2003 Toyota Tacoma

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO STATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS A MANUFACTURING DEFECT AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE WHO DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE EITHER. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 75,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 85,000.

AFTER GETTING OFF THE HIGHWAY, AS I WAS PULLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE EXIT RAMP I NOTICED THE SPARE TIRE HAD FALLEN FROM THE TRUCK AND WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. I WAS ABLE TO QUICKLY BACK UP AND LOAD THE SPARE ONTO THE BACK OF THE TRUCK. I NOTICED PART OF THE CARRIER WAS RUSTED TO THE SPARE, BUT THE MIDDLE OF THE CARRIER HAD RUSTED THROUGH. I HAD PARTICIPATED IN TOYOTA'S FRAME RECALL A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO AND BELIEVE THEY SHOULD HAVE SEEN HOW BAD THE SITUATION WAS AT THAT TIME, AND DONE SOMETHING TO RECTIFY THE PROBLEM. I HAD JUST SPENT A HALF-HOUR DRIVING HOME ON THE HIGHWAY. I CAN'T IMAGINE THE DAMAGE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN CAUSED HAD THE TIRE DROPPED AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS DURING RUSH HOUR RATHER THAN AT 10 MPH!! IN SEARCHING THE INTERNET, THIS IS AN ALL TOO COMMON OCCURRENCE FOR OLDER TACOMAS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS ISN'T CONSIDERED A SAFETY ISSUE AND SUBJECT TO RECALL. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE. WHILE AT THE DEALER, THE CONTACT INQUIRED ABOUT AN UNKNOWN FRAME RECALL. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE RECALL DID NOT APPLY TO HIS VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS THEN NOTIFED AND INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS COVERED UNDER A PRIOR VOLUNTARY CAMPAIGN FOR THE FRAME, BUT THE CAMPAIGN EXPIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 68,000.

I BOUGHT A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA FROM A TOYOTA DEALER IN DECEMBER 2011 WITH 81,841 MILES ON IT. UPON DRIVING THE VEHICLE FROM TENNESSEE TO OREGON A LEAK IN THE OIL PAN APPEARED. I LOOKED UNDER THE VEHICLE AND TO MY SURPRISE THE WHOLE UNDERCARRIAGE OF THE VEHICLE WAS EXTREMELY RUSTING. THE LEAK WAS FROM THE OIL PAN THAT WAS CORRECTED BADLY. I WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT FROM THERE TO MY HOME IN OREGON HAVING TO ADD ABOUT ONE QUART OF OIL. THE DISTANCE WAS ABOUT 700 MILES. I TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER AND HE INFORMED ME THAT I HAD MAJOR RUST PROBLEMS UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE GAS TANK SHIELD IS GONE DUE TO RUST. THE FRONT END SUSPENSION WAS SO RUSTY THEY COULDN,T GET SOME OF THE BOLTS OUT. THEY HAD TO REMOVE SOME OF THE FRONT END SUSPENSION TO REPLACE THE OIL PAN. BOTH FRONT BACKING PLATES FOR THE ROTORS WHERE RUSTED AWAY. NO ALIGNMENT COULD BE DONE BECAUSE OF THE RUST. I HAD THE FRONT END REPLACE WITH GOOD USED PARTS AND WHEN THEY ATTEMPTED TO ALIGN THE VEHICLE THE FRONT TIE ROD BROKE DUE TO RUST. THE WHOLE FRAME ASSEMBLY IS VERY RUSTY. I FIND OUT NOW THAT THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY RECALL OF FRAME WHICH I DID NOT KNOW ABOUT. THIS VEHICLE WAS BOUGHT FROM A TOYOTA DEALER IN TENNESSEE IN DECEMBER OF 2011. THEY NEVER SAID A WORD TO ME ABOUT THE RUST PROBLEM. THEY DID A OIL CHANGE AND THEY ALSO REPLACED THE EMERGENCY BRAKE CABLE SO THEY HAD TO BE AWARE OF THE RUST PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE A FIND OUT CAME FROM NEW YORK ORIGINALLY. THEY SAY THEY WILL HELP OUT WITH REPAIR COSTS SO FAR BUT WHAT ABOUT THE FRAME RUST. THIS DEALERSHIP WITHHELD VITAL INFORMATION FROM ME. TOYOTA OF AMERICA SAYS THE FRAME RECALL WAS VOLUNTARY AND HAS EXPIRED. I FEEL THIS IS A SAFETY PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TAKEN CARE OF. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR AN INSPECTION AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FRAME WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED DUE TO CORROSION. THE DEALER WOULD NOT ASSIST THE CONTACT WITH ANY REPAIRS OUTSIDE OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED, BUT AGREED WITH THE DEALER'S DECISION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 116,000.

