← New search

2005 Toyota Prius

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Prius years

Owner complaints for the 2005 Toyota Prius are substantially higher than the model-year median of 164.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

871 reports with mileage · 180 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.

  • Exterior Lighting. Review the 346 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 178 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 128 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

102 crash reports4 fire reports46 injury reports

Exterior Lighting complaints

346 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Jul 21, 2011
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD INTERMITTENTLY STOP ILLUMINATING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE WOULD HAVE TO TURN THE HEADLIGHTS ON AND OFF SEVERAL TIMES IN ORDER TO KEEP THE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS IN…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD INTERMITTENTLY STOP ILLUMINATING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT SHE WOULD HAVE TO TURN THE HEADLIGHTS ON AND OFF SEVERAL TIMES IN ORDER TO KEEP THE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE LIGHTS FIXTURE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT THIS WAS A WIDESPREAD ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 96,000.

NHTSA ODI #10413905

106,250 miles · Jul 17, 2011
Exterior Lighting

RIGHT FRONT HEADLIGHT WOULD GO OFF WHILE DRIVING. REQUIRED THAT I SWITCH LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON TO GET THE LIGHT TO WORK AGAIN. I HAD THE FRONT RIGHT HEADLIGHT REPLACED AND THREE WEEKS LATER THE LEFT FRONT HEADLIGHT FOLLOWED THE SAME SEQUENCE OF EVENTS. I PURCHASED A NEW HEADLIGHT AND HAD TWO DIFFERENT AUTO MECHANICS REPLACE …

Read full complaint

RIGHT FRONT HEADLIGHT WOULD GO OFF WHILE DRIVING. REQUIRED THAT I SWITCH LIGHTS OFF AND BACK ON TO GET THE LIGHT TO WORK AGAIN. I HAD THE FRONT RIGHT HEADLIGHT REPLACED AND THREE WEEKS LATER THE LEFT FRONT HEADLIGHT FOLLOWED THE SAME SEQUENCE OF EVENTS. I PURCHASED A NEW HEADLIGHT AND HAD TWO DIFFERENT AUTO MECHANICS REPLACE IT AND THE LEFT FRONT HEADLIGHT WILL NOT WORK. I AM SCHEDULED TO TAKE THE CAR BACK TO THE LAST MECHANIC NEXT WEEK. VERY UNSAFE TO HAVE THIS HAPPEN WHILE OPERATING THE CAR AT NIGHT AND ANNOYING AND FRUSTRATING THAT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP WANTS $300+ TO REPLACE THEIR OBVIOUS MANUFACTURING MALFUNCTION. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10413183

80,000 miles · Jul 15, 2011
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 60 MPH WHEN THE AUTOMATIC HEADLIGHT SENSOR FAILED DUE TO A DESIGN FLAW AND CORROSION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE COULD POTENTIALLY CAUSE THE HEADLIGHTS TO BLIND THE DRIVERS OF ONCOMING TRAFFIC. THE MANUFACTURE WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 60 MPH WHEN THE AUTOMATIC HEADLIGHT SENSOR FAILED DUE TO A DESIGN FLAW AND CORROSION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE COULD POTENTIALLY CAUSE THE HEADLIGHTS TO BLIND THE DRIVERS OF ONCOMING TRAFFIC. THE MANUFACTURE WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 80,000.

NHTSA ODI #10412415

176,319 miles · Jul 2, 2011
Exterior Lighting

I HAVE A 2005 (01/01/05) MANUFACTURE DATE PRIUS. I DON'T REMEMBER THE TRIM PACKAGE. I NOTICED THE DRIVERS SIDE HEAD LIGHT WOULD INTERMITTENTLY FAIL CYCLING THE LIGHT OFF AND ON WOULD RESUME OPERATION. ONE WEEK LATER WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT BOTH HEADLIGHTS COMPLETELY FAILED AGAIN CYCLING THEM OFF AND ON RESUMED OPERATION. I WAS IS…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2005 (01/01/05) MANUFACTURE DATE PRIUS. I DON'T REMEMBER THE TRIM PACKAGE. I NOTICED THE DRIVERS SIDE HEAD LIGHT WOULD INTERMITTENTLY FAIL CYCLING THE LIGHT OFF AND ON WOULD RESUME OPERATION. ONE WEEK LATER WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT BOTH HEADLIGHTS COMPLETELY FAILED AGAIN CYCLING THEM OFF AND ON RESUMED OPERATION. I WAS ISSUED A WARNING WHILE DRIVING HOME FROM WORK BY THE POLICE AND DEMONSTRATED THIS FACT. I HAVE TAKEN THE CAR TO THE DEALER WHO TOLD ME BOTH HEADLIGHTS NEEDED REPLACED AND CHARGED ME 607.25 TO REPLACE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10410293

