NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
780 reportsMileage unknown · Mar 10, 2004
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
WHILE APPLYING THE BRAKES AT A TOLL BOOTH BRAKE PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR AND VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. AS A RESULT, CONSUMER'S VEHICLE REAR END ANOTHER VEHICLE. UPON IMPACT, BOTH AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. DRIVER AND PASSENGER SUSTAINED HEAD AND BACK INJURIES, AND WERE TRANSPORTED BY AMBULANCE TO THE HOSPITAL. VEHICLE WA…
Read full complaint
WHILE APPLYING THE BRAKES AT A TOLL BOOTH BRAKE PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR AND VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. AS A RESULT, CONSUMER'S VEHICLE REAR END ANOTHER VEHICLE. UPON IMPACT, BOTH AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. DRIVER AND PASSENGER SUSTAINED HEAD AND BACK INJURIES, AND WERE TRANSPORTED BY AMBULANCE TO THE HOSPITAL. VEHICLE WAS TOTALED.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10062922
Mileage unknown · Mar 9, 2004
Steering
I HAVE TAKEN MY 2003 CAMRY LE TO TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS 3 TIMES FOR THE PROBLEM OF IT PULLING TO THE LEFT. I BROUGHT MY BRAND NEW CAR IN FOR THE FIRST TIME WITHIN ONE MONTH OF PURCHASE. THE SECOND TIME I BROUGHT MY CAR IN, THE PULL LEFT HAD CAUSED MY TIRES UNEVEN, PREMATURE WEAR. MY TIRES NEEDED REPLACEMENT AT 15,000 MILES, AL…
Read full complaint
I HAVE TAKEN MY 2003 CAMRY LE TO TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS 3 TIMES FOR THE PROBLEM OF IT PULLING TO THE LEFT. I BROUGHT MY BRAND NEW CAR IN FOR THE FIRST TIME WITHIN ONE MONTH OF PURCHASE. THE SECOND TIME I BROUGHT MY CAR IN, THE PULL LEFT HAD CAUSED MY TIRES UNEVEN, PREMATURE WEAR. MY TIRES NEEDED REPLACEMENT AT 15,000 MILES, ALTHOUGH THE DEALERSHIP TOLD ME THAT THEY WOULD LAST FOR 20,000 AND THIS WAS "CLOSE ENOUGH." I TOOK MY CAR TO A SERPARATE BUSINESS AS I DID NOT RECEIVE AN ACCEPTABLE RESPONSE FROM SEVEAL EMPLOYEES AT THIS TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. ADDITIONALLY, THE OWNER REFUSED TO CALL ME DESPITE SIGNS PLASTERED AROUND THE DEALERSHIP STATING THAT HE CARES AND TO ASK FOR HIM. FOR THE THIRD TRIP REGARDING THE CAR PULLING LEFT, I TOOK IT TO A NEW TOYOTA DEALER. DESPITE AN IMPROVEMENT IN CUSTOMER SERVICE, THEY WERE ALSO UNABLE TO FIX THE PROBLEM. BY THE NEXT DAY, MY CAR WAS PULLING LEFT AGAIN. THIS DEALERSHIP INFORMED ME THAT I HAD A "TIRE PULL," AND PUT THIS IN WRITING. I WAS TOLD THAT THE TIRES THAT HAD BEEN PLACED ON MY CAR WERE MADE INCORRECTLY AND CAUSED THE CAR TO PULL TO THE LEFT. I AM SO DISAPPOINTED IN TOYOTA. THIS IS MY FIRST NEW CAR AND I SPECIFICALLY PURCHASED IT DUE TO ITS REPUTATION AND SUPPOSED RELIABILITY. I HOPE THAT CHANGES ARE MADE TO REGAIN CUSOTMER CONFIDENCE AND ALLOW FOR SATISFACTION AND SAFETY AMONG TOYOTA OWNERS.
