TAKATA RECALL. ON AUGUST 2017 I WAS IN A ACCIDENT I PUT MY CAR IN REVERSE AND IT FLEW ME BACK AND FORWARD FAST. MY LEG WAS BROKEN AND MOUTH BUSTED.. THE AIR BAG DIDN'T DEPLOY. I WAS THROWN TO A BRICK WALL
2005 Toyota Camry Solara
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2005 Toyota Camry Solara do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 83.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Camry Solara 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
68 reports with mileage · 24 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 24 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 20 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 16 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
20 reportsPREVIOUS ODI 10576595, 2 APRIL 2014/ TODAY 25AUG2017: AT APPROX. 1910-1915 HRS I WAS DRIVING SOUTH ON BELL AVE. APPROACHING HURLEY AVE, IN SACRAMENTO, CA., WHEN FOR THE THIRD TIME I HAVE EXPERIENCED VEHICLE ACCELERATION WHILE BRAKING. THE SECOND TIME, I WAS DRIVING IN THE LATE EVENING, 2200, TO THE MOVIES; APPROACHING ARDEN AN…
Read full complaint
PREVIOUS ODI 10576595, 2 APRIL 2014/ TODAY 25AUG2017: AT APPROX. 1910-1915 HRS I WAS DRIVING SOUTH ON BELL AVE. APPROACHING HURLEY AVE, IN SACRAMENTO, CA., WHEN FOR THE THIRD TIME I HAVE EXPERIENCED VEHICLE ACCELERATION WHILE BRAKING. THE SECOND TIME, I WAS DRIVING IN THE LATE EVENING, 2200, TO THE MOVIES; APPROACHING ARDEN AND FULTON, SAME THING, BRAKING AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ALMOST HITTING THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF ME; THAT TIME MY ACTIONS OF STANDING ON THE BRAKE AND TURNING OFF THE IGNITION KEY KEPT ME FROM HITTING THE OTHER CAR. THIS SECOND INCIDENT HAPPENED MAYBE 2 MONTHS AGO! I CONSIDERED THAT MAYBE MY SANDAL GOT CAUGHT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, WHICH IS WHY I DID NOT MAKE AN IMMEDIATE REPORT! NOW I KNOW FOR SURE THAT IT IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN A TAUTLY PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKING, ENGINE REV/ACCELERATION PROBLEM! TOYOTA DENIES THAT THIS PROBLEM HAPPENS WITH THE SOLARA! TONIGHT, I ALSO STOOD ON MY BRAKES WHEN I HEARD THE ENGINE REV AND THE CAR ACCELERATED, HITTING THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF ME. THE VEHICLE WAS PUSHED OUT INTO THE INTERSECTION, BUT, NOT INTO CROSS TRAFFIC! INSTEAD OF THE STUCK VEHICLE CROSSING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION AND PULLING OVER, THEY/HE/SHE SPED OFF DOWN BELL ABOUT? TO NORTHRUP AND TURNED LEFT. I CALLED CHP AND THE MADE A REPORT: NCIC 9250 / OFFICER 19071. TRIED PULLING UP MY PREVIOUS REPORT VIA VIN# AND ODI# AND FOUND NOTHING ON FILE! WHAT GIVES? THE FIRST INCIDENT OCCURRED DURING THE PERIOD OF TOYOTA DEALING WITH MASSIVE VEHICLE RECALL FOR THE SAME PROBLEM; SOLARA'S WERE NOT ON THE LIST AT THAT TIME, AND THE DENIED THAT THIS WAS ALSO A PROBLEM WITH SOLARA'S. WHAT I PERCEIVE AS A PROBLEM IS THAT ONLY TOYOTA CAN READ THE BLACK BOX; AND, CAN CLAIM WHATEVER THEY WANT THE ANALYSIS TO BE. WHICH, IS TOTALLY UNFAIR TO THE VICTOMIZED OWNER!!!!!!!!!!!! STREET SPEED 35 MPH, BRAKING FOR INTERSECTION, ENGINE REV AND ACCELERATION!