110,000 miles · Mar 18, 2011
Exterior Lighting

STARTING IN LATE WINTER, EARLY SPRING OF 2010, WE NOTICED INTERMITTENT OCCASIONAL FAILURE OF ONE OR THE OTHER OF OUR HID HEADLAMPS ON OUR 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS (WHICH WE WERE TOLD BY THE TOYOTA SALESMAN WERE LIFETIME HEADLIGHTS). THIS SITUATION COULD BE IMMEDIATELY RECTIFIED BY QUICKLY TURNING OFF AND ON AGAIN THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH …

Read full complaint

STARTING IN LATE WINTER, EARLY SPRING OF 2010, WE NOTICED INTERMITTENT OCCASIONAL FAILURE OF ONE OR THE OTHER OF OUR HID HEADLAMPS ON OUR 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS (WHICH WE WERE TOLD BY THE TOYOTA SALESMAN WERE LIFETIME HEADLIGHTS). THIS SITUATION COULD BE IMMEDIATELY RECTIFIED BY QUICKLY TURNING OFF AND ON AGAIN THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH AT THE STEERING WHEEL STALK. THEN, ON JULY 24, 2010, WHILE ON A REMOTE AND STEEP WINDING MOUNTAIN PASS ROAD IN CALIFORNIA, (SONORA PASS ROAD) IN PITCH DARK, BOTH HEADLAMPS FAILED SIMULTANEOUSLY AND COULD NOT BE RECTIFIED WITH A QUICK FLICK OF THE HEADLAMP SWITCH OFF AND ON. I BRAKED HEAVILY, KEEPING IN MY MIND A VISION OF THE CURVE IN THE ROAD I HAD JUST SEEN AHEAD OF ME. BRAKING HEAVILY AND TRYING TO STEER IN THE DARK, I PUT THE FLASHERS ON SO I WOULDN'T BE REAR-ENDED. THIS ENDED UP BEING A FORTUITOUS DECISION, BECAUSE IT WAS SO DARK THAT THE MOMENTARY FLASHES OF THE FORWARD FLASHERS ALLOWED ME TO SEE JUST ENOUGH ROAD IN BRIEF SNIPPETS SO THAT I COULD STEER MY VEHICLE SAFELY AROUND THE CURVE AND GET IT OFF THE ROAD. I FIGURED OUT THAT WITH BOTH LAMPS OUT, A MUCH SLOWER OFF/ON AGAIN CYCLE OF THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH WOULD BRING THEM BACK ON, AND I LIMPED THE VEHICLE HOME. HAVING DRIVEN OVER A MILLION MILES IN MY ADULT LIFE, LUCKILY I HAD THE EXPERIENCE AND THE CALM TO HANDLE THIS SITUATION WITHOUT CATASTROPHIC RESULT. HAD MY WIFE OR MY DAUGHTER BEEN DRIVING, WE CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE GONE OFF THE ROAD AND CRASHED THE VEHICLE. IMMEDIATELY THE FOLLOWING DAY I SCHEDULED AN APPOINTMENT WITH A TOYOTA DEALERSHIP SERVICE CENTER; END RESULT OF WHICH THEY WANT ME TO PAY NEARLY $900 TO REPLACE THESE DEFECTIVE HEADLAMPS. I CALLED TOYOTA, AND UPON INITIAL CONTACT, WON'T DO ANYTHING FOR US. NEEDLESS TO SAY IN THIS ECONOMY, WE DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY, AND WE HAVE BEEN RELEGATED TO DRIVING OUR PRIUS MOSTLY DAYTIMES, AND CERTAINLY NOT ON MOUNTAIN PASS ROADS AT NIGHT. READING ONLINE TOYOTA FORUMS, I AM VERY OBVIOUSLY NOT THE ONLY PERSON WHO HAS THIS PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10392168

