NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
238 reportsClear category filter28,000 miles · Feb 4, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH IN REVERSE THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT APPLYING PRESSURE TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT NOTIFIED THE MANUFACTURER REGARDING THE FAILURE; HOWEVER, HE HAS RECEIVED NO RE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH IN REVERSE THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT APPLYING PRESSURE TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT NOTIFIED THE MANUFACTURER REGARDING THE FAILURE; HOWEVER, HE HAS RECEIVED NO RESPONSE. THE CONTACT IS CONCERNED SINCE THE CRASH COULD HAVE BEEN MUCH WORSE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 28,000.
NHTSA ODI #10305769
80,000 miles · Feb 4, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
MY WIFE'S 2004 CAMRY HESITATES ON ACCELERATION AT TIMES. THERE IS A BRIEF, FEW-SECOND HESITATION, FOLLOWED BY A SURGE WHERE THE CAR SUDDENLY LURCHES FORWARD. THIS PROBLEM HAS OCCURRED FREQUENTLY WHENEVER EITHER OF US DRIVE THE VEHICLE AND EVER SINCE SHE FIRST PURCHASED IT (USED) ABOUT A YEAR AGO. WE THOUGHT IT MAY HAVE BEEN TRAN…
Read full complaint
MY WIFE'S 2004 CAMRY HESITATES ON ACCELERATION AT TIMES. THERE IS A BRIEF, FEW-SECOND HESITATION, FOLLOWED BY A SURGE WHERE THE CAR SUDDENLY LURCHES FORWARD. THIS PROBLEM HAS OCCURRED FREQUENTLY WHENEVER EITHER OF US DRIVE THE VEHICLE AND EVER SINCE SHE FIRST PURCHASED IT (USED) ABOUT A YEAR AGO. WE THOUGHT IT MAY HAVE BEEN TRANSMISSION-RELATED, BUT TOYOTA HAS INSPECTED THE VEHICLE A COUPLE TIMES TO NO AVAIL AND HAS DENIED ANY PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10305225
30,000 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
SUDDEN ACCELERATION CAUSED CAR LOOSE CONTROL AND CRASHED INTO GUARDRAIL. HAPPENED IN 3 LANE ROAD. CAR IS TOTAL LOSS . TIRE SEEN BLEW OUT THINKING HAPPENED DUE TO THE IMPACT OF THE HIT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304654
37,000 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
I OWN A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. I HAVE HAD TWO ACCIDENTS IN IT. BOTH TIMES THE CAR FAILED TO BRAKE BUT ACCELERATED INSTEAD. NO ONE BELIEVED ME THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDDLE STUCK INSTEAD OF BRAKING. MY INSURANCE PAID FOR REPAIR BOTH TIMES (EXCEPT FOR THE $500 DEDUCTIBLES). HOWEVER, AS A RESULT MY INSURANCE CARRIER OF 15 YEARS DROPPED M…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. I HAVE HAD TWO ACCIDENTS IN IT. BOTH TIMES THE CAR FAILED TO BRAKE BUT ACCELERATED INSTEAD. NO ONE BELIEVED ME THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDDLE STUCK INSTEAD OF BRAKING. MY INSURANCE PAID FOR REPAIR BOTH TIMES (EXCEPT FOR THE $500 DEDUCTIBLES). HOWEVER, AS A RESULT MY INSURANCE CARRIER OF 15 YEARS DROPPED ME AND I WAS FORCED TO TAKE OUT INSURANCE THAT COST ME MORE THAN THREE TIMES AS MUCH FOR COVERAGE. I BELIEVE THE ACCELERATOR PEDDLE STUCK BUT THE 2004 MODEL IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CALL BACK. DO I HAVE ANY GROUNDS FOR PURSUING THIS? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304522
65,000 miles · Feb 2, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
IT WAS MARCH 2008 AND I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SPACE IN FRONT OF A STORE (SPEED WAS NOT A FACTOR AS I WAS IN THE PARKING LOT AND HAD TO STOP BEFORE I PULLED INTO THE SPACE); IT WAS 1:00 IN THE AFTERNOON (BEAUTIFUL, SUNNY DAY); THE CAR TOUCHED THE CURB, MADE A REVVING SOUND, JUMPED THE CURB AND I WAS HITTING THE BRAKE (SAYING…
Read full complaint
