NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
257 reports80,000 miles · Mar 11, 2014
Air BagsCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 TOYOTA RAV 4. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER WAS TRAVELING AN UNKNOWN SPEED AND CRASHED INTO A BEAR. THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED BUT DID NOT DEFLATE AFTER DEPLOYMENT, MAKING IT EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR THE DRIVER TO IMMEDIATELY EXIT THE VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE INCIDENT. THE VIN WAS …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 TOYOTA RAV 4. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER WAS TRAVELING AN UNKNOWN SPEED AND CRASHED INTO A BEAR. THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED BUT DID NOT DEFLATE AFTER DEPLOYMENT, MAKING IT EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR THE DRIVER TO IMMEDIATELY EXIT THE VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE INCIDENT. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 80,000. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10568511
8,500 miles · Mar 11, 2014
Air BagsCrashInjury
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 TOYOTA RAV4. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 42 MPH AND CRASHED INTO A LARGE ANIMAL. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED BRUISES TO THE BODY AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED OF THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC AND WAS LATER INSPECTED BY THE MANUFACTURER…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 TOYOTA RAV4. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 42 MPH AND CRASHED INTO A LARGE ANIMAL. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED BRUISES TO THE BODY AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED OF THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC AND WAS LATER INSPECTED BY THE MANUFACTURER THIRTY DAYS LATER, WHO DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NO DEFECT IN THE VEHICLE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 8,500. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10568493
3,025 miles · Feb 27, 2014
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed Control
I LEASED 2013 TOYOTA RAV4, AROUND 2900 MILES THE WARNING AND INDICATING LIGHTS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL LIT UP WHILE I WAS DRIVING. TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER WHO DETERMINED THE CAUSE WAS "SOME ONE HIT ABS SENSOR AND CUT HARNESS ..." SINCE THE SENSORS WERE NOT UNDER WARRANTY, IT WILL COST ME $600 IN REPAIRS. THE FAILED SENSORS A…
Read full complaint
I LEASED 2013 TOYOTA RAV4, AROUND 2900 MILES THE WARNING AND INDICATING LIGHTS ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL LIT UP WHILE I WAS DRIVING. TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER WHO DETERMINED THE CAUSE WAS "SOME ONE HIT ABS SENSOR AND CUT HARNESS ..." SINCE THE SENSORS WERE NOT UNDER WARRANTY, IT WILL COST ME $600 IN REPAIRS. THE FAILED SENSORS ARE USED FOR VEHICLE SAFETY AND TRACTION CONTROL . I THINK THAT THE CABLE HARNESS SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO BE BETTER PROTECTED FROM ROAD HAZARDS AND THE CUSTOMER SHOULD NOT BE LIABLE FOR TOYOTA DESIGN FLAWS. PLEAD FIND ATTACHED SOME SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. THANK YOU,
NHTSA ODI #10578701
6,025 miles · Feb 26, 2014
Electrical System
THE INSTALLED NAVIGATION SCREEN IS IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE IN THE DRIVER'S NORMAL DRIVING POSITION AND IN ALMOST ANY DAYTIME LIGHTING CONDITION. BOUGHT A NEW TOYOTA RAV 4 LIMITED JULY 2013 WITH NAVIGATION. AMBIENT GLARE THROUGH THE VEHICLE WINDOWS AND/OR SUN ROOF WASH OUT THE DISPLAY, THIS IS DEFINITELY A DISTRACTION WHILE DRIVING AND…
Read full complaint