138,500 miles · Mar 9, 2011
Exterior Lighting

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING BETWEEN 35-40 MPH WHEN THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE CONTACT ENGAGED THE EMERGENCY HAZARD LIGHTS UNTIL SHE WAS ABLE TO DRIVE TO A SAFE LOCATION. THE HEADLIGHTS BEGAN TO FUNCTION AFTER THE CONTACT ABRUPTLY JOLTED THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH HOWEVER, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIG…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING BETWEEN 35-40 MPH WHEN THE HEADLIGHTS FAILED. THE CONTACT ENGAGED THE EMERGENCY HAZARD LIGHTS UNTIL SHE WAS ABLE TO DRIVE TO A SAFE LOCATION. THE HEADLIGHTS BEGAN TO FUNCTION AFTER THE CONTACT ABRUPTLY JOLTED THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH HOWEVER, THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD ONLY ILLUMINATE SPORADICALLY. AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE BUT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT WAS PREVIOUSLY REPLACED BUT NOT RECENTLY. THE FAILURE HAD NOT RECURRED SINCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 138,500. UPDATED 4/4/11 *CN UPDATED 04/06/11

NHTSA ODI #10389614

80,000 miles · Feb 24, 2011
Exterior Lighting

INTERMITTENT HEADLIGHT PROBLEM PASSENGER HEADLIGHT TURNS OFF INTERMITTENTLY WHILE DRIVING WHEN I TURN THE LIGHTS ALL THE WAY OFF THEN BACK ON AGAIN THE LIGHT WILL WORK AGAIN FOR A WHILE. I HAVE BEEN STOPPED BY POLICE TWICE SO FAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10384419

Mileage unknown · Feb 10, 2011
Exterior Lighting

THE HEADLIGHT LEVEL SWITCH FAILURE (WATER-RUST IN SWITCH) IS CAUSING REAL DANGER. WHEN LOCATED IN UP WHILE IN DIM - ONCOMING TRAFFIC IMPAIRED. WHEN LEVEL SWITCH ENDS DOWN, THE LINE OF SIGHT IS ONLY SEVERAL FEET IN FRONT OF VEHICLE. A SHORTER PERSON (WIFE) IS UNABLE TO SEE ANY LIGHTED ROAD. DRIVING REALLY BECOMES BAD WITH THE B…

Read full complaint

THE HEADLIGHT LEVEL SWITCH FAILURE (WATER-RUST IN SWITCH) IS CAUSING REAL DANGER. WHEN LOCATED IN UP WHILE IN DIM - ONCOMING TRAFFIC IMPAIRED. WHEN LEVEL SWITCH ENDS DOWN, THE LINE OF SIGHT IS ONLY SEVERAL FEET IN FRONT OF VEHICLE. A SHORTER PERSON (WIFE) IS UNABLE TO SEE ANY LIGHTED ROAD. DRIVING REALLY BECOMES BAD WITH THE BRIGHT SWITCHED ON. ONCOMING TRAFFIC BECOMES IMPAIRED CAUSING DANGER. THE WIFE ACTUALLY REFUSES TO DRIVE AT NIGHT. JUST UNABLE TO SEE PROPERLY. I HAVE TRIED UNSUCCESSFULLY TO CONTACT DIRECTLY TO TOYOTA WITH THIS SITUATION. SERVICE GARAGES WANT JUST UNDER $ 500.00 TO CORRECT PROBLEM. I FEEL THIS SHOULD BE A RECALL ITEM BECAUSE OF QUALITY, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY THE DRIVING DANGER. THE ACTUAL SWITCH SHOULD BE PURCHASED MUCH LOWER COST. THE VALUE OF SWITCH ALONE WITHOUT THE BRACKETS.WE FEEL THE DANGER ON HIGHWAY TO BE A REAL CONCERN. I HAVE SPOKE WITH OTHER 05 PRIUS OWNERS AND EACH HAS EXPRESS THE PROBLEM. MOST HAVE JUST HAD IT REPAIRED UNDER WARRANTY.