IT WAS MARCH 2008 AND I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SPACE IN FRONT OF A STORE (SPEED WAS NOT A FACTOR AS I WAS IN THE PARKING LOT AND HAD TO STOP BEFORE I PULLED INTO THE SPACE); IT WAS 1:00 IN THE AFTERNOON (BEAUTIFUL, SUNNY DAY); THE CAR TOUCHED THE CURB, MADE A REVVING SOUND, JUMPED THE CURB AND I WAS HITTING THE BRAKE (SAYING "WHY WON'T IT STOP?") BUT IT WENT INTO THE STOREFRONT WINDOW. I WAS 55 AT THE TIME, NEVER HAD AN ACCIDENT (CAUSED BY ME), AND A VERY GOOD DRIVING RECORD SINCE 16. IT WAS NOT REPORTED VIA THE POLICE; ONLY THE MALL SECURITY BECAUSE IT WAS A PARKING LOT. MY INSURANCE COVERED IT (CAR & BUILDING). I HAVE THE REPAIR RECORDS BUT NO PARTS. I WAS TOTALLY DISMISSED BY EVERYONE WHEN I SAID THE CAR WOULDN'T STOP, HENCE I DOUBTED MYSELF. MY FRIEND & I BOTH HAD OUR SEAT BELTS ON AND NO ONE WAS INJURED (THANK GOD NO ONE WAS WALKING ON THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THE SPACE). I ASKED THE REPAIR PLACE TO CHECK MY ACCELERATOR & PEDAL BUT SAID THEY FOUND NOTHING WRONG. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10303996
8,921 miles · Feb 2, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE. THERE WAS PRESSURE APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL, FOLLOWED BY AN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION AND SUDDENLY, THE VEHICLE TRAVELED OVER A CURB AND CRASHED INTO A BUILDING. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE POLICE WAS CALLED TO THE SCENE. THE VEHICLE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE. THERE WAS PRESSURE APPLIED TO THE BRAKE PEDAL, FOLLOWED BY AN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION AND SUDDENLY, THE VEHICLE TRAVELED OVER A CURB AND CRASHED INTO A BUILDING. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE POLICE WAS CALLED TO THE SCENE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTO COLLISION SHOP. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AT THE COST OF $4,298.43. IN ADDITION, THE BUILDING SUSTAINED MODERATE DAMAGES. THE CONTACT HAD CONCERN OF THE SAFETY RISK INVOLVED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 8,921.
NHTSA ODI #10303848
24,358 miles · Jan 30, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
MY HUSBAND HAD JUST PULLED HIS 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY INTO A SCHOOL PARKING LOT AT A SLOW RATE OF SPEED. HE STOPPED WITH FOOT ON THE BRAKE, AND SHIFTED INTO REVERSE AS HE WAS GOING TO BACK INTO A PARKING SPACE. SUDDENLY, THE ACCELERATOR SURGED AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED WITHOUT WARNING AND HE HIT THE BACK OF THE SCHOOL BUILDING AT A G…
Read full complaint
MY HUSBAND HAD JUST PULLED HIS 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY INTO A SCHOOL PARKING LOT AT A SLOW RATE OF SPEED. HE STOPPED WITH FOOT ON THE BRAKE, AND SHIFTED INTO REVERSE AS HE WAS GOING TO BACK INTO A PARKING SPACE. SUDDENLY, THE ACCELERATOR SURGED AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED WITHOUT WARNING AND HE HIT THE BACK OF THE SCHOOL BUILDING AT A GREAT RATE OF FORCE. THE ENGINE STOPPED BUT THE AIR BAG FAILED TO DEPLOY. EXTENSIVE DAMAGE WAS DONE TO THE SCHOOL BUILDING ($19,000) AND TO HIS VEHICLE ($9000.) CAR HAD TO BE TOWED TO AUTO BODY DEALERSHIP. THIS WAS THE FIRST INCIDENT THAT THE CAR'S ACCELERATOR SURGED. AUTO BODY SHOP REPAIRED THE BODY OF THE CAR, BUT NO REPAIR TO ACCELERATOR AT ALL. WE HAD NO EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THE CAR ACCELERATED AT SUCH A HIGH RATE OF SPEED. NOW THAT WE HAVE BECOME AWARE OF ALL THE OTHER TOYOTAS THAT HAVE HAD ACCELERATION FAILURES, WE ARE NOW FILING THIS COMPLAINT. THIS ACCIDENT COULD HAVE BEEN MUCH MORE SERIOUS, AS CHILDREN WERE COMING IN AND OUT OF THE BUILDING FROM A SPORTS EVENT. THANKFULLY NO ONE WAS HURT. WE BELIEVE THAT TOYOTA NEEDS TO GO BACK MUCH FURTHER ON THEIR RECALLS ON TOYOTA CAMRYS THAN 2007, SINCE CLEARLY TOYOTA CAMRYS HAVE HAD THIS ACCELERATION PROBLEM AT LEAST AS FAR BACK AS 2004, PROBABLY EARLIER.R
NHTSA ODI #10303385
Mileage unknown · Jan 30, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING HER 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY LAST YEAR AND THE ACCELERATOR STUCK AND WHEN SHE GAVE IT SOME MORE GAS IT GOT STUCK AND ACCELERATED AND SHE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE CAR WITH HER BRAKES AND SHE RAN INTO A STORE WHICH IS HOW SHE STOPPED , TORE THE STORE WALL DOWN AND TOTALED HER CAR. THE OFFICER THAT RESPONDED TO THE …
