IllustrationLOOSENESS IN STEERING WHEEL WITH BINDING ASSOCIATED WITH POPPING NOISE IN FRONT OF 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH 40K. *NM
2004 Toyota Camry
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Camry years
Owner complaints for the 2004 Toyota Camry are substantially higher than the model-year median of 295.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Camry years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
1700–25K
11225–50K
7950–75K
6075–100K
63100–150K
32150K+
516 reports with mileage · 122 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 238 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 80 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Air Bags. Review the 79 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
199 crash reports11 fire reports96 injury reports
What owners actually said
638 reportsDT*: 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.
FAILURE OF INTERMEDIATE STEERING SHAFT CAUSES CLUNKING AND LOOSENESS OF STEERING SYSTEM. TOYOTA REFUSED TO GIVE ITS DEALER A REPLACEMENT PART. INSTEAD, DEALER NOTED THIS INFORMATION ON SERVICE FORM: "TOYOTA WILL BE ISSUING A RECALL REGARDING CONDITION IN NEAR FUTURE. WILL RECEIVE NOTICE BY MAIL." THIS WAS ON DECEMBER 10, 20…
Read full complaint
FAILURE OF INTERMEDIATE STEERING SHAFT CAUSES CLUNKING AND LOOSENESS OF STEERING SYSTEM. TOYOTA REFUSED TO GIVE ITS DEALER A REPLACEMENT PART. INSTEAD, DEALER NOTED THIS INFORMATION ON SERVICE FORM: "TOYOTA WILL BE ISSUING A RECALL REGARDING CONDITION IN NEAR FUTURE. WILL RECEIVE NOTICE BY MAIL." THIS WAS ON DECEMBER 10, 2005. I HAVE NOT YET RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE. HAS TOYOTA CONTACTED NHTSA ABOUT A RECALL FOR THE INTERMEDIATE STEERING SHAFT? *NM
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WITHOUT WARNING, THE DRIVER SIDE SEAT BELT QUIT WORKING. THE BUCKLE WILL NO LONGER LOCK INTO THE BUCKLE ASSEMBLY. THE DEALERSHIP DETERMINED THE BUCKLE ASSEMBLY NEEDS TO BE REPLACED.
I PURCHASED A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY LIMITED EDITION. THIS CAR HANDLES POORLY, LIKE DRIVING IN A WINDSTORM. IT HAS BEEN BACK TO 2 DIFFERENT DEALERS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIX IT. THE TOYOTA REPS HAVE LOOKED AT IT AND TOLD ME THAT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG. I FILED FOR ARBITRATION IN 10/05. THE ARBITRATOR AGREED THAT THERE IS A PROBLE…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY LIMITED EDITION. THIS CAR HANDLES POORLY, LIKE DRIVING IN A WINDSTORM. IT HAS BEEN BACK TO 2 DIFFERENT DEALERS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIX IT. THE TOYOTA REPS HAVE LOOKED AT IT AND TOLD ME THAT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG. I FILED FOR ARBITRATION IN 10/05. THE ARBITRATOR AGREED THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM AND ORDERED TOYOTA TO CORRECT IT. THE TOYOTA REPS HAVE NOT YET BEEN ABLE TO FIX IT. I AM NOW SEEKING ARBITRATION TO HAVE TOYOTA BUY THE CAR BACK. *JB
STEERING KNUCKLE DEFECTIVE ON 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. PROVIDES A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE. PROBLEM HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR TWO WEEKS. NOW AFTER TAKING IT TO AN OFFICIAL TOYOTA DEALER REPAIR SHOP, PROBLEM STILL NOT FIXED. NOW AT LEAST TWO WEEK TO A MONTH WAIT ON PART. WAS TOLD WE WERE NUMBER 536 ON WAITING LIST, AND WAS TOLD IT WAS NOT …
Read full complaint