NHTSA ODI #10382313

120,000 miles · Feb 9, 2011
Exterior Lighting

EITHER OR BOTH HIGH-INTENSITY HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF WHILE DRIVING WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT. THIS IS THE EXACT SAME PROBLEM DESCRIBED IN THE CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT FOR 2006-2009 PRIUS VEHICLES. ACCORDING TO THE LAWSUIT, THE HEADLIGHTS PREMATURELY FAIL BY FLICKERING OR TURNING OFF INTERMITTENTLY, OFTEN REQUIRING COSTLY REPAIRS. ALTHO…

Read full complaint

EITHER OR BOTH HIGH-INTENSITY HEADLIGHTS TURN OFF WHILE DRIVING WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT. THIS IS THE EXACT SAME PROBLEM DESCRIBED IN THE CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT FOR 2006-2009 PRIUS VEHICLES. ACCORDING TO THE LAWSUIT, THE HEADLIGHTS PREMATURELY FAIL BY FLICKERING OR TURNING OFF INTERMITTENTLY, OFTEN REQUIRING COSTLY REPAIRS. ALTHOUGH TOYOTA HAS DENIED THESE CLAIMS, GIRARD GIBBS LLP IS PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT THE PARTIES REACHED A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT THAT HAS BEEN GRANTED PRELIMINARY COURT APPROVAL. AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE SETTLEMENT WILL PROVIDE: ' A FREE WARRANTY EXTENSION FOR HID HEADLIGHT BULB AND ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS (THROUGH THE EARLIER OF 5 YEARS AND 50,000 MILES); AND ' CASH REIMBURSEMENTS TO MANY CLASS MEMBERS WHO PAID FOR HEADLIGHT REPAIRS. UNFORTUNATELY, MY VEHICLE YEAR WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CLASS. HOWEVER, AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, THE PROBLEM WITH MY VEHICLE IS IDENTICAL TO THOSE IN THE SUIT. THE REPAIR COST ME $593.75. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND ASKED THEM TO REIMBURSE ME FOR THE REPAIR. THEIR RESPONSE WAS THAT MY VEHICLE IS NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY AND MY VEHICLE YEAR IS NOT PART OF THE CLASS ACTION SUIT. THEY WILL NOT REIMBURSE ME FOR THE REPAIR. HOWEVER, THE VEHICLES IN THE CLASS ACTION SUIT WERE NO LONGER UNDER WARRANTY. UPDATED 05/04/11

NHTSA ODI #10382149

78,000 miles · Feb 8, 2011
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD SOMETIMES GO OUT AND THEN COME BACK ON AFTER TURNING THE CAR OFF/ON. EVENTUALLY BOTH OF THE HEADLIGHTS HAD THIS PROBLEM ALONG WITH THEM TURNING PINK IN COLOR AND BACK TO WHITE WHILE DRIVING. I TOOK THE PRIUS INTO THE DEALERSHIP AND SINCE I PURCHASED THE EXTENDED WARRANTY OF 100,000 MILES THE HI…

Read full complaint

THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WOULD SOMETIMES GO OUT AND THEN COME BACK ON AFTER TURNING THE CAR OFF/ON. EVENTUALLY BOTH OF THE HEADLIGHTS HAD THIS PROBLEM ALONG WITH THEM TURNING PINK IN COLOR AND BACK TO WHITE WHILE DRIVING. I TOOK THE PRIUS INTO THE DEALERSHIP AND SINCE I PURCHASED THE EXTENDED WARRANTY OF 100,000 MILES THE HID ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNITS (ECUS) WILL BE REPLACED FREE OF CHARGE BUT THE HID LIGHT BULBS ARE COSTING $350 TO REPLACE. I SEE THAT TOYOTA HAS EXTENDED THE WARRANTY OF THE LIGHT BULBS TO A FIVE YEAR/50,000 FOR THE 2006-2009 PRIUS STARTING FEB 9TH 2011, TOMORROW. THE MECHANICS SAY THESE BULBS SHOULD LAST OVER A 100,000 MILES BUT THE ECUS ARE MAKING THEM GO BAD EARLY. I HAD A "WONDERFUL" CONVERSATION WITH TOYOTA EXTRA CARE REPRESENTATIVE ABOUT THIS PROBLEM. HE BASICALLY TOLD ME ANYTHING THAT ANYTHING THAT BREAKS THAT IS NOT COVERED BY WARRANTY (HEADLIGHTS) BECAUSE AN ITEM THAT IS UNDER EXTENDED WARRANTY(ECU), IS NOT COVERED. AND THEN HE WENT ON TO EXPLAIN THIS BY TALKING ABOUT WHAT CAME FIRST, CHICKEN OR THE EGG. I WAS HOPING TO GET INTO MORE IN-DEPTH EVOLUTION DISCUSSION WITH HIM, BUT I RAN OUT OF TIME AND PATIENCE. I STILL LOVE OUR PRIUS, 78000 MILES. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10381137

Official recalls

6

12V536000 · Engine And Engine Cooling; Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter

Nov 14, 2012

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Engine And Engine Cooling

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.

Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

12V537000 · Steering; Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector

Nov 14, 2012

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Steering

Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.

Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.

Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center 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.

09V388000 · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

Oct 5, 2009

TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.

Remedy: TOYOTA FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.

06V188000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System

May 31, 2006

THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND SLIDING YOKE IN THE ELECTRIC POWER STEERING SYSTEM CAN CRACK WHEN LARGE FORCES ARE APPLIED AND THE CONNECTION MAY SEPARATE OR THE SLEEVE MAY FRACTURE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE.

Remedy: TOYOTA WILL REPLACE THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND INSPECT THE SLIDING YOKE AND REPLACE IT IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 9, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.

06V096000 · Air Bags

Apr 3, 2006

ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY OF THE AIR BAG INFLATOR, WHICH IS USED IN THE SIDE AIR BAG, THE CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAG, AND THE KNEE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY, SOME INFLATORS WERE PRODUCED WITH AN INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF THE HEATING AGENTS NECESSARY FOR PROPER AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. IN THIS CONDITION, THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE GAS MAY BE INSUFFICIENT TO PROPERLY INFLATE THE AIR BAG WHEN THE SRS SYSTEM IS ACTIVATED DURING A CRASH.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT IN THE INVOLVED SEATING POSITION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SPECIFIC SRS AIR BAG. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-888-270-9371, SCION AT 1-866-548-1851, OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

3

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.

DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation

Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Additional source detail variants (3)

Steering:column

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Steering:linkages

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

Steering

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606

PE05029 · Engine Stalling

Opened May 31, 2005 · Closed Oct 12, 2005

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Unknown Or Other

ODI OPENED PE05-029 BASED ON 33 REPORTS OF ALLEGED GASOLINE ENGINE STALLING ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE GASOLINE/ ELECTRIC HYBRID VEHICLES THAT CAN BE OPERATED IN GASOLINE OR ELECTRIC MODES, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH DEPENDING ON THE POWER DEMAND.ALL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE GASOLINE ENGINE SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING.SOME OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO OPERATE USING THE ELECTRIC MODE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE GAS ENGINE STALLED AND SOME REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY FELT THE GAS ENGINE STALLED.SOME CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER ALLOWING THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A SHORT TIME, WHEREAS OTHERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD THEIR VEHICLE TOWED.DURING PE05-029, ADDITIONAL FAILURE DATA WAS IDENTIFIED AS NOTED IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY ABOVE.THE COMPLAINT DATA REPRESENTS INCIDENTS WHERE ENGINE STALLING WAS ALLEGED OR WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE ONE OF THE VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT CAUSES THE GAS ENGINE TO STALL.IN ITS AUGUST 26, 2005 RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST, TOYOTA IDENTIFIED VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TO EXPERIENCE A GAS ENGINE STALL.IF THIS HAPPENS, THE DRIVER IS ALERTED BY AN AUDIBLE SOUND AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS.THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE ELECTRIC MODE AND THE ELECTRICALLY-POWERED BRAKE AND STEERING OPERATION WILL CONTINUE TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. ANALYSIS OF THE WARRANTY DATA INDICATED THAT OVER 97% OF VEHICLES EXPERIENCING A GAS ENGINE STALL RESULTED FROM AN ISSUE WITH THE PROGRAM LOGIC IN THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE (ECM) SYSTEM, WHICH MAY CAUSE THE ECM SYSTEM TO NOT START THE GAS ENGINE WHEN REQUIRED.AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE WILL ENTER THE LIMITED OPERATION MODE DESCRIBED ABOVE.THE MAJORITY OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE DRIVER EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENGINE STALL. DURING OCTOBER 2005, TOYOTA INFORMED ODI THAT IT WOULD INITIATE A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN (SSC) TO REPROGRAM THE ECM SOFTWARE ON APPROXIMATELY 75,000 MY 2004 AND EARLY 2005 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS THE GAS ENGINE STALLING CONDITION.DURING THIS SSC, DEALERS WILL ALSO APPLY SPECIAL DIELECTRIC GREASE TO A TRANSAXLE CONNECTOR TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION WHICH MAY ALSO CAUSE SIMILAR LIMITED OPERATION CONDITIONS.BASED ON ODI'S ANALYSIS, THIS REMEDY SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTING IN A LIMITED OPERATION MODE.GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER USE OF THE AGENCY RESOURCES IN THIS MATTER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Additional source detail variants (3)

