WINDSHIELD WAS CHIPPED BY SOME DEBRIS WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY GOING ABOUT 55 MPH, THE SIZE WAS HALF A CENTIMETER, IF THAT. THE NEXT MORNING IT TURNED INTO A 6 INCH CRACK AND HAS GROWN EVEN BIGGER IN THE PAST COUPLE WEEKS TO WHERE IT HAS COME TO BLOCK MY VISION. OTHER CARS THAT I HAVE OWNED HAD CHIPS IN THE WINDSHIELD, BUT N…
Read full complaint
WINDSHIELD WAS CHIPPED BY SOME DEBRIS WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY GOING ABOUT 55 MPH, THE SIZE WAS HALF A CENTIMETER, IF THAT. THE NEXT MORNING IT TURNED INTO A 6 INCH CRACK AND HAS GROWN EVEN BIGGER IN THE PAST COUPLE WEEKS TO WHERE IT HAS COME TO BLOCK MY VISION. OTHER CARS THAT I HAVE OWNED HAD CHIPS IN THE WINDSHIELD, BUT NEVER DEVELOPED INTO A CRACK. I AM THINKING THE WINDSHIELD IS TOO, TOO, THIN FOR IT TO BE PRACTICAL FOR A VEHICLE TRAVELING HIGHWAY SPEEDS AND HAVE READ THAT THIS IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE AMONG OTHER OWNERS. MY BIGGEST CONCERN, IF THE DEBRIS IS A LITTLE LARGER, WILL THE WINDSHIELD PREVENT PENETRATION INTO THE DRIVER AND/OR PASSENGER COMPARTMENT SO AS NO ONE WILL BE HARMED DUE TO A THIN WINDSHIELD? *TR
NHTSA ODI #10547468
Official recalls
0
No recalls in this snapshot.
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
DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System
NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP13002 · Drivability, Service Brake Failure
Opened Mar 18, 2013 · Closed Jul 25, 2014
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes
On January 3, 2013, NHTSA received a letter (ODI No. 10487746) from Ms. Jessie A. Powell petitioning the agency to investigate drivability and braking concerns in the subject vehicle.The petition expressed two concerns: 1. The first software problem was when the vehicle shifted from battery to motor and caused such impact, I initially believed the vehicle had been struck in the rear.2. The next more alarming problem was NO BRAKES. The brake pedal traveled to the floor and a dashboard warning light flashed.This symptom occurred twice, leading to the vehicle being towed to the dealership, the second time in the dealership parking lot after diagnostics of the first incident.After a test drive and vehicle inspection, no actionable problem was found within the petitioner?s vehicle.The braking concern reported turned out to be normal vehicle operation.The petitioner identified other complaints of poor braking performance and low brake pedal received by NHTSA concerning Prius models. Broader review of the consumer complaints reported for all variants of the subject vehicle showed no indication that either the reported jolting sensation or the brake performance concerns reported are occurring in this vehicle population at a level that would require investigative action by NHTSA.The following recalls by Toyota were to address many of these complaints in Prius variants. Neither of these recalls is applicable to Ms. Powell?s 2012 Prius C: 1. Recall 10V-039 March 5, 2010 - 2010 Prius, Lexus HS - Reprogramming ABS ECU - Improve Antilock brake function over bumpy surfaces. 2. Recall 13V-235 August 7, 2013 - 2010 Prius, Lexus HS - Replace Brake Booster / Pump assembly - Low brake pedal due to nitrogen bubble in hydraulic portion of brake system. In the Agency?s view, additional investigation is unlikely to result in a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles.Therefore, given the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA limited resources to best accomplish the Agency?s safety mission, the petition is denied.This action does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The Agency will take further action if warranted by future circumstances.More details concerning our review can be found in the Federal Register Notice for this action.
2012 Toyota Prius C Problems, Complaints & Recalls | Skip That Year
Illustration