NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
272 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Feb 8, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
2005 CAMRY AT LOW THROTTLE POSITIONS 35-40 MPH RPMS JUMP 200 AND THEN RETURNS. THIS HAPPENS CONSISTANTLY. I HAVE WRITTEN TOYOTA THREE LETTERS AND THEY HAVE BLOWN ME OFF EACH TIME. I STILL HAVE COPIES OF THE LETTERS. NOW THAT TOYOTA IS FESSING UP, PERHAPS THEY WILL FIX THIS CONDITION AS IT UNNERVING IF NOT DANGEROUS. I AM PUTTIN…
Read full complaint
2005 CAMRY AT LOW THROTTLE POSITIONS 35-40 MPH RPMS JUMP 200 AND THEN RETURNS. THIS HAPPENS CONSISTANTLY. I HAVE WRITTEN TOYOTA THREE LETTERS AND THEY HAVE BLOWN ME OFF EACH TIME. I STILL HAVE COPIES OF THE LETTERS. NOW THAT TOYOTA IS FESSING UP, PERHAPS THEY WILL FIX THIS CONDITION AS IT UNNERVING IF NOT DANGEROUS. I AM PUTTING IN A DATE AS YOUR FORM WILL NOT LET ME CONTINUE ALTHOUGH THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.
NHTSA ODI #10307388
Mileage unknown · Feb 7, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
BECAUSE THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ON MY 2005 CAMRY LE ARE CLOSE TO EACH OTHER AND ENGAGE AT THE SAME LEVEL, IT IS ALL TOO EASY FOR A FOOT TO OVERLAP THE BRAKE PEDAL AND DEPRESS THE ACCELERATOR AND BRAKE AT THE SAME TIME. UNLESS I AM UNUSUALLY VIGILANT ABOUT MY FOOT POSITION, THIS CAN HAPPEN, AND THE CAR ACCELERA…
Read full complaint
BECAUSE THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ON MY 2005 CAMRY LE ARE CLOSE TO EACH OTHER AND ENGAGE AT THE SAME LEVEL, IT IS ALL TOO EASY FOR A FOOT TO OVERLAP THE BRAKE PEDAL AND DEPRESS THE ACCELERATOR AND BRAKE AT THE SAME TIME. UNLESS I AM UNUSUALLY VIGILANT ABOUT MY FOOT POSITION, THIS CAN HAPPEN, AND THE CAR ACCELERATES INSTEAD OF BRAKING. THIS HAS HAPPENED OFTEN, BOTH IN CITY AND HIGHWAY DRIVING. MY MECHANIC HAS TRIED HIS BEST TO RAISE THE LEVEL OF THE BRAKE PEDAL ENGAGEMENT, BUT WITHOUT SUCCESS; THERE IS NO BRAKE ADJUSTMENT ON THIS MODEL. MY TOYOTA DEALER SAYS, TOO, THAT THERE IS NO ADJUSTMENT POSSIBLE AND REFUSES TO MODIFY THE BRAKE PEDAL TO RAISE IT ABOVE THE ACCELERATOR LEVEL. THIS IS A DESIGN PROBLEM, BUT IT OCCURS TO ME THAT AT LEAST SOME OF THE INCIDENTS OF INADVERTENT ACCELERATION MAY BE DUE TO THIS FAULT. IF THE CAR ACCELERATES WHILE YOU ARE BRAKING, ONE INSTINCTIVELY PRESSES HARDER ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, WHICH ALSO FURTHER DEPRESSES THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL. THIS HAS NOT RESULTED IN AN ACCIDENT IN MY CASE. IT SEEMS LIKE THE SIMPLE ADDITION OF A THICKER PAD ON THE BRAKE PEDAL MIGHT CORRECT THE DEFECT. *TW
NHTSA ODI #10307164
38,335 miles · Feb 6, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH 3.0L V6 ENGINE. I RECENTLY BRAKED MY TOYOTA CAMRY ON THE STREET NEXT TO MY HOUSE, PARALLEL TO THE CURBING. THEN, I PUT THE VEHICLE IN REVERSE, MADE A 180 DEGREE TURN AND BACKED BETWEEN THE TWO LARGE BUSHES ON EITHER SIDE OF MY DRIVEWAY. I MUST BACK VERY SLOWLY INTO THE OPENING. AFTER I HAD THE VEHICLE …
