NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
721 reports46,000 miles · Sep 30, 2011
Steering
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS A CLUNCKING SOUND COMING FROM THE STEERING AREA. THE DEALER DIAGNOSED THAT THE STEERING COLUMN WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER DENIED ANY ASSISTANCE WITH REPAIR TO THE DEFECT. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS A CLUNCKING SOUND COMING FROM THE STEERING AREA. THE DEALER DIAGNOSED THAT THE STEERING COLUMN WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER DENIED ANY ASSISTANCE WITH REPAIR TO THE DEFECT. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 46,000.
NHTSA ODI #10428048
67,717 miles · Sep 27, 2011
Steering
THERE IS A CLUNK, POP, OR KNOCK TYPE NOISE WHEN TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL LEFT OR RIGHT. THERE IS A TSB ISSUED ABOUT THIS AND TOYOTA REFUSES TO FIX IT,SAID THE WARRANTY IS OFF. THE INTRODUCTION, WARRANTY INFORMATION, PARTS INFORMATION, AND REPAIR PROCEDURE SECTIONS HAVE BEEN UPDATED TO REFLECT REMOVAL, LUBRICATION, AND REINST…
Read full complaint
THERE IS A CLUNK, POP, OR KNOCK TYPE NOISE WHEN TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL LEFT OR RIGHT. THERE IS A TSB ISSUED ABOUT THIS AND TOYOTA REFUSES TO FIX IT,SAID THE WARRANTY IS OFF. THE INTRODUCTION, WARRANTY INFORMATION, PARTS INFORMATION, AND REPAIR PROCEDURE SECTIONS HAVE BEEN UPDATED TO REFLECT REMOVAL, LUBRICATION, AND REINSTALLATION OF THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT INSTEAD OF REPLACEMENT. APPLICABLE WARRANTY ' THIS REPAIR IS COVERED UNDER THE TOYOTA COMPREHENSIVE WARRANTY. THIS WARRANTY IS IN EFFECT FOR 36 MONTHS OR 36,000 MILES, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST, FROM THE VEHICLE''S IN-SERVICE DATE. ' WARRANTY APPLICATION *TT
NHTSA ODI #10427647
114,000 miles · Sep 21, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
MY 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY IS LEAKING COOLANT. I DISCOVERED THERE HAS BEEN A LONG TERM PROBLEM WITH STRIPPED ENGINE BOLTS IN TOYOTAS, RESULTING IN LEAKING COOLANT AND THE NEED TO REPLACE THE ENGINE BLOCK. THIS HAS HAPPENED IN 2002-2006 CAMRYS AND HIGHLANDERS CAUSING WIDESPREAD COMPLAINTS BUT NO ACTION FROM TOYOTA. THEY MADE A DEFECT…
Read full complaint
MY 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY IS LEAKING COOLANT. I DISCOVERED THERE HAS BEEN A LONG TERM PROBLEM WITH STRIPPED ENGINE BOLTS IN TOYOTAS, RESULTING IN LEAKING COOLANT AND THE NEED TO REPLACE THE ENGINE BLOCK. THIS HAS HAPPENED IN 2002-2006 CAMRYS AND HIGHLANDERS CAUSING WIDESPREAD COMPLAINTS BUT NO ACTION FROM TOYOTA. THEY MADE A DEFECTIVE PRODUCT AND REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT, PUTTING THE BURDEN BACK ON THE CONSUMER. IT'S TIME TOYOTA STEPPED UP AND RECALLED THESE CARS, MADE THE FIX AND ACKNOWLEDGED THEIR ERROR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10426672
53,000 miles · Sep 15, 2011
Engine And Engine CoolingVehicle Speed Control
MY 2005 CAMRY HAS 53000 ON IT, VERY WELL MAINTAINED. WAS DRIVING 25 MPH ON A TRAVERSE WHEN THE ENGINE SUDDENLY DIED. I TRIED TO RESTART THE CAR WITHOUT SUCCESS. CALLED A TOWING SERVICE, HOWEVER, 10 MINUTES LATER I WAS ABLE TO START THE CAR AND DROVE HOME. THE "SERVICE ENGINE" LIGHT REMAINED ON. AT FIRST CHANCE I DROVE MY CA…
Read full complaint
