← New search

2008 Toyota Corolla

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Corolla years

Owner complaints for the 2008 Toyota Corolla are substantially higher than the model-year median of 129.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

182 reports with mileage · 132 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 138 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 54 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 33 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

74 crash reports1 fire reports35 injury reports

Vehicle Speed Control complaints

54 reports
Clear category filter
100 miles · Jun 12, 2013
Power TrainVehicle Speed Control

SINCE, I BOUGHT THIS CAR BRAND NEW IT WOULD MAKE NOISE RATTLE LIKE SOMETHING WAS LOOSE. EVERY TIME I WOULD TAKE THE VEHICLE IN THEY WOULD KEEP IT THE WHOLE DAY FOR DAYS AND I WAS WITHOUT TRANSPORTATION. THEY REFUSED TO LEND ME A VEHICLE. AND AT THE END STATED THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG. MAKING IT LOOK LIKE I WAS HEARING THINGS. THE…

Read full complaint

SINCE, I BOUGHT THIS CAR BRAND NEW IT WOULD MAKE NOISE RATTLE LIKE SOMETHING WAS LOOSE. EVERY TIME I WOULD TAKE THE VEHICLE IN THEY WOULD KEEP IT THE WHOLE DAY FOR DAYS AND I WAS WITHOUT TRANSPORTATION. THEY REFUSED TO LEND ME A VEHICLE. AND AT THE END STATED THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG. MAKING IT LOOK LIKE I WAS HEARING THINGS. THE 2ND ISSUE IS WHEN I PUT IN REVERSE FOR EXAMPLE I WANT TO PARALLEL PARK AND PUT IT IN REVERSE IT GETS STUCK AND REVERSES SUPER FAST. WHEN I TOOK BACK THEY SAID THEY HEARD IT THEN THEY DID NOT. NOW THE REVERSE PART AND RATTLE NOISE IS WORSE. THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING AND I GO IN TO LEAVE THE CAR TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE SAME ISSUES BUT ON THE PAPER THEY WOULD ALWAYS CHANGE THE COMPLAINT TO A NEW ONE. THIS IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR. AT FIRST THEY WERE NICE BUT ONCE I WAS OUT THEY WERE HELPLESS. THEN I HAD TO RETURN VARIOUS TIMES FOR A LETTER I GOT IN THE MAIL THAT THE VEHICLE WAS ON "RECALL". EVER SINCE BUYING A BRAND NEW CAR FROM TOYOTA HAS BEEN A BAD EXPERIENCE BECAUSE I WAS WITH A NEW CAR BUT WITH THE CONDITIONS OF A USED CAR. AND TO TOP IT OFF THEY CHARGE ME TO INSPECT THE VEHICLE. SADLY TO SAY THESE PEOPLE DON'T CAR ONCE THEY GET YOU HOOKED ON THE CAR. ONCE YOU'RE OUT YOUR ALONE AND THEY WON'T BACK UP THEIR VEHICLES. AND ANOTHER ISSUE THE BATTERIES DIED FAST AND I HAD TO PAY FOR A NEW ONE. AND SINCE THEY KNOW ONE NEEDS A CAR THEIR IS NOTHING TO DO BUT TO SUCK IT UP THIS SUCKS!! WARNING!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10519407

45,300 miles · Apr 24, 2013
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

I HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING SINCE NOVEMBER 2012 TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ABOUT WHEN DRIVING VEHICLE FEELS LIKE ACCELERATOR PEDAL GETS STUCK AND VEHICLE KEEPS ACCELERATING WITHOUT FOOT ON PEDAL. EVERY TIME I TOOK IT THE GAVE ME THE RUN AROUND ABOUT DIRTY GAS LINE AND CHARGE FOR SERVICE NOT REALLY NEEDED. IN FEBRUARY CAR BROKE TOWN BE…

