NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
780 reports118,000 miles · Feb 13, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
I HAVE EXPERIENCED BRAKING PROBLEMS SIMILAR TO THOSE PROMPTING THE PRIUS RECALL SINCE APPROXIMATELY OCTOBER, 2009. IF THE BRAKE IS ENGAGED ON ROUGH PAVEMENT (BUMPY, POTHOLES,ETC), IT SHUDDERS AND DOES NOT ENGAGE FOR SEVERAL SECONDS EVEN WHEN THE PEDAL IS DEPRESSED COMPLETELY TO THE FLOOR. I HAVE HAD THE ROTORS AND PADS REPLACE…
Read full complaint
I HAVE EXPERIENCED BRAKING PROBLEMS SIMILAR TO THOSE PROMPTING THE PRIUS RECALL SINCE APPROXIMATELY OCTOBER, 2009. IF THE BRAKE IS ENGAGED ON ROUGH PAVEMENT (BUMPY, POTHOLES,ETC), IT SHUDDERS AND DOES NOT ENGAGE FOR SEVERAL SECONDS EVEN WHEN THE PEDAL IS DEPRESSED COMPLETELY TO THE FLOOR. I HAVE HAD THE ROTORS AND PADS REPLACED WITHIN THE LAST SIX MONTHS AND HAVE HAD THE ABS SENSORS CLEANED AND LINES INSPECTED WITH NO IMPROVEMENT. THE PROBLEM OCCURS ON BOTH WET AND DRY PAVEMENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10310201
147,000 miles · Feb 12, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
TOYOTA CAMRY 2003 4 CYLINDER. RATTLING NOISE FROM THE INTAKE MANIFOLD. MY MECHANIC SAID THAT THIS NOISE OCCURS DUE TO PLASTIC MATERIAL OF WHICH THE INTAKE MANIFOLD WAS MADE OF. MY MECHANIC HAS SEEN THIS PROBLEM WITH OTHER 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY AND IS VERY COMMON. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10310107
50,000 miles · Feb 11, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
I WAS PARKING MY 2003 CAMRY IN A MALL PARKING LOT WHEN IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. I HAD NO CONTROL AND SMASHED INTO A PARKED CAR. I NEVER HAD AN ACCIDENT IN 60+ YEARS OF DRIVING. NOW I KNOW IT WAS THE TOYOTA ACCELERATOR THAT CAUSED THE CRASH. MY ED MORSE TOYOTA DEALER IN DELRAY BEACH FL. TURNED ME AWAY FROM SERVICE SAYING IT IS…
Read full complaint
I WAS PARKING MY 2003 CAMRY IN A MALL PARKING LOT WHEN IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. I HAD NO CONTROL AND SMASHED INTO A PARKED CAR. I NEVER HAD AN ACCIDENT IN 60+ YEARS OF DRIVING. NOW I KNOW IT WAS THE TOYOTA ACCELERATOR THAT CAUSED THE CRASH. MY ED MORSE TOYOTA DEALER IN DELRAY BEACH FL. TURNED ME AWAY FROM SERVICE SAYING IT IS NOT THEIR PROBLEM BUT I SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA. I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO REACH ANYONE THERE. I KNOW IT IS NOT IN THE RECALL BUT I TOLD THE DEALER I WANT TOYOTA TO KNOW THIS HAPPENED TO MY 2003 CAMRY AND I WANT THEM TO FIND THE CAUSE AND REMEDY IT. MY WIFE ALSO HAS A 2003 CAMRY AND WE DRIVE THEM BOTH WITH FEAR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10308815
Mileage unknown · Feb 10, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
PREVIOUSLY REPORTED ACCELERATION SURGE OF 2003 CAMRY WHILE BACKING OUT OF THE GARAGE. REPORTS OF ACCELERATION SURGES ON YOUR SITE EXCEED 140 FOR THE 2003 CAMRY VERSUS (AS BEST I COULD IDENTIFY) 29 FOR THE MALIBU, 26 FOR THE ACCORD AND 12 FOR THE TAURUS, ALL 2003 MODELS. IN LIGHT OF RECENT TOYOTA FINDINGS ARE YOU GOING TO REOPEN…
Read full complaint
