← New search

2006 Toyota Corolla

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Corolla years

Owner complaints for the 2006 Toyota Corolla are substantially higher than the model-year median of 129.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

446 reports with mileage · 393 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Air Bags. Review the 453 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 104 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 85 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

115 crash reports8 fire reports68 injury reports

Electrical System complaints

85 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Jan 26, 2015
Air BagsElectrical System

MY 2006 TOYOTA COROLLA HORN JUST STOPPED WORKING ONE DAY FOR NO APPARENT REASON. I TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE AIRBAG WAS FAULTY AND IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. I ASSUMED THAT IT (THE AIRBAG) WOULD BE REPLACED AT TOYOTA'S EXPENSE, BECAUSE OF THERE MANY AIRBAG RECALLS. THIS WAS NOT THE CASE, TO…

Read full complaint

MY 2006 TOYOTA COROLLA HORN JUST STOPPED WORKING ONE DAY FOR NO APPARENT REASON. I TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE AIRBAG WAS FAULTY AND IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. I ASSUMED THAT IT (THE AIRBAG) WOULD BE REPLACED AT TOYOTA'S EXPENSE, BECAUSE OF THERE MANY AIRBAG RECALLS. THIS WAS NOT THE CASE, TOYOTA IS CLAIMING THAT MY VEHICLE IS NOT ON THE AIRBAG RECALL LIST. SO, I CONTACTED TOYOTA CORPORATE OFFICE AND OF COURSE I RECEIVED THE "SORRY WE CAN'T HELP YOU STATEMENT"! THIS IS NOT A WEAR AND TEAR ITEM, SO HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT TOYOTA GET TO CHOOSE WHAT AIRBAGS SHOULD BE ON THERE RECALL LIST? BEWARE ALL TOYOTA OWNERS!!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10679034

66,737 miles · Oct 7, 2014
Electrical SystemEngine

I WAS DRIVING MY CAR HOME FROM WORK. SUDDENLY THE CAR WON'T MOVE FORWARD AND ON THE DASHBOARD ALL THE LIGHTS KEEPS LIGHT UP AND BLINKING AND THE CAR GRADUALLY DIED ON THE ROAD. IT'S SO DANGEROUS. I SEE EMC IS LISTED RECALL BUT I DON'T RECEIVE ANY LETTER FROM DEALER TO FIX ITS PROBLEM. PLEASE LET ME KNOW WITH VIN NUMBER ABOVE IS…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING MY CAR HOME FROM WORK. SUDDENLY THE CAR WON'T MOVE FORWARD AND ON THE DASHBOARD ALL THE LIGHTS KEEPS LIGHT UP AND BLINKING AND THE CAR GRADUALLY DIED ON THE ROAD. IT'S SO DANGEROUS. I SEE EMC IS LISTED RECALL BUT I DON'T RECEIVE ANY LETTER FROM DEALER TO FIX ITS PROBLEM. PLEASE LET ME KNOW WITH VIN NUMBER ABOVE IS ON THE LIST OF RECALL. I HAVE CHECKED THE ALTERNATOR, IT WORKS OK AND THE BATTERY IS OK (JUST REPLACE A FEW MONTHS AGO). IF IT IS RECALL, SHOULD I BRING IT TO DEALER TO FIX IT EVEN I DIDN'T RECEIVE THEIR LETTER. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10641903

68,000 miles · Jun 17, 2014
Air BagsElectrical SystemSteering

OUR TOYOTA COROLLA 2006 HAD A SRS AIR BAG WARNING LIGHT COME ON. WE TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP AND WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE DRIVER?S AIRBAG MODULE IS ATTACHED TO A SPIRAL CABLE ASSEMBLY WITH ELECTRICAL CONNECTIONS THAT HAVE BECOME DAMAGED FROM TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL. THE DAMAGE TO THE SPINAL WIRE CAUSED THE AIR BAG WARNING …

Read full complaint

OUR TOYOTA COROLLA 2006 HAD A SRS AIR BAG WARNING LIGHT COME ON. WE TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP AND WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE DRIVER?S AIRBAG MODULE IS ATTACHED TO A SPIRAL CABLE ASSEMBLY WITH ELECTRICAL CONNECTIONS THAT HAVE BECOME DAMAGED FROM TURNING THE STEERING WHEEL. THE DAMAGE TO THE SPINAL WIRE CAUSED THE AIR BAG WARNING LAMP TO ILLUMINATE WHICH MEANS THAT THE AIR BAGS MAY NOT DEPLOY IN AN ACCIDENT. THE SPINAL CORD NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. THERE IS A SIMILAR ISSUE ON OTHER COROLLAS I BELIEVE THEY ARE YEARS 2009 AND 2010 AND SO I THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE LOOKED INTO SINCE IT IS HAPPENING ON OUR VEHICLE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10598856