Read full complaint

I HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING SINCE NOVEMBER 2012 TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ABOUT WHEN DRIVING VEHICLE FEELS LIKE ACCELERATOR PEDAL GETS STUCK AND VEHICLE KEEPS ACCELERATING WITHOUT FOOT ON PEDAL. EVERY TIME I TOOK IT THE GAVE ME THE RUN AROUND ABOUT DIRTY GAS LINE AND CHARGE FOR SERVICE NOT REALLY NEEDED. IN FEBRUARY CAR BROKE TOWN BECAUSE OF SYSTEM THROTTLE WAS REPLACED AND STILL HAD SAME ACCELERATION AFTER 3 WEEKS FROM REPAIRED. WAS DRIVING HOME WITH MY 2 MONTH SON AFTER DROPPING MY WIFE AT WORK AND MY CAR STARTED TO GET ACCELERATION PEDAL PROBLEM AND VEHICLE LOST CONTROL AND CRASH INTO 2 PARKED VEHICLE. SON WAS OK I WAS BRUISED WITH BLACK AND BLUE AROUND SEATBELT AREA AND PELVIS AND JUST LEFT KNEE PAIN FOR NOW. WENT TO HOSPITAL FROM SCENE AND CAR WAS TOTALED. WOULD HAVE NEVER HAD PROBLEM IF DEALERSHIP LISTEN AND DIDN'T BRUSH MY CAR TO SIDE AND FIX PROBLEM CAR HAD WARRANTY. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10509413

2,000 miles · Dec 20, 2012
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE AND CAME TO A STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTO SHOP FOR BODY REPAIR. THE CONTACT WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL VIA AMBULANCE FOR TREATMENT OF CHEST CONTUS…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE AND CAME TO A STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTO SHOP FOR BODY REPAIR. THE CONTACT WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL VIA AMBULANCE FOR TREATMENT OF CHEST CONTUSIONS, A BRAIN CONCUSSION AND INJURIES TO THE SPINE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND SENT A TECHNICIAN TO INSPECT THE VEHICLE. THE TECHNICIAN WAS UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 2,000. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10489344

57,704 miles · Aug 30, 2012
EngineUnknown Or OtherVehicle Speed Control

I HAD MY TOYOTA COROLLA 08 SERVICED ON 4/5/11 DUE TO A RECALL FOR THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE. AFTER THE TOYOTA DEALER LOOKED AT THEY DETERMINED IT DID NOT NEED TO BE REPLACED ACCORDING TO "LOT #7238" AND ON 8-21-2012 MY WIFE WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY GOING 55 MPH WHEN ALL OF THE SUDDEN THE VEHICLE'S ELECTRICAL SYSTEM JUST CUT OF…

Read full complaint

I HAD MY TOYOTA COROLLA 08 SERVICED ON 4/5/11 DUE TO A RECALL FOR THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE. AFTER THE TOYOTA DEALER LOOKED AT THEY DETERMINED IT DID NOT NEED TO BE REPLACED ACCORDING TO "LOT #7238" AND ON 8-21-2012 MY WIFE WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY GOING 55 MPH WHEN ALL OF THE SUDDEN THE VEHICLE'S ELECTRICAL SYSTEM JUST CUT OFF. LUCKILY THERE WERE NO CARS IN FRONT OF HER AT A DISTANCE AND IT STARTED TO SLOW DOWN UNTIL SHE WAS ABLE TO CONTROL IT AND MANAGE TO PARK AT THE MEDIAN. SHE SAID THAT THE BREAKS DID NOT WORK AND THE POWER STEERING DID NOT WORK. SHE WAS TERRIFIED AT THAT MOMENT AND FEARED FOR HER LIFE. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND EXPLAINED WHAT HAD HAPPENED. THEY JUST TOLD ME THAT THERE WAS A RECALL AND IT SHOULD BE FIXED IMMEDIATELY. I ASKED THE REPRESENTATIVE WHY THIS RECALL WAS NOT TAKEN CARE OF THE FIRST TIME I WENT TO THE DEALER. HE HAD TOLD ME THAT AT THAT TIME IT WAS NOT NECESSARY TO CHANGE THE PART WHICH AFFECTED THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. WELL THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE WASTED MY TIME, BUT LOOKING BACK THEY WERE NEGLIGENT ON THEIR PART. I COULD HAVE LOST MY LOVED ONE OR ONE OF MY BELOVED CHILDREN WHICH COULD HAVE DEVASTATING FOR ME. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10473090

57,000 miles · Aug 2, 2012
Vehicle Speed Control

CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED WHILE OFF. I TYPICALLY USE CRUISE CONTROL EVERY DAY. WHEN I ATTEMPTED TO USE IT ON 7/27, THE INDICATOR LIGHT SHOWED "ON" BUT IT WOULD NOT ENGAGE WHEN I TRIED TO SET THE VEHICLE SPEED. I TURNED THE CRUISE OFF AND RETRIED - AGAIN THE CONTROL FAILED TO ENGAGE. AFTER 4 ATTEMPTS I GAVE UP AND LEFT THE CONTR…

