NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Tires complaints
25 reportsClear category filter125,616 miles · Mar 12, 2019
Tires
REAR DRIVER SIDE FIRESTONE TIRE GUARANTEED FOR 70,000 MILES BLOWN INTO PIECES WHILE DRIVING ON MARCH 11, 2019. IT HAS ONLY 36,000 MILES ON IT. ON MARCH 12, 2019, I NOTIFIED BRIAN OF FIRESTONE CUSTOMER SERVICE (800/367-3872) AND HE ASKED ME TO TAKE IT FOR INSPECTION BY FIRESTONE, 715B MERRICK AVE, WESTBURY, NY 11590 (516/228-90…
Read full complaint
REAR DRIVER SIDE FIRESTONE TIRE GUARANTEED FOR 70,000 MILES BLOWN INTO PIECES WHILE DRIVING ON MARCH 11, 2019. IT HAS ONLY 36,000 MILES ON IT. ON MARCH 12, 2019, I NOTIFIED BRIAN OF FIRESTONE CUSTOMER SERVICE (800/367-3872) AND HE ASKED ME TO TAKE IT FOR INSPECTION BY FIRESTONE, 715B MERRICK AVE, WESTBURY, NY 11590 (516/228-9055) AT 11.00 AM ON MARCH 14, 2019
NHTSA ODI #11186274
Mileage unknown · Nov 22, 2011
SteeringTiresVehicle Speed Control
THE LEFT FRONT TIRE ( NEW TIRE, I PUNCHED 4 NEW MICHELIN TIRES 7/11) ON MY CAR POPPED. I AM NOT SURE IF THE CAR PEDAL GOT STUCK FIRST, EVERYTHING HAPPENED FAST. STEERING BECAME IMPOSSIBLE AND THE CAR WHEN SIDE TO SIDE AS I ATTEMPTED TO STEER THE CAR. THE STEWING WHEEL WOULD TURN, BUT IT DIDN'T WORK. THE MAJOR THING IS THAT I C…
Read full complaint
THE LEFT FRONT TIRE ( NEW TIRE, I PUNCHED 4 NEW MICHELIN TIRES 7/11) ON MY CAR POPPED. I AM NOT SURE IF THE CAR PEDAL GOT STUCK FIRST, EVERYTHING HAPPENED FAST. STEERING BECAME IMPOSSIBLE AND THE CAR WHEN SIDE TO SIDE AS I ATTEMPTED TO STEER THE CAR. THE STEWING WHEEL WOULD TURN, BUT IT DIDN'T WORK. THE MAJOR THING IS THAT I COULDN'T OPERATE THE CAR BECAUSE OF THE PEDAL GETTING STUCK AND THE STEERING WAS IMPOSSIBLE AFTER THAT. THE CAR WAS TAKEN TO CARRIAGE CAGE AUTO REPAIR BY AAA, WHO RECOMMENDED I TAKE IT THERE, SINCE THE CAR COULD NOT BE DRIVEN. I THEN WENT TO THE ER ROOM FOR CARE. NATIONWIDE INSURANCE WAS NOTIFIED, THEY GAVE AN ESTIMATE OF OVER FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS TO REPAIR THE CAR. TOYOTA IN LAKE CITY, WA -BRUCE IN AUTO CARE WAS NOTIFIED REGARDING THE PEDAL BECOMING STUCK. I WILL HAVE TO TAKE THE CAR THERE ONCE IT IS REPAIRED. I WONDER HOW SAFE IS THE CAR AND WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10436798
Mileage unknown · Apr 7, 2009
Tires
MY WIFE UNKNOWINGLY DROVE ON A FLAT TIRE. AFTER I COLLECTED HER AND THE CAR, I TOOK THE TIRE TO SEARS AND THEY SAID THE VALVE STEM FAILED. THE TIRE WAS REPLACE BUT I HAD TO PAY FOR IT. MONTHS LATER, SHE HAD A NAIL IN A TIRE SO I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO SEARS. THEY PATCHED IT, AND A WEEK OR SO LATER IT WAS FLAT AGAIN. WHEN I T…
Read full complaint
MY WIFE UNKNOWINGLY DROVE ON A FLAT TIRE. AFTER I COLLECTED HER AND THE CAR, I TOOK THE TIRE TO SEARS AND THEY SAID THE VALVE STEM FAILED. THE TIRE WAS REPLACE BUT I HAD TO PAY FOR IT. MONTHS LATER, SHE HAD A NAIL IN A TIRE SO I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO SEARS. THEY PATCHED IT, AND A WEEK OR SO LATER IT WAS FLAT AGAIN. WHEN I TOOK IT IN, I NOTICED ANOTHER TIRE WAS FLAT AND THAT HAD A BAD VALVE STEM. SO, NOW 3 OF THE ORIGINAL VALVE STEMS HAD BEEN REPLACED. LAST NIGHT, SHE HAD ANOTHER FLAT TIRE, I CHANGED IT, AND IT WAS THE REMAINING VALVE STEM. I BOUGHT THE TIRES AT SEARS AND COMPLAINED AFTER THE SECOND VALVE STEM THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM. THE MANAGER SAID THAT MY WIFE MUST BE DRIVING UP ON CURBS. I CHECKED THE DATES AND THE TIRES WERE INSTALLED RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RECALL PERIOD. SEARS IS NOT HANDLING THIS PROBLEM WELL--THEY ARE PUTTING PEOPLE ON THE ROAD WITH DEFECTIVE VALVE STEMS. I DID NOT KNOW OFFICIALLY THAT THERE WAS A DOCUMENTED PROBLEM UNTIL I RETURNED FROM SEARS THIS MORNING AND DID SOME CHECKING ON THE INTERNET. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10264357