54,500 miles · Feb 10, 2014
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine Cooling

CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON RANDOMLY 5 TIMES OVER THE PAST 2 MONTHS. FILED COMPLAINT WITH TOYOTA. ECM SEEMS TO BE ACTING UP, THEY THINK IT'S AN ISSUE WITH A MANIFOLD GASKET. TAKING VEHICLE TO DEALER THIS WEEK TO HAVE THEM DIAGNOSE THE ISSUE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10563682

118,784 miles · Jul 3, 2012
Electrical System

THIS IS THE 2ND TIME THE COMPUTER ECU UNIT FAILED. MY DAUGHTER DROVE THE CAR TO PERFORMANCE COLLISION FOR SOME BODY WORK REPAIRS. THE BODY SHOP CALLED TO INFORM US THAT THEY COULDN'T COMPLETE THE REPAIRS BECAUSE THE CAR WOULDN'T START. I CALLED AAA WHO TOWED THE CAR TO PERFORMANCE TOYOTA. AFTER THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE THE TEC…

Read full complaint

THIS IS THE 2ND TIME THE COMPUTER ECU UNIT FAILED. MY DAUGHTER DROVE THE CAR TO PERFORMANCE COLLISION FOR SOME BODY WORK REPAIRS. THE BODY SHOP CALLED TO INFORM US THAT THEY COULDN'T COMPLETE THE REPAIRS BECAUSE THE CAR WOULDN'T START. I CALLED AAA WHO TOWED THE CAR TO PERFORMANCE TOYOTA. AFTER THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE THE TECHNICIAN MANAGER TOLD ME THAT THE ECU UNIT FAILED AGAIN AND THIS TIME IT WAS OUT OF WARRANTY. I HAD TO PAY $725.74 AND PERFORMANCE TOYOTA AGAIN REPLACED THE ECU UNIT. TOYOTA REPLACED THE INITIAL ECU ON AUGUST 25, 2008 ( I FILED A SEPARATE COMPLAINT) UNDER WARRANTY. I EXPLAINED TO TOYOTA THAT A COMPUTER SHOULD NOT HAVE TO BE REPLACED AT ALL AND OUT OF ALL THE 7 CARS I'VE OWNED OVER THE PASS 40 YEARS THIS IS THE FIRST CAR THAT EVER HAD SO MANY MECHANICAL PROBLEMS. TOYOTA CLAIMED THAT THE ECU COMPUTERS DON'T LAST VERY LONG AND NEED TO BE REPLACED ABOUT EVERY 4 YEARS. I DON'T BELIEVE THESE ECU ARE QUALITY UNITS AND ARE DEFECTIVE. I'M HOPING TO GET MY MONEY REFUNDED. *JS

NHTSA ODI #10464145

51,135 miles · Jul 3, 2012
Electrical System

MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING THE TOYOTA 2006 COROLLA WHEN THE WINDOWS STOP WORKING, THEN THE LIGHTS BEGIN STOP WORKING SO SHE PARKED THE CAR. THE CAR WOULD NOT START UP AGAIN SO SHE WAS ABLE TO GET SOMEONE WITH JUMPER CABLES TO START THE CAR. SHE CONTACTED PERFORMANCE TOYOTA WHO INSTRUCTED HER TO BRING THE CAR TO TOYOTA. THEY INFORME…