PREVIOUSLY REPORTED ACCELERATION SURGE OF 2003 CAMRY WHILE BACKING OUT OF THE GARAGE. REPORTS OF ACCELERATION SURGES ON YOUR SITE EXCEED 140 FOR THE 2003 CAMRY VERSUS (AS BEST I COULD IDENTIFY) 29 FOR THE MALIBU, 26 FOR THE ACCORD AND 12 FOR THE TAURUS, ALL 2003 MODELS. IN LIGHT OF RECENT TOYOTA FINDINGS ARE YOU GOING TO REOPEN INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 2003 CAMRY?...*TR
NHTSA ODI #10308476
72,539 miles · Feb 10, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric
IN WET WEATHER, I OFTEN FIND THE BRAKES ON MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY FAILING, EVEN AFTER I HAVE HAD NEW BRAKE PADS INSTALLED. ESPECIALLY WHEN I GO DOWNHILL NEAR MY HOUSE, WHEN I SLOWLY APPLY THE BRAKES IN WET WEATHER I HEAR A CRUNCHING SOUND AND GET LITTLE, AND OCCASIONALLY, NO BRAKE ACTION. N.B. I AM NOT SURE OF THE DAY I AM PUTTIN…
Read full complaint
IN WET WEATHER, I OFTEN FIND THE BRAKES ON MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY FAILING, EVEN AFTER I HAVE HAD NEW BRAKE PADS INSTALLED. ESPECIALLY WHEN I GO DOWNHILL NEAR MY HOUSE, WHEN I SLOWLY APPLY THE BRAKES IN WET WEATHER I HEAR A CRUNCHING SOUND AND GET LITTLE, AND OCCASIONALLY, NO BRAKE ACTION. N.B. I AM NOT SURE OF THE DAY I AM PUTTING IN BELOW, BUT AM PICKING THE 4TH AS AN APPROXIMATE DATE SO I CAN CONTINUE WITH THE FORM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10308420
1,500 miles · Feb 10, 2010
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
I WATCHED THE CNN EVENING NEWS COVERAGE YESTERDAY, FEBRUARY 9 ON THE PRIUS RECALL DUE TO A BRAKE PROBLEM. THE CNN NEWS REPORTER ACTUALLY OWNS A PRIUS AND WAS RELAYING HER EXPERIENCE. HER STORY RESONANT WITH ME BECAUSE I HAVE CONTINUALLY HAD THE SAME PROBLEM WITH MY 2003 CAMRY. THOUGH I HAVE TAKEN IT BACK TO THE DEALER A NUMBE…
Read full complaint
I WATCHED THE CNN EVENING NEWS COVERAGE YESTERDAY, FEBRUARY 9 ON THE PRIUS RECALL DUE TO A BRAKE PROBLEM. THE CNN NEWS REPORTER ACTUALLY OWNS A PRIUS AND WAS RELAYING HER EXPERIENCE. HER STORY RESONANT WITH ME BECAUSE I HAVE CONTINUALLY HAD THE SAME PROBLEM WITH MY 2003 CAMRY. THOUGH I HAVE TAKEN IT BACK TO THE DEALER A NUMBER OF TIMES AND THE TECHNICIAN HAS EXAMINED THE VEHICLE, INCLUDING ROAD TESTS, NO MECHANICAL PROBLEM IS FOUND. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10308414
Mileage unknown · Feb 10, 2010
Equipment Adaptive/mobility
THE DRIVER SIDE FLOOR MAT IS NOT FIXED TO THE UNDERLYING FLOOR. IT SLIDES AROUND. THIS CONDITION WAS APPARENT FROM THE DAY I BOUGHT THE CAR. THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP SAID THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO. BEFORE I RECENTLY HEARD THIS COULD BE AN ACTUAL DANGER BY INTERFERING WITH THE GAS OR BRAKE PEDALS, I JUST STRAIGHTENED IT OUT WH…
Read full complaint
THE DRIVER SIDE FLOOR MAT IS NOT FIXED TO THE UNDERLYING FLOOR. IT SLIDES AROUND. THIS CONDITION WAS APPARENT FROM THE DAY I BOUGHT THE CAR. THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP SAID THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO. BEFORE I RECENTLY HEARD THIS COULD BE AN ACTUAL DANGER BY INTERFERING WITH THE GAS OR BRAKE PEDALS, I JUST STRAIGHTENED IT OUT WHEN I SAW IT HAS MOVED OUT OF PLACE. NOW I REMOVED THE MAT BUT THIS MEANS THE FLOOR BELOW IS NOT PROTECTED FROM DIRT, ETC. IT BOTHERS ME THAT TOYOTA NEVER THOUGHT THIS WAS AN ISSUE. NOW I FIND OUT THAT LATER MODELS WERE RECALLED FOR THIS PROBLEM. THEY STILL WILL NOT DO ANYTHING BECAUSE IT'S A 2003 AND NOT UNDER A RECALL ORDER. I WANTED TO FILE THIS COMPLAINT SO IT KNOWN THAT THE 2003 CAMRY (XLE) HAS THIS PROBLEM TOO. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10308260
