NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
238 reportsClear category filter160,000 miles · Jul 17, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
THROTTLE BODY FAILURE, ENGINE SHUTS DOWN, WILL RESTART IN LIMP MODE. CORRODED DEFECTIVE THROTTLE BODY. NEW PART ON ORDER FROM TOYOTA. $900 REPAIR. THIS ALSO HAPPENED IN 2007 AN $850 REPAIR. I CALLED TOYOTA IN 2007 AND AGAIN THIS TIME. TOYOTA REFUSES TO PROVIDE NEW THROTTLE BODY OR PAY FOR REPAIR. I ASSERT THIS IS A DESIGN AND SA…
Read full complaint
THROTTLE BODY FAILURE, ENGINE SHUTS DOWN, WILL RESTART IN LIMP MODE. CORRODED DEFECTIVE THROTTLE BODY. NEW PART ON ORDER FROM TOYOTA. $900 REPAIR. THIS ALSO HAPPENED IN 2007 AN $850 REPAIR. I CALLED TOYOTA IN 2007 AND AGAIN THIS TIME. TOYOTA REFUSES TO PROVIDE NEW THROTTLE BODY OR PAY FOR REPAIR. I ASSERT THIS IS A DESIGN AND SAFETY PROBLEM THAT TOYOTA SHOULD REPAIR OR RECALL AT NO CHARGE. I PURCHASED CAR NEW AND HAVE BEEN A LOYAL TOYOTA CUSTOMER. PURCHASED FOUR NEW TOYOTA CARS SINCE 2002. WHY WOULD I PURCHASE ANOTHER CAR FROM TOYOTA? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10525474
Mileage unknown · Jul 2, 2013
EngineFuel System, GasolineVehicle Speed Control
PURCHASED CAR FROM LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER WITH JUST OVER 100K MILES. GAS PEDAL STOPPED WORKING. CAR WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. FOUND OUT IT WAS A FAILURE OF THE THROTTLE BODY. IT COSTS OVER $1000 TO FIX. THERE ARE NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS FOR THIS EXACT PART ON TOYOTA CAMRY'S. WHEN IS IT GOING TO BE RECALLED! OBVIOUS DESIGN FLAW! *TR
NHTSA ODI #10522974
70,000 miles · Apr 22, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS AND DECELERATING, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE FAILURE RECURRED NUMEROUS TIMES. THE FAILURE HAD NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 70,000.
NHTSA ODI #10509072
15 miles · Mar 24, 2013
Fuel/propulsion SystemVehicle Speed Control
I HAD SLOWED DOWN TO TURN INTO SIDE ROAD, FOOT WAS OFF GAS AND IT ACCELERATED. I IMMEDIATELY PUT ON BRAKES AND IT CORRECTED THE PROBLEM. THIS IS ABOUT THE 3RD TIME IT HAS HAPPENED. THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED FAST AND I THOUGHT IT WAS ME. THE NEXT TIME SAME THING SO I HAVE BEEN AWARE TO WATCH AND NOTICE. TODAY IT HAPPENED AGAIN A…
Read full complaint
I HAD SLOWED DOWN TO TURN INTO SIDE ROAD, FOOT WAS OFF GAS AND IT ACCELERATED. I IMMEDIATELY PUT ON BRAKES AND IT CORRECTED THE PROBLEM. THIS IS ABOUT THE 3RD TIME IT HAS HAPPENED. THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED FAST AND I THOUGHT IT WAS ME. THE NEXT TIME SAME THING SO I HAVE BEEN AWARE TO WATCH AND NOTICE. TODAY IT HAPPENED AGAIN AND I KNOW FOR SURE IT HAS A PROBLEM IN ACCELERATING. SOMETIMES IT CUTS OFF WHEN FIRST CRANKS LIKE NOT GETTING ENOUGH GAS. I HAVE HAD TOYOTAS FOR YEARS BUT NOW GETTING LEARY
NHTSA ODI #10504309
65,000 miles · Mar 4, 2013
EngineSteeringVehicle Speed ControlCrash
I WAS DRIVING, TOOK A CORNER AND MY CAR TURNED OFF WITHOUT WARNING OR SIGNAL, AND I LOST POWER STEERING AND HIT ANOTHER PARKED VEHICLE. I PROCEEDED TO TURN MY CAR BACK ON, DRIVE TEN FEET AND THE ENGINE SHUT OFF AGAIN WITHOUT WARNING. I WENT TO THE AUTO BODY SHOP AND THEY STATED IT WAS A CODE 2112 THROTTLE ISSUE. I RESEARCHED ON…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING, TOOK A CORNER AND MY CAR TURNED OFF WITHOUT WARNING OR SIGNAL, AND I LOST POWER STEERING AND HIT ANOTHER PARKED VEHICLE. I PROCEEDED TO TURN MY CAR BACK ON, DRIVE TEN FEET AND THE ENGINE SHUT OFF AGAIN WITHOUT WARNING. I WENT TO THE AUTO BODY SHOP AND THEY STATED IT WAS A CODE 2112 THROTTLE ISSUE. I RESEARCHED ON THE INTERNET AND SAW SEVERAL OTHER CONSUMER COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS SAME ISSUE WITH THE SAME MAKE/MODEL/YEAR AND AROUND THE SAME MILEAGE AS MY CAR HAS. TOYOTA IS NOT RECALLING OR PROVIDING FREE SERVICE ON THE PARTS AND I WAS GIVEN AN ESTIMATE OF OVER 1300.00 TO FIX. SEEING THAT THIS IS NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR - I DIDNT DO A THING TO CAUSE THIS TO HAPPEN, AND IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE, I BELIEVE THEY SHOULD BE REPLACING AND OR RECALLING THESE VEHICLES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10501306