STEERING KNUCKLE DEFECTIVE ON 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. PROVIDES A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE. PROBLEM HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR TWO WEEKS. NOW AFTER TAKING IT TO AN OFFICIAL TOYOTA DEALER REPAIR SHOP, PROBLEM STILL NOT FIXED. NOW AT LEAST TWO WEEK TO A MONTH WAIT ON PART. WAS TOLD WE WERE NUMBER 536 ON WAITING LIST, AND WAS TOLD IT WAS NOT A SAFETY ISSUE IN SHORT TERM, BUT DO NOT BELIEVE THAT. STEERING IS LOOSE, AND A CATCH OCCURS IN STEERING. PASSENGER CAN EVEN FEEL WHEN THIS OCCURS. DEALER HAS REPORTED THREE EXACT SAME PROBLEMS WITH OTHER CAMRYS IN THE SAME WEEK. *NM
SINCE I PURCHASED MY 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SE V6 NEW IN NOVEMBER 2003, THERE HAS BEEN A PROBLEM WITH ACCELERATION AFTER COMING TO A YIELD. BASICALLY WHAT OCCURS IS I COME TO AN INTERSECTION OR A SITUATION WHERE I MUST YIELD AND WHEN I PRESS THE GAS PEDAL THE CAR HESITATES FOR A FEW SECONDS. WHEN I FIRST PURCHASED THE CAR I THOUGHT…
Read full complaint
SINCE I PURCHASED MY 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY SE V6 NEW IN NOVEMBER 2003, THERE HAS BEEN A PROBLEM WITH ACCELERATION AFTER COMING TO A YIELD. BASICALLY WHAT OCCURS IS I COME TO AN INTERSECTION OR A SITUATION WHERE I MUST YIELD AND WHEN I PRESS THE GAS PEDAL THE CAR HESITATES FOR A FEW SECONDS. WHEN I FIRST PURCHASED THE CAR I THOUGHT THIS MAY BE NEW CAR JITTERS AND IT WOULD EVENTUALLY STRAIGHTEN OUT. HOWEVER, TWO YEARS LATER THE PROBLEM STILL EXISTS. THIS CAN POTENTIALLY BE A DANGEROUS SITUATION FOR SEVERAL REASONS. IF YOU MAKE THE DECISION TO GO AND THERE IS ONCOMING TRAFFIC BUT THE CAR HESITATES A WRECK COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN. SO TO KEEP THIS FROM HAPPENING, I WILL PRESS THE GAS PEDAL MORE THAN NECESSARY TO OVER-COMPENSATE FOR THE HESITATION AND THEN WHEN THE CAR DOES GO IT JETS OUT INTO TRAFFIC FASTER THAN I ANTICIPATE. I VOICED MY CONCERN TO THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER IN COLUMBIA, MISSOURI AND THEIR FIRST RESPONSE WAS "OH, THAT'S JUST NORMAL V6 HESITATION." I EXPRESSED THERE WAS NOTHING NORMAL ABOUT IT AND I WANTED TO TALK TO THE MANAGER. THE MANAGER CALLED IN THE REGIONAL REP AND WE ALL WENT FOR A RIDE IN ONE OF THE 2004 XLE V6 SO THEY COULD SHOW ME THE PROBLEM EXISTS IN ALL THE V6'S. THE REGIONAL REP AGREED THERE WAS A PROBLEM BUT THEY DIDN'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW TO FIX IT. HE DID SAY THAT WHEN THE PROBLEM WAS RESOLVED THEY WOULD LET ME KNOW. SO FAR NO PHONE CALL. *JB
O2 SENSORS FAILED DUE TO RODENTS OR RABBITS CHEWING THE PLASTIC WIRING HOUSING THE INTERNAL ELECTRICAL WIRES. O2 SENSORS HAD TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF ABOUT $600. THE OUTSIDE COATINGS OR SHEATHS FOR THE WIRING IS MADE OF A SOY BASED PLASTIC, AND POSSIBLY CONTAINING A "FISH OIL" IN THE SHEATH, WHICH ATTRACTS RODENTS AND RABBI…
Read full complaint
O2 SENSORS FAILED DUE TO RODENTS OR RABBITS CHEWING THE PLASTIC WIRING HOUSING THE INTERNAL ELECTRICAL WIRES. O2 SENSORS HAD TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF ABOUT $600. THE OUTSIDE COATINGS OR SHEATHS FOR THE WIRING IS MADE OF A SOY BASED PLASTIC, AND POSSIBLY CONTAINING A "FISH OIL" IN THE SHEATH, WHICH ATTRACTS RODENTS AND RABBITS, AND THEY CHEW ON THE PLASTIC WIRE COVERINGS, THEREBY DESTROYING THE O2 SENSOR'S WIRING MECHANISM. THIS PROBLEM IS PREVALENT IN THE DENVER AND MOUNTAIN STATES AREAS AND SHOULD BE CORRECTED AS THE PROBLEM COULD LEAD TO ENGINE FIRES OR ENGINE FAILURES. THE WIRING HOUSING SHOULD BE CHANGED TO A "RETARDANT" TYPE OF WIRING TO PREVENT OTHER INCIDENTS OF THIS PROBLEM, AND NOT JUST FOR TOYOTA BUT FOR ALL MANUFACTURERS. *NM