41,200 miles · Aug 5, 2008
Tires
TWO TIRES WENT FLAT FOR FAULTY VALVES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10237102
23,000 miles · Sep 11, 2007
Air BagsTiresCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE SWITCHING LANES AT 35 MPH, THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER VEHICLE. SHE STATED THAT THE TIRES SLID WITHOUT RESISTANCE AND THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE POLICE ARRIVED ON THE SCENE AND FILED A REPORT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER, BUT NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE SWITCHING LANES AT 35 MPH, THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER VEHICLE. SHE STATED THAT THE TIRES SLID WITHOUT RESISTANCE AND THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE POLICE ARRIVED ON THE SCENE AND FILED A REPORT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER, BUT NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED SEVERAL MINOR INJURIES. THE POWERTRAIN WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 23,000.
NHTSA ODI #10202544
Mileage unknown · Nov 14, 2006
Tires
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I BOUGHT A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY FROM A TOYOTA DEALER, GREEN BROOK, NJ ON JUNE 2004. IT CAME WITH GOODYEAR 205/R60/15 TIRES. I ONLY DROVE MAINLY ON CITY ROADS AND THE MILEAGE IS ONLY 20,500 MILES. I ROTATED FOUR TIRES ONCE IN THE PAST TWO YEARS. I, HOWEVER, AM SHOCKED TO FIND THAT THE TIRE TREADS IN RA…
Read full complaint
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I BOUGHT A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY FROM A TOYOTA DEALER, GREEN BROOK, NJ ON JUNE 2004. IT CAME WITH GOODYEAR 205/R60/15 TIRES. I ONLY DROVE MAINLY ON CITY ROADS AND THE MILEAGE IS ONLY 20,500 MILES. I ROTATED FOUR TIRES ONCE IN THE PAST TWO YEARS. I, HOWEVER, AM SHOCKED TO FIND THAT THE TIRE TREADS IN RADIAL DIRECTION (ACROSS FROM THE CENTER TREAD TO THE OUTER RIM) OF ALL FOUR TIRES WERE TOTALLY GONE TODAY WHEN I VISITED A CAR SHOP FOR OIL CHANGE. I HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING CAR SLIDING ON WET ROAD SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR BUT I DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE CAUSE IS. THE TECHNICIAN IN THE CAR POINTED OUT THE TREAD PROBLEM TO ME THAT THE CAR SLIDING PROBLEM IS BECAUSE THE WORN-OUT OUTER TREAD COULD NOT EXPEL WATER OUT FROM THE INNER CENTER TREAD. HE WARNED ME THE SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE ON DRIVING SUCH WORN-OUT TIRES ON A WATERY OR ICED ROAD SURFACE. I CHECKED YOUR PRODUCT INFORMATION THAT STATES THE TIRE WARRANTY IS 80,000 MILES. HOW COULD THIS WORN-OUT TREAD PROBLEM HAPPEN WHEN THE MILEAGE ONLY REACHES A QUARTER OF THE WARRANTY. I HAVE CHECKED THE INTERNET THAT THERE HAVE BEEN MANY COMPLAINTS ON THIS ISSUE SPECIFIED TO THE TOYOTA CAMRY 2004. TOYOTA SHALL ADDRESS THIS ISSUE AND MAKE A RECALL OR COMPENSATION IN RESPONSE TO THIS SAFETY CONCERN. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10173427
