IllustrationI WAS DOING AN OIL CHANGE AND NOTICED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED VERY BADLY . I THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE A RECALL ON THIS MODEL 3RD GEN 4RUNNER (1999-2002)THIS IS THE SAME FRAME AS THE TRUCK THAT WAS RECALLED ,SO THIS SHOULD BE INCLUDED .IF THIS FRAME BREAKS IT WILL HURT OR KILL SOME ONE .
2002 Toyota 4RUNNER
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most 4RUNNER years
Owner complaints for the 2002 Toyota 4RUNNER are substantially higher than the model-year median of 58.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all 4RUNNER years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
40–25K
325–50K
1550–75K
1375–100K
57100–150K
54150K+
146 reports with mileage · 46 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.
- Structure. Review the 88 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Suspension. Review the 43 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
12 crash reports2 fire reports9 injury reports
Suspension complaints
43 reportsON MY 2002 TOYOTA 4 RUNNER THE BRACKET WELDED TO THE FRAME FOR REAR TRAILING ARM ON DRIVERS SIDE RUSTED OFF CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO SWAY AND ACT VERY STRANGE. LOTS OF OTHER PLACES RUSTED BAD ON FRAME ALSO!
REAR SWAYBAR RUSTED FROM FRAME CAUSING 4RUNNER TO WOBBLE EXCESSIVLY ALMOST CAUSING ME TO WRECK. THAT SIDE OF FRAME IS COMPLETELY RUSTED AWAY.
THIS IS YET ANOTHER COSTUMER OF THE 4RUNNER 3RD GENERATION COMPLAINING ABOUT THE FRAME RUSTING OUT. THERE NEEDS TO BE RESPONSABILITY FOR THE BAD FRAMES ON THIS YEAR 4RUNNER. MY FRAME HAS HOLES IN THE REAR CONTROL ARM ATTACHMENT AREA AND MORE RUST ALL THROUGHOUT ENTIRE FRAME. I'M DOING ALL I CAN TO KEEP MY FRAME FROM GETTING ANY …
Read full complaint
THIS IS YET ANOTHER COSTUMER OF THE 4RUNNER 3RD GENERATION COMPLAINING ABOUT THE FRAME RUSTING OUT. THERE NEEDS TO BE RESPONSABILITY FOR THE BAD FRAMES ON THIS YEAR 4RUNNER. MY FRAME HAS HOLES IN THE REAR CONTROL ARM ATTACHMENT AREA AND MORE RUST ALL THROUGHOUT ENTIRE FRAME. I'M DOING ALL I CAN TO KEEP MY FRAME FROM GETTING ANY MORE RUST ON IT AND KEEPING IT SAFE TO BE ON THE ROAD. I STRONGLY BELIEVE TOYOTA SHOULD ALSO HAVE A FRAME RECALL FOR THE 4RUNNER LIKE IT DID FOR THE TUNDRA TACOMA AND SEQUOIA FRAMES.
REAR AXEL IS RUSTED OFF THE FRAME, AND ROTTING, MECHANIC SAYS IT'S UNSAFE TO DRIVE
THE REAR BODY MOUNT BUSHINGS ARE COMPLETELY RUSTED AWAY AND DO NOT HOLD THE FRAME TO THE BODY DUE TO EXCESSIVE FRAME BODY RUST THRU OUT THE VEHICLE'S FRAME. MAKES NOISE WHEN TURNING OR GOING OVER BUMPS
FRAME RUST ON THE INSIDE PORTION FOR THE FRAME. 33" HOLE RUSTED THROUGH COMPLETELY ON PASSENGER SIDE. RUST CONTINUES ABOUT 80% OF THE WAY THROUGH THE REAR LOWER CONTROL ARM MOUNT. DRIVER'S SIDE HAS A SIMILAR AMOUNT OF SEVERE RUST THAT HAS WEAKENED THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE FRAME TO THE POINT WHERE IT IS NO LONGER SAFE TO D…
Read full complaint
FRAME RUST ON THE INSIDE PORTION FOR THE FRAME. 33" HOLE RUSTED THROUGH COMPLETELY ON PASSENGER SIDE. RUST CONTINUES ABOUT 80% OF THE WAY THROUGH THE REAR LOWER CONTROL ARM MOUNT. DRIVER'S SIDE HAS A SIMILAR AMOUNT OF SEVERE RUST THAT HAS WEAKENED THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE FRAME TO THE POINT WHERE IT IS NO LONGER SAFE TO DRIVE. SHOULD THE CO TROLL ARM MOUNT FINISH RUSTING THROUGH, THE AXLE WILL NO LONGER BE ATTACHED TO THE FRAME ON THAT SIDE. THERE IS NOTICBLE FLEX AND SOUND ASSOCIATED WITH THE FRAME ROT. IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THE CONTROL ARM MOUNT DISCONNECTS COMPLETELY, OR THE FRAME BUCKLES.