Read full complaint

CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED WHILE OFF. I TYPICALLY USE CRUISE CONTROL EVERY DAY. WHEN I ATTEMPTED TO USE IT ON 7/27, THE INDICATOR LIGHT SHOWED "ON" BUT IT WOULD NOT ENGAGE WHEN I TRIED TO SET THE VEHICLE SPEED. I TURNED THE CRUISE OFF AND RETRIED - AGAIN THE CONTROL FAILED TO ENGAGE. AFTER 4 ATTEMPTS I GAVE UP AND LEFT THE CONTROL OFF. A FEW MINUTES LATER THE CAR ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN (ON A SLIGHT UPHILL INCLINE), HARD ENOUGH TO DROP FROM 4TH TO 2ND GEAR, AS IF THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED. I HIT THE BRAKES AND THE ACCELERATION STOPPED. OPERATION THEN SEEMED NORMAL. AFTER A FEW MINUTES OF THOUGHT, I DECIDED TO (CAUTIOUSLY) CHECK THE CRUISE CONTROL AGAIN. IT ENGAGED AND OPERATED PROPERLY. AFTER CHECKING THOUGH, I TURNED IT OFF. LATER THAT DAY I TOOK THE CAR TO A TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT SCANNED THE ELECTRONICS, BUT FOUND NO ERRORS. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10468910

39,436 miles · Apr 10, 2012
Vehicle Speed Control

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO ACTIVATE THE CRUISE CONTROL, THE CRUISE CONTROL BUTTON AND ARM SEPARATED FROM THE BASE DUE TO DEFECTIVE MATERIAL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO DEALER, WHERE THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH AND ARM WERE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURE TOOK A COMPLAINT AND OFF…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO ACTIVATE THE CRUISE CONTROL, THE CRUISE CONTROL BUTTON AND ARM SEPARATED FROM THE BASE DUE TO DEFECTIVE MATERIAL. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO DEALER, WHERE THE CRUISE CONTROL SWITCH AND ARM WERE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURE TOOK A COMPLAINT AND OFFERED TO REIMBURSE THE REPAIR COST. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 39,436. SM.

NHTSA ODI #10454724

39,742 miles · Aug 18, 2011
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 55 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATED. WHEN THE CONTACT APPLIED THE BRAKES, THE VEHICLE DID NOT RESPOND. THE CONTACT THEN VEERED OFF THE ROAD AND PUMPED THE BRAKES WHILE RELEASING THE CLUTCH. THE VEHICLE THEN BECAME RESPONSIVE. NEITHER THE DEALER NOR THE MAN…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 55 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATED. WHEN THE CONTACT APPLIED THE BRAKES, THE VEHICLE DID NOT RESPOND. THE CONTACT THEN VEERED OFF THE ROAD AND PUMPED THE BRAKES WHILE RELEASING THE CLUTCH. THE VEHICLE THEN BECAME RESPONSIVE. NEITHER THE DEALER NOR THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 39,742 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 39,782. UPDATED 09/14/11*LJ UPDATED 12/05/11

NHTSA ODI #10419992

90,000 miles · Jun 8, 2011
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 25 MPH WHEN THERE WAS A SUDDEN ACCELERATION WITH THE VEHICLE. AS THE BRAKE WAS BEING DEPRESSED, THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SLOW DOWN AND CRASHED HEAD INTO A CONCRETE WALL. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED VERY SERIOUS INJURIES TO THE BODY AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO A TRAUMA UNIT. T…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 25 MPH WHEN THERE WAS A SUDDEN ACCELERATION WITH THE VEHICLE. AS THE BRAKE WAS BEING DEPRESSED, THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SLOW DOWN AND CRASHED HEAD INTO A CONCRETE WALL. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED VERY SERIOUS INJURIES TO THE BODY AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO A TRAUMA UNIT. THE CONTACT WAS THE ONLY OCCUPANT IN THE VEHICLE AND WAS WEARING HER SEAT BELT AT THE TIME OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND TOWED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY. A POLICE REPORT WAS AVAILABLE IF NEEDED. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000.