Read full complaint

MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING THE TOYOTA 2006 COROLLA WHEN THE WINDOWS STOP WORKING, THEN THE LIGHTS BEGIN STOP WORKING SO SHE PARKED THE CAR. THE CAR WOULD NOT START UP AGAIN SO SHE WAS ABLE TO GET SOMEONE WITH JUMPER CABLES TO START THE CAR. SHE CONTACTED PERFORMANCE TOYOTA WHO INSTRUCTED HER TO BRING THE CAR TO TOYOTA. THEY INFORMED US THAT THE CAR COMPUTER'S ECU UNIT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AND THEY REPLACED THE ECU WITH NO CHARGE SINCE THE CAR WAS UNDER WARRANTY. HOWEVER, THEY CHARGED ME $257.99 FOR A WIRE THAT HAD SHORTENED BEHIND THE DASH CAUSING THE FUSES TO BLOW. I BELIEVE THAT IT WAS DUE TO THE COMPUTER FAILURE BUT THEY DISAGREED. THEN ON JUNE 20, 2012 WHILE THE CAR WAS BEING REPAIRED BY PERFORMANCE COLLISION BODY SHOP THEY CONTACTED ME TO INFORM ME THAT THE CAR WOULDN'T START. I TOWED IT TO PERFORMANCE TOYOTA AND THEY INFORM ME THAT THE ECU COMPUTER FAILED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. I WILL SUBMIT A NEW COMPLAINT FOR THIS INCIDENT. *JS

NHTSA ODI #10464142

70,000 miles · Jul 3, 2012
Electrical SystemFire

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE DOOR PANEL CAUGHT ON FIRE. THE CONTACT STATED THE WIRING WAS BURNED AND CAUSED DAMAGE TO THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE SEAT, AND TO THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DID NOT REPORT TO THE SCENE AND THE FIRE WENT OUT ON ITS OWN. THE …

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE DOOR PANEL CAUGHT ON FIRE. THE CONTACT STATED THE WIRING WAS BURNED AND CAUSED DAMAGE TO THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE SEAT, AND TO THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DID NOT REPORT TO THE SCENE AND THE FIRE WENT OUT ON ITS OWN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC. THE TECHNICIAN WAS UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE DOOR AND SEAT. THE WIRING IN THE DOOR WAS ALSO REPLACED. THE CONTACT WAS NOT AWARE OF THE EXACT REPAIR HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 70,000.

NHTSA ODI #10464044

69,000 miles · Dec 28, 2011
Electrical SystemEquipment Adaptive/mobilityFuel System, Gasoline

THE FUEL PUMP ASSEMBLY IS MOUNTED IN THE TOP OF THE FUEL TANK , HANGING DOWN SUBMERGED IN THE GAS. ONE OF THE POWER WIRES FROM THE PUMP ASSY. GOING TO THE ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR AT THE TOP MOUNTING PLATE OF THE PUMP, WAS BADLY BURNED AND MELTED CAUSING THE PUMP NOT TO WORK WHEN IT WARMED UP ALONG WITH THIS ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR. RE…

Read full complaint

THE FUEL PUMP ASSEMBLY IS MOUNTED IN THE TOP OF THE FUEL TANK , HANGING DOWN SUBMERGED IN THE GAS. ONE OF THE POWER WIRES FROM THE PUMP ASSY. GOING TO THE ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR AT THE TOP MOUNTING PLATE OF THE PUMP, WAS BADLY BURNED AND MELTED CAUSING THE PUMP NOT TO WORK WHEN IT WARMED UP ALONG WITH THIS ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR. REMEMBER THIS IS INSIDE THE FUEL TANK. THIS COULD HAVE CREATED A SERIOUS EXPLOSION ! TOYOTA ISSUED A RECALL FOR "ECM" (ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE) PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH STALLING ENGINE, SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER AND ENGINE CRANKS AND WILL NOT START. I THINK SOME OF THE "ECM " PROBLEMS COULD HAVE BEEN MIS-DIAGNOSED AND WERE THIS BURNT WIRE AND CONNECTOR FROM THE FUEL PUMP. ON TOP OF THAT THIS REPAIR COST ME APPROX. $1500.00 BUT MAYBE IT SAVED MY LIFE. FOR SAFETY REASONS ALONE , THIS SHOULD BE LOOKED INTO AND RESOLVED. I HOPE THIS MIGHT HELP SOMEONE ELSE BEFORE THEY ARE HURT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10441494

Mileage unknown · Mar 7, 2011
Electrical SystemElectronic Stability Control (esc)

1. RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA INDICATING THAT A SAFETY DEFECT EXISTS IN MY ENGINE CONTROL MODULE (ECM) FOR MY 2006 TOYOTA COROLLA. I TOOK MY CAR TO SPRINGFIELD TOYOTA ON 2/22/2011. THEY REPLACED THE ECM AND NOW THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT IS ON. THEY TOLD ME THAT IN ORDER TO TURN THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT OFF , IT WILL REQUIRE…