93,000 miles · Feb 9, 2010
Latches/locks/linkages
IN THE SPRING OF 2008 THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE DOOR LOCK ON OUR 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY "FROZE" IN THE LOCKED POSITION. THE DOOR COULD NOT BE UNLOCKED BY ANY MEANS INCLUDING THE ELECTRONIC KEYLESS ENTRY, THE KEY IN THE DOOR OR MANUALLY FROM THE INSIDE. THERE WAS NO "WARNING" THAT THIS WAS ABOUT TO HAPPEN IT JUST COULDN'T BE UNLOCKED.…
Read full complaint
IN THE SPRING OF 2008 THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE DOOR LOCK ON OUR 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY "FROZE" IN THE LOCKED POSITION. THE DOOR COULD NOT BE UNLOCKED BY ANY MEANS INCLUDING THE ELECTRONIC KEYLESS ENTRY, THE KEY IN THE DOOR OR MANUALLY FROM THE INSIDE. THERE WAS NO "WARNING" THAT THIS WAS ABOUT TO HAPPEN IT JUST COULDN'T BE UNLOCKED. FORTUNATELY WE WERE NOT IN THE CAR WHEN THIS OCCURRED. THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR THEM TO SEE WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE LOCK. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE "ACTUATOR" HAD GONE OUT AND HAD TO BE REPLACED, AT A COST TO ME OF APPROX. $380.00 WHICH I PAID. THE SAME THING HAPPENED AGAIN IN 9-09 ONLY THIS TIME ON THE PASSENGER SIDE AND AGAIN WITH NO "WARNING". THIS TIME WE WERE IN THE VEHICLE AND DIDN'T REALIZE IT HAD HAPPENED AGAIN UNTIL WE PARKED AND TRIED TO EXIT. AGAIN THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN IN ( TO AN INDEPENDENT GARAGE) AND THE ACTUATOR ON THE PASSENGER SIDE HAD TO BE REPLACED, AGAIN AT A COST OF APPROX $350. MY CONCERN IS THAT WITH NO "WARNING OF WHEN THIS IS GOING TO OCCUR THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD HAPPEN WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN AND IF THERE WERE AN ACCIDENT AND THE DOOR WAS UNABLE TO BE UNLOCKED THIS COULD POSE A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD IF A PERSON WAS UNABLE TO GET OUT OF THEIR VEHICLE DUE TO THIS FAILURE. I ASKED BOTH THE DEALERSHIP AND THE MAIN OFFICES OF TOYOTA IF THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM IN THESE VEHICLES AND WAS TOLD THAT THERE HAD BEEN NO REPORTS OF THIS SORT OF PROBLEM. I HAVE A HARD TIME BELIEVING THAT I HAVE THE ONLY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY THAT HAS HAD THIS PROBLEM. I FEEL THIS BEARS INVESTIGATING FOR THE SAFETY OF ALL CONSUMERS WHO OWN A VEHICLE THAT THIS PROBLEM MAY OCCUR IN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10308206
