NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
272 reportsClear category filter3,000 miles · Mar 10, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS ATTEMPTING TO PULL OUT OF A PARKING SPACE TRAVELING AT 5 MPH THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO TWO VEHICLES. NO ONE WAS INJURED DURING THE CRASH. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED FOR THE INCIDENT. THE DEALERSHIP HAS NOT BEEN CONTACTE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS ATTEMPTING TO PULL OUT OF A PARKING SPACE TRAVELING AT 5 MPH THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO TWO VEHICLES. NO ONE WAS INJURED DURING THE CRASH. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED FOR THE INCIDENT. THE DEALERSHIP HAS NOT BEEN CONTACTED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 3000.
NHTSA ODI #10318427
179,199 miles · Mar 9, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, HE EXPERIENCED SEVERAL INCIDENTS OF ABNORMAL ACCELERATION. IN EACH INCIDENT, HE WAS UNABLE TO INITIALLY BRING THE VEHICLE TO A STOP UNTIL PLACING THE VEHICLE IN NEUTRAL AND COASTING TO A STOP. THE DEALER ADVISED THERE WERE NO RECALLS ON HIS SPECIFIC VEHICLE. NO REP…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, HE EXPERIENCED SEVERAL INCIDENTS OF ABNORMAL ACCELERATION. IN EACH INCIDENT, HE WAS UNABLE TO INITIALLY BRING THE VEHICLE TO A STOP UNTIL PLACING THE VEHICLE IN NEUTRAL AND COASTING TO A STOP. THE DEALER ADVISED THERE WERE NO RECALLS ON HIS SPECIFIC VEHICLE. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE TO THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 179,199 AND THE CURRENT WAS 182,000.
NHTSA ODI #10318132
55,000 miles · Mar 8, 2010
SteeringVehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 25MPH AND THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE WHILE SLOWING DOWN TO COMPLETE A TURN . THE DEALER WAS INFORMED AND THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER DID REPAIR THE VEHICLE BUT NEVER INFORMED THE CONTACT OF WHAT THE FAILURE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 25MPH AND THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE WHILE SLOWING DOWN TO COMPLETE A TURN . THE DEALER WAS INFORMED AND THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER DID REPAIR THE VEHICLE BUT NEVER INFORMED THE CONTACT OF WHAT THE FAILURE WAS. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT EXPERIENCED ANY OTHER FAILURES SINCE THEN. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 55000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 60000. THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED THE VEHICLE HAD A STEERING PROBLEM AND IT WOULD COST $500.00 TO REPAIR. UPDATED 03/22/10. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10317770
54,000 miles · Mar 8, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
HAD A 3RD UNINTENDED ACCELERATION IN MY 2005 CAMRY. I WAS ABLE TO STOP CAR BY SHIFTING INTO NEUTRAL ALONG WITH BRAKE APPLICATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10317613
21,000 miles · Mar 6, 2010
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
ON MAR. 1 2010 MY WIFE WAS DRIVING IN CITY TRAFFIC AT 30 MPH WHEN SHE REAR- ENDED THE CAR AHEAD. HER HEAD HIT THE STEERING WHEEL AND WAS RENDERED UNCONSCIOUS. THE AIR BAGS NEVER DEPLOYED DESPITE MAJOR FRONT END DAMAGE. HER MEMORY OF WHAT HAPPENED WAS LOST BUT SHE FELT THE CAR HAD JUMPED OR SURGED JUST BEFORE. SHE WAS DRIVING A 2…
Read full complaint
ON MAR. 1 2010 MY WIFE WAS DRIVING IN CITY TRAFFIC AT 30 MPH WHEN SHE REAR- ENDED THE CAR AHEAD. HER HEAD HIT THE STEERING WHEEL AND WAS RENDERED UNCONSCIOUS. THE AIR BAGS NEVER DEPLOYED DESPITE MAJOR FRONT END DAMAGE. HER MEMORY OF WHAT HAPPENED WAS LOST BUT SHE FELT THE CAR HAD JUMPED OR SURGED JUST BEFORE. SHE WAS DRIVING A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY WHICH HAS NOT YET BEEN RECALLED.THE CAR WAS TOTALED AND TOYOTA DOESN'T FEEL THE CAR MIGHT HAVE A PROBLEM. WHEN WITNESSES WENT TO HELP, MY WIFE HAD BOTH FEET ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, THE TOYOTA WAS STILL RUNNING AT A FAST IDLE AND SHE WAS JUST BEGINNING TO REGAIN HER WITS BUT COULD REMEMBER ONLY THAT THE CAR HAD JUMPED AHEAD. AS TOYOTA HAS NOT INCLUDED THE 2005 CAMRY IN IT'S RECALL I FEEL THAT MAYBE IT SHOULD. MY WIFE WAS NOT ON THE CELL PHONE NOR WAS SHE DRINKING OR ON MEDICATION. SHE IS A SAFE DRIVER AND I BELIEVE THE CAR RACED AHEAD ON ITS OWN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10317405
116,520 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
SUDDEN ACCELERATION 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10316402
Mileage unknown · Mar 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY- COMPLAINED A YEAR AGO THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STICKING- I HAVE INVOICE AND THEY SAID IT WAS THE FUEL INJECTOR BUT NOW I AM SUSPICIOUS- IN ADDITION THE THING THAT HOLDS MY FLOOR MAT IN PLACE TO PREVENT IT FROM SLIDING NEAR THE PEDAL BROKE OFF AND THAT IS NOT RECALLED RECALL MY 2005 SINCE IT NEEDS TO BE A…
