← 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
Mileage unknown · Sep 8, 2004
Power TrainCrash

THE CONSUMER PARKED THE VEHICLE AND EXITED TO RETRIEVE A GAS CAN. WHEN THE CONSUMER TURNED AROUND THE VEHICLE WAS MOVING FORWARD INTO HER GARAGE. *NM *SC *JB

NHTSA ODI #10091936

36,126 miles · Sep 6, 2004
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury

I STEPPED ON THE BRAKES OF MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY TO SLOW DOWN IN PREPARATION OF A LANE CHANGE WHILE I WAS TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEED (APPROX. 50MPH) DURING RUSH HOUR ON I-15 NORTHBOUND, A MAJOR LAS VEGAS HIGHWAY (4 LANES WIDE + SHOULDER AND EXIT LANE). TO MY SURPRISE THE ABS BRAKES KICKED IN AND SHUDDERED UNDERFOOT. I WAS NOT A…

Read full complaint

I STEPPED ON THE BRAKES OF MY 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY TO SLOW DOWN IN PREPARATION OF A LANE CHANGE WHILE I WAS TRAVELING AT HIGHWAY SPEED (APPROX. 50MPH) DURING RUSH HOUR ON I-15 NORTHBOUND, A MAJOR LAS VEGAS HIGHWAY (4 LANES WIDE + SHOULDER AND EXIT LANE). TO MY SURPRISE THE ABS BRAKES KICKED IN AND SHUDDERED UNDERFOOT. I WAS NOT ATTEMPTING A FULL STOP AND HAD NOT ATTEMPTED TO STOP SHORT. I REMOVED MY FOOT FROM THE BRAKES (FOOT WAS NOT ON ANY PEDAL) BUT THE ABS REMAINED ENGAGED AND THERE WAS A SENSE OF BOTH ACCELERATION AND DECELERATION SIMULTANEOUSLY. I IMMEDIATELY TRIED AGAIN TO ENGAGE THE BRAKES WHEN MY STEERING WHEEL LOCKED. I WAS COMPLETELY SHOCKED BY THIS OCCURRENCE BUT REMAINED CALM WHILE IN DISBELIEF MY CAR BEGAN TO SKID UNCONTROLLABLY AROUND THE EXTREMELY CONGESTED FREEWAY. AS MY POWER STEERING WAS DISABLED I COULD BARELY AVOID SEVERAL COLLISIONS AS I TRIED TO FIRMLY ENGAGE MY BRAKES. I PRAYED TO GOD TO WATCH OVER ME AND HELD ON TO THE STEERING WHEEL FOR DEAR LIFE. MY CAR WAS VEERING BUT NOT SLOWING AS IT SHOULD UNTIL FINALLY MY CAR STRUCK ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE IMPACT SENT MY CAR INTO A FULL 360 TURN. FINALLY THE CAR CAME TO A STOP WITH ME FACING ONCOMING TRAFFIC. MY CAR SUSTAINED SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE BUT MY AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY. NO SAFETY WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON IN MY CAR PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT. I AM EXTREMELY LUCKY THAT BOTH THE DRIVER OF THE OTHER CAR AND I WERE ABLE TO WALK OUT OF OUR CARS UNASSISTED AFTER THE ACCIDENT, THOUGH BOTH OF US HAD NECK/SHOULDER/BACK STRAIN LATER. NEVADA HIGHWAY PATROL WAS ON SCENE AND TOOK A REPORT. I HAVE REQUESTED A FULL SAFETY INVESTIGATION AND AM AWAITING RESPONSE FROM TOYOTA CORPORATION. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10090515

4,000 miles · Aug 31, 2004
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

WHILE PULLING INTO A PARKING SPACE THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND HIT THE CEMENT BLOCK IN THE PARKING SPACE. *AK *NM

NHTSA ODI #10083953

24,000 miles · Aug 31, 2004
Engine And Engine CoolingFire

THE CONSUMER PARKED THE VEHICLE AND THE ENGINE BURST INTO FLAMES. VEHICLE WAS TOTALED.*AK

NHTSA ODI #10083797

Mileage unknown · Aug 24, 2004
Engine And Engine Cooling

WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH VEHICLE STALLED. CONSUMER WAS UNABLE TO RESTART VEHICLE, AND HAD IT WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION. MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT THE ENGINE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, AND REPLACED IT. HOWEVER, THE PROBLEM RECURRED. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10089675