THE INSTALLED NAVIGATION SCREEN IS IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE IN THE DRIVER'S NORMAL DRIVING POSITION AND IN ALMOST ANY DAYTIME LIGHTING CONDITION. BOUGHT A NEW TOYOTA RAV 4 LIMITED JULY 2013 WITH NAVIGATION. AMBIENT GLARE THROUGH THE VEHICLE WINDOWS AND/OR SUN ROOF WASH OUT THE DISPLAY, THIS IS DEFINITELY A DISTRACTION WHILE DRIVING AND TRYING TO VIEW THE SCREEN WHEN IT IS IN NAVIGATION MODE, BORDERS FIRMLY AS UNSAFE. THERE IS NO WAY TO SAFELY USE THAT ITEM AND ITS FUNCTIONS LOCATED THERE WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT DISTRACTION. MY 2011 TOYOTA RAV 4 LIMITED WITH NAVIGATION DID NOT PRESENT THIS PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10566174
3,000 miles · Feb 26, 2014
Air BagsCrashInjury
THE TOYOTA WAS TRAVELING 35 MPH NORTH BOUND AND A MERCEDES MADE A LEFT HAND TURN IN FRONT OF THE TOYOTA. THE TOYOTA T-BONE THE MERCEDES AT 35 MPH AND THE AIR BAGS ON THE TOYOTA DID NOT DEPLOY. THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER IN THE TOYOTA SUFFERED SEVERAL INJURIES TO THE NECK, BACK, HANDS, LEG AND FEET AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOS…
Read full complaint
THE TOYOTA WAS TRAVELING 35 MPH NORTH BOUND AND A MERCEDES MADE A LEFT HAND TURN IN FRONT OF THE TOYOTA. THE TOYOTA T-BONE THE MERCEDES AT 35 MPH AND THE AIR BAGS ON THE TOYOTA DID NOT DEPLOY. THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER IN THE TOYOTA SUFFERED SEVERAL INJURIES TO THE NECK, BACK, HANDS, LEG AND FEET AND WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL FOR TREATMENT. THE TOYOTA WAS TOTALED BY THE INSURANCE CARRIER. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10565936
4,000 miles · Jan 20, 2014
EquipmentStructure
THERE IS HUGE SUN REFLECTION ON NAVIGATION SYSTEM & YOU HAVE VERY POOR VISION ON NAVIGATION. TIME TO TIME YOU HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR HEAD POSITION TO FIND RIGHT ANGLE TO READ NAVIGATION DISPLAY. THIS WILL DANGER THE LIFE OF DRIVER TREMENDOUSLY. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10560639
5,343 miles · Jan 13, 2014
Service Brakes
BRAKES SCRAPE LOUDLY WHILE BACKING AND ON TURNS. TOOK INTO DEALER,REAR PADS GLAZED ,ROTORS UNEVEN DEALER SANDED AND DEGLAZED REAR PADS,APPLY FINISH CUT/MACHINE TO REAR ROTORS NOW AT0.455IN NEW ROTORS0.472 NOT A GOOD SIGN AT 5343 MILES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10559706
270 miles · Jan 12, 2014
Electrical SystemEquipment
WHEN DRIVING AT ANY SPEED, UNDER ANY CONDITION, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE THE NAVIGATION SCREEN, CAUSING THE DRIVER TO LOOK, RATHER THAN GLANCE, AT THE SCREEN TO DETERMINE DRIVING INSTRUCTIONS, ROAD HAZARDS, WARNINGS, ETC. THE GLARE IS ALMOST BLINDING AT TIMES. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10559490
100 miles · Dec 31, 2013
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
THE INSTRUMENTS (SPEEDOMETER, TACHOMETER, FUEL GAUGE) OF THE CAR DO NOT LIGHT UP IF THE HEADLIGHTS ARE OFF. THIS CAN BE DANGEROUS WHEN DRIVING UNDER UNDERPASSES OR IN THE SHADOW OF TREES, ETC., SINCE ONE UNEXPECTEDLY CANNOT SEE THE SPEEDOMETER OR TACHOMETER UNDER THOSE CONDITIONS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10558027
127 miles · Dec 12, 2013
Vehicle Speed Control
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 TOYOTA RAV 4. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 55 MPH AND NOTICED THAT THE SPEED READING WAS INACCURATE WHEN COMPARED TO THE SPEED DISPLAYED ON THE GPS SYSTEM. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER BUT NO REPAIRS WERE PERFORMED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MECHANIC CONFIRMED THAT THE SPEEDOMETER WAS INDICATING A…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 TOYOTA RAV 4. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 55 MPH AND NOTICED THAT THE SPEED READING WAS INACCURATE WHEN COMPARED TO THE SPEED DISPLAYED ON THE GPS SYSTEM. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER BUT NO REPAIRS WERE PERFORMED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MECHANIC CONFIRMED THAT THE SPEEDOMETER WAS INDICATING A HIGHER SPEED THEN THE VEHICLE WAS ACTUALLY TRAVELING BUT THE SPEED WAS WITHIN AN ACCEPTABLE RANGE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND NO SOLUTION WAS OFFERED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 127.
