← New search

2017 Toyota Corolla

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2017 Toyota Corolla do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 129.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

107 reports with mileage · 71 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 54 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes. Review the 25 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

44 crash reports1 fire reports29 injury reports

What owners actually said

178 reports
Mileage unknown · Oct 17, 2024
Air BagsCrashInjury

I was driving for work and got into a pretty bad accident and the airbags did not deploy. I am not sure if it was because the airbag recall I got fixed back in 2020 or it was because the damages weren’t enough to deploy the airbags.

NHTSA ODI #11620410

Mileage unknown · May 8, 2024
Unknown Or OtherCrashInjury

I was t-boned by a driver on 5/16/2023. Since this occurred, my vehicle has been repaired. However I have a shake and hoovering noise coming from the front of the vehicle. It has been aligned, tires have been rotated, and suspension has been checked. My mechanic can find no fault. However he has stated that he can feel the shake…

Read full complaint

I was t-boned by a driver on 5/16/2023. Since this occurred, my vehicle has been repaired. However I have a shake and hoovering noise coming from the front of the vehicle. It has been aligned, tires have been rotated, and suspension has been checked. My mechanic can find no fault. However he has stated that he can feel the shake and can hear the noise. He also says it pulls to the left really hard when accelerating. These issues were not present before my accident. Also my seatbelts on my driver and passenger side were replaced shortly after my accident. I felt like this wasn't checked by the body shop.

NHTSA ODI #11587634

Mileage unknown · May 7, 2024
Structure

To whom it may concern, I would like to report that my vehicle's paint has been peeling off since June 2018. The vehicle was purchased on 8/11/17, and I have continuously reported the paint problem to no avail from the dealership or manufacturer. As a matter of fact, in February 2019, the vehicle was serviced to due bubbles deve…

Read full complaint

To whom it may concern, I would like to report that my vehicle's paint has been peeling off since June 2018. The vehicle was purchased on 8/11/17, and I have continuously reported the paint problem to no avail from the dealership or manufacturer. As a matter of fact, in February 2019, the vehicle was serviced to due bubbles developing around the windshield, and I again reported the paint issues and received no resolution to my problem. Hence, I would like to know whether my case is an isolated one or just like the white paint settlement, Toyota has deceived some of its customers that chose blue paint in this model (Corolla).

NHTSA ODI #11587382

Mileage unknown · Mar 12, 2024
Air Bags

See attached document for complaint

NHTSA ODI #11576816

Mileage unknown · Jan 2, 2024
Power Train

My college son was driving down from Orlando, and when he got here I took his/my car to my mechanic because the AC was not cold. I felt a hard shift when I put it in reverse, and when I started to drive the car to the mechanic, it didn’t feel right. They fixed my AC and I asked him to check the car as I was worried it did not f…

Read full complaint

My college son was driving down from Orlando, and when he got here I took his/my car to my mechanic because the AC was not cold. I felt a hard shift when I put it in reverse, and when I started to drive the car to the mechanic, it didn’t feel right. They fixed my AC and I asked him to check the car as I was worried it did not feel safe to drive. They changed all the filters and did a complete transmission flush even though it was not due for 60,000 miles and there is less than 54,000 miles on this vehicle. They changed all the filters and upon doing the transmission flush my mechanic of 15 years found chunks of metal and shavings in the transmission pan. He took pics & told me my transmission was bad but it was an internal defect and I needed to take it to Toyota as there was no damage on the outside of my transmission, it’s pan, gasket or filter and there were no signs of any leak. He told me these CVT transmissions were a problem and there were a lot of ones not recalled, but there was a Special Service Campaign JSD for 1.3 million of these transmissions from Toyota. Toyota said my Vin number was not part of this Special Service Campaign JSD but I found there were also 3400 recalls on the CVT transmissions from the Toyota hatchback. Toyota told me because my car was already out of warranty, even if it was a manufacturing defect, they were not responsible. I take very good care of my cars. I have two Toyota Corollas, both 2017 and now I am very concerned about the other one. I’ve been on a lot of Toyota forums and it seems there are so many other Toyota Corollas that don’t have many miles on them and all of a sudden their transmission has an internal defect. I brought it to the dealership and they simply said it needed to be replaced, that it was hard shifting when going into reverse and banging gears intermediately. They told me if I wanted to know what the defect was I would have to pay at least 15 hrs of labor to start. My son could have been killed driving it

NHTSA ODI #11563178

Mileage unknown · Oct 21, 2023
Air BagsCrash

I was hit yesterday and my airbags didn't deploy. WHY???