Mileage unknown · Aug 24, 2004
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

WHILE APPLYING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL VEHICLE ACCELERATED UNCONTROLLABLY. CONSUMER WAS NOT ABLE TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND COLLIDED WITH THE VEHICLE IN FRONT. UPON IMPACT,BOTH FRONTAL AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. DRIVER SUSTAINED MINOR INJURIES, AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL BY AN AMBULANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS T…

Read full complaint

WHILE APPLYING THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL VEHICLE ACCELERATED UNCONTROLLABLY. CONSUMER WAS NOT ABLE TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND COLLIDED WITH THE VEHICLE IN FRONT. UPON IMPACT,BOTH FRONTAL AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. DRIVER SUSTAINED MINOR INJURIES, AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL BY AN AMBULANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10089673

Mileage unknown · Aug 23, 2004
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

INQUIRY REGARDING WHY NO INVESTIGATION OR RECALL HAS BEEN DONE REGARDING BRAKES FOR 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. *MR *NM

NHTSA ODI #10092213

Mileage unknown · Aug 20, 2004
SuspensionTires

2003 TOYOTA CAMRY PROBLEMS WITH LEFT PULL.*MR THE VEHICLE PULLED TO THE LEFT WHILE DRIVING. THE TECHNICIAN TEST DROVE THE VEHICLE AND INDICATED IT WAS EITHER AN ALIGNMENT PROBLEM OR TIRES. THE TECHNICIAN THEN REALIGNED THE VEHICLE BUT THE ALIGNMENT WAS OUTSIDE OF THE MANUFACTURES SPECIFICATION. THE CONSUMER INDICATED THAT TH…

Read full complaint

2003 TOYOTA CAMRY PROBLEMS WITH LEFT PULL.*MR THE VEHICLE PULLED TO THE LEFT WHILE DRIVING. THE TECHNICIAN TEST DROVE THE VEHICLE AND INDICATED IT WAS EITHER AN ALIGNMENT PROBLEM OR TIRES. THE TECHNICIAN THEN REALIGNED THE VEHICLE BUT THE ALIGNMENT WAS OUTSIDE OF THE MANUFACTURES SPECIFICATION. THE CONSUMER INDICATED THAT THE PULL IS DIMINISHED, IF NOT GENERALLY GONE, BUT IS CONCERN ABOUT THE PARAMETERS OF THE ALIGNMENT. THE CONSUMER BELIEVES IF THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE ALIGNED OUT OF SPECIFICATION THAT THE PROBLEM MAY BE WITH THE TIRES. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10089534

Mileage unknown · Aug 12, 2004
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

WHEN THE CONSUMER ATTEMPTED TO PARK, THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD. THIS CAUSED THE CONSUMER TO LOSE CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND HIT A TREE HEAD ON. UPON IMPACT, BOTH AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. *AK THE VEHICLE WAS ALMOST AT A COMPLETE STOP, IN WHICH THE CONSUMER HAD HER FOOT LIGHTLY RESTING ON THE BRAKE, WHEN THE SUDDEN ACCELERATI…

Read full complaint

WHEN THE CONSUMER ATTEMPTED TO PARK, THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD. THIS CAUSED THE CONSUMER TO LOSE CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND HIT A TREE HEAD ON. UPON IMPACT, BOTH AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. *AK THE VEHICLE WAS ALMOST AT A COMPLETE STOP, IN WHICH THE CONSUMER HAD HER FOOT LIGHTLY RESTING ON THE BRAKE, WHEN THE SUDDEN ACCELERATION OCCURRED. *SC *JB

NHTSA ODI #10081639

Mileage unknown · Aug 8, 2004
Visibility

REARVIEW MIRROR INADEQUATE SERIOUS BLIND SPOTS. WORSE THAN ANY OTHER CAR I HAVE DRIVEN IN 40 YEARS! 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY-ALL. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10086405

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