Read full complaint

1. RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA INDICATING THAT A SAFETY DEFECT EXISTS IN MY ENGINE CONTROL MODULE (ECM) FOR MY 2006 TOYOTA COROLLA. I TOOK MY CAR TO SPRINGFIELD TOYOTA ON 2/22/2011. THEY REPLACED THE ECM AND NOW THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT IS ON. THEY TOLD ME THAT IN ORDER TO TURN THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT OFF , IT WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL DIAGNOSIS AND THAT I WOULD HAVE TO PAY $300 TO $400. THE DEALERSHIP LEFT THE ECM DISCONNECTED AND SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT IS ON ALL THE TIME. 2. THE SERVICE LIGHT IS ON ALL THE TIME. THIS MAY BE A SAFETY ISSUE. 3. DEALERSHIP DOES NOT WANT TO FIX THE PROBLEM UNLESS I PAY THEM FOR THE DIAGNOSIS TIME. WITH THE OLD ECT I DID NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE CAR. I TOOK MY CAR TO THE DEALERSHIP TO HAVE THE ECM REPLACED BASED ON THE LETTER FROM TOYOTA. DEALERSHIP KEPT THE OLD ECM AND REFUSED TO GIVE IT BACK TO ME NOR FIX THE PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10386780

71,000 miles · Oct 20, 2010
Electrical System

APRIL 2010 - TACHOMETER STARTED 'JUMPING' AROUND. CEL WOULD ILLUMINATE ON AND OFF AND THE CAR WOULD OCCASIONALLY ACT LIKE IT WANTED TO STALL AND ACTED SLUGGISH. JUNE 2010 - BROUGHT TO LOCAL SHOP THAT SAID IT MIGHT BE A COMPUTER ISSUE AND TO TAKE TO TOYOTA. TOOK TO TOYOTA, TOYOTA SAID THAT IT WAS JUST A BAD TACHOMETER AND …

Read full complaint

APRIL 2010 - TACHOMETER STARTED 'JUMPING' AROUND. CEL WOULD ILLUMINATE ON AND OFF AND THE CAR WOULD OCCASIONALLY ACT LIKE IT WANTED TO STALL AND ACTED SLUGGISH. JUNE 2010 - BROUGHT TO LOCAL SHOP THAT SAID IT MIGHT BE A COMPUTER ISSUE AND TO TAKE TO TOYOTA. TOOK TO TOYOTA, TOYOTA SAID THAT IT WAS JUST A BAD TACHOMETER AND THAT I COULD CHOOSE TO REPLACE IT. I DID NOT. CEL LIGHT CONTINUED TO GO ON AND OFF. VEHICLE WOULD SOMETIMES SHIFT VERY HARD OR SEEM TO HAVE TROUBLE. SEPTEMBER 2010 - THE VEHICLE ALMOST STALLED AT 45MPH WHEN IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS TRYING TO SWITCH GEARS (AUTO TRANSMISSION). WHEN GOING HIGHWAY SPEEDS THE RPMS WOULD NOT GET OVER 1800 WHEN NORMALLY IT RUNS AROUND 2300 (AT 65MPH) WHEN I WOULD STEP ON BRAKE, RPMS WOULD DROP TO AROUND 1000 AND THEN TO THE POINT OF STALLING. SOMETIMES I HAVE TO DRIVE WITH THE LEFT FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND THE RIGHT FOOT ON THE ACCELERATOR TO NOT HAVE IT STALL IN STOP AND GO TRAFFIC. SOMETIMES AT A LIGHT, I PUT IT IN NEUTRAL AND CONTINUE TO REV THE ENGINE. SOME DAYS THE VEHICLE SEEMS TO BE RUNNING FINE, OTHER TIMES IT IS VERY STRESSFUL TO DRIVE WHEN IT IS HAVING ISSUES. OCTOBER 2010 - RECEIVED RECALL LETTER FROM TOYOTA REGARDING THE ECM (ENGINE CONTROL MODULE) AND THAT PARTS WILL START TO BE COME AVAILABLE THE END OF NOVEMBER. CALLED TOYOTA CORPORATE AND THEY SAID THEY DID NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A FIX FOR THE PROBLEM. CONTINUE TO DRIVE THIS VEHICLE BECAUSE IT IS MY ONLY MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10361355