NHTSA ODI #11551148

Mileage unknown · Sep 10, 2023
Unknown Or OtherCrashInjury

Twice within one month my Corolla experienced Sudden Unintended Acceleration. The first time I had just entered the parking lot of my local Star Market. I stopped for a man in the crosswalk and was just about to ease off the break when I saw a woman approaching the crosswalk so I stayed on my break. Suddenty the car revve…

Read full complaint

Twice within one month my Corolla experienced Sudden Unintended Acceleration. The first time I had just entered the parking lot of my local Star Market. I stopped for a man in the crosswalk and was just about to ease off the break when I saw a woman approaching the crosswalk so I stayed on my break. Suddenty the car revved up and went forward. I think it was so loud the woman heard it and stopped. My car returned to normal operation within maybe five seconds and as I drove by the woman, I yelled there was something wrong. Went home and scheduled an appointment with Toyota. It took a few days for them to check my car. I think this type of issue brings in the next level up of repair. I was told they went over everything and could find nothing wrong. My car was safe to drive. I drove it for exactly one month and it did the same thing. This time I was inching my way into a parking space that was up against a wall. Nowhere near the gas. I was maybe a couple of feet from the wall when the car accelerated again. The engine really revved up again and I went into the wall. The car was drivable, and I got it right back to Toyota. It is still sitting there pending investigation. I am waiting to hear from someone from their liability department. I'm not sure what will happen, but I know I will not drive that car again. My biggest concern is that Toyota will claim I'm elderly and hit the gas, not the brake. That is not what happened.

NHTSA ODI #11543658

Mileage unknown · Sep 8, 2023
Unknown Or Other

Unknown I didn’t have any accidents

NHTSA ODI #11543340

Mileage unknown · Aug 15, 2023
Electrical SystemEngineFuel/propulsion SystemFire

On the morning of July 21st the vehicle was parked in the garage the night before when all of the sudden our neighbors were yelling at my wife and I to exit the house because they saw fire flames and black smoke coming out of the garage. Everything in that garage and part of the house was destroyed. After it was safe to enter th…

Read full complaint

On the morning of July 21st the vehicle was parked in the garage the night before when all of the sudden our neighbors were yelling at my wife and I to exit the house because they saw fire flames and black smoke coming out of the garage. Everything in that garage and part of the house was destroyed. After it was safe to enter the house we noticed the damage was concentrated where the Toyota was parked, the explosion from the engine caused the hood to almost touch the windshield. Half the engine was gone.

NHTSA ODI #11538587

Mileage unknown · Jun 19, 2023
Air BagsCrashInjury

Three car accident. Driver 3 was at stop light (red) driver 2 (myself) was directly behind him (stopped). Driver 1 and at high speed hit me from behind. Airbags didn’t deploy. Causing injury to me and my passenger.

NHTSA ODI #11527734

Official recalls

3

20V024000 · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module

Jan 17, 2020

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2011-2019 Corolla, 2011-2013 Matrix, 2012-2018 Avalon, and 2013-2018 Avalon Hybrid vehicles. During certain crashes, the air bag electronic control unit (ECU) may malfunction, possibly disabling the deployment of the air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: In the event of a crash, air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners that do not deploy as intended may increase the risk of injury.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the ECU and install a noise filter between the air bag control module and its wire harness, as necessary, free of charge. Owners were notified of the safety risk beginning March 2, 2020. A second letter notifying owners of the remedy repair will be mailed between March 16, 2020 and June 27, 2020. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are 20TB03, 20TA03 and 20TA05.

19V503000 · Equipment:other:labels

Jun 28, 2019

Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain 2017-2019 Toyota Camry, Corolla, Rav4, Sienna, and Yaris iA vehicles equipped with factory-installed floor mats. The load carrying capacity modification label may be incorrect. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 110, "Tire Selection and Rims."

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An incorrect label may lead to unintentionally overloading the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: SET will notify owners and provide a corrected label for placement over the inaccurate label, free of charge. The recall began August 23, 2019. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. SET's number for this recall is SET19A.

17V295000 · Tires:temporary/emergency Spare Tire

May 2, 2017

Gulf States Toyota, Inc. (Gulf States) is recalling certain 2017 4Runner , 86, Avalon, Camry, Camry Hybrid, Corolla, Corolla iM, Highlander, Highlander Hybrid, Prius, Prius C, RAV4, RAV4 Hybrid, Sienna and Yaris vehicles. The spare tire air pressure was not adjusted to the proper pressure as stated on the Tire Pressure Label.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A spare tire that is not inflated to the proper value may not perform as intended, increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Gulf States will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the spare tires, adjusting their pressure as necessary, free of charge. The recall began June 15, 2017. Owners may contact Gulf States customer service at 1-800-444-1074. Toyota's number for this recall is 17R2.

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

2

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.

EA19001 · Electrical Overstress

Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect.  During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications.  The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU.  In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment.  FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle.  Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW.  These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes.  An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time.   In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU.  This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners.  Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation.  The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage.  There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation.  The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU.  If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC.  Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC.  All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled.  In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024.  With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Go deeper into Toyota Corolla problems