NHTSA ODI #10405579

20,000 miles · Feb 24, 2011
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SHE APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKES WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FORWARD WITHOUT WARNING AND CRASHED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED SEVERAL BRUISES TO VARIOUS PARTS OF THE BODY AND THE WIRING FROM THE VEHICLE BURNED HER ARM…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SHE APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKES WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FORWARD WITHOUT WARNING AND CRASHED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED SEVERAL BRUISES TO VARIOUS PARTS OF THE BODY AND THE WIRING FROM THE VEHICLE BURNED HER ARM. NEITHER THE DEALER NOR THE MANUFACTURER HAD BEEN NOTIFIED. A PRIVATE MECHANIC PERFORMED REPAIRS BUT THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO IDENTIFY WHAT REPAIRS WERE DONE. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN AND THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 20,000. A POLICE REPORT WAS AVAILABLE. UPDATED 03/24/11*LJ UPDATED 03/24/11

NHTSA ODI #10384378

45,014 miles · Dec 21, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

MY WIFE WAS ENTERING A PERPENDICULAR PARKING SPOT, SHE WAS APPROXIMATELY 10 TO 15 FEET FROM A RETAINING WALL WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN OUR 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA ACCELERATED. HER FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE, BRINGING IT SLOWLY INTO THE PARKING SPOT, AND TO A STOP. THE CAR ALL OF A SUDDEN ACCELERATED AND SOUNDED LIKE SOME ONE ACCELERATING TH…

Read full complaint

MY WIFE WAS ENTERING A PERPENDICULAR PARKING SPOT, SHE WAS APPROXIMATELY 10 TO 15 FEET FROM A RETAINING WALL WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN OUR 2008 TOYOTA COROLLA ACCELERATED. HER FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE, BRINGING IT SLOWLY INTO THE PARKING SPOT, AND TO A STOP. THE CAR ALL OF A SUDDEN ACCELERATED AND SOUNDED LIKE SOME ONE ACCELERATING THE CAR IF IT WAS IN PARK. OUR DAUGHTER AND GRANDSON'S WERE IN THE CAR. THE CAR HIT THE RETAINING WALL CAUSING $2500 DAMAGE TO THE FRONT OF THE CAR. THE RETAINING WALL WAS MADE OF RAILROAD TIES. A TIE WAS KNOCKED OUT OF PLACE (ALSO ROTTEN) THIS HAPPENED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, SO AUTHORITIES WERE NOT CALLED. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY, MAINLY BECAUSE THE CAR WENT UP ON THE WALL. HAD SHE NOT BEEN TURNING INTO A PARKING PLACE, SHE WOULD HAVE WENT STRAIGHT INTO A CROWD OF FAMILIES. THE TOYOTA DEALER WAS CONTACTED, THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED IN CHECKING IT OUT. TOYOTA COMPANY WAS CONTACTED, THEY PULLED THE DATA OUT OF THE COMPUTER, AND CHECKED THE CAR OUT FOR BRAKES. ACCELERATOR PEDAL, AND FLOOR MATS, FIVE WEEKS AFTER THE ACCIDENT. WE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTA STATING THE INCIDENT WAS NOT A RESULT OF ANY TYPE OF MANUFACTURE DESIGN OR DEFECT. DURING THE TIME I WAS DEALING WITH TOYOTA I DID SOME INTERNET SURFING TRYING TO FIND INFORMATION ON TOYOTA'S HAVING UNINTENDED ACCELERATION (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL). WHILE LOOKING IN A CONSUMER PROTECTION WEB PAGE, "WWW-ODI.NHTSA.GOT.GOV/COMPLAINTS/RESULTS.CFM" I FOUND THAT HUNDREDS OF TOYOTA COROLLAS HAVE HAD VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL PROBLEMS, LIKE OURS. THEY ARE ALL SIMILAR, JUST A LITTLE DIFFERENT TIME DURING DRIVING, BUT MOST HAPPENED WHILE COMING TO A STOP, AND WITH DIFFERENT LEVELS OF DAMAGE. TOYOTA IS NO HELP, IT THEY WERE, THEY WOULD BE ADMITTING THEY HAD A PROBLEM. THE LINKAGE BETWEEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, AND COMPUTER ON THESE TOYOTAS IS ELECTRONIC. IT IS MY FEELING THE COMPUTER IS GETTING A NOISE SPIKE, OR HAVE A TIMING PROBLEM IN THEIR COMPUTER. NOW I HAVE A CAR THAT MY WIFE WON'T DRIVE. UPDATED IVOQ 02/10/11 *TR

NHTSA ODI #10371991

Official recalls

6

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.

