NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
721 reports45,000 miles · Mar 14, 2014
Steering
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED HE HEARD A KNOCKING SOUND COMING FROM THE STEERING COLUMN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE DEALER STATED THE ENTIRE STEERING COLUMN WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURE WAS NOT ALERTED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 45,000. THE CUR…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED HE HEARD A KNOCKING SOUND COMING FROM THE STEERING COLUMN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE DEALER STATED THE ENTIRE STEERING COLUMN WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURE WAS NOT ALERTED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 45,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 76,207.
NHTSA ODI #10569395
Mileage unknown · Feb 28, 2014
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPOT AT WAL-MART CAR SURGED AND I HAD TO SLAM ON THE BRAKE. MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE WHEN BACKING UP AND I TURNED AROUND TO GO FORWARD WHEN CAR WAS STILL BACKING UP SO I SLAMMED ON THE BRAKE. OF COURSE I PANICKED AND COULD NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS HAPPENING. THE CAR WAS MOVING BACKWARD AND MY FOOT WA…
Read full complaint
BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPOT AT WAL-MART CAR SURGED AND I HAD TO SLAM ON THE BRAKE. MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE WHEN BACKING UP AND I TURNED AROUND TO GO FORWARD WHEN CAR WAS STILL BACKING UP SO I SLAMMED ON THE BRAKE. OF COURSE I PANICKED AND COULD NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS HAPPENING. THE CAR WAS MOVING BACKWARD AND MY FOOT WAS NOT ON THE GAS. THIS WAS THE SECOND TIME THE SAME THING HAPPENED IN OCTOBER WHILE BACKING UP. IT ALSO HAD SURGE FORWARD BEFORE AFTER GOING BACK AND FORTH OUT OF A PARKING SPACE. I STILL HAVE THE DENT ON THE FRONT BUMPER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10566500
Mileage unknown · Feb 26, 2014
Electrical SystemEngineEquipment
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE ENGINE BEING DEFECTIVE. *SMD THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. A DIAGNOSIS REVEALED WATER WAS IN THE ENGINE AND IT WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $1,858.33 THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED, THE HEADS COULD NOT BE REMOVED, BECAUSE OF AN ENGINE DEFECT. THE SCREWS ON T…
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE ENGINE BEING DEFECTIVE. *SMD THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. A DIAGNOSIS REVEALED WATER WAS IN THE ENGINE AND IT WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $1,858.33 THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED, THE HEADS COULD NOT BE REMOVED, BECAUSE OF AN ENGINE DEFECT. THE SCREWS ON THE MANIFOLD OR HEADS WERE COMING LOOSE AND THAT'S HOW WATER ENTERED THE ENGINE, AND THE HEAD GASKET HAD BLOWN. THE CONSUMER STATED ABOUT A MONTH AGO, SHE STARTED HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE VEHICLE. SHE WAS INFORMED THE IGNITION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. ALSO, THE WATER PUMP, AND ALTERNATOR WERE REPLACED. THE AIR COMPRESSOR AND HEATER SENSOR ELEMENT FAILED. *JB UPDATED 05/12/14. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10566142
Mileage unknown · Feb 6, 2014
SteeringSuspension
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO HEARING NOISE FROM REAR DRIVERS SIDE OF VEHICLE AND DEALERSHIP MECHANIC REPAIRED BROKEN STRUT BUT NOISE CONTINUED. *SMD WHEN THE CONSUMER RETURNED TO THE DEALER, AND INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED, WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED THE STRUT WAS BROKEN. THE CONSUMER CONTINUED TO HEAR THE NOISE…
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO HEARING NOISE FROM REAR DRIVERS SIDE OF VEHICLE AND DEALERSHIP MECHANIC REPAIRED BROKEN STRUT BUT NOISE CONTINUED. *SMD WHEN THE CONSUMER RETURNED TO THE DEALER, AND INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED, WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED THE STRUT WAS BROKEN. THE CONSUMER CONTINUED TO HEAR THE NOISE, SO HE RETURNED TO THE DEALER, WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED AGAIN. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THE NOISE WAS COMING FROM THE STEERING COLUMN INTERMEDIATE SHAFT. THE CONSUMER DID NOT BELIEVE THE NOISE WAS COMING FROM THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT.