Read full complaint
MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING HER 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY LAST YEAR AND THE ACCELERATOR STUCK AND WHEN SHE GAVE IT SOME MORE GAS IT GOT STUCK AND ACCELERATED AND SHE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE CAR WITH HER BRAKES AND SHE RAN INTO A STORE WHICH IS HOW SHE STOPPED , TORE THE STORE WALL DOWN AND TOTALED HER CAR. THE OFFICER THAT RESPONDED TO THE SCENE SAID THAT HIS FRIEND'S CAR DID THE SAME THING A WEEK PREVIOUSLY AND HE ALSO HAD A TOYOTA CAMRY. MY DAUGHTER WAS TOTALLY LIABLE FOR THIS AND SHE AND HER FRIEND SUSTAINED SOME SCRATCHES AND BUMPS ON THE ARMS AND FOREHEAD BUT DID NOT GO TO THE HOSPITAL BECAUSE SHE THOUGHTS THIS WAS ALL HER FAULT AND WAS CONCERNED IF THE INSURANCE WOULD PAY FOR THE BUILDING! SHE WAS VERY UPSET AND FOR SEVERAL DAYS DID NOT DRIVE, WHEN SHE DID BUY A CAR SHE HAD TO USE HER OWN MONEY FOR A DOWN PAYMENT BECAUSE SHE DID NOT HAVE THAT CAR FOR VERY LONG. SHOULD WE LOOK INTO TRYING TO CONTACT TOYOTA ABOUT THIS SITUATION? THERE IS A POLICE AND INSURANCE REPORT THAT I CAN OBTAIN THAT STATES THESE THINGS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10303308
53,913 miles · Jan 29, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
ON JULY 25, 2009, I WAS DRIVING MY TOYOTA CAMRY (2004), I PULLED INTO THE PARKING LOT WHERE I WORK FOUND A SPOT AND PROCEEDED TO PARK AS I TURNED IN MY CAR TOOK OFF AND SLAMMED IN TO A CEMENT PILLAR AT A VERY HIGH SPEED, I AM SO THANKFUL THAT I HIT THE PILLAR, BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PLATE GLASS WINDOW OF THE SHOE …
Read full complaint
ON JULY 25, 2009, I WAS DRIVING MY TOYOTA CAMRY (2004), I PULLED INTO THE PARKING LOT WHERE I WORK FOUND A SPOT AND PROCEEDED TO PARK AS I TURNED IN MY CAR TOOK OFF AND SLAMMED IN TO A CEMENT PILLAR AT A VERY HIGH SPEED, I AM SO THANKFUL THAT I HIT THE PILLAR, BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PLATE GLASS WINDOW OF THE SHOE STORE. IT COULD HAVE BEEN A TRAGIC ACCIDENT. I BELIEVE THAT THIS HAPPENED DUE TO THE CAR ACCELERATING OUT OF CONTROL. I SENT A COMPLAINT TO CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND TOYOTA CORP. ON JULY 27TH, 2009 WITH NO RESPONSE, NOW ALL OF THIS IS COMING OUT. MY CAR WAS REPAIRED, AT A COST OF $6439.57. MY INSURANCE HAS INCREASED BY ABOUT 40%, I NOW HAVE A CAR I DO NOT FEEL SAFE DRIVING, AND I CAN'T SELL IT, BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH TOYOTA. I WOULD LIKE SOME HELP, ANSWERS TO WHAT TOYOTA REALLY IS DOING TO HELP? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10303247
30,000 miles · Jan 29, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE EXITING A PARKING GARAGE AT SPEEDS OF 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BECAME STUCK IN POSITION. SHE CONTACTED HER LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER AND THEY ADVISED HER THAT IT WOULD BE SAFE FOR HER TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE HOME. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO DRIVE HOME WITHIN THREE HOURS, A DRIVE THA…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE EXITING A PARKING GARAGE AT SPEEDS OF 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BECAME STUCK IN POSITION. SHE CONTACTED HER LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER AND THEY ADVISED HER THAT IT WOULD BE SAFE FOR HER TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE HOME. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO DRIVE HOME WITHIN THREE HOURS, A DRIVE THAT USUALLY WOULD HAVE TAKEN HER 25 MINUTES, AS ADVISED BY HER DEALER. THE VEHICLE WAS LATER TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY MADE REPAIRS UNKNOWN TO HER. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 30,000.
NHTSA ODI #10303166
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