MY 2005 CAMRY HAS 53000 ON IT, VERY WELL MAINTAINED. WAS DRIVING 25 MPH ON A TRAVERSE WHEN THE ENGINE SUDDENLY DIED. I TRIED TO RESTART THE CAR WITHOUT SUCCESS. CALLED A TOWING SERVICE, HOWEVER, 10 MINUTES LATER I WAS ABLE TO START THE CAR AND DROVE HOME. THE "SERVICE ENGINE" LIGHT REMAINED ON. AT FIRST CHANCE I DROVE MY CAR TO MY LOCAL MECHANIC WHO TOLD ME IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY, BUT SUGGESTED TO BRING MY CAR TO THE TOYOTA DEALER BECAUSE HE HAD SEEN SO MANY OF CAMRY THROTTLE MALFUNCTIONS THAT HE THOUGHT THERE MIGHT BE A RECALL. I TOOK HIS ADVICE, BROUGHT IT TO THE DEALER WHO CONFIRMED THAT MY THROTTLE BODY WAS BAD AND NEEDED REPLACING. HOWEVER HE TOLD ME THAT HE COULD NOT GUARANTEE THAT THE "SERVICE ENGINE" LIGHT WOULD NOT GO OFF UNLESS I HAD AN ENGINE FLUSH AND A FULL TUNE-UP. THIS DID NOT SIT WELL WITH ME, SO I DECLINED THE SERVICES. I PAID HIM $100 AS A DIAGNOSTIC FEE. WHEN HE WENT TO GET MY CAR, THE ENGINE WOULD NOT TURN ON AT ALL. I CALLED A TOWING COMPANY WHO TOOK IT BACK TO MY MECHANIC. HE REPLACED THE THROTTLE AND RESET THE SERVICE LIGHT. THE CAR IS NOW RUNNING, BUT BECAUSE OF MY MECHANIC'S STATEMENT AND MANY SIMILAR THROTTLE COMPLAINTS RECORDED ON THE INTERNET, I STRONGLY FEEL THAT THE THROTTLE ISSUE SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED. *KB
NHTSA ODI #10425602
99,000 miles · Sep 4, 2011
Fuel System, GasolineVehicle Speed Control
WIFE WAS RETURNING FROM WORK WHEN 2005 CAMRY DECELERATED FROM 50 MPH TO ALMOST DYING. WHEN RESTARTED, CAR WOULD ONLY DRIVE 20 MPH FOR THE 13 MILE TRIP HOME. LUCKILY, AS THE CAR ALMOST DIED, THE VEHICLES BEHIND WERE ABLE TO BRAKE AND ALLOW HER TO PULL INTO A DRIVEWAY. THROTTLE BODY WAS REPLACED. NO "SERVICE ENGINE" LIGHTS GAVE AN…
Read full complaint
WIFE WAS RETURNING FROM WORK WHEN 2005 CAMRY DECELERATED FROM 50 MPH TO ALMOST DYING. WHEN RESTARTED, CAR WOULD ONLY DRIVE 20 MPH FOR THE 13 MILE TRIP HOME. LUCKILY, AS THE CAR ALMOST DIED, THE VEHICLES BEHIND WERE ABLE TO BRAKE AND ALLOW HER TO PULL INTO A DRIVEWAY. THROTTLE BODY WAS REPLACED. NO "SERVICE ENGINE" LIGHTS GAVE ANY ADVANCED WARNING TO THE SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10423252
137,000 miles · Aug 10, 2011
Electrical SystemService Brakes, HydraulicCrashFireInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, HE NOTICED A BURNING ODOR. ANOTHER DRIVER NOTICED FLAMES COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD ON THE PASSENGER SIDE AND ALERTED THE CONTACT. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO STOP THE VEHICLE, BUT THE BRAKES WOULD NOT RESPOND AFTER DEPRESSING THE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, HE NOTICED A BURNING ODOR. ANOTHER DRIVER NOTICED FLAMES COMING FROM UNDER THE HOOD ON THE PASSENGER SIDE AND ALERTED THE CONTACT. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO STOP THE VEHICLE, BUT THE BRAKES WOULD NOT RESPOND AFTER DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL CONTINUOUSLY. THE CONTACT JUMPED OUT OF THE VEHICLE AND THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP WHEN IT CRASHED INTO THE DIVIDER ON THE ROAD. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED SEVERE SCRAPES TO HER LEFT FOOT, LEGS, AND ARMS. THE CONTACT WAS THEN TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL FOR TREATMENT. AFTER BEING RELEASED, THE CONTACT SUFFERED MUSCLE SPASMS AND WAS RUSHED BACK TO THE HOSPITAL FOR FURTHER TREATMENT. THE FIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS REPORTED TO THE SCENE AND REPORTS WERE FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A JUNK YARD WHERE THE INSURANCE COMPANY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND DETERMINED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND SENT AN INSPECTOR TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE WAS UNDETERMINED, BUT THE REPRESENTATIVE STATED THAT THERE WAS CORROSION FOUND ON THE AIR CONDITIONER HOSE. THE MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT SUPPLY THE CUSTOMER WITH THE INVESTIGATION REPORT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 137,000.