I WENT TO BACK UP MY CAR OUT OF A PARKING SPACE AT CHURCH. PUT THE CAR IN REVERSE, AND TOUCHED THE GAS PEDAL, AND SUDDENLY THE CAR TOOK OFF BACKWARDS AT AN EXTREMELY HIGH SPEED AND BECAME UNCONTROLLABLE. WOULD APPEAR THAT THE ACCELERATOR WAS STUCK. THE ACCIDENT RESULTED IN PROPERTY, DAMAGE TO ANOTHER CAR, FINANCIAL LOSS AND M…
Read full complaint
I WENT TO BACK UP MY CAR OUT OF A PARKING SPACE AT CHURCH. PUT THE CAR IN REVERSE, AND TOUCHED THE GAS PEDAL, AND SUDDENLY THE CAR TOOK OFF BACKWARDS AT AN EXTREMELY HIGH SPEED AND BECAME UNCONTROLLABLE. WOULD APPEAR THAT THE ACCELERATOR WAS STUCK. THE ACCIDENT RESULTED IN PROPERTY, DAMAGE TO ANOTHER CAR, FINANCIAL LOSS AND MENTAL ANGUISH. CAR WAS ON CHURCH PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT CAR WAS TOTALLED BY SAFECO, NOT REPAIRED. I COULD NOT FIND AN OPEN RECALL ON THIS CAR, BUT DO NOT BELIEVE THAT SHOULD RULE OUT THE DEFECT.
MY CAR EXPERIENCES A LAG BETWEEN THE TIME WHEN I PRESS THE GAS PEDAL AND WHEN THE CAR ACTUALLY STARTS TO MOVE. THE LAG CAN LAST UP TO 2 SECONDS AND PRESENTS A CRITICAL SAFETY ISSUE WHICH HAS LED TO COUPLE OF NEAR MISS ACCIDENTS IN INTERSECTIONS AND CHANGING LANES. THIS FEELS LIKE IT WOULD IF YOUR CAR STALLED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE…
Read full complaint
MY CAR EXPERIENCES A LAG BETWEEN THE TIME WHEN I PRESS THE GAS PEDAL AND WHEN THE CAR ACTUALLY STARTS TO MOVE. THE LAG CAN LAST UP TO 2 SECONDS AND PRESENTS A CRITICAL SAFETY ISSUE WHICH HAS LED TO COUPLE OF NEAR MISS ACCIDENTS IN INTERSECTIONS AND CHANGING LANES. THIS FEELS LIKE IT WOULD IF YOUR CAR STALLED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INTERSECTION AND THEN THE LIGHT CHANGED OR ACCELERATE TO CHANGE LANES WHILE IT TRIES TO FLOW WITH THE TRAFFIC. A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN WAS ISSUED FOR CERTAIN VIN SOLARAS WHICH REFLASHED THE ECU TO A NEW PROGRAM IN AN EFFORT TO REDUCE THE LAG BUT MY CAR IS NOT UNDER THIS ISSUE. I ALSO FIND OUT THAT MANY OF OTHER SOLARA OWNERS SAID THIS WAS NOT AN EFFECTIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION. TOYOTA HAS NO SOLUTION AT THIS TIME AND THIS PUTS MY AND OTHERS' SAFETY AT RISK. *TR
I OWN A 2005 SOLARA SLE V6 AUTOMATIC: PULLING INTO A RESTAURANT PARKING SPACE, MAKING A RIGHT TURN, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FORWARD: JUMPING THE CURB, FORWARD ONTO A MUDDY OPEN SPACE, AN APPROX. 25* INCLINE, AND INTO A LOW BARRIER WALL BETWEEN THE TWO NEIGHBORING RESTAURANTS' PARKING LOTS (WITH CARS ON THE OTHER-SIDE …
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2005 SOLARA SLE V6 AUTOMATIC: PULLING INTO A RESTAURANT PARKING SPACE, MAKING A RIGHT TURN, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FORWARD: JUMPING THE CURB, FORWARD ONTO A MUDDY OPEN SPACE, AN APPROX. 25* INCLINE, AND INTO A LOW BARRIER WALL BETWEEN THE TWO NEIGHBORING RESTAURANTS' PARKING LOTS (WITH CARS ON THE OTHER-SIDE OF THE BARRIER). FORTUNATELY, NO VEHICLES OR PERSONS WERE STUCK!; JUST, THE DAMAGE TO MY VEHICLE! WHEN IT ACCELERATED, MY FOOT WAS OFF THE ACCELERATOR PETAL, ABOUT TO BRAKE; STOOD ON MY ABS BRAKE; AND, THE BARRIER, I BELIEVE, STOPPED MOST OF THE FORWARD MOTION; HIT HARD; AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY !!! NOTHING LIKE THIS HAS EVER HAPPENED TO ME BEFORE; NOT IN ANY OF MY PAST VEHICLES !!! IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT TOYOTA IS DENYING PROBLEMS WITH THE SOLARA MODELS, WHEN THEY'RE THE SPORTY MODEL THE CAMRY !!! DEALERSHIP SAID TO CONTACT CORPORATE, BUT, THIS IS NOT ... BLAME IT ON THE DRIVER FOR INCORRECT MATS; MINE ARE THE ORIGINALS HOOKED UNDER THE FRONT SEATS !!! THIS IS TRANSMISSION CONTROL LINKAGE TO THE ACCELERATOR PETAL !? WHEN I BACKED UP, OFF THE MUDDY HILL, I NOTICED THE TRANSMISSION WAS STIFF/SLUGGISH !!! 