Engine And Engine Cooling:engine

ODI OPENED PE05-029 BASED ON 33 REPORTS OF ALLEGED GASOLINE ENGINE STALLING ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE GASOLINE/ ELECTRIC HYBRID VEHICLES THAT CAN BE OPERATED IN GASOLINE OR ELECTRIC MODES, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH DEPENDING ON THE POWER DEMAND.ALL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE GASOLINE ENGINE SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING.SOME OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO OPERATE USING THE ELECTRIC MODE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE GAS ENGINE STALLED AND SOME REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY FELT THE GAS ENGINE STALLED.SOME CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER ALLOWING THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A SHORT TIME, WHEREAS OTHERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD THEIR VEHICLE TOWED.DURING PE05-029, ADDITIONAL FAILURE DATA WAS IDENTIFIED AS NOTED IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY ABOVE.THE COMPLAINT DATA REPRESENTS INCIDENTS WHERE ENGINE STALLING WAS ALLEGED OR WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE ONE OF THE VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT CAUSES THE GAS ENGINE TO STALL.IN ITS AUGUST 26, 2005 RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST, TOYOTA IDENTIFIED VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TO EXPERIENCE A GAS ENGINE STALL.IF THIS HAPPENS, THE DRIVER IS ALERTED BY AN AUDIBLE SOUND AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS.THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE ELECTRIC MODE AND THE ELECTRICALLY-POWERED BRAKE AND STEERING OPERATION WILL CONTINUE TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. ANALYSIS OF THE WARRANTY DATA INDICATED THAT OVER 97% OF VEHICLES EXPERIENCING A GAS ENGINE STALL RESULTED FROM AN ISSUE WITH THE PROGRAM LOGIC IN THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE (ECM) SYSTEM, WHICH MAY CAUSE THE ECM SYSTEM TO NOT START THE GAS ENGINE WHEN REQUIRED.AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE WILL ENTER THE LIMITED OPERATION MODE DESCRIBED ABOVE.THE MAJORITY OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE DRIVER EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENGINE STALL. DURING OCTOBER 2005, TOYOTA INFORMED ODI THAT IT WOULD INITIATE A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN (SSC) TO REPROGRAM THE ECM SOFTWARE ON APPROXIMATELY 75,000 MY 2004 AND EARLY 2005 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS THE GAS ENGINE STALLING CONDITION.DURING THIS SSC, DEALERS WILL ALSO APPLY SPECIAL DIELECTRIC GREASE TO A TRANSAXLE CONNECTOR TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION WHICH MAY ALSO CAUSE SIMILAR LIMITED OPERATION CONDITIONS.BASED ON ODI'S ANALYSIS, THIS REMEDY SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTING IN A LIMITED OPERATION MODE.GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER USE OF THE AGENCY RESOURCES IN THIS MATTER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Engine And Engine Cooling