Mileage unknown · Aug 25, 2006
Tires
MY WIFE WAS DRIVING OUR 04' CAMRY LIMITED EDITION WITH MICHELIN P235/45/18 MXM4 FACTORY INSTALLED TIRES AT 70 MILES AN HOUR ONE TIRE BLEW OUT. THE COMPANY WAS SENT AN E-MAIL OUTLINING THE INCIDENT. THEY ASK US TO BRING THE TIRE IN TO BE CHECKED. AFTER EXAMINATION WE WERE TOLD THE FAILURE WAS DUE TO A SMALL PUNCTURE THE SIZE OF …
Read full complaint
MY WIFE WAS DRIVING OUR 04' CAMRY LIMITED EDITION WITH MICHELIN P235/45/18 MXM4 FACTORY INSTALLED TIRES AT 70 MILES AN HOUR ONE TIRE BLEW OUT. THE COMPANY WAS SENT AN E-MAIL OUTLINING THE INCIDENT. THEY ASK US TO BRING THE TIRE IN TO BE CHECKED. AFTER EXAMINATION WE WERE TOLD THE FAILURE WAS DUE TO A SMALL PUNCTURE THE SIZE OF A TOOTH PICK IN THE CENTER OF THE TIRE. THE RIP IN THE TIRE WHERE IT BLEW WAS ABOUT 8" LONG AND WAS RIGHT AT THE AREA OF WHERE THE BELT MEETS THE SIDE WALL. THE EVENT CAUSED MY WIFE TO BECOME EXTREMELY UPSET. WE HAVE ORDERED 4 NEW TIRES FROM COSTCO BECAUSE MY WIFE DOES NOT BELIEVE THE COMPANY'S FINDINGS. UPON FURTHER EXAMINATION BY ME I NOTICED THE INSIDE OF THE TIRE RUBBER WAS EXTREMELY DAMAGED ONLY ON ONE SIDE THAT BLEW IN A CIRCLE WHERE THE BELT JOINS THE SIDE WALL. THE OPPOSITE SIDE WAS IN PRISTINE CONDITION. WE HAVE OUR CARS DEALER SERVICED ROUTINELY. THE NEW TIRES HAVE COST US MORE THAN $1000.00 FOR 4 NEW TIRES. WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE COMPANY'S FINDINGS AND WISH TO GO ON THE RECORD REGARDING THIS TIRE FAILURE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE IS STILL PARKED AWAITING THE DELIVERY OF THE NEW TIRES WHICH ARE NOT STOCKED ANY WHERE LOCALLY. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10166504
8,000 miles · May 26, 2006
Service Brakes, HydraulicTiresCrash
I OWN A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY LE, MY PROBLEM WITH THIS VEHICLE ARE TWO THINGS ONE IS THE BRAKING SYSTEM/ABS AND THE SECOND IS THE TIRES BRIDGESTONE. THE PEDAL IS TOO SOFT, DOESN'T STOP THE CAR AS IT SHOULD, THE ABS LOCKED ON MANY OCCASIONS REGARDLESS OF THE WEATHER CONDITION. I MANAGED TO HIT A THE FRONT OF THE CAR TWICE AND ONCE I…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY LE, MY PROBLEM WITH THIS VEHICLE ARE TWO THINGS ONE IS THE BRAKING SYSTEM/ABS AND THE SECOND IS THE TIRES BRIDGESTONE. THE PEDAL IS TOO SOFT, DOESN'T STOP THE CAR AS IT SHOULD, THE ABS LOCKED ON MANY OCCASIONS REGARDLESS OF THE WEATHER CONDITION. I MANAGED TO HIT A THE FRONT OF THE CAR TWICE AND ONCE IN THE REAR. ALL OF THE ABS SYSTEM, WHILE THE DAMAGE IS ONLY TO MY CAR ITS BECOMING A VERY SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE REGARDING THE HOW SAFE IS THIS VEHICLE. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE DEALER AND HE REPLACED THE PADS ONCE, HOWEVER THE PROBLEM STILL EXIST AND THE REAR BREAKS ARE MAKING SQUEAKY SOUND. I HAVE 21,000 MILES ON THIS CAR AND ITS MY FIRST NEW CAR AND IT WILL BE THE LAST TOYOTA I OWN. THE DEALER DENIES ANY PROBLEMS AND THEY SAY ITS NORMAL BUT ITS NOT. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10158372
126,000 miles · Mar 2, 2006
Tires
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED FOR 8 HOURS IN 70 DEGREE SUNNY WEATHER, AND THE SPARE TIRE IN THE TRUNK OVER INFLATED AND BURST. THE SPARE TIRE WAS USED 2 WEEKS PRIOR WITH NO PROBLEMS. THE TIRE INCIDENT CAUSED ONLY MINOR DAMAGE TO THE TRUNK; HOWEVER THE AUDIO SPEAKERS WERE DESTROYED.