NHTSA ODI #10060776
12,300 miles · Mar 6, 2004
Visibility
WINDSHIELD HAS ONE TINY MARK THAT I WOULD DESCRIBE EXACTLY THE WAY THE FIRST COMPLAINANT DESCRIBED IT, LIKE A TINY NAIL MARK. THE WINDSHIELD IS CRACKING BY THIS MARK. PERIODICALLY, I WOULD HEAR A LOUD NOISE LIKE A ROCK HAD HIT MY WINDSHIELD BUT WAS NOT ABLE TO DISCERN WHAT HAD HAPPENED. IT WAS A MYSTERY BECAUSE THE FIRST COUP…
Read full complaint
WINDSHIELD HAS ONE TINY MARK THAT I WOULD DESCRIBE EXACTLY THE WAY THE FIRST COMPLAINANT DESCRIBED IT, LIKE A TINY NAIL MARK. THE WINDSHIELD IS CRACKING BY THIS MARK. PERIODICALLY, I WOULD HEAR A LOUD NOISE LIKE A ROCK HAD HIT MY WINDSHIELD BUT WAS NOT ABLE TO DISCERN WHAT HAD HAPPENED. IT WAS A MYSTERY BECAUSE THE FIRST COUPLE OF TIMES THAT I HEARD THE NOISE, THERE WERE NO VEHICLES AROUND ME THAT COULD HAVE THROWN A ROCK. AFTER HEARING THIS NOISE A FEW TIMES, A CRACK STARTED APPEARING AT THE TOP OF THE WINDSHIELD ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE. I HAVE HAD THE DEALER THAT I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE NEW FROM EXAMINE IT AND THEY CLAIM IT WAS CAUSED BY A ROCK. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT WHEN IT HAPPENED I HAD MY STEREO ON AND DID NOT KNOW IT HAPPENED. BUT THE STARTLING SOUND THAT A ROCK DOES MAKE WHEN IT HITS THE WINDSHIELD WITH THAT MUCH FORCE IS HARD TO MISS. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10060561
4,000 miles · Mar 3, 2004
Power Train
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY V6 LE TRANSMISSION REPLACED AT ONLY 4000 MILES. CONTINUED PROBLEMS WITH TRANSMISSION, ENGINE. FAULTY, DELAYED SHIFTING, ENGINE NOISE/RESONANCE, LACK OF ACCELERATION FROM A STOP OR TO PASS. IDLE IS NOISY INTO THE CABIN. VEHICLE CONTINUES TO EXHIBIT TRANSMISSION AND ENGINE PROBLEMS. CAR HAS A REPUTATION FOR SMOO…
Read full complaint
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY V6 LE TRANSMISSION REPLACED AT ONLY 4000 MILES. CONTINUED PROBLEMS WITH TRANSMISSION, ENGINE. FAULTY, DELAYED SHIFTING, ENGINE NOISE/RESONANCE, LACK OF ACCELERATION FROM A STOP OR TO PASS. IDLE IS NOISY INTO THE CABIN. VEHICLE CONTINUES TO EXHIBIT TRANSMISSION AND ENGINE PROBLEMS. CAR HAS A REPUTATION FOR SMOOT, COMPLIANT RIDE. HAVE TAKEN VEHICLE TO DEALER ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. PROBLEMS PERSIST DEPSITE DEALER INSISTENCE THAT THE PROBLEMS ARE NORMAL.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10060310
12,000 miles · Mar 2, 2004
Suspension
WHILE DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEED VEHICLE VIBRATED. DEALER STATED THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10061130
25,300 miles · Mar 1, 2004
TiresCrash
WHILE DRIVING (2003 TOYOTA) 60 MPH ON INTERSTATE HWY WITH MODERATE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC, THE LEFT, REAR TIRE BLEW OUT AND COMPLETELY SEPERATED. POTENZA RE92 IS THE OEM VEHICLE DIFFICULT TO CONTROL, WENT INTO MAJOR SKID. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10060103
4,100 miles · Feb 27, 2004
Tires
ON A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY THE RIGHT REAR TIRE BLEW OUT DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE TIRE, IT HAS COMPLETELY SEPARATED AT THE SIDEWALL AND HAS PARTIALLY SEPARATED ON THE INSIDE. THERE IS NO SIGN OF ANY PUNCTURE IN THE TIRE. THE TIRE IS A BRIDGESTONE POTENZA P215/60R16 94V OTHER NUMBERS ON THE TIRE: E92M2…
Read full complaint
ON A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY THE RIGHT REAR TIRE BLEW OUT DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE TIRE, IT HAS COMPLETELY SEPARATED AT THE SIDEWALL AND HAS PARTIALLY SEPARATED ON THE INSIDE. THERE IS NO SIGN OF ANY PUNCTURE IN THE TIRE. THE TIRE IS A BRIDGESTONE POTENZA P215/60R16 94V OTHER NUMBERS ON THE TIRE: E92M2 34364EXBM25816-2 DM419E DOT 0BX8 PFA 1603 D03L. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10059953