LETTER TO THE SECRETARY FROM RE COMPLAINT REGARDING THE SAFETY OF THE 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED WHILE DRIVING, ANOTHER VEHICLE SLID INTO HIS VEHICLE AND HE HIT THE PASSENGER FRONT TIRE OF THE OTHER VEHICLE AT 40 MPH. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED THE TIRES AND FRONT FENDER RATIO HAD A DESIGN DEFECT. THE CONSUMER WAS INJURED IN THE ACCIDENT. *JB..UPDATED 01/31/12..UPDATED 11/19/13 *BF

RUST PERFORATION ON 1998 TO 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAMES AND UNDERCARRIAGES, THE DEALER STATED WAS DUE TO IMPROPERLY MANUFACTURED FRAMES. TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE TOLD ME THAT THE VOLUNTARY FRAME RECALL ON MY 2003 TACOMA FOR FRAME RUST EXPIRED IN MARCH OF 2011 AND THEY WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THE FRAMES OF CERTAIN YEAR TOYOTA TACOMA ARE DEFECTIVE AND WERE NOT PROPERLY MADE AND ARE SUBJECT TO RAPID RUST PERFORATION. TOYOTA SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THEIR VOLUNTARY PROGRAM SHOULD BE MADE MANDATORY. *TR

2003 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS RECALLED IN APRIL 2010 FOR FRAME REPLACEMENT. THE TRUCK FAILED AND THE "ENTIRE" FRAME WAS REPLACED. JULY 18, 2011, WHILE DRIVING THIS TRUCK THE SPARE TIRE FALLS OUT FROM BENEATH THE VEHICLE. THANKFULLY I WAS ON A SIDE ROAD GOING ABOUT 35 MPH AND THE OTHER VEHICLES ON THE ROAD WERE ABLE TO AVOID ANY IMPACT. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK THE PLATE THAT WAS " HOLDING" THE SPARE TIRE TO THE TOYOTA SERVICE CENTER THAT REPLACED THE FRAME. DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE PLATE LOOKED LIKE IT COULD HAVE BEEN A PIECE FROM THE TITANIC, I WAS TOLD THAT THIS PARTICULAR PART WAS NOT PART OF THE TACOMA RECALL. I ASKED IF THEY HAD TO REMOVE THIS PART WHILE REPLACING THE FRAME, WHICH THEY ACKNOWLEDGED THEY DID, AND THEN I ASKED WHY THEY WOULD PUT A WORN PIECE BACK ON... THE RESPONSE WAS "IT PROBABLY DIDN'T LOOK THAT BAD A YEAR AGO"....!!! I CALLED THE TOYOTA 800 PHONE NUMBER AND OPENED A CASE. AS A RESULT, I HAVE LEARNED THAT THIS PART WAS RECALLED ON THE 2003 TUNDRA, BUT NOT THE TACOMA... TOYOTA WILL HOWEVER REIMBURSE ME THE COST $233 IF I WISH TO HAVE THE PIECE REPLACED. I AM DISGUSTED AND SHOCKED AT THE FACT THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS COULD HAPPEN. THANKFULLY NO ONE WAS INJURED...HOWEVER I COULD NOT GET THIS VERY SAME TRUCK INSPECTED IN THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR UNTIL I REPLACED THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER ($1600)...YET IT IS OKAY TO PUT SAFETY INSPECTION STICKER ON A VEHICLE THAT IS A HAZARD TO OTHERS DUE TO A SPARE TIRE PROJECTILE THAT COULD OCCUR AT ANY MOMENT. THIS IS INSANITY TO ME. I ALSO HAVE A 1994 TOYOTA WHICH WOULD NOT PASS DUE TO RUST ON THE EXTERIOR "BUMPER"... EXTERIOR RUST WAS CONSIDERED A HAZARD.. AND I HAD TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE BUMPER "OR REMOVE IT" BEFORE IT WOULD PASS. PERHAPS THE "INSPECTION" REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE ENHANCED TO INCLUDE TRUE LIFE THREATENING PROBLEMS... I HAVE NEVER HAD ANYONE HARM THEMSELVES ON MY RUSTY BUMPER....BUT I NEARLY TOOK OUT 4 VEHICLES WITH MY FAULTY SPARE TIRE MOUNT.. *TT

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 10 MPH THE CONTACT FELT A BUMP AND NOTICED THE SPARE TIRE DETACHED FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE ONTO THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER AND THE CONTACT NOTICED THE CHAIN WHICH HELD THE SPARE TIRE UNDER THE VEHICLE WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 85,036.