2001 Toyota Tacoma

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SUBFRAME WAS PERFORATED DUE TO RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 154,000.

IN REVIEWING YOUR WEBSITE FOR RECALLS ON THE TOYOTA TACOMA, IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS ONE MISSING THAT CAME BEFORE THE RECALL FOR THE SPARE TIRES. THE ONE I SPEAK OF IS THE RECALL ON THE VEHICLE FOR FRAME PERFORATIONS OF WHICH MY VECHICLE NOW HAS AND HAS DEEMED UNSAFE FOR DRIVING. I BELIEVE THIS RECALL SHOULD BE ENFORCED BY TOYOTA AS MYSELF AND NUMEROUS OTHERS HAVE VEHICLES THAT CAUSE SAFETY HAZARDS FOR NOT ONLY OURSELVES BUT INJURIES TO OTHERS. THESE VEHICLES ARE STILL ON THE ROAD, AS OTHERS LIKE MY SELF WERE NOT AWARE OF THE DANGEROUS SITUATIN TOYOTA HAS PLACED US IN BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING NOTHING TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION, I'D LIKE TO TAKE M VEHICLE IN FOR THE TIRE RECALL HOWEVER I WILL NOT RISK MY LIFE IN ORDER TO GET THIS REPAIR DONE. AS AN AGENCY TO IS ESTABLISHED TO PROTECT CONSUMERS FROM HAZARDS, I AND MANY OTHERS (VISIT FACEBOOK PAGE TOYOTA TACOMA FRAME DEFECTS) FEEL THAT YOUR AGENCY SHOULD STEP-UP AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. *TT

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO EXCESSIVE CORROSION RECALL. *SMD A LOCAL MECHANIC INFORMED THE CONSUMER, THERE WAS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF CORROSION AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. THE DEALER REPAIRED THE SPARE LIFT TIRE PLATE UNDER THE RECALL. HOWEVER, THEY STATED THE RECALL FOR THE FRAME HAD EXPIRED AND THEY WOULD NOT DO THE REPAIR.

FOLLOWING ROUTINE SERVICE INSPECTION ON 4/2/2014, SIGNIFICANT PERFORATION OF MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA 4X4 TRUCK FRAME WAS IDENTIFIED, DUE TO CONDITIONS CONSISTENT WITH RUSTING. ACCORDING TO A 2012 TOYOTA DEALERSHIP DIAGNOSTIC, NO INDICATION OF RUST WAS NOTED DURING THE DEALERSHIP SERVICE INSPECTION. ALSO, NO HARD COPY DOCUMENTATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY TOYOTA CORPORATION REGARDING AN ALLEGED VOLUNTARY RECALL CAMPAIGN TO ADDRESS CORROSION OF FRAME. ACCORDING TO THE TOYOTA CORPORATION CASE WORKER ASSIGNED, HE WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE ANY HARD COPY DOCUMENTATION OF SAID VOLUNTARY RECALL CAMPAIGN NOTICE REGARDING CORROSION OF TRUCK FRAME; IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE CASE WORKER DID SAY HE COULD PROVIDE 'VERBAL' CONFIRMATION THAT NOTIFICATION WAS SENT TO MY RESIDENCE AT THE TIME. AT THIS TIME, I AM CURRENTLY CONSIDERING LEGAL ACTION, PENDING FURTHER REVIEW OF CASE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH, A LOUD NOISE EMITTED OUTSIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR INSPECTION. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT ENTIRE FRAME WAS FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS DECLARED UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE EXTENDED SERVICE WARRANTY EXPIRED AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER HAD BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 160,000. UPDATED 4/29/14*CN *TR THE CONSUMER STATED DECLINED TO REPAIR THE VEHICLE BUT WILL HOWEVER REPLACE THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER DUE TO CORROSION BUT NOT THE FRAME. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS CRACKED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS CRACKED ON BOTH SIDES NEAR THE SHACKLES. THE FRAME WAS WELDED BUT THE PROBLEM RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE INCIDENT. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000.

THE FRAME ON THE VEHICLE IS RUSTING. I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT TACOMA'S HAD RUSTY FRAME ISSUES UNTIL AFTER I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE. I AM CONCERNED THAT THIS FRAME WILL CAUSE UNSAFE DRIVING CONDITIONS IF SOMETHING GIVES OUT WHILE DRIVING. I AM ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE RESALE VALUE OF A YEAR CLASS OF VEHICLES THAT ARE KNOWN TO HAVE RUSTY FRAMES. *TR

WE PURCHASED A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA NEW IN LATE 2000. MY HUSBAND RECENTLY REALIZED THE FRAME IS ALMOST RUSTED THROUGH ON THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE NEAR THE GAS TANK. NEEDLESS TO SAY, IT ISN'T SAFE TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE UNTIL/IF IT CAN BE FIXED. WE HAVE VIEWED AND READ UP ON NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS FROM OTHER TACOMA OWNERS AND HAVE SEEN SOME RECALLS OR NOTIFICATIONS TO SELECT TACOMA OWNERS BUT NOT IN THE STATE WE RESIDE IN-MO. WE RAN INTO A SIMILAR ISSUE WITH ANOTHER NON-TOYOTA VEHICLE WHICH ONLY COVERED HOT-WEATHER STATES. WE LIVE IN MISSOURI....WE HAVE EXPERIENCED EXTREME HEAT AND COLD DURING THE LAST FEW YEARS. IT'S UNREASONABLE TO ME THAT THE AUTO DEALERS CAN EXCLUDE CERTAIN STATES WHEN IT IS HIGHLY LIKELY CUSTOMERS IN THOSE EXCLUDED STATES COULD EXPERIENCE THE SAME ISSUE. IF IT'S DETERMINED TO BE THE SAME ISSUE OWNERS IN OTHER STATES ARE FACING, WHY NOT AGREE TO COVER THE REPAIR??? WE PLAN TO DO SOME INVESTIGATING AND CALLING OF OUR OWN TO SEE IF TOYOTA IS GOING TO PAY FOR THE REPAIR OR AT LEAST OFFER US A REASONABLE BUY BACK OPTION. WE ARE TOYOTA OWNERS AND PLAN TO STAY THAT WAY DEPENDING ON HOW THIS ALL TURNS OUT. WE'VE ALWAYS URGED OTHERS TO BUY TOYOTA VEHICLES DUE TO THEIR LONGEVITY AND RELIABILITY....I HOPE WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE PROVEN WRONG ON THIS ONE. *JS