NHTSA ODI #10563079
166,000 miles · Feb 3, 2014
Service Brakes, HydraulicSteeringSuspension
WHEN I TOOK MY CAR FOR A TEST RIDE AT DEALER I NOTICED THAT THE WHEEL SHOOK AND TOLD THE SALESMAN IT NEEDED TO BE FIXED IF I PURCHASED THE CAR, HE WAS CERTAIN IT WAS JUST A TIRE BALANCING ISSUE AND IT WOULDN'T COST MUCH TO FIX. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK THE CAR TO LESS SCHWAB WHO COULD NOT FIGURE OUT WHAT COULD POSSIBLE BE WRONG SO WE…
Read full complaint
WHEN I TOOK MY CAR FOR A TEST RIDE AT DEALER I NOTICED THAT THE WHEEL SHOOK AND TOLD THE SALESMAN IT NEEDED TO BE FIXED IF I PURCHASED THE CAR, HE WAS CERTAIN IT WAS JUST A TIRE BALANCING ISSUE AND IT WOULDN'T COST MUCH TO FIX. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK THE CAR TO LESS SCHWAB WHO COULD NOT FIGURE OUT WHAT COULD POSSIBLE BE WRONG SO WE PUT NEW TIRES ON, STILL SHOOK, THEN HAD WHEELS BALANCED AND ALIGNED SEVERAL TIMES IN FIRST WEEK OF HAVING CAR, THEN REPLACED MOTOR MOUNTS, THEN STRUTS, STILL SHOOK, THEN REPLACED BRAKE PADS, ROTORS, YUP STILL SHAKES. I TOOK IT BACK TO THE DEALER AND THEY STILL SWEAR IT'S JUST A BALANCING ISSUE SO THEY BALANCED THE TIRES, CAR STILL SHAKES VIOLENTLY. I HAVE NOW OWNED THIS CAR FOR 1 YR AND TRIED EVERYTHING POSSIBLE, NOW I FIND OUT IT MAY BE THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE IN THIS CAR I HAVE TWO SMALL CHILDREN AND I'M AFRAID THIS ISSUE MAY CAUSE AN ACCIDENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10562777
6,158 miles · Jan 22, 2014
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
I WAS BACKING UP ON GRASS WHEN THE CAR ACCELERATED BACKWARDS. I PANICKED BECAUSE I THOUGHT I HAD MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND THEN I WAS CONFUSED REACHING FOR THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THEN GAS PEDAL. MY FOOT WAS GOING BACK AND FORTH. I SLAMMED ON THE BRAKE TO STOP BUT HIT A FENCE POLE DESTROYED BUMPER. THE CAR SEEMED TO BE MOVING ON …
Read full complaint
I WAS BACKING UP ON GRASS WHEN THE CAR ACCELERATED BACKWARDS. I PANICKED BECAUSE I THOUGHT I HAD MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND THEN I WAS CONFUSED REACHING FOR THE BRAKE PEDAL AND THEN GAS PEDAL. MY FOOT WAS GOING BACK AND FORTH. I SLAMMED ON THE BRAKE TO STOP BUT HIT A FENCE POLE DESTROYED BUMPER. THE CAR SEEMED TO BE MOVING ON ITS OWN AND I MAY HAVE HIT THE GAS PEDAL BY ACCIDENT THEN SLAMMED ON THE BRAKE. NO ONE WAS HURT BUT SHOOK UP. IT HAPPENED AGAIN ON DECEMBER 18, 2013. I WAS BACKING UP AGAIN IN WAL-MARTS PARKING LOT AND FOR SOME REASON IT ACCELERATED AGAIN AND I REMEMBER SAYING NOT AGAIN. THAT TIME I KNOW MY RIGHT FOOT WAS NOT ON THE GAS PEDAL AT ALL. I PANICKED AGAIN AND SLAMMED ON THE BRAKE HITTING ANOTHER VEHICLE BEHIND ME. THIS CAR JERKS A LOT AND IT HAD ACCELERATED GOING FORWARD TWICE, ONCE IN A PARKING GARAGE AND DAMAGED MY FRONT BUMPER, THEN AGAIN I ALMOST WENT OVER THE RAIL ROAD TRACKS PARKING BY A BUSINESS. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE IN THIS CAR. TOYOTA IS INVESTIGATING MY CLAIM NO.[XXX]. INVESTIGATOR WILL LOOK AT MY CAR NEXT WEEK. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)*TR
NHTSA ODI #10560998
57,000 miles · Jan 4, 2014
SteeringSuspension
A CONSISTENT GRINDING/KNOCKING/CLUNKING SOUND STARTED COMING FROM THE STEERING WHEEL WHILE STEERING AT LOW SPEEDS (0-30 MPH). ALSO, THE STEERING WHEEL FELT LOOSER THAN NORMAL AT ALL SPEEDS (0-65MPH). THE SERVICE ADVISER AT THE DEALERSHIP INFORMED ME THAT THIS WAS A COMMON ISSUE WITH A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY, AND THAT THE INTERMEDIA…
Read full complaint
A CONSISTENT GRINDING/KNOCKING/CLUNKING SOUND STARTED COMING FROM THE STEERING WHEEL WHILE STEERING AT LOW SPEEDS (0-30 MPH). ALSO, THE STEERING WHEEL FELT LOOSER THAN NORMAL AT ALL SPEEDS (0-65MPH). THE SERVICE ADVISER AT THE DEALERSHIP INFORMED ME THAT THIS WAS A COMMON ISSUE WITH A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY, AND THAT THE INTERMEDIATE STEERING SHAFT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. HOWEVER, SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS OUT OF WARRANTY, I HAD TO COVER THE ~$660 COST. A GOOGLE SEARCH REVEALS SEVERAL SIMILAR ISSUES WITH OTHER LATE MODEL CAMRYS. TOYOTA HAS A TSB T-SB-0296-08 TO "GREASE" THE STEERING SHAFT FOR THE NOISE. HOWEVER, BOTH THE DEALERSHIP, AS WELL AS A GOOGLE SEARCH REVEALED THAT THE GREASE FIX WOULD BE TEMPORARY, AND DOES NOT LAST. THE DEALERSHIP ALSO INFORMED ME THAT THE NEWER REPLACEMENT STEERING SHAFTS ARE BETTER DESIGNED, ARE COMPLETELY SEALED, AND CANNOT BE GREASED. SINCE A TSB IS OUT, IT LOOKS LIKE TOYOTA IS AWARE OF THIS SAFETY ISSUE. HOWEVER, NO RECALL HAS BEEN MADE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10558427