Official recalls

7

19V741000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Oct 17, 2019

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2010-2016 4Runner, 2003-2006 Tundra, 2003-2013 Corolla, 2009-2010 Corolla Matrix, 2004-2005 RAV4, 2002-2007 Sequoia, 2011-2013 Sienna, 2008-2012 Scion xB, 2008-2009 Lexus IS-F, 2007-2012 Yaris and Lexus ES350, 2010-2017 Lexus GX460, 2002-2010 Lexus SC430, 2006-2012 Lexus IS250 and IS350 and 2010-2015 Lexus IS250C and IS350C vehicles. These vehicles had their driver or passenger frontal air bag inflators previously replaced under a prior recall using inflators of the same design. The inflators may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners. Depending on the vehicle model, dealers will replace the front driver inflator, front passenger airbag inflator, the airbag assembly, or the front passenger airbag sub-assembly and inflator. The recall began November 20, 2019. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371 or Lexus customer service at 1-800-255-3987. Toyota's numbers for this recall are J0A, J0B, and J0C. Lexus' numbers for this recall are JLI, JLJ, and JLK.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2010-2016 4Runner, 2003-2006 Tundra, 2003-2013 Corolla, 2009-2010 Corolla Matrix, 2004-2005 RAV4, 2002-2007 Sequoia, 2011-2013 Sienna, 2008-2012 Scion xB, 2008-2009 Lexus IS-F, 2007-2012 Yaris and Lexus ES350, 2010-2017 Lexus GX460, 2002-2010 Lexus SC430, 2006-2012 Lexus IS250 and IS350 and 2010-2015 Lexus IS250C and IS350C vehicles. These vehicles had their driver or passenger frontal air bag inflators previously replaced under a prior recall using inflators of the same design. The inflators may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence: An inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners. Depending on the vehicle model, dealers will replace the front driver inflator, front passenger airbag inflator, the airbag assembly, or the front passenger airbag sub-assembly and inflator. The recall began November 20, 2019. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371 or Lexus customer service at 1-800-255-3987. Toyota's numbers for this recall are J0A, J0B, and J0C. Lexus' numbers for this recall are JLI, JLJ, and JLK.

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2010-2016 4Runner, 2003-2006 Tundra, 2003-2013 Corolla, 2009-2010 Corolla Matrix, 2004-2005 RAV4, 2002-2007 Sequoia, 2011-2013 Sienna, 2008-2012 Scion xB, 2008-2009 Lexus IS-F, 2007-2012 Yaris and Lexus ES350, 2010-2017 Lexus GX460, 2002-2010 Lexus SC430, 2006-2012 Lexus IS250 and IS350 and 2010-2015 Lexus IS250C and IS350C vehicles. These vehicles had their driver or passenger frontal air bag inflators previously replaced under a prior recall using inflators of the same design. The inflators may explode due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to high absolute humidity, temperature and temperature cycling.

Consequence: An inflator explosion may result in sharp metal fragments striking the driver or other occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners. Depending on the vehicle model, dealers will replace the front driver inflator, front passenger airbag inflator, the airbag assembly, or the front passenger airbag sub-assembly and inflator. The recall began November 20, 2019. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371 or Lexus customer service at 1-800-255-3987. Toyota's numbers for this recall are J0A, J0B, and J0C. Lexus' numbers for this recall are JLI, JLJ, and JLK.

19V627000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Aug 28, 2019

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2003-2008 Corolla, 2005-2008 Corolla Matrix, and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with a front passenger air bag assembly replaced under a prior recall. The air bag may not unfold as designed during inflation under high temperature conditions, possibly resulting in the air bag not inflating properly.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An improperly inflated air bag increases the risk of injury during a crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify their owners. Pontiac Vibe owners will be notified by GM. Dealers will replace the front passenger air bag assembly or sub-assembly, free of charge. Toyota owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are K1Q and K0Q. Pontiac owners may contact GM customer service at 1-800-762-2737. GM's number for this recall is N192273760.