NHTSA ODI #10151600
19,647 miles · Nov 7, 2005
Tires
DT: THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE HAD TWO BLOWOUTS. THE FIRST ONE WAS ON THE RIGHT REAR, AND THE SECOND ONE WAS ON THE LEFT FRONT. THE SIDEWALL OF THE TIRES BLEW OUT WHILE DRIVING. THE SPEED WAS 55 MPH. THE CONSUMER HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE MANUFACTURER OF THE TIRES. THE CONSUMER WAS IN CONTACT WITH THE VEHICLE MANUFACTURER AN…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE HAD TWO BLOWOUTS. THE FIRST ONE WAS ON THE RIGHT REAR, AND THE SECOND ONE WAS ON THE LEFT FRONT. THE SIDEWALL OF THE TIRES BLEW OUT WHILE DRIVING. THE SPEED WAS 55 MPH. THE CONSUMER HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE MANUFACTURER OF THE TIRES. THE CONSUMER WAS IN CONTACT WITH THE VEHICLE MANUFACTURER AND THEY REFERRED HIM BACK TO THE TIRE MANUFACTURER. THE CONSUMER HAD PIECES OF THE TIRES AVAILABLE. THESE WERE THE ORIGINAL TIRES THAT HAD COME ON HIS VEHICLE. *AK (12/08/05) THE CONSUMER FOLLOWED UP WITH THE TIRE MANUFACTURER AND THEY AGREED TO REPLACE 2 TIES AT NO CHARGE. THE TIRE FAILURES HAD OCCURRED DURING THE DAY TIME ON CLEAR DAYS WHILE TRAVELING ON THE EXPRESSWAY. THE VEHICLE WAS REGULARLY MAINTAINED. *SC
NHTSA ODI #10141952
Official recalls
3Nov 9, 2011
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AVALON VEHICLES; 2004 AND 2005 CAMRY, CAMRY SOLARA, HIGHLANDER, AND SIENNA VEHICLES, 2006 HIGHLANDER HYBRID; 2004 AND 2005 LEXUS ES330 AND RX330; AND 2006 LEXUS RX400H VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 2004 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2005, EQUIPPED WITH THE 1MZ-FE OR 3MZ-FE ENGINE. THE AMOUNT OF ADHESIVE AGENT APPLIED BETWEEN THE OUTER RING AND THE TORSIONAL RUBBER DAMPER (INNER RING) IN THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY MAY BE INADEQUATE. IF THE ADHESIVE IS INSUFFICIENT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE OUTER RING MAY BECOME MISALIGNED AND IT MAY NOT PROPERLY ROTATE WITH THE INNER RING, CAUSING NOISE AND/OR ILLUMINATION OF THE BATTERY DISCHARGE INDICATOR LIGHT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN SOME CASES, THE BELT FOR THE POWER STEERING PUMP MAY BECOME DETACHED FROM THE PULLEY WHICH COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF POWER STEERING AND A SUDDEN INCREASE IN STEERING EFFORT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL CHECK THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY TO IDENTIFY WHETHER IT WAS PRODUCED BY THE U.S. SUPPLIER. IF SO, THE DEALER WILL REPLACE THE PULLEY WITH A NEW ONE AT NO CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING EARLY JANUARY 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Dec 15, 2004
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A FRONT PASSENGER POWER SEAT, WHEN INSTALLING CERTAIN REAR-FACING INFANT CHILD SEAT BASES ONTO THE SEAT WITH AN EXCESSIVELY HIGH SEATBELT TENSION, IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO UNSEAT A COMPONENT CALLED THE BUCKLE STATUS SWITCH FROM THE SEAT BELT BUCKLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE SWITCH BECOMES UNSEATED, THE FRONT PASSENGER OCCUPANT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAY MISTAKE THE REAR-FACING CHILD RESTRAINT FOR AN UNBELTED ADULT OCCUPANT, AND MAY NOT SUPPRESS THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT PASSENGER SEATBELT BUCKLE STATUS SWITCH. THIS SAFETY IMPROVEMENT CAMPAIGN (SSC 40M) BEGAN ON DECEMBER 20, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331 OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987..
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
2DP06003 · 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
Illustration