NHTSA ODI #10418395
124,000 miles · Jul 22, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT GRAY SMOKE BEGAN EMITTING FROM THE EXHAUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE ENGINE WOULD NEED REPLACING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT GRAY SMOKE BEGAN EMITTING FROM THE EXHAUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE ENGINE WOULD NEED REPLACING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 124,000.
NHTSA ODI #10414762
86,258 miles · Jul 20, 2011
Engine And Engine Cooling
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY 4CYL. ENGINE STOPS WITHOUT WARNING. NO ERROR CODE IN COMPUTER. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS FAULT SINCE YOU LOSE ALL POWER FUNCTIONS. STEERING, BRAKES ETC. COULD LEAD TO BEING REAR ENDED. *KB
NHTSA ODI #10413791
56,000 miles · Jul 12, 2011
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO DECELERATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIANS ADVISED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND A COMPLAINT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE APP…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO DECELERATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIANS ADVISED THAT THE THROTTLE BODY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND A COMPLAINT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 56,000.
NHTSA ODI #10411947
78,550 miles · Jul 10, 2011
Vehicle Speed Control
I HAVE BEEN AN EXTREMELY SAFE DRIVER FOR 21 YEARS. TWO INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED ACCELERATION OCCURRED WITHIN ONE HOUR YESTERDAY AFTERNOON WITH MY 2005 CAMRY 2005 LE. UNTIL THIS TIME, THE CAR BEHAVED AND DROVE PERFECTLY FOR 6 YEARS. *TR IT WAS A DRY AND HOT (93F) DAY, AND THE ROAD CONDITION WAS PERFECT IN BOTH CASES. THE FIRS…
Read full complaint
I HAVE BEEN AN EXTREMELY SAFE DRIVER FOR 21 YEARS. TWO INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED ACCELERATION OCCURRED WITHIN ONE HOUR YESTERDAY AFTERNOON WITH MY 2005 CAMRY 2005 LE. UNTIL THIS TIME, THE CAR BEHAVED AND DROVE PERFECTLY FOR 6 YEARS. *TR IT WAS A DRY AND HOT (93F) DAY, AND THE ROAD CONDITION WAS PERFECT IN BOTH CASES. THE FIRST TIME WAS DURING A 30-MPH CRUISING ALONG A SIDE STREET WHEN THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED BY ITSELF AND JERKED TOWARD ONE SIDE. I IMMEDIATELY CORRECTED THE PROBLEM BY BRAKING AND STEERING. THE SECOND TIME WAS AT A STOP SIGN ON A SIDE STREET. I WAS WAITING FOR THE OTHER CAR TO PASS BEFORE I COULD TURN LEFT WHEN THE CAR SUDDENLY TRIED TO ACCELERATED BY ITSELF EVEN THOUGH MY FOOT WAS FIRMLY PRESSING THE BRAKE. DURING THIS BRIEF STRUGGLE BETWEEN ME AND THE CAR, THE ENGINE MADE SOME LOW, GRINDING NOISE, AND THE CAR WAS ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD TWICE, ABOUT 6 INCHES EACH TIME, DESPITE MY HARD FOOT BRAKING. NO ACCIDENT WAS RESULTED IN EITHER CASE. I REPORTED THESE TWO INCIDENTS TO TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE IMMEDIATELY AND WAS DIRECTED TO A LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP FOR INVESTIGATION. THE CAR IS CURRENTLY BEING EXAMINED BY A LOCAL DEALER FOR POTENTIAL CAUSES. I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE THIS CAR IF THE DEFECT IS NOT REPAIRED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10411645
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