ODI OPENED PE05-029 BASED ON 33 REPORTS OF ALLEGED GASOLINE ENGINE STALLING ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE GASOLINE/ ELECTRIC HYBRID VEHICLES THAT CAN BE OPERATED IN GASOLINE OR ELECTRIC MODES, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH DEPENDING ON THE POWER DEMAND.ALL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE GASOLINE ENGINE SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING.SOME OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO OPERATE USING THE ELECTRIC MODE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE GAS ENGINE STALLED AND SOME REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY FELT THE GAS ENGINE STALLED.SOME CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER ALLOWING THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A SHORT TIME, WHEREAS OTHERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD THEIR VEHICLE TOWED.DURING PE05-029, ADDITIONAL FAILURE DATA WAS IDENTIFIED AS NOTED IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY ABOVE.THE COMPLAINT DATA REPRESENTS INCIDENTS WHERE ENGINE STALLING WAS ALLEGED OR WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE ONE OF THE VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT CAUSES THE GAS ENGINE TO STALL.IN ITS AUGUST 26, 2005 RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST, TOYOTA IDENTIFIED VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TO EXPERIENCE A GAS ENGINE STALL.IF THIS HAPPENS, THE DRIVER IS ALERTED BY AN AUDIBLE SOUND AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS.THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE ELECTRIC MODE AND THE ELECTRICALLY-POWERED BRAKE AND STEERING OPERATION WILL CONTINUE TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. ANALYSIS OF THE WARRANTY DATA INDICATED THAT OVER 97% OF VEHICLES EXPERIENCING A GAS ENGINE STALL RESULTED FROM AN ISSUE WITH THE PROGRAM LOGIC IN THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE (ECM) SYSTEM, WHICH MAY CAUSE THE ECM SYSTEM TO NOT START THE GAS ENGINE WHEN REQUIRED.AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE WILL ENTER THE LIMITED OPERATION MODE DESCRIBED ABOVE.THE MAJORITY OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE DRIVER EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENGINE STALL. DURING OCTOBER 2005, TOYOTA INFORMED ODI THAT IT WOULD INITIATE A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN (SSC) TO REPROGRAM THE ECM SOFTWARE ON APPROXIMATELY 75,000 MY 2004 AND EARLY 2005 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS THE GAS ENGINE STALLING CONDITION.DURING THIS SSC, DEALERS WILL ALSO APPLY SPECIAL DIELECTRIC GREASE TO A TRANSAXLE CONNECTOR TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION WHICH MAY ALSO CAUSE SIMILAR LIMITED OPERATION CONDITIONS.BASED ON ODI'S ANALYSIS, THIS REMEDY SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTING IN A LIMITED OPERATION MODE.GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER USE OF THE AGENCY RESOURCES IN THIS MATTER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

Unknown Or Other

ODI OPENED PE05-029 BASED ON 33 REPORTS OF ALLEGED GASOLINE ENGINE STALLING ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE GASOLINE/ ELECTRIC HYBRID VEHICLES THAT CAN BE OPERATED IN GASOLINE OR ELECTRIC MODES, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH DEPENDING ON THE POWER DEMAND.ALL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE GASOLINE ENGINE SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING.SOME OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO OPERATE USING THE ELECTRIC MODE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE GAS ENGINE STALLED AND SOME REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY FELT THE GAS ENGINE STALLED.SOME CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER ALLOWING THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A SHORT TIME, WHEREAS OTHERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD THEIR VEHICLE TOWED.DURING PE05-029, ADDITIONAL FAILURE DATA WAS IDENTIFIED AS NOTED IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY ABOVE.THE COMPLAINT DATA REPRESENTS INCIDENTS WHERE ENGINE STALLING WAS ALLEGED OR WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE ONE OF THE VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT CAUSES THE GAS ENGINE TO STALL.IN ITS AUGUST 26, 2005 RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST, TOYOTA IDENTIFIED VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TO EXPERIENCE A GAS ENGINE STALL.IF THIS HAPPENS, THE DRIVER IS ALERTED BY AN AUDIBLE SOUND AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS.THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE ELECTRIC MODE AND THE ELECTRICALLY-POWERED BRAKE AND STEERING OPERATION WILL CONTINUE TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. ANALYSIS OF THE WARRANTY DATA INDICATED THAT OVER 97% OF VEHICLES EXPERIENCING A GAS ENGINE STALL RESULTED FROM AN ISSUE WITH THE PROGRAM LOGIC IN THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE (ECM) SYSTEM, WHICH MAY CAUSE THE ECM SYSTEM TO NOT START THE GAS ENGINE WHEN REQUIRED.AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE WILL ENTER THE LIMITED OPERATION MODE DESCRIBED ABOVE.THE MAJORITY OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE DRIVER EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENGINE STALL. DURING OCTOBER 2005, TOYOTA INFORMED ODI THAT IT WOULD INITIATE A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN (SSC) TO REPROGRAM THE ECM SOFTWARE ON APPROXIMATELY 75,000 MY 2004 AND EARLY 2005 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS THE GAS ENGINE STALLING CONDITION.DURING THIS SSC, DEALERS WILL ALSO APPLY SPECIAL DIELECTRIC GREASE TO A TRANSAXLE CONNECTOR TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION WHICH MAY ALSO CAUSE SIMILAR LIMITED OPERATION CONDITIONS.BASED ON ODI'S ANALYSIS, THIS REMEDY SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTING IN A LIMITED OPERATION MODE.GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER USE OF THE AGENCY RESOURCES IN THIS MATTER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.