NHTSA ODI #10555875
NHTSA investigations
1PE21005 · Battery Hold Down Bracket Thermal Events
Opened Feb 25, 2021 · Closed Aug 12, 2024
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical SYSTEM:12V/24V/48V Battery
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE) to understand the contributing factors and frequency of vehicle fires originating from the battery region of the engine compartment in Model Year (MY) 2013-2018 Toyota RAV4 vehicles on 25 February 2021. At the time of opening, ODI attributed eleven allegations and additional EWR events to this PE. PE21005 focused on replacement batteries installed in the subject vehicles. No reported fire event identified in PE21005 involved the originally supplied 12V battery. The reported fires took place in vehicles known to contain aftermarket batteries or whose age exceeded the expected life of the original equipment battery. ODI identified battery dimensioning as it relates to the battery retention system (hold down bracket, radiator support bolt, J-hook, and battery tray) as the main factor set in the contact between the battery hold down bracket contacting the positive terminal of the 12V battery. The subject vehicles carried over the same battery tray and retention system from the prior generation (MY2006 – MY2012) of RAV4 vehicles. However, the subject vehicles were equipped with a dimensionally smaller battery (Group 35) than the prior generation (Group 24F). The smaller- length measurement in the Group 35 battery size in a battery tray originally designed to fit a Group 24F battery contributed to increased potential for battery movement which was exacerbated by the diversity in aftermarket battery configuration and irregularities intrinsic to battery replacement procedures. Battery movement coupled with the proximity of the B+ terminal on the battery and the grounded electrically conductive hold down bracket set the stage for a short to ground leading to an engine stall (if in operation) followed by a vehicle fire. This investigation was not able to classify the installation status, battery size, or cause of every allegation due to the fire event causing damage to the area, inaccessible vehicle, modification to the battery retention system after the event, and/or inconclusive photographic evidence. Toyota's investigation of the issue identified aftermarket battery catalogs that listed an improper battery replacement size (Group 26R) that would nevertheless fit into the subject vehicles whose battery retention system is incapable of reliably restraining a Group 26R battery. On 18 November 2021, Toyota initiated a consumer advisory campaign (21TG01) to the subject vehicle owners, notifying them of the correct size battery and offering a free inspection of the battery and retention hardware, a caution label to affix to the hold down bracket, and a discounted replacement 12V battery. This investigation with Toyota established three broad categories to characterize the battery retention system state of a given vehicle: "correct", "minor mis-installation", and "major mis-installation". - The "correct" terminology references the front bolt, bracket, and J-hook installed in a position not in contact with the positive battery terminal and the front bolt torqued to 17 Nm and the J-hook engaged with the tray hole and torqued to 4.9 Nm. - A "minor mis-installation" would describe the three retention components installed in the prescribed location, however not to the correct torque values. - The "major mis-installation" condition would constitute a retention component missing or disconnected from the system. Toyota's own testing used five exemplar batteries installed on a subject vehicle in each battery categorization resulted in: - Contact between the B+ terminal and hold down bracket in "major mis-installations" - Movement of the battery in "minor mis-installations" - No observable motion in "correct" installations. ODI conducted its own evaluation of the Toyota- specified replacement battery and 5 aftermarket Group 35 batteries. The six batteries tested conformed to the Group 35 Battery Council International (BCI) standard on overall dimensional tolerance and terminal location. That standard does not define the edge shape or material of battery casing. Physical interaction between the hold down bracket and the battery case and the friction between the casing material and the battery tray resulted in a large variability in movement forces required to incite movement when the battery was installed in the "correct" condition. Resulting in movement at an induced lateral load between 0.6 G and 1.91 G equivalent force across each battery. This force is higher than a typical vehicle could exert in a steady state turn and would only experience loads through brief shock or impulses. Multiple shock or impulse loads across time would contribute to a delay between the replacement battery installation and the fire event. Likelihood of a fire event increases as the installation method degraded from the "correct", to "minor mis-installation", and then to "major mis-installation". Protruding vent caps atop some of the batteries tested aided in restricting battery movement relative to the hold down. An absence of vent caps permitted additional movement. Following several discussions and vehicle inspections with ODI during this investigation, on 01 November 2023, Toyota filed a safety recall (NHTSA 23V-734) of 1,853,568 MY 2013 through MY 2018 Toyota RAV4 vehicles to reduce the risk of a vehicle fire with redesigned battery retention components. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
Illustration