103,000 miles · Feb 9, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I PURCHASED A USED TOYOTA CAMRY, 2003 MODEL, FROM A SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS CAR DEALER IN JANUARY, 2007. AT THE TIME THE CAR HAD ABOUT 103,000 MILES. I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT ABOUT 65 MILES PER HOUR WHEN SUDDENLY THE CAR'S ENGINE REVVED UP, THERE WAS A EASILY PERCEPTIBLE JOLT AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED BY ITSELF. ABOUT 2-…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A USED TOYOTA CAMRY, 2003 MODEL, FROM A SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS CAR DEALER IN JANUARY, 2007. AT THE TIME THE CAR HAD ABOUT 103,000 MILES. I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT ABOUT 65 MILES PER HOUR WHEN SUDDENLY THE CAR'S ENGINE REVVED UP, THERE WAS A EASILY PERCEPTIBLE JOLT AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED BY ITSELF. ABOUT 2-3 SECONDS LATER I STEPPED ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, VERY HARD. THE CAR ACCELERATION RATE WENT SLIGHTLY DOWN, ENGINE RPMS STILL HIGH, AND I COULD BARELY KEEP CONTROL OF THE CAR, SO I BECAME CONCERNED (ALMOST FEARED) OF LOSING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. AFTER ABOUT 30-40 SECONDS, RPMS WENT BACK TO MORE NORMAL LEVELS, ALTHOUGH THE VEHICLE ENGINE WAS STILL ACCELERATED. AT THAT MOMENT I WAS DRIVING AT ABOUT 65 MILES PER HOUR AND IF I HAD LET GO ON THE BRAKE THE CAR WOULD HAVE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN. AFTERWARDS, AND FOR BOUT 15 MINUTES (15-16 MILES) I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE BRAKE AND GAS PEDALS AND THE CAR CRUISED ON ITS OWN AT ABOUT 65 MPH. I FINALLY GOT HOME, PARKED THE CAR AND NEXT TIME I USED IT EXPERIENCED NO PROBLEMS. I DON'T RECALL IF I HAD SIMILAR INCIDENTS LATER ON. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10308038
47,000 miles · Feb 7, 2010
Service Brakes, Electric
I WAS PULLING INTO A SPACE IN A PARKING LOT IN MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY, WHEN MY CAR SURGED FORWARD. I HIT AND DAMAGED 2 PARKED VEHICLES AS WELL AS SUSTAINING SIGNIFICANT FRONT-END DAMAGE TO MY OWN CAR, BUT NO ONE WAS INJURED. I CALLED THE POLICE AND REPORTED THE ACCIDENT, BUT I COULD NOT SWEAR THAT MY FOOT HAD NOT PARTIALLY COVERED…
Read full complaint
I WAS PULLING INTO A SPACE IN A PARKING LOT IN MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY, WHEN MY CAR SURGED FORWARD. I HIT AND DAMAGED 2 PARKED VEHICLES AS WELL AS SUSTAINING SIGNIFICANT FRONT-END DAMAGE TO MY OWN CAR, BUT NO ONE WAS INJURED. I CALLED THE POLICE AND REPORTED THE ACCIDENT, BUT I COULD NOT SWEAR THAT MY FOOT HAD NOT PARTIALLY COVERED THE GAS PEDAL. IT WAS WINTER AND I WAS WEARING HEAVY BOOTS. I PURCHASED THE CAR NEW IN 2003. TWICE SINCE THEN, IN MAY 2006 AND MARCH 2008, MY CAR SURGED ON THE HIGHWAY. I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE GAS PEDAL BUT THE CAR DID NOT SLOW DOWN FOR ABOUT 30 SECONDS. I PUT MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE, BUT THERE WAS A DELAY BEFORE THE CAR SLOWED DOWN. IN NONE OF THESE INCIDENTS DID I HAVE A FLOOR MAT RIDING UP UNDER THE GAS PEDAL. I HAVE CALLED SEVERAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS, BUT WHEN I LEAVE A MESSAGE TO TALK TO A SERVICE MANAGER I HAVE NOT RECEIVED A CALL BACK. A FEW DAYS LATER I RECEIVE A TRADE-IN OFFER FROM THE DEALERSHIP. *TW
NHTSA ODI #10307294
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.