2ND TOPIC - DRIVER'S LEFT SIDE LEATHER SEAT PANEL FOR AIR BAG: TOOK IT IN DUE TO PANEL SPLITTING IN TWO PARALLEL SPOTS (POSSIBLE SPLIT LEATHER MATERIAL, RATHER THAN FULL HIDE ? TOO THIN FOR SIDE-AIR BAG ! ) TOYOTA REFUSED TO FIX THIS SAFETY ISSUE !!! *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE VEHICLE MADE A ROARING NOISE AND ACCELERATED WITHOUT MANUAL FORCE, CRASHING INTO A FENCE AND A TREE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES HOWEVER, A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NEITHER DIAGNOSED NOR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE VEHICLE MADE A ROARING NOISE AND ACCELERATED WITHOUT MANUAL FORCE, CRASHING INTO A FENCE AND A TREE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES HOWEVER, A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NEITHER DIAGNOSED NOR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE DEFECT. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 135,000.
ON JAN. 5, 2012 AROUND 10:00 A.M. I WAS ACCELERATING UP HILL AT THE SPEED OF 50 MPG. WHEN I LET UP ON THE GAS PEDAL MY CAR CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. I STARTED APPLYING THE BRAKES BUT IT DIDN'T HELP. AS THE CAR KEPT GOING FASTER I WENT INTO A PANIC MODE APPLYING THE BRAKES, PULLING BACK ON THE EMERGENCY BRAKES AS FAR AS I COULD, A…
Read full complaint
ON JAN. 5, 2012 AROUND 10:00 A.M. I WAS ACCELERATING UP HILL AT THE SPEED OF 50 MPG. WHEN I LET UP ON THE GAS PEDAL MY CAR CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE. I STARTED APPLYING THE BRAKES BUT IT DIDN'T HELP. AS THE CAR KEPT GOING FASTER I WENT INTO A PANIC MODE APPLYING THE BRAKES, PULLING BACK ON THE EMERGENCY BRAKES AS FAR AS I COULD, AND TRYING TO SHIFT INTO NEUTRAL OR PARK OR ANYTHING TO GET MY CAR TO STOP. I WENT OFF THE ROAD AT THE SAME TIME I GOT IT INTO PARK. STOPPING ABRUPTLY I JUMPED FROM THE CAR THE WHEELS STILL SPINNING AND SMOKE POURING FORM THE WHEEL WELLS. I WAS PRETTY HYSTERICAL FROM MY ORDEAL BUT HAD THE SENSE TO REACH IN AND TURN OFF THE KEY. I CALLED MY HUSBAND AND SAT DOWN AND CRIED UNTIL HE GOT THERE. WE HAD THE CAR TOWED TO TOYOTA IN NAPA CA. AND YESTERDAY (JAN. 11, 2011) THEY CALLED TO SAY THEY CAN'T FIND ANYTHING WRONG AND WE CAN PICK UP THE CAR ANYTIME WE WANT. PLEASE HELP ME !!!! THIS WASN'T JUST A FIGMENT OF MY IMAGINATION. IT HAPPENED FOR SOME REASON. DO THEY REALLY THINK I EVER WANT TO DRIVE THIS CAR AGAIN??? I FEEL VERY GRATEFUL TO WALK AWAY WITH MY LIFE. IF THERE HAD BEEN MORE TRAFFIC OR NO PLACE TO GO OFF THE ROAD OR IN A WORSE CASE SCENARIO DRIVING THE 10 MILE MOUNTAIN ROAD FROM TOWN TO MY HOUSE I PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE. I FEEL THE NEED TO TELL AS MANY PEOPLE AS I CAN TO SAVE SOME ONE ELSE FROM THIS. *TR
WHEN CAR MOVING IN A LITTLE UP HILL AT 25 MPH WITH ACCELERATOR SLIGHTLY DEPRESS ENGINE SURGED FORWARD SUDDENLY LOSING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE ROLLING OUT OF THE ROAD AN CRASH IN A CONCRETE BARRIER RESULTING DRIVER INJURED AND THE FRONT END OF THE CAR BODY DAMAGED. AT THE MOMENT OF THE INCIDENT THE CAR CONTINUED MOVING FORWARD DRA…
Read full complaint
WHEN CAR MOVING IN A LITTLE UP HILL AT 25 MPH WITH ACCELERATOR SLIGHTLY DEPRESS ENGINE SURGED FORWARD SUDDENLY LOSING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE ROLLING OUT OF THE ROAD AN CRASH IN A CONCRETE BARRIER RESULTING DRIVER INJURED AND THE FRONT END OF THE CAR BODY DAMAGED. AT THE MOMENT OF THE INCIDENT THE CAR CONTINUED MOVING FORWARD DRAGGING THE BRAKES THAT WERE FULLY APPLIED TO TRY TO STOP THE CAR. A WITNESS DRIVING BEHIND THE CAR SAW ALL THE STOP LIGHTS OF THE CAR BLINKING BUT THE CAR CONTINUED MOVING FORWARD INSTEAD OF STOPPING. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 48916.