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY- COMPLAINED A YEAR AGO THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STICKING- I HAVE INVOICE AND THEY SAID IT WAS THE FUEL INJECTOR BUT NOW I AM SUSPICIOUS- IN ADDITION THE THING THAT HOLDS MY FLOOR MAT IN PLACE TO PREVENT IT FROM SLIDING NEAR THE PEDAL BROKE OFF AND THAT IS NOT RECALLED RECALL MY 2005 SINCE IT NEEDS TO BE AND I HAVE INVOICES FOR THE REPAIRS BEFORE THE RECALLS WERE ANNOUNCED WHICH SHOULD BE PROOF ENOUGH THE CAR WAS MESSED UP- 2005 WITH 50,000 MILES- CAR IS AN EXTRA CAR THAT IS RARELY DRIVEN...... *TR
NHTSA ODI #10316399
50,000 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I WAS DRIVING HOME AFTER A BRIEF COMMUTE (~10 MILES) AND WAS IN MY DRIVEWAY WAITING FOR GARAGE TO OPEN AND WHEN I STEPPED ON THE ACCELERATOR GENTLY TO ENTER THE GARAGE, THE CAR SEEMED TO SURGE FORWARD. I STEPPED ON THE BRAKE WITH ALL MY STRENGTH AND THE CAR STOPPED IN TIME AND I TURNED THE IGNITION OFF. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10316311
90,000 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Fuel System, GasolineVehicle Speed Control
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. CAR WAS BEING DRIVEN THROUGH TOWN AND HAD STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT. LIGHT TURNED GREEN AND WHEN ACCELERATOR WAS PRESSED TO TURN RIGHT CAR SUDDENLY OVER ACCELERATED AND STARTED TO ACCELERATE ON IT'S OWN EVEN WHEN SLAMMING ON THE BRAKES. AFTER A FEW MORE SECONDS THE CAR DID DECELERATE AND WAS ABLE TO BE STOPPED. N…
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. CAR WAS BEING DRIVEN THROUGH TOWN AND HAD STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT. LIGHT TURNED GREEN AND WHEN ACCELERATOR WAS PRESSED TO TURN RIGHT CAR SUDDENLY OVER ACCELERATED AND STARTED TO ACCELERATE ON IT'S OWN EVEN WHEN SLAMMING ON THE BRAKES. AFTER A FEW MORE SECONDS THE CAR DID DECELERATE AND WAS ABLE TO BE STOPPED. NO FURTHER OCCURRENCES SINCE THEN. THIS YEAR MODEL SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN TOYOTA'S RECALL FOR DEFECTIVE ACCELERATORS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10316298
20,000 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE UNEXPECTEDLY ACCELERATED AND REAR-ENDED A VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE UNCONTROLLABLY OFF OF THE ROAD. THE DRIVER AVOIDED STRIKING A PEDESTRIAN AND CRASHED INTO A PARKED VEHICLE. THE AIR BAG DEPLOYED WITH THE LEVEL OF IMPACT INVOLVED. THE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE VEHICLE UNEXPECTEDLY ACCELERATED AND REAR-ENDED A VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE UNCONTROLLABLY OFF OF THE ROAD. THE DRIVER AVOIDED STRIKING A PEDESTRIAN AND CRASHED INTO A PARKED VEHICLE. THE AIR BAG DEPLOYED WITH THE LEVEL OF IMPACT INVOLVED. THE POLICE WAS CALLED TO THE SCENE. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED MULTIPLE INJURIES, AND DIED OF THE INJURIES THREE MONTHS LATER. THE OTHER VEHICLE DRIVER SUFFERED MINOR INJURIES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 20,000. UPDATED 4/26/10 *CN
NHTSA ODI #10316048
Official recalls
5Jun 2, 2016
Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain 2005-2011 4Runner, Highlander, Sequoia, and Sienna, 2005-2010 Avalon and Tundra, 2006-2008 Camry Solara, 2006-2010 Highlander hybrid, 2006-2011 Rav4 and Tacoma, 2007-2010 FJ Cruiser, 2007-2011 Camry hybrid, 2009-2010 Venza, 2010-2012 Prius, 1988-1990 and 2005-2010 Camry, and 1989 and 2009-2010 Corolla vehicles equipped with aftermarket accessory seat heaters with a copper strand heating element. The electrical wiring in the seat heaters may be damaged when the seat cushion is compressed.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If damaged, the copper strand heating element may short circuit, increasing the risk of a fire.
Remedy: SET will notify owners, and dealers will disconnect the seat heaters, free of charge, and refund the purchase price of the seat heater accessory. The recall began on July 14, 2016. Owners may contact SET customer service at 1-866-405-4226. SET number for this recall is SET16B.
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.
Feb 3, 2010
GULF STATES TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2010 VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 AND JUNE 2, 2008 WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. DEALERS WILL ALSO CORRECT THE OWNER'S MANUAL. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT GULF STATES TOYOTA AT 713-580-3300.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
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..
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