10,941 miles · Jan 4, 2014
Air Bags
THE PASSENGER AIRBAG STAYS OFF FOR A SMALLER ADULT IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. (~95LBS). ACCORDING TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT AT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, THIS IS NORMAL, AND THAT THE ADULT MAY NEED TO PUT ON WEIGHT. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE PASSENGER AIRBAG INDICATOR SHOULD TURN ON AND OFF INTERMITTENTLY, OR STAY OFF WITH AN ADULT SEAT…
Read full complaint
THE PASSENGER AIRBAG STAYS OFF FOR A SMALLER ADULT IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. (~95LBS). ACCORDING TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT AT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, THIS IS NORMAL, AND THAT THE ADULT MAY NEED TO PUT ON WEIGHT. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE PASSENGER AIRBAG INDICATOR SHOULD TURN ON AND OFF INTERMITTENTLY, OR STAY OFF WITH AN ADULT SEATED IN THE PASSENGER SEAT. THE PASSENGER IS SEATED CORRECTLY. PROBLEM CONTINUES TO PERSIST FOR ADULTS UNDER 95LBS. THE INCIDENT WAS REPORTED TO THE DEALERSHIP AS WELL AS TOYOTA. APPARENTLY, TOYOTA NOW HAS A TSB OUT - TSB EL005-05 TO CORRECT THIS SAFETY ISSUE. HOWEVER, SINCE THE VEHICLE IS OUT OF WARRANTY AND THERE HAS BEEN NO RECALL, THE ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED IN THE VEHICLE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10558425
60,000 miles · Dec 18, 2013
Air BagsCrashInjury
[XXX] WAS STOPPED AT AN EXIT RAMP ON A FREEWAY IN HIS 2005 CAMRY. HE WAS REAR ENDED BY ANOTHER VEHICLE AT APPROXIMATELY 55-60 MPH, CAUSING [XXX] CAR TO HIT A GUARD RAIL. BOTH CARS WERE TOTALED AND SUSTAINED MAJOR DAMAGE. [XXX] AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY, DESPITE THE FACT HIS VEHICLE SUSTAINED LARGE IMPACTS TO BOTH THE FRONT AND …
Read full complaint
[XXX] WAS STOPPED AT AN EXIT RAMP ON A FREEWAY IN HIS 2005 CAMRY. HE WAS REAR ENDED BY ANOTHER VEHICLE AT APPROXIMATELY 55-60 MPH, CAUSING [XXX] CAR TO HIT A GUARD RAIL. BOTH CARS WERE TOTALED AND SUSTAINED MAJOR DAMAGE. [XXX] AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY, DESPITE THE FACT HIS VEHICLE SUSTAINED LARGE IMPACTS TO BOTH THE FRONT AND BACK OF HIS CAR. [XXX] HIT HIS HEAD AND SUSTAINED HEAD INJURIES (IN ADDITION TO OTHER INJURIES) AS A RESULT OF THE IMPACT AND FAILURE OF THE AIR BAGS TO DEPLOY. I AM SUBMITTING THIS FORM ON BEHALF OF [XXX] AS HIS ATTORNEY. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NHTSA ODI #10556574
205,000 miles · Dec 17, 2013
Air BagsPower TrainCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS SITTING IDLE WHEN ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS THROWN FORWARD, CAUSING THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER VEHICLE AND INTO A WALL. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONTAC…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS SITTING IDLE WHEN ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE REAR DRIVER'S SIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS THROWN FORWARD, CAUSING THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO THE REAR OF ANOTHER VEHICLE AND INTO A WALL. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED NECK AND HEAD INJURIES AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED AND THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THERE WERE NO FURTHER INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE INCIDENT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 205,000. UPDATED 02/19/14*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD INTERMITTENTLY NOT BE ABLE TO SHIFT OUT OF PARK. UPDATED 2/20/2013 *JS
NHTSA ODI #10556430
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