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE ATTEMPTING TO BRAKE FROM APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE UNINTENDED ACCELERATION AND THE VEHICLE PROCEEDED TO DRIVE OVER A CURB AND CRASH INTO THE BUSHES. THE DOOR AJAR WARNING ALARM THEN ABNORMALLY SOU…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA SOLARA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE ATTEMPTING TO BRAKE FROM APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE UNINTENDED ACCELERATION AND THE VEHICLE PROCEEDED TO DRIVE OVER A CURB AND CRASH INTO THE BUSHES. THE DOOR AJAR WARNING ALARM THEN ABNORMALLY SOUNDED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE DEALER WOULD INSPECT THE EVENT DATA RECORDER TO DETERMINE WHY THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. A POLICE REPORT WAS AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 57,314.
2005 TOYOTA SOLARA. CONSUMER STATES UNINTENDED ACCELERATION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HIS SON WAS AT A COMPLETE STOP AT AN INTERSECTION WITH HIS FOOT ON THE BRAKE, WHEN SUDDENLY THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD AND TRUCK THE REAR END OF A TRUCK WITH A PROTRUDING TRAILER HITCH. HE COULD FEEL THE BRAKES PULSATE AS THE VEHICLE MOVED FOR…
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA SOLARA. CONSUMER STATES UNINTENDED ACCELERATION *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HIS SON WAS AT A COMPLETE STOP AT AN INTERSECTION WITH HIS FOOT ON THE BRAKE, WHEN SUDDENLY THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD AND TRUCK THE REAR END OF A TRUCK WITH A PROTRUDING TRAILER HITCH. HE COULD FEEL THE BRAKES PULSATE AS THE VEHICLE MOVED FORWARD. WHILE THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO THE TRUCK DUE TO THE HITCH, THE INCIDENT CAUSE CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE. THE CONSUMER DID NOT INDICATE IF A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. *JB
Official recalls
111V539000 · Engine And Engine Cooling
Nov 9, 2011
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AVALON VEHICLES; 2004 AND 2005 CAMRY, CAMRY SOLARA, HIGHLANDER, AND SIENNA VEHICLES, 2006 HIGHLANDER HYBRID; 2004 AND 2005 LEXUS ES330 AND RX330; AND 2006 LEXUS RX400H VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 2004 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2005, EQUIPPED WITH THE 1MZ-FE OR 3MZ-FE ENGINE. THE AMOUNT OF ADHESIVE AGENT APPLIED BETWEEN THE OUTER RING AND THE TORSIONAL RUBBER DAMPER (INNER RING) IN THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY MAY BE INADEQUATE. IF THE ADHESIVE IS INSUFFICIENT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE OUTER RING MAY BECOME MISALIGNED AND IT MAY NOT PROPERLY ROTATE WITH THE INNER RING, CAUSING NOISE AND/OR ILLUMINATION OF THE BATTERY DISCHARGE INDICATOR LIGHT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN SOME CASES, THE BELT FOR THE POWER STEERING PUMP MAY BECOME DETACHED FROM THE PULLEY WHICH COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF POWER STEERING AND A SUDDEN INCREASE IN STEERING EFFORT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL CHECK THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY TO IDENTIFY WHETHER IT WAS PRODUCED BY THE U.S. SUPPLIER. IF SO, THE DEALER WILL REPLACE THE PULLEY WITH A NEW ONE AT NO CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING EARLY JANUARY 2012. 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
2DP06003 · Engine Surging
Opened Sep 14, 2006 · Closed Apr 3, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Vehicle Speed Control
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
DP05002 · Vehicle Speed Control
Opened Aug 5, 2005 · Closed Jan 5, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