15V285000 · Air Bags

May 13, 2015

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) notified the agency on May 13, 2015 that they are recalling certain model year 2004 Sequoia vehicles manufactured August 18, 2003, to August 19, 2004, and 2003-2004 Tundra vehicles manufactured March 18, 2003, to August 25, 2004. On June 16, 2015, Toyota expanded the recall to include an additional 1,270,468 vehicles, including model year 2002-2003 and 2005-2007 Sequoia, 2005-2006 Tundra, 2003-2007 Corolla, 2003-2007 Corolla Matrix, 2003-2007 Pontiac Vibe and 2002-2007 Lexus SC vehicles. This is to address a safety defect in the passenger side frontal air bag inflator which may produce excessive internal pressure causing the inflator to rupture upon deployment of the air bag. This recall addresses both the passenger side frontal air bags that were originally installed in the vehicles, as well as replacement air bags that may have been installed as replacement service parts. A replacement air bag may have been installed, as one example, if a vehicle had been in a crash necessitating the replacement of the passenger side frontal air bag.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants potentially resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: 2003-2004 Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles that are recalled under both 15V-043 and 15V-285 are under a Do Not Drive advisory. Owners of these vehicles are advised not to drive their vehicles until the recall remedy has been completed. Toyota will notify their owners. Pontiac Vibe owners will be notified by GM. Dealers will replace the front passenger air bag. The recall began on July 13, 2015. Toyota owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331. Pontiac owners may call 1-800-762-2737. NOTE: This recall supersedes recall 14V-312 in its entirety.

15V286000 · Air Bags

May 13, 2015

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) notified the agency on May 13, 2015, that they are recalling 2005-2007 Lexus SC, Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix, Sequoia, and Pontiac Vibe, and 2005-2006 Toyota Tundra vehicles that were originally sold, or ever registered, in Florida, along the Gulf Coast, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, Saipan and American Samoa. On June 16, 2015 Toyota expanded the recall to cover an additional 769,055 vehicles, including certain model year 2002-2004 Lexus SC, Toyota Sequoia, 2003-2004 Toyota Corolla Matrix, Toyota Corolla, Pontiac Vibe, and Toyota Tundra vehicles, as well the vehicles covered by the May 13, 2015 notification in the portions of Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas that were not previously included. The inflators in the front passenger air bags are susceptible to rupture in the event of a crash necessitating the deployment of the front passenger air bag.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the passenger's frontal air bag, the inflator could rupture with metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants potentially resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: 2003-2004 Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles that are recalled under both 15V-043 and 15V-286 are under a Do Not Drive advisory. Owners of these vehicles are advised not to drive their vehicles until the recall remedy has been completed. Toyota will notify their owners. Pontiac Vibe owners will be notified by GM. Dealers will replace the passenger side front air bag, free of charge. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331. Toyota began the recall on July 13, 2015. Pontiac Vibe owners may contact GM at 1-800-762-2737. GM began the recall on June 29, 2015. NOTE: This recacll supersedes recall 14V-655 in its entirety. For vehicles located in the U.S. states not listed above, please see Toyota recall 15V-285 which covers all other U.S. states.

10V384000 · Engine And Engine Cooling

Aug 26, 2010

TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2008 COROLLA AND COROLLA MATRIX VEHICLES. THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE (ECM) FOR THE SUBJECT MODELS EQUIPPED WITH THE 1ZZ-FE ENGINE AND TWO-WHEEL DRIVE MAY HAVE BEEN IMPROPERLY MANUFACTURED. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT A CRACK MAY DEVELOP AT CERTAIN SOLDER POINTS OR ON VARISTORS ON THE CIRCUIT BOARD.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THERE ARE A VARIETY OF WARNINGS AND CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEFECT. THE ENGINE WARNING LAMP COULD BE ILLUMINATED, HARSH SHIFTING COULD RESULT, THE ENGINE MAY NOT START, OR THE ENGINE COULD SHUT OFF WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN. AN ENGINE SHUTOFF WHILE THE VEHICLE IS BEING DRIVEN INCREASES THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE PRODUCTION NUMBER OF THE ECM AND REPLACE THE ECM IF NECESSARY. THIS SERVICE WILL BE PERFORMED FREE OF CHARGE. TOYOTA WILL MAIL AN INTERIM OWNER NOTIFICATION THE MIDDLE OF SEPTEMBER 2010 TO ADVISE OWNERS OF THIS DEFECT AND RECALL. THIS INTERIM NOTIFICATION WILL INFORM OWNERS THAT THEY WILL RECEIVE A FUTURE NOTIFICATION WHEN PARTS BECOME AVAILABLE TO HAVE THE FREE REMEDY PERFORMED ON THEIR VEHICLE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 29, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.

10V035000 · Equipment:other:labels

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.

10V036000 · Equipment:other:labels

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.