16,000 miles · Feb 25, 2004
Air BagsCrash
FAILURE OF AIRBAGS TO DEPLOY DURING A SERIOUS ACCIDENT. VEHICLE TOTALED WITH MAJOR FRONT END DAMAGE. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10058998
5,600 miles · Feb 24, 2004
Service Brakes, Air
OUR 2003 LEASED TOYOTA CAMRY HAS BEEN GREAT FOR THE FIRST YEAR. WE CURRENTLY HAVE APPROX 5600 MILES ON THE CAR. DURING JANUARY AND FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR WE EXPERIENCED TWO SEPARATE ABS (ANTISKID BRAKE SYSTEM) ACTIVATIONS. IN BOTH INCIDENTS THE CAR WAS ON DRY, CLEAN, HARD SURFACED ROADS. THERE WAS NO GRAVEL, DIRT, ICE, ETC OR …
Read full complaint
OUR 2003 LEASED TOYOTA CAMRY HAS BEEN GREAT FOR THE FIRST YEAR. WE CURRENTLY HAVE APPROX 5600 MILES ON THE CAR. DURING JANUARY AND FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR WE EXPERIENCED TWO SEPARATE ABS (ANTISKID BRAKE SYSTEM) ACTIVATIONS. IN BOTH INCIDENTS THE CAR WAS ON DRY, CLEAN, HARD SURFACED ROADS. THERE WAS NO GRAVEL, DIRT, ICE, ETC OR ANY FOREIGN MATTER ON THE ROADS. THE ROADS WERE ALSO DRY. NO RAIN WAS FALLING. IN BOTH INCIDENTS THE CAR WAS GONG LESS THAN 30 MPH AND IN BOTH CASES THE CAR WAS DESCENDING A SLIGHT HILL. WHEN THE OPERATOR APPLIED BRAKES THE ABS SYSTEM ACTIVATED AND NO AMOUNT OF BRAKE PEDDLE PRESSURE CHANGED THE STOPPING ABILITY OF THE CAR. KICKBACK THRU THE BRAKE PEDDLE WAS FELT BY ME. THE STOPPING DISTANCE WAS INCREASED DRAMATICALLY. IN THE FIRST INCIDENT MY WIFE WAS ALONE IN THE CAR AND COMING DOWN A HILL TO A STOP LIGHT. SHE COULD NOT STOP THE CAR BEFORE THE LIGHT AND HAD TO MAKE A HARD RIGHT HAND TURN TO PREVENT HITTING CARS OR BEING HIT BY CARS THAT WERE GOING 45+ MPH ON THEIR ROAD THRU THE LIGHT. AT THE INTERSECTION. FORTUNATELY THERE HAD BEEN A BREAK IN TRAFFIC SO WHEN SHE TURNED RIGHT AT THE RED LIGHT THERE WAS A BREAK IN TRAFFIC SO THEREE WAS NO IMPACT. IN MY SITUATION I WAS DRIVING MY WIFE TO A SHOPPING CENTER AND WAS ALSO COMING DOWN A SLIGHT HILL AND COMING UP BEHIND TRAFFIC WHICH WAS STOPPING AT A STOP SIGN. I COULD NOT STOP THE VEHICLE. I WAS GETTING KICKBACK THRU THE BRADE PEDDLE AND THE CAR BRAKES WERE CYCLING ON AND OFF AND THUS I HAD TO SWING AROUND THE CAR AHEAD AND ONTO THE RIGHTHAND SHOULDER TO AVOID HITTING THE CAR AHEAD AND ALMOST HAD TO CLIMB AN EMBACKMENT TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. IMMEDIATELY AFTER MY INCIDENT, THE LATER OF THE TWO INCIDENTS, WE DROVE RIGHT TO OUR TOYOTA LEASING AGENCY AND TURNED THE CAR OVER TO THE MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT. TOYOTA GOT US A RENTAL VEHICLE WHILE THEY CHECK THE CAR OUT. SO FAR THEY HAVE TOLD ME THAT IN CHECKING THE ABS COMPUTER IT SHOWS NO FAULT CODES. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10058845
10,666 miles · Feb 24, 2004
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
AFTER GETTING THE VEHICLE WASHED, THE CONSUMER MOVED THE GEAR SHIFT FROM NEUTRAL TO DRIVE AND THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD. THE CONSUMER'S VEHICLE COLLIDED WITH THE VEHICLE IN FRONT AND INJURED A PEDESTRIAN STANDING IN BETWEEN THE TWO VEHICLES. THE PEDESTRIAN SUFFERED SERIOUS INJURIES TO THE LEGS AND WAS TAKEN TO A HOSPITAL. *…
Read full complaint
AFTER GETTING THE VEHICLE WASHED, THE CONSUMER MOVED THE GEAR SHIFT FROM NEUTRAL TO DRIVE AND THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD. THE CONSUMER'S VEHICLE COLLIDED WITH THE VEHICLE IN FRONT AND INJURED A PEDESTRIAN STANDING IN BETWEEN THE TWO VEHICLES. THE PEDESTRIAN SUFFERED SERIOUS INJURIES TO THE LEGS AND WAS TAKEN TO A HOSPITAL. *AK *JB
NHTSA ODI #10056117
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.