1997 Toyota Tacoma

MY HUSBAND HAS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. HE BOUGHT IT USED FROM A DEALERSHIP IN 2004. RECENTLY HE SAW THAT THE FRAME UNDERNEATH WAS RUSTED AND ROTTING OUT. SOMEONE TOLD HIM THAT TOYOTA WAS TAKING CARE OF THIS PROBLEM AND THEIR CUSTOMERS BECAUSE IT TURNS OUT THAT THIS IS A MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT IN THIS YEAR, MAKE AND MODEL. WELL, THEY TOLD US TAT WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE THE VEHICLE IN BY FEBRUARY TO RECEIVE THE 15 YEAR EXTENDED WARRANTY. WE WERE NEVER CONTACTED BY TOYOTA, THEY DO NOT HAVE US AS THE CURRENT OWNER AND MY HUSBAND COULD HAVE HAD ANOTHER 5 OR SO YEARS WITH THIS VEHICLE. 15 YEARS SHOULD BE UP IN DECEMBER, BUT THEY SAY THAT THEY ARE GOING BY THE DATE IT WAS SOLD OR SOMETHING. THIS VEHICLE IS PRACTICALLY UNDRIVABLE AND TOYOTA BASICALLY SAID OH, WELL, YOU WERE TOO LATE. I FEEL THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB CONTACTING THEIR CUSTOMERS AND I HAVE FOUND EVIDENCE OF MANY OTHER DISSATISFIED CUSTOMERS ON THE INTERNET WHO ALSO WERE NOT NOTIFIED AND WHO ALSO MISSED THE DEADLINE. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS NOT RIGHT, AND IF IT IS A MANUFACTURER DEFECT IT SHOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF REGARDLESS OF WEATHER WE BROUGHT IT IN 9 MONTHS AGO OR TODAY. THE TOYOTA REPRESENTATIVE SAID THAT THERE WAS NO LEEWAY IN THIS AND THAT THERE WAS NO ELSE I COULD TAKE THIS ISSUE UP WITH. I AM ASKING FOR YOUR HELP IN THIS MATTER. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE BALL JOINT WAS REPAIRED TWICE. THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE COIL SPRING WAS REPLACED ONCE. EACH TIME THE BALL JOINTS FAILED, IT CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO FALL TO THE GROUND AND WOULD NEED A SPECIAL TRUCK TO TOWING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DEALER REPAIRED THE VEHICLE, BUT HAD NEVER GIVEN A CAUSE FOR THE FAILURE. THE CONTACT STATED THE FAILURE RECURRED WITHIN SEVEN MONTHS APART. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN, BUT THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 144,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE PARKED, THE CONTACT NOTICED SEVERE CORROSION ON THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED AND THERE WERE HOLES IN THE CROSS MEMBER. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE FRAME WOULD HAVE TO BE REBUILT. THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY RECALL ISSUED BY THE MANUFACTURER FOR THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THE RECALL HAD EXPIRED TWO MONTHS PRIOR. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 212,000.

1. DRIVING NORMALLY, MY 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA'S FRONT PASSENGER TIRE FELL OFF AT AN INTERSECTION. THE BALL JOINT FAILED. IT WAS TOWED TO A SERVICE PLACE TODAY. HAD I BEEN DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEED, MYSELF AND PASSENGERS COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED OR SERIOUSLY INJURED. 2. HAS NOT HAPPENED BEFORE. THE VEHICLE IS WELL MAINTAINED. 3. WAITING ON REPAIR PARTS AND ESTIMATE. *TR

I AM THE OWNER OF A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA 4X4. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT TOYOTA HAS AN INSPECTION AND REPAIR PROGRAM FOR 1995 TO 2000 TACOMAS. I HAVE REQUESTED AN INSPECTION OF MY VEHICLE. THEY HAVE NOT GIVEN ME ANY ANSWER TO MY REQUEST. THEIR ATTITUDE IS THAT RUST IS NOT AN ISSUE IN CALIFORNIA. THEY THINK THAT RUST STOPS AT THE BORDER. ALL THAT I ASKED FOR WAS A SIMPLE INSPECTION SO THAT RUST THRU WARRANTY CAN BE APPLIED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP. *TR

THIS CONCERNS THE TOYOTA RUSTY FRAME PROBLEM IN TACOMAS. MY 1997 TACOMA IS BECOMING DANGEROUS BECAUSE OF THE FRAME BUT TOYOTA REFUSES ANY HELP BECAUSE OF A RECONSTRUCTED TITLE WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RUSTY FRAME PROBLEM. AS A TAXPAYER I WOULD LIKE TO SEE TOYOTA ADDRESS THIS AT THE CURRENT CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS. TOYOTA IS BASICALLY USING A LEGAL LOOPHOLE TO LEAVE DANGEROUS VEHICLES ON THE ROAD. *TR

I OWN A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA THAT SHOULD FALL INTO THEIR RUSTY FRAME RECALL BUT WAS TOLD IT DIDN'T QUALIFY BECAUSE OF A REBUILT TITLE. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN ON THE ROAD FOR APPROXIMATELY 6 YEARS SINCE THE REBUILD. THE FRAME IS VERY RUSTY AND I'VE HAD TO HAVE IT WELDED. IT SEEMS TO ME THE FRAME RUST HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THE TRUCK WAS IN AN ACCIDENT AND THE RECALL SHOULD BE IN EFFECT, PROBABLY WITH A LOWER REIMBURSEMENT DUE TO THE SALVAGE TITLE. IF THE POINT IS TO GET UNSAFE VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD, A RUSTY FRAME IS A RUSTY FRAME WHETHER THE TRUCK HAS BEEN REBUILT OR NOT. IT'S ACTUALLY A VERY NICE TRUCK EXCEPT FOR THE FRAME. *TR

I HAVE A 97 TACOMA EXTENDED CAB. AT ABOUT 30K MILES, THE TRUCK'S BLACK PAINT STARTED TO CRACK UNDER THE CLEARCOAT. I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY A TOYOTA APPROVED BODYSHOP THAT IS WAS CALLED "CROW'S FEET". THE BODYSHOP SAID THAT IT WAS NOTHING THAT I COULD HAVE DONE, THAT IT WAS A DEFECT FROM THE FACTORY. I THEN TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE DEALER WHERE I GOT IT FROM, AND THEY PROLONGED DEALING WITH THE ISSUE UNTIL THE TRUCK RAN OUT OF WARRANTY. I HAVE ABOUT 134K NOW ON THE TRUCK, AND IT ALSO HAS A BAD VALVE TICK THAT FROM WHAT I READ ON THE INTERNET SEEMS NOT UNCOMMON FOR THIS ENGINE. I KNOW THAT SOME TIME HAS PAST, BUT I JUST FOUND THIS SITE. I THINK THAT SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT THE WAY THIS COMPANY TREATS THEIR CUSTOMERS. THIS TRUCK WAS NOT CHEAP, EVEN FOR THE WINTER OF 1998. *TR