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

4

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

DP14003 · Low-speed Surging

Opened Sep 19, 2014 · Closed Apr 29, 2015

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control

The Agency received a petition on September 11, 2014 requesting an investigation into, low-speed surging in the 2006-2010 Toyota Corolla [vehicles] with ETCS-i, in which the brakes fail to stop the vehicle in time to prevent a crash.NHTSA conducted a technical review of the material cited and provided by the petitioner, material Toyota submitted in response to a NHTSA formal request, interviews with complainants and manufacturer representatives, as well as the results of testing of the complaint vehicle.Taking into account the allocation of agency resources, agency priorities, and the likelihood that an additional investigation would result in a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists, NHTSA has concluded that further investigation of the issues raised by the petition is not warranted.The agency accordingly has denied the petition.The official petition denial, as published in the Federal Register, is available in the document file for this defect petition, as well as copies of reference material related to the denial.Regarding the VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation, the scope as defined by the petitioner is MY 2006 through 2010 Toyota Corollas.Of the 163 VOQs submitted by the petitioner, 149 are within that specific population (11 of the 163 were outside the model and model year scope of investigation as defined by the petitioner and 3 VOQs were submitted by owners from foreign countries) and 6 of the 163 are duplicate submissions.Therefore, there are 143 unique vehicles vins are within the specific population.Of the 143 only 105 fit the alleged defect category as defined by the petitioner.The single complaint and crash noted in the Failure Report above is the petitioner's VOQ.The 143 VOQs are: 10165337, 10166526, 10209540, 10216514, 10256808 (duplicate with 10266580 and 10335955), 10272505, 10293497, 10293688, 10294727, 10297407, 10298012, 10302217, 10302877, 10303106, 10303469, 10303730, 10304192, 10305748, 10305845, 10306012, 10306480, 10307953, 10310973, 10311137, 10311176, 10311185, 10311756, 10312246, 10312272 (duplicate with 10343088), 10312771, 10313972, 10314880, 10315240, 10315442, 10315836, 10315927, 10316192, 10316627, 10316643, 10316800, 10316952, 10317128, 10317598, 10317725, 10317804, 10317894, 10317972, 10317978, 10318562, 10319589, 10320693, 10320720, 10322163, 10322213, 10322333, 10322415, 10324355, 10325755, 10326481, 10327623, 10328492, 10328519, 10329537, 10330026 (duplicate with 10356866), 10330952, 10332679, 10334005 (duplicate with 10340570 and 10547602), 10334028, 10334628, 10334936, 10336649, 10339772, 10339969, 10341515, 10342670, 10342932, 10343174, 10344874, 10345714, 10348120, 10350342, 10351112, 10352668, 10352691, 10353587, 10358767, 10359645, 10360875, 10360905, 10361254, 10363529, 10363685, 10363866, 10364127, 10366100, 10366413, 10369073, 10369494, 10371991, 10376535, 10376721, 10377193, 10379320, 10380210, 10381365, 10381849, 10382018, 10392618, 10396747, 10402827, 10412382, 10433860, 10437011, 10437801, 10450183, 10461118, 10479582, 10482133, 10489344, 10494568, 10496026, 10499932, 10520195, 10521013, 10523677, 10534094, 10537426, 10543949, 10549101, 10551478, 10552563, 10558153, 10562577, 10564980, 10566370, 10572873, 10578871, 10579722, 10587140, 10597296, 10621449, and 10637908 (which is the petitioner's VOQ and not one of the 163 submitted with the petition).The three VOQs that were submitted from foreign countries: 10303105, 10303749, and 10308974. The eleven VOQs that are out of the specified population by model or model year: 10447756, 10453401, 10490200, 10507434, 10521377, 10563214, 10563585, 10575230, 10583796, 10584534,

EA10006 · Engine Stall

Opened Aug 18, 2010 · Closed Sep 16, 2010

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling

On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Engine And Engine Cooling

On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.