IN A LETTER DATED JULY 8, 2005, AND AFTER EXPERIENCING TWO INCIDENTS (AND ONE CRASH) WHERE HE ALLEGES HIS MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002 CAMRY ACCELERATED WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT, MR. JORDAN ZIPRIN PETITIONED THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION?S (NHTSA) OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) TO COMMENCE A PROCEEDING TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF A DEFECT WITHIN THE ETC SYSTEM IN MY 2002 TO 2005 TOYOTA AND LEXUS VEHICLES, OR TO REOPEN A PRIOR INVESTIGATION PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE) 04-021.IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 18, 2005, MR. ZIPRIN AMENDED HIS PETITION TO INCLUDE ALLEGATIONS OF INTERRELATED BRAKE AND ACCELERATION PROBLEMS THAT ALLEGEDLY RESULT IN INAPPROPRIATE AND UNCONTROLLABLE VEHICLE ACCELERATIONS.THE 1172 VEHICLE OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE REPORTS CITED BY THE PETITIONER INVOLVE 4 LEXUS AND 15 TOYOTA MODELS DEFINING A POPULATION OF 7 MILLION VEHICLES.THE REPORTS TYPICALLY ALLEGED A DEFECT IN THE BRAKE SYSTEM, THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH SYSTEMS.IN ITS REVIEW OF THE REPORTS, ODI A) FAILED TO FIND EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A BRAKE RELATED DEFECT IN THE CITED MODELS, AND B) DETERMINED THAT MANY CITED PRODUCTS WERE NOT EQUIPPED WITH ETC.ACCORDINGLY, ODI RESTRICTED ITS ANALYSIS TO THE 432 PETITIONER REPORTS INVOLVING MY 2002 TO 2005 CAMRY, SOLARA, AND ES MODELS (ALL EQUIPPED WITH ETC) THAT ALLEGED AN ABNORMAL THROTTLE CONTROL EVENT (SEE THE JANUARY 3, 2006 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS).ABOUT 40% OF THE 432 REPORTS INVOLVE A DRIVEABILITY CONCERN WHERE THE OPERATOR INTENTIONALLY APPLIES THE THROTTLE PEDAL, IN EXPECTATION THAT THE VEHICLE WILL ACCELERATE, AND THEN EXPERIENCES A DELAY OR HESITATION IN VEHICLE RESPONSE.THESE REPORTS INVOLVE VEHICLE RESPONSE TO INTENTIONAL DRIVER COMMANDS WHICH ODI CONSIDERS UNRELATED TO THE ALLEGATIONS RAISED BY THE PETITIONER.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED.ABOUT 20% OF THE REPORTS INVOLVE INCIDENTS WHERE OPERATORS ALLEGE VEHICLE ACCELERATION WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND AN INABILITY OF THE BRAKE SYSTEM TO CONTROL THE VEHICLE WHEN APPLIED.NEITHER THE REPORTS, NOR THE INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED BY ODI, IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE INCIDENTS OR DISCLOSED EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT A FAILURE OF THE BRAKE OR THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM HAD OCCURRED.BECAUSE THESE REPORTS DO NOT INDICATE A DISTINCT SAFETY DEFECT FOR INVESTIGATION, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONERTHE REMAINING REPORTS (~ 40%, SIMILAR TO THE PETITIONER?S AND THOSE OF PE04-021) TYPICALLY DESCRIBE INCIDENTS WHERE A VEHICLE IS BEING MANEUVERED AT SLOW SPEED IN A CLOSE QUARTER SITUATION AT WHICH POINT THE OPERATOR ALLEGES THAT THE VEHICLE ACCELERATES WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND CRASHES.IN THE AFTERMATH, OPERATORS ARE UNSURE OF WHETHER THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED OR NOT, SOMETIMES STATING THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT TIME TO USE THE BRAKE; A CRASH OCCURRED AND THE OPERATOR BELIEVES AN UNCOMMANDED ACCELERATION CAUSED IT.IN SPITE OF THE EFFORT EXPENDED DURING PE04-021 AND DURING THIS ANALYSIS, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE REPORTS, OR UNCOVERED ANY EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT A THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM FAILURE OCCURRED.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS HAVE AMBIGUOUS SIGNIFICANCE AND DO NOT CONSTITUTE A BASIS ON WHICH ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATIVE ACTION IS WARRANTED.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES T
Illustration