FRAME RUSTED OUT, SIMILAR TO TACOMA PICK UP TRUCKS RECALL. ADDITIONALLY CLIMATE CONTROL HEATING, COOLING, FAN DEFECTIVE, POWER ANTENNA IN-OPERABLE.
TAKATA RECALL: I WAS DRIVING ON. FREEEWAY (5) FREEWAY AND BALL JOINTS BUSTED OFF AND LOST WHEEL AND SLID ABOUT 60 FEET BEFORE STOPING. BUSTED BREAK LINE AND BENT CONTROL JOINT.
TAKATA RECALL. I HAVE A RUSTY FRAME THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED FOR SAFETY REASONS I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH FRAME CRACKED AND I ALMOST DIED BECAUSE OF IT TOYOTAS HAVE POOR FRAME THAT SHOULD BE RECALLED
Official recalls
105V225000 · Suspension:front:control Arm:lower Ball Joint
May 17, 2005
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, DUE TO A MANUFACTURING ISSUE IN THE FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER BALL JOINT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE SURFACE OF THE BALL OF THE JOINT MAY HAVE BEEN SCRATCHED. THE BALL JOINT MAY EVENTUALLY EXPERIENCE EXCESSIVE WEAR AND LOOSENESS, RESULTING IN INCREASED STEERING EFFORT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE LOWER BALL JOINT MAY SEPARATE FROM THE KNUCKLE CAUSING LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL AND A CRASH COULD OCCUR.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER BALL JOINTS FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 5, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
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
1DP18002 · Frame Corrosion
Opened Aug 17, 2018 · Closed Mar 18, 2022
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:frame And Members
On August 7, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a defect petition from Mr. Gary Weinreich alleging premature frame corrosion failure in model year (MY) 2002 - 2006 Toyota 4Runner vehicles. The petitioner based his request upon a corrosion-related front suspension failure he experienced in his MY 2005 Toyota 4Runner, a class action lawsuit settlement involving other Toyota products, and other complaints of underbody corrosion in Toyota 4Runner vehicles that he found in NHTSA?s online complaint database. The petitioner submitted a complaint to NHTSA documenting his experience (NHTSA ID 11098055). On August 17, 2018, ODI opened DP18-002 to evaluate the petitioner?s request. ODI?s evaluation included information provided by the petitioner regarding his vehicle, facts related to the class action lawsuit cited by the petitioner, and consumer complaint data received by NHTSA regarding underbody corrosion in third and fourth-generation Toyota 4Runner vehicles.The undercarriage of the petitioner?s vehicle exhibited severe corrosion damage indicative of seawater immersion. The vehicle?s service history shows that concerns with underbody corrosion were first noted by a Toyota dealer in a multi-point vehicle inspection performed on April 28, 2011. The invoice for that inspection noted ?severe and excessive amount of rust on the undercarriage and on the drive shaft transmission.? Two years later, on October 21, 2013, another multi-point inspection by a Toyota dealer observed further progression of underbody corrosion damage, noting: ?rust on shocks/struts and other components,? ?rust on exhaust system,? ?both splash shields severely rusted,? and ?undercarriage very rusty.? On July 17, 2017, approximately 10 months prior to experiencing the suspension failure incident, an independent repair facility performing routine oil change and brake maintenance informed the Petitioner of a concern with ?excessive frame corrosion? on his vehicle. The service history, severe general corrosion damage, failure age, and environment do not support the petitioner?s allegation of premature corrosion failure.ODI?s analysis of NHTSA complaint data identified fifteen incidents of front lower control arm failure in fourth-generation Toyota 4Runner sport utility vehicles. Two of the failures, including the petitioner?s vehicle, involve vehicles operated in ocean front communities with continuous exposure to aerosolized marine salts and potential exposure to seawater immersion. The remaining thirteen failures all involved vehicles owned or previously registered in states with the greatest use of deicing salts to treat road surfaces in winter months (?Salt states?). On average, the front lower control arm failures occurred after 13.1 years in service in highly corrosive environments. The failure ages and environments do not support the petitioner?s allegation of premature corrosion failure. NHTSA is authorized to issue an order requiring notification and remedy of a defect if the Agency?s investigation shows a defect in design, construction, or performance of a motor vehicle that presents an unreasonable risk to safety. 49 U.S.C. ?? 30102(a)(9), 30118. Since the information before the Agency is not indicative of a vehicle-based defect, it is unlikely that any investigation opened because of granting this petition would result in an order concerning the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect. Therefore, upon full consideration of the information presented in the petition and the potential risks to safety, the petition is denied. The denial of this petition does not foreclose the Agency from taking further action if warranted or the p