Engine And Engine Cooling

On August 26, 2010, Toyota submitted a Defect Information Report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding problems with Engine Control Modules that could result in engine stall while driving in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2008 Toyota Corolla, Corolla Matrix and Pontiac Vibe vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine and two-wheel drive and manufactured between April 19, 2004 and January 2, 2008.Toyota's report indicated that cracks may develop at certain solder point or on varistors on the ECMs.According to Toyota, such cracks generally resulted in engine warning lamp illumination, harsh shifting or engine no-start.In some cases, if the cracking occurs on particular solder points or varistors, the engine could stop while the vehicle is being driven.Toyota will notify owners of subject vehicles that they should return their vehicles to a Toyota or Pontiac dealer.Dealers will be instructed to inspect the production number of the ECM for each vehicle and replace the ECM if necessary.On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stall while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.In its response to ODI's information request, submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible conditions with ECMs used in MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles:1) cracks forming between the IC and the board caused by an improperly cured conformal coating applied to the circuit boards after the soldering process is completed; and 2) cracks occurring in a variable resistor (varistor) due to overheating.During the manufacturing process a glass coating is created on the surface of the varistor.Between March and August 2010, Toyota began collecting ECMs from the field to further investigate failure modes that may result in engine stall.Toyota also conducted durability testing on ECMs collected from in-use vehicles to assess whether the problems may be a continuing trend. In addition, they conducted durability testing in order to assess whether this problem was a continuing trend.Toyota found that 4 of 32 collected ECMs malfunctioned after thermal shock testing.Toyota also confirmed that cracking could develop at solder points on the ECM circuit board that could lead to engine stall while driving and that this trend was likely to continue.The manufacturer failure data in this resume is limited to MY 2005 through 2007 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles.Based on Toyota's recall, this Engineering analysis has been closed.

PE09054 · Engine Stalling

Opened Nov 30, 2009 · Closed Aug 19, 2010

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling

On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a preliminary evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stalling, while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles .In its response to ODI's information request submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible causes of production defects of the engine control units (ECU) used in the MY 2005 through 2007 Corolla and Matrix vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine.Failure mode A1 - BGA ball failure caused by improperly cured conformal coating applied to ECU circuit boards. This can cause cracks to form in the soldered joints of some components. Failure mode A2 - Varistor over heating; a glass coating is created on the surface of the Varistor during its production process.In case of an insufficient coating, a crack can occur in the surface of the glass coating. When ions are charged in the plating electrolytes after the glass coating process, the plating electrolytes can penetrate into the Varistor through the glass crack then an electrical short occurs. With respect to these failures, if the condition arises, it can potentially lead to one or more of the following: MIL on, engine stall or engine no start, harsh shifting.Of the approximately 155,000 warranty and extended warranty claims Toyota has analyzedthe projected 5 year failure rate of the ECU associated with an engine stall is 0.8%. This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA10-006) to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with the identified defects.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Engine And Engine Cooling

On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a preliminary evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stalling, while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles .In its response to ODI's information request submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible causes of production defects of the engine control units (ECU) used in the MY 2005 through 2007 Corolla and Matrix vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine.Failure mode A1 - BGA ball failure caused by improperly cured conformal coating applied to ECU circuit boards. This can cause cracks to form in the soldered joints of some components. Failure mode A2 - Varistor over heating; a glass coating is created on the surface of the Varistor during its production process.In case of an insufficient coating, a crack can occur in the surface of the glass coating. When ions are charged in the plating electrolytes after the glass coating process, the plating electrolytes can penetrate into the Varistor through the glass crack then an electrical short occurs. With respect to these failures, if the condition arises, it can potentially lead to one or more of the following: MIL on, engine stall or engine no start, harsh shifting.Of the approximately 155,000 warranty and extended warranty claims Toyota has analyzedthe projected 5 year failure rate of the ECU associated with an engine stall is 0.8%. This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA10-006) to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with the identified defects.

Engine And Engine Cooling

On November 30, 2009, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a preliminary evaluation (PE09-054) to investigate alleged engine stalling, while driving in model year (MY) 2006 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix vehicles .In its response to ODI's information request submitted on March 2, 2010, Toyota indicated that it had identified two possible causes of production defects of the engine control units (ECU) used in the MY 2005 through 2007 Corolla and Matrix vehicles equipped with the 1ZZ-FE engine.Failure mode A1 - BGA ball failure caused by improperly cured conformal coating applied to ECU circuit boards. This can cause cracks to form in the soldered joints of some components. Failure mode A2 - Varistor over heating; a glass coating is created on the surface of the Varistor during its production process.In case of an insufficient coating, a crack can occur in the surface of the glass coating. When ions are charged in the plating electrolytes after the glass coating process, the plating electrolytes can penetrate into the Varistor through the glass crack then an electrical short occurs. With respect to these failures, if the condition arises, it can potentially lead to one or more of the following: MIL on, engine stall or engine no start, harsh shifting.Of the approximately 155,000 warranty and extended warranty claims Toyota has analyzedthe projected 5 year failure rate of the ECU associated with an engine stall is 0.8%. This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA10-006) to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with the identified defects.

Go deeper into Toyota Corolla problems