16V127000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Mar 3, 2016

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2008-2010 Lexus SC vehicles manufactured August 3, 2007, to July 30, 2010, 2008 Toyota Corolla vehicles manufactured May 25, 2007, to December 21, 2007, 2008 Toyota Corolla Matrix vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to December 18, 2007, and 2008 Pontiac Vibe vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to January 2, 2008. 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: The recall began on March 25, 2016 for Toyota and Lexus vehicle owners. The recall began on June 23, 2016 for GM owners. The respective dealers will either replace the front passenger air bag inflator or the entire front passenger air bag assembly depending on the model. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331, or Pontiac customer service at 1-800-762-2737. This recall expands recall 15V-285.

16V128000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

Mar 2, 2016

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2008-2010 Lexus SC vehicles manufactured August 3, 2007, to July 30, 2010, 2008 Toyota Corolla vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to December 21, 2007, 2008 Toyota Corolla Matrix vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to December 18, 2007, and 2008 Pontiac Vibe vehicles manufactured June 1, 2007, to January 2, 2008 that were originally sold, or ever registered, in Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, Saipan, American Samoa, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. The affected vehicles have a passenger side frontal air bag that may be susceptible to moisture intrusion which, over time, could cause the inflator to rupture upon its deployment.

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: The recall began on March 25, 2016 for Toyota and Lexus vehicle owners. The recall began on June 8, 2016 for GM owners. The respective dealers will either replace the front passenger air bag inflator or the entire front passenger air bag assembly depending on the model. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331, or Pontiac customer service at 1-800-762-2737. This recall expands recall 15V-286.

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.

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,

DP11001 · Frontal Air Bag Non-deployment

Opened Apr 7, 2011 · Closed Aug 19, 2011

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags; Air Bags:frontal

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a defect petition requesting that it open an investigation of model year (MY) 2008 Toyota Corolla vehicles for the failure of the frontal air bags to deploy during an alleged serious crash. The petitioner alleges that the frontal air bags in their MY 2008 Corolla failed to deploy during a 55-mph frontal impact with a large animal (a deer).The petitioner also filed a complaint with the agency (see ODI 10327470 for further details of the incident and the petition submitted to the agency).ODI has reviewed the petition, assessed consumer complaints on the MY 2008 Toyota Corolla and similar vehicles, analyzed statistics derived from NHTSA's Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and its National Automotive Sampling System (NASS), and evaluated crash tests of the subject vehicles.Based on its review, ODI does not believe that a safety-related defect trend currently exists for air bag non-deployment in the subject vehicles.Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA's limited resources to accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied.However, the agency will continue to monitor this event and will take further action if warranted by changing future circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the DP11-001 file (www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/defects).

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a defect petition requesting that it open an investigation of model year (MY) 2008 Toyota Corolla vehicles for the failure of the frontal air bags to deploy during an alleged serious crash. The petitioner alleges that the frontal air bags in their MY 2008 Corolla failed to deploy during a 55-mph frontal impact with a large animal (a deer).The petitioner also filed a complaint with the agency (see ODI 10327470 for further details of the incident and the petition submitted to the agency).ODI has reviewed the petition, assessed consumer complaints on the MY 2008 Toyota Corolla and similar vehicles, analyzed statistics derived from NHTSA's Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and its National Automotive Sampling System (NASS), and evaluated crash tests of the subject vehicles.Based on its review, ODI does not believe that a safety-related defect trend currently exists for air bag non-deployment in the subject vehicles.Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA's limited resources to accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied.However, the agency will continue to monitor this event and will take further action if warranted by changing future circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the DP11-001 file (www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/defects).

Air Bags

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a defect petition requesting that it open an investigation of model year (MY) 2008 Toyota Corolla vehicles for the failure of the frontal air bags to deploy during an alleged serious crash. The petitioner alleges that the frontal air bags in their MY 2008 Corolla failed to deploy during a 55-mph frontal impact with a large animal (a deer).The petitioner also filed a complaint with the agency (see ODI 10327470 for further details of the incident and the petition submitted to the agency).ODI has reviewed the petition, assessed consumer complaints on the MY 2008 Toyota Corolla and similar vehicles, analyzed statistics derived from NHTSA's Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and its National Automotive Sampling System (NASS), and evaluated crash tests of the subject vehicles.Based on its review, ODI does not believe that a safety-related defect trend currently exists for air bag non-deployment in the subject vehicles.Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA's limited resources to accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied.However, the agency will continue to monitor this event and will take further action if warranted by changing future circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the DP11-001 file (www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/defects).

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.

Go deeper into Toyota Corolla problems