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH 3.0L V6 ENGINE. I RECENTLY BRAKED MY TOYOTA CAMRY ON THE STREET NEXT TO MY HOUSE, PARALLEL TO THE CURBING. THEN, I PUT THE VEHICLE IN REVERSE, MADE A 180 DEGREE TURN AND BACKED BETWEEN THE TWO LARGE BUSHES ON EITHER SIDE OF MY DRIVEWAY. I MUST BACK VERY SLOWLY INTO THE OPENING. AFTER I HAD THE VEHICLE BETWEEN THE 2 BUSHES AT THE TOP OF THE DRIVEWAY, I BRAKED THE VEHICLE, STILL IN REVERSE, SO THAT I COULD STRAIGHTEN OUT AND PROCEED SLOWLY TO PARK NEXT TO MY HUSBAND'S TRUCK AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY. SUDDENLY, THE VEHICLE JOLTED AND I FOUND MYSELF PRACTICALLY FLYING BACKWARDS. THE VEHICLE WENT BACK ABOUT 25 FEET, THEN TOOK OUT OUR FENCE, AND HALF OF OUR 6 FOOT TRELLIS. HOWEVER, IT DID NOT STOP THERE. IT PRACTICALLY FLEW INTO OUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR'S YARD, DID A 180 BEHIND THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE, FINALLY STOPPING AT THE BOTTOM OF A HILL IN SOME SNOW TWO DOORS DOWN FROM MY HOUSE. DURING THIS TIME, I HAD NO CONTROL OVER THE VEHICLE. BECAUSE OF THE RECENT TOYOTA RECALLS, I THOUGHT I HAD PROGRAMMED MYSELF AS TO WHAT TO DO, IF MY VEHICLE WENT OUT OF CONTROL. HOWEVER, GOING IN REVERSE AT A HIGH SPEED IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. IT COMPLETELY DISORIENTED ME, SO THAT I DID NOT DROP THE VEHICLE INTO NUETRAL OR TURN OFF THE KEY. I HAVE BEEN BACKING INTO MY DRIVEWAY THE SAME WAY FOR 45 YEARS, AND NEVER EXPERIENCED ANY PROBLEM BECAUSE I DO SO AT SUCH A SLOW PACE. MY VEHICLE MUST HAVE GONE ABOUT 150 FEET BEFORE STOPPING, AND I FELT LIKE IT WAS POSSESSED. FORTUNATELY, NO ONE WAS INJURED, BUT THERE IS $5,000 WORTH OF DAMAGE TO MY VEHICLE. AFTER READING ABOUT SIMILAR EXPERIENCES ON YOUR SITE, I TRULY FEEL THE 2005 CAMRY SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. I DO NOT FEEL THAT I COULD TRUST IT AGAIN. *CN
NHTSA ODI #10307020
48,000 miles · Feb 5, 2010
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control
CONSTANT "JUMPING" AT STOPLIGHTS. I ALWAYS HAVE TO CHECK TO SEE IF SOMEONE HAS BUMPED INTO ME FROM BEHIND. THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING PROBLEM SINCE I PURCHASED THE CAR IN 2005. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10306827
65,000 miles · Feb 4, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY GAS PEDAL STICKS WHILE ON AT A CONSTANT RATE OF HIGH SPEED (FREEWAY). WHILE DEPRESSING THE PEDAL IT WOULD RACHET AND STICK BEFORE RETURNING TO A NORMAL POSITION. MY WIFE AND I HAVE HAD OUR 05 CAMRY AND THIS WOULD OCCUR AT LEAST TWICE A YEAR. WE BELIEVE THAT OUR 2005 CAMRY SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE RECALL BY …
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY GAS PEDAL STICKS WHILE ON AT A CONSTANT RATE OF HIGH SPEED (FREEWAY). WHILE DEPRESSING THE PEDAL IT WOULD RACHET AND STICK BEFORE RETURNING TO A NORMAL POSITION. MY WIFE AND I HAVE HAD OUR 05 CAMRY AND THIS WOULD OCCUR AT LEAST TWICE A YEAR. WE BELIEVE THAT OUR 2005 CAMRY SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE RECALL BY TOYOTA, WHICH IT IS NOT, AT THIS TIME. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10306039
