DURING A REGULAR MAINTENANCE CHECK, IT WAS DISCOVERED THE ENGINE HAD A CRACK IN THE ENGINE BLOCK. THE CONSUMER MADE CONTACT WITH THE MANUFACTURER AND THEY WILL BE REPLACING THE ENGINE. *JB. TOYOTA HAS CORRECTED THE PROBLEM IN THE NEW MODELS OF CAMRY.*AK
2002 Toyota Camry
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Camry years
Owner complaints for the 2002 Toyota Camry are substantially higher than the model-year median of 295.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Camry 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
610 reports with mileage · 343 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.
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 281 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 146 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 107 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
107 reportsWHILE DRIVING CHECK ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED ON THE DASHBOARD AND REMAINED ON. CONSUMER DROVE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION, AND MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT THE SENSOR NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. *AK
CONSUMER TOOK VEHICLE' TO DEALER FOR AN OIL CHANGE, AND SINCE THEN THE VEHICLE EMITTED GRAY SMOKE. DEALER DETERMINED THAT TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. CONSUMER TOOK VEHICLE TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO REPLACED CORRODED SPARK PLUG WIRES, AND GAVE THE VEHICLE A TUNE UP. ALSO THE MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT SMOKE CAME…
Read full complaint
CONSUMER TOOK VEHICLE' TO DEALER FOR AN OIL CHANGE, AND SINCE THEN THE VEHICLE EMITTED GRAY SMOKE. DEALER DETERMINED THAT TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. CONSUMER TOOK VEHICLE TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO REPLACED CORRODED SPARK PLUG WIRES, AND GAVE THE VEHICLE A TUNE UP. ALSO THE MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT SMOKE CAME FROM A DEFECTIVE VALVE SEAL OR RINGS . *AK IT WAS FINALLY DETERMINED THAT THE TRANSMISSION WAS NOT THE PROBLEM IT WAS THE ENGINE WHICH NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. *JB
MY VEHICLE, A VINTAGE 1965 PONTIAC CATALINA HARDTOP COUPE WAS PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY AT MY FRIEND'S RESIDENCE AT 1271 N.E. 207TH STREET WHEN AT AROUND 4:50 P.M. IT WAS STRUCK BY A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY SEDAN DRIVEN BY A MRS. UNA ELIZABETH TUCKER OF PORT ST. LUCIE, FL. THE TOYOTAS WAS ON THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS DRIVEWAY. ACCORDING …
Read full complaint
MY VEHICLE, A VINTAGE 1965 PONTIAC CATALINA HARDTOP COUPE WAS PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY AT MY FRIEND'S RESIDENCE AT 1271 N.E. 207TH STREET WHEN AT AROUND 4:50 P.M. IT WAS STRUCK BY A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY SEDAN DRIVEN BY A MRS. UNA ELIZABETH TUCKER OF PORT ST. LUCIE, FL. THE TOYOTAS WAS ON THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS DRIVEWAY. ACCORDING TO HER, SHE WAS TRYING TO GET OUT OF HER DRIVEWAY WHEN SHE CLAIMS HER CAR STARTED SMOKING AND SUDDENLY BOLTED. HER VEHICLE SMASHED ONTO MY CAR WITH SUCH FORCE.. THAT IT MOVED IT AND PUSHED IT AGAINST A VAN THAT WAS PARKED NEXT TO IT. MY CAR'S FRONT FENDERS WHERE SMASHED, MAKING THE FRONT WHEELS IMMOBILE. THE LEFT FRONT BUMPER BENT UNDER, LEFT FRON HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY SMASHED, UNABLE TO OPEN HOOD, POSSIBLE FRONT SUSPENSION DAMAGE, UNKNOWN DAMAGE TO ENGINE. HSMV CRASH REPORT NUMBER 4464507 MIAMI DADE COUNTY. *AK
WHILE PARKED VEHICLE WAS STARTED AND ENGINE ROARED AND SURGED FORWARD. CONSUMER HAD TO USE EXTREME FORCE TO KEEP THE VEHICLE FROM MOVING. ALSO, WHEN AIR CONDITIONER WAS ON AND TURNED OFF AND BACK ON AGAIN THERE WAS A FOUL ODOR COMING FROM THE VENTS. *AK
I HAVE A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE, SINCE I GOT THE CAR NEW IT STARTED TO LUNGE SEVERAL TIMES WHILE SITTING AT STOP LIGHTS/SIGNS. I WENT TO TWO DIFFERENT TOYOTA DEALERS AND WAS TOLD THAT THE CAR IS RUNNING AS MANUFACTURED. I SAID THIS CAN CAUSE AN ACCIDENT. THEY SAID NOTHING WAS WRONG. ALSO, SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW IT WANTS TO ST…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE, SINCE I GOT THE CAR NEW IT STARTED TO LUNGE SEVERAL TIMES WHILE SITTING AT STOP LIGHTS/SIGNS. I WENT TO TWO DIFFERENT TOYOTA DEALERS AND WAS TOLD THAT THE CAR IS RUNNING AS MANUFACTURED. I SAID THIS CAN CAUSE AN ACCIDENT. THEY SAID NOTHING WAS WRONG. ALSO, SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW IT WANTS TO STALL WHEN COMING TO A STOP. AGAIN, NO DEALER WILL HELP. SOMETHING IS WRONG BUT THE DEALERS WON'T HELP. I DO NOT HAVE TIME TO KEEP RUNNING TO DEALERS, THAT IS WHY I BOUGHT A NEW CAR. THERE IS A DEFINITE PROBLEM WITH THESE CARS. AS TIMES GOES BY, IT'S GETTING WORSE, ESPECIALLY IN WARM WEATHER CONDITIONS.
DRIVER SIDE WINDOW DID NOT ROLL SMOOTHLY. SQUEAKED BUT WAS ONLY FIXED AFTER TAKING THE CAR A DEALER A THIRD TIME. SPUTTERING/RATTLING SOUND SEEMS TO BE COMING FROM THE ENGINE WHEN THE CAR IS IDLE OR UPON COLD START. SOUND GETS PROGRESSIVELY LOUDER. DEALER CLAIMS THAT NO SOUNDS WERE HEARD. CAR ALSO HESITATES WHEN RESPONDING T…
Read full complaint
DRIVER SIDE WINDOW DID NOT ROLL SMOOTHLY. SQUEAKED BUT WAS ONLY FIXED AFTER TAKING THE CAR A DEALER A THIRD TIME. SPUTTERING/RATTLING SOUND SEEMS TO BE COMING FROM THE ENGINE WHEN THE CAR IS IDLE OR UPON COLD START. SOUND GETS PROGRESSIVELY LOUDER. DEALER CLAIMS THAT NO SOUNDS WERE HEARD. CAR ALSO HESITATES WHEN RESPONDING TO ACCELERATION. IN RESEARCHING FOR ANSWERS, I FOUND THAT THE DRIVER'S SIDE AIRBAG HAS A RECALL. I WAS IN DISBELIEF WHEN I FOUND THAT NO EFFORTS WERE MADE IN CONTACTING ME ABOUT AN AIRBAG RECALL! I FEEL UTTERLY DISAPPOINTED. I'D COME FROM A "HONDA" FAMILY AND DECIDED TO GIVE TOYOTA A TRY. I HAVE LEARNT MY LESSON NOW THAT BUYING A BRAND NEW TOYOTA MEANS HAVING TO CHECK UP ON RECALLS AND PROBLEMS.*AK
ROTTEN EGG SMELL SINCE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED. COMPLAINED TO TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND THE REGIONAL REP WITHOUT A RESOLUTION. THE REP SUGGESTION WAS TