFF AS IF I HAD THE GAS TO THE FLOOR(WHICH I DIDN'T). I CRASHED INTO MY BROTHER'S TRUCK KNOCKING IT INTO HIS HOUSE, STILL COULDN'T STOP THE CAR, IT ACTED LIKE IT WAS GOING TO CLIMB HIS TRUCK. IT THEN VEERED TO THE LEFT AND SIDE SWIPED HIS OTHER VEHICLE. WHEN I FINALLY GOT IT STOPPED, I HAD BOTH FEET ON THE BRAKE AND THE ENGINE WAS STILL REVVING AND TRYING TO GO. I FINALLY GOT IT STOPPED WHERE I COULD TURN IT OFF WITH THE KEY. THE DAMAGE TO MY CAR WAS NEARLY $14,000.00 PLUS THE DAMAGE TO MY BROTHER'S PROPERTY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10316709

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