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE ACCELERATING FROM A STOP AT ABOUT 25 MPH AT A CROSSROAD A TRUCK TURNING LEFT HIT THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE HEAD ON. UPON IMPACT, THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. BOTH OCCUPANTS WERE WEARING SEAT BELTS BUT SUSTAINED INJURIES. THE CRASH WAS DOCUMENTED BY THE POLICE. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER SPECULATED…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE ACCELERATING FROM A STOP AT ABOUT 25 MPH AT A CROSSROAD A TRUCK TURNING LEFT HIT THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE HEAD ON. UPON IMPACT, THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. BOTH OCCUPANTS WERE WEARING SEAT BELTS BUT SUSTAINED INJURIES. THE CRASH WAS DOCUMENTED BY THE POLICE. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER SPECULATED THAT THE SPEED WAS NOT FAST ENOUGH OR NOT HIT PROPERLY FOR THE AIR BAGS TO DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS DEEMED TOTALED. *AK
DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STUCK. SHE WAS PULLING OUT ONTO THE ROAD. AS SHE LIGHTLY PRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL THE VEHICLE WENT ACROSS THE ROAD AND CRASHED INTO A METAL POLE. THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE WAS PUSHED UNDERNEATH THE WINDSHIELD. THE CONTACT WAS WEARING THE SEAT BELT. THE AIR BAGS DEP…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STUCK. SHE WAS PULLING OUT ONTO THE ROAD. AS SHE LIGHTLY PRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL THE VEHICLE WENT ACROSS THE ROAD AND CRASHED INTO A METAL POLE. THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE WAS PUSHED UNDERNEATH THE WINDSHIELD. THE CONTACT WAS WEARING THE SEAT BELT. THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. HOWEVER, SHE WAS TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL WITH CHEST PAINS AND BRUISING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A REPAIR SHOP FOR INSPECTION. A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE MANUFACTURER WAS COMING TO THE REPAIR SHOP TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE INCIDENT. NO REPAIRS WERE ADE BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED. A POLICE REPORT WAS TAKEN AT THE SCENE OF THE ACCIDENT. *AK UPDATED 1/11/2006. *NM
Official recalls
311V539000 · Engine And Engine Cooling
Nov 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.
04V595000 · Seat Belts:front:buckle Assembly
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..
04V346000 · Air Bags:side/window
Jul 13, 2004
ON CERTAIN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAGS (CSA), ONE OR BOTH OF THE CURTAIN AIR BAGS MAY BE TWISTED NEAR THE INFLATOR DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS, THE CSA MAY NOT DEPLOY RAPIDLY ENOUGH WHEN ACTIVATED IN A SIDE IMPACT COLLISION. THIS MAY RESULT IN FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE INTENDED HEAD PROTECTION, INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE CSAS AND REPLACE THE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 6, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
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