5 miles · Feb 4, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I OWN A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE V6, PURCHASED FROM KOONS TYSONS TOYOTA, VA IN AUGUST 2004. WHILE DRIVING HOME THE CAR GAVE ME A FEELING OF AN IMMINENT STALL AS I WOULD PRESS THE GAS PEDAL FROM A DEAD STOP, AFTER COASTING AND UPON TRYING TO ACCELERATE TO CHANGE LANES. I HAD AN OCCASION TO GO BACK TO THE DEALER TO PICK UP SOME ACCE…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE V6, PURCHASED FROM KOONS TYSONS TOYOTA, VA IN AUGUST 2004. WHILE DRIVING HOME THE CAR GAVE ME A FEELING OF AN IMMINENT STALL AS I WOULD PRESS THE GAS PEDAL FROM A DEAD STOP, AFTER COASTING AND UPON TRYING TO ACCELERATE TO CHANGE LANES. I HAD AN OCCASION TO GO BACK TO THE DEALER TO PICK UP SOME ACCESSORIES THAT I WAS MISSING INITIALLY. I BROUGHT MY DRIVING EXPERIENCE TO THE ATTENTION OF THE SALESPERSON WHO IN TURN ASKED A SERVICE TECHNICIAN. THE EXPLANATION I WAS GIVEN WAS THAT 'THIS YEAR MODEL CAR DOES NOT HAVE A LINKAGE CABLE BUT A SENSOR AT THE GAS PEDAL; UPON DEPRESSING THE PEDAL, IT SENDS A SIGNAL TO THE COMPUTER AND THE COMPUTER DOES ALL THE REST, HENCE THE HESITATION IS NORMAL'. THE DRIVING EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN THE SAME FOR MY WIFE AND SON. THEY ARE SCARED TO DRIVE THIS CAR! IN JANUARY 2005 THE CAR WAS AT LAUREL TOYOTA IN LAUREL, MD FOR OIL SERVICE AND I MENTIONED MY CONCERN TO THE SERVICE ADVISOR WHO IN TURN GOT ME A SIMILAR EXPLANATION AS STATED ABOVE FROM HIS TECHNICIAN. I SUBSEQUENTLY CALLED TOYOTA NATIONAL CUSTOMER RELATIONS WHO TOLD ME THAT SOMEONE WILL CALL ME FROM KOONS TYSONS TOYOTA AND THEY GAVE ME CASE #. I HAD A CALL FROM MR. A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE DEALERSHIP AND HE ASKED ME TO BRING THE CAR IN TODAY AT 10 A.M. TO BE SEEN BY HIS TECHNICIAN. THE CAR WAS TEST DRIVEN BY MR. MELVIN BEAVERS WHO AGREED WITH ME THAT THERE IS HESITATION AS YOU PRESS THE GAS PEDAL AND HE OFFERED THAT OTHER OWNERS OF THE SAME YEAR MODEL CAR HAVE COMPLAINED OF THIS PROBLEM AS WELL. HIS EXPLANATION HOWEVER WAS THE SAME REGARDING THE REDESIGN THAT ELIMINATED THE ACCELERATOR LINKAGE CABLE AND THAT THE BEHAVIOR IS TYPICAL AND NORMAL FOR THIS YEAR'S MODEL? THIS IS DANGEROUS AND UNACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR OF THE CAR IN CASE OF A LANE CHANGE OR ANY OTHER SUDDEN ACCELERATION SIITUATION! I WOULD LIKE TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, USA TO ADDRESS AND REMEDY THIS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS DESIGN FLAW. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10305778
38,000 miles · Feb 4, 2010
Fuel System, GasolineVehicle Speed Control
ACCELERATOR STUCK AND CAR ADVANCED. SIGNIFICANT DAMAGED AVOIDED BY SWERVING AUTO TO MISS HOUSE & GO THROUGH LANDSCAPING. CAR TAKEN INTO REPAIR SHOP NEXT DAY & NOTHING FOUND. CONTACTED TOYOTA & NO HELP AT THAT TIME. THEREFORE, NO CORRECTIVE ACTION. RUGS WERE NOT AN ISSUE. THIS YEAR & MODEL IS NOT PART OF THE RECALL BUT I BELIE…
Read full complaint
ACCELERATOR STUCK AND CAR ADVANCED. SIGNIFICANT DAMAGED AVOIDED BY SWERVING AUTO TO MISS HOUSE & GO THROUGH LANDSCAPING. CAR TAKEN INTO REPAIR SHOP NEXT DAY & NOTHING FOUND. CONTACTED TOYOTA & NO HELP AT THAT TIME. THEREFORE, NO CORRECTIVE ACTION. RUGS WERE NOT AN ISSUE. THIS YEAR & MODEL IS NOT PART OF THE RECALL BUT I BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10305673