86,365 miles · Mar 4, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
I STARTED MY 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY LE IN MY DRIVEWAY. AT THE TIME OF IGNITION, THE ENGINE CHUGGED THEN IDLED AS USUAL, BUT THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. I PUT THE VEHICLE INTO RESERVE AND ROLLED BACK ABOUT 20 FEET INTO THE STREET, THEN PUT THE VEHICLE INTO DRIVE. I STEPPED ONTO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND NOTHING HAPPENED. T…
Read full complaint
I STARTED MY 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY LE IN MY DRIVEWAY. AT THE TIME OF IGNITION, THE ENGINE CHUGGED THEN IDLED AS USUAL, BUT THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. I PUT THE VEHICLE INTO RESERVE AND ROLLED BACK ABOUT 20 FEET INTO THE STREET, THEN PUT THE VEHICLE INTO DRIVE. I STEPPED ONTO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND NOTHING HAPPENED. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO IDLE WHILE IN THE DRIVE GEAR, HOWEVER, IT WOULD NOT ACCELERATE DESPITE ME PRESSING THE PEDAL ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR. I TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE AND WAITED APPROXIMATELY 10 MINUTES, THEN RESTARTED THE VEHICLE. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS NO LONGER ILLUMINATED AND WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS PUT INTO DRIVE THE ACCELERATOR WORKED PROPERLY. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL REPAIR FACILITY AND WAS TOLD ABOUT 2 CODES IN MY COMPUTER: P2112 - THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL SYSTEM - STUCK CLOSED, AND P2102 - THROTTLE ACTUATOR CONTROL MOTOR CIRCUIT LOW (SUGGESTING THE THROTTLE BODY BE REPLACED). I CONTACTED THE LOCAL DEALERSHIP IN FARMINGTON, MI AT WHICH THEY REPORTED THROTTLE BODY ISSUES WERE A KNOWN AND COMMON PROBLEM THAT THEY GET CALLS ABOUT FREQUENTLY, BUT THERE WAS NO RECALL ON THE VEHICLE REGARDING THIS ISSUE AT THIS TIME. I WAS FORTUNATE THAT I WAS ON A SIDE STREET NEAR MY HOME WHEN THIS OCCURRED, BUT AM CONCERNED THAT THIS COULD HAPPEN AGAIN WHILE DRIVING (AS I HAVE READ IN MANY SAFETY COMPLAINTS ON THE VEHICLE SAFETY WEBSITE). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10501145
40,653 miles · Feb 27, 2013
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO 40 MPH WITHOUT ANY WARNING. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO 5 OTHER VEHICLES. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE POLICE WERE CONTACTED AND A REPORT WAS AVAILABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS LATER TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANI…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO 40 MPH WITHOUT ANY WARNING. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO 5 OTHER VEHICLES. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE POLICE WERE CONTACTED AND A REPORT WAS AVAILABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS LATER TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DEEMED DESTROYED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND THEY ADVISED HIM THAT AN INVESTIGATOR WOULD COME OUT AND INSPECT THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 40,653.
NHTSA ODI #10500633
108,000 miles · Feb 11, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH DOWNHILL. THE ENGINE SURGED AT A MUCH HIGHER RATE OF SPEED. THE BRAKES FAILED AND THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO CONTROL THE STEERING. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE UNTIL SHE CRASHED INTO AN EMBANKMENT. THE CONTACT WAS …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH DOWNHILL. THE ENGINE SURGED AT A MUCH HIGHER RATE OF SPEED. THE BRAKES FAILED AND THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO CONTROL THE STEERING. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE UNTIL SHE CRASHED INTO AN EMBANKMENT. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED. THE VEHICLE WAS LATER TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC BUT WAS NOT DIAGNOSED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 108,000. UPDATED 3/14/13 *CN THE CONSUMER STATED SHE HAD NOT CONTROL OVER THE VEHICLE. IT CONTINUED APPROXIMATELY 3/4 OF A MILE ALL OVER THE ROAD AND SURROUNDING AREAS, UNTIL IT FINALLY HIT AN EMBANKMENT AND THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE WENT INTO THE GROUND. AND THEN STOPPED.
NHTSA ODI #10497689
51,284 miles · Jan 21, 2013
Electrical SystemEngineVehicle Speed ControlCrash
AFTER ENTERING A PARKING LOT MY MOTHER-IN-LAW WAS TURNING INTO A SPOT WHEN THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED THRU THE SPOT AND WAS HEADING FOR THE CONCRETE WALL. SHE WAS ABLE TO TURN IT TO THE LEFT, RUN OVER THE CURB AND IN TO A SNOW BANK. SHE WAS UNABLE TO BACK THE CAR OUT AND HAD TO BE TOWED OUT. THERE WAS DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END, …
Read full complaint
AFTER ENTERING A PARKING LOT MY MOTHER-IN-LAW WAS TURNING INTO A SPOT WHEN THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED THRU THE SPOT AND WAS HEADING FOR THE CONCRETE WALL. SHE WAS ABLE TO TURN IT TO THE LEFT, RUN OVER THE CURB AND IN TO A SNOW BANK. SHE WAS UNABLE TO BACK THE CAR OUT AND HAD TO BE TOWED OUT. THERE WAS DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END, BUT THE AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE TOW TRUCK DRIVER SAID THAT SHE COULD DRIVE IT HOME AND SHE MANAGED TO DO SO, BUT SHE WAS SCARED TO DO SO. IT IS NOW SITTING IN THE DRIVEWAY AND WILL NOT BE DRIVEN UNTIL WE ARE SATISFIED WITH THE REPAIRS TO THE ACCELERATION PROBLEM. I AM STILL WAITING TO HEAR FROM THE DEALER?. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10493600
107,400 miles · Dec 27, 2012
SteeringStructureVehicle Speed ControlCrash
I WAS APPROACHING A FREEWAY IN ATLANTA, GA. AS THE CONNECTOR CURVED, I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 35 MPH AND GENTLY BRAKE ABOUT 200 FEET FROM THE FREEWAY. THE CAR IMMEDIATELY AND VIOLENTLY ACCELERATED, THROWING MY HEAD BACK AGAINST THE HEADREST; I BRAKE HARDER BUT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE CAR; THE CAR SEEMED TO PIVOT ON THE RIGHT…
Read full complaint
I WAS APPROACHING A FREEWAY IN ATLANTA, GA. AS THE CONNECTOR CURVED, I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 35 MPH AND GENTLY BRAKE ABOUT 200 FEET FROM THE FREEWAY. THE CAR IMMEDIATELY AND VIOLENTLY ACCELERATED, THROWING MY HEAD BACK AGAINST THE HEADREST; I BRAKE HARDER BUT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE CAR; THE CAR SEEMED TO PIVOT ON THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE AND THE REAR END FLEW TO MY LEFT ABOUT 240 DEGREES OR SO AND STRUCK THE GUARD RAIL WITH THE LEFT REAR QUARTER PANEL AND BUMPER. THE CAR THEN, CONTINUING AT HIGH SPEED, RICOCHETED OFF THE GUARD RAIL AND THE REAR END PIVOTED TOWARD THE ROAD, MAKING THE FRONT BUMPER STRIKE THE SAME GUARD RAIL. THE SECOND COLLISION SCRAPED THE PAINT OFF THE CENTER OF THE BUMPER BUT THE IMPACT SEEMED STRONGER THAN THE DAMAGE WOULD INDICATE. THE SECOND IMPACT DID STOP THE CAR. I MAKE THIS REPORT BECAUSE MY CAR WAS NOT ONE OF THOSE RECALLED BY TOYOTA FOR THIS PROBLEM; BUT, BELIEVE ME, IT HAPPENED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10490196
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