29,363 miles · Feb 4, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 20 MPH, THE VEHICLE WAS BEGAN COASTING ALTHOUGH THE ENGINE WAS RUNNING THE VEHICLE RESPONDED NORMALLY WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS ENGAGED. WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO STOP THE VEHICLE, HE NOTICED THE HESITATION AND SUDDENLY THE VEHICLE WOULD ACCELERATE RAPIDLY. THE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 20 MPH, THE VEHICLE WAS BEGAN COASTING ALTHOUGH THE ENGINE WAS RUNNING THE VEHICLE RESPONDED NORMALLY WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS ENGAGED. WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO STOP THE VEHICLE, HE NOTICED THE HESITATION AND SUDDENLY THE VEHICLE WOULD ACCELERATE RAPIDLY. THE FAILURE OCCURRED THREE TIMES AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT. A LOCAL MECHANIC STATED THAT THE THROTTLE POSITION SENSOR WAS OUT OF RANGE AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE SENSOR WAS REPLACE AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE. SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED THERE WAS MINIMAL HESITATION WHEN THE VEHICLE IS DRIVEN AT LOW SPEEDS. HE HAS NOT CALLED THE MANUFACTURER. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 33,000. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 29,363.
NHTSA ODI #10305635
Mileage unknown · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT HAS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THEY HAVE EXPERIENCED THE ACCELERATION PROBLEM SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED. THE CALLER STATED THAT THE ACCELERATION PROBLEM WAS NOT BAD UNTIL THE SURGE THEY HAD ON NOVEMBER 19, 2009. THE VEHICLE SURGE FORWARD AND THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO ANOTHER CAR. THE FAIL…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT HAS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THEY HAVE EXPERIENCED THE ACCELERATION PROBLEM SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED. THE CALLER STATED THAT THE ACCELERATION PROBLEM WAS NOT BAD UNTIL THE SURGE THEY HAD ON NOVEMBER 19, 2009. THE VEHICLE SURGE FORWARD AND THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO ANOTHER CAR. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN.
NHTSA ODI #10304577
32,000 miles · Feb 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
ON AUGUST 30, 2009, I WAS BACKING OUT OF MY DAUGHTER'S DRIVEWAY, WHEN THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. I WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WITH THE BRAKES. THE CAR SWERVED ONTO MY DAUGHTER'S FRONT LAWN AND PROPELLED ITSELF ONTO HER NEIGHBOR'S LAWN, WHERE IT WEDGED BETWEEN 2 TRESS. THE TIRES CONTINUED TO SPIN WHEN I WAS WEDGED AND SOME…
Read full complaint
ON AUGUST 30, 2009, I WAS BACKING OUT OF MY DAUGHTER'S DRIVEWAY, WHEN THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. I WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WITH THE BRAKES. THE CAR SWERVED ONTO MY DAUGHTER'S FRONT LAWN AND PROPELLED ITSELF ONTO HER NEIGHBOR'S LAWN, WHERE IT WEDGED BETWEEN 2 TRESS. THE TIRES CONTINUED TO SPIN WHEN I WAS WEDGED AND SOMEONE LEANED INTO THE CAR AND TURNED THE IGNITION OFF. I HAVE WITNESSES TO THE ACCIDENT. THE CAR WAS REPAIRED AT SUBURBAN TOYOTA-SCION IN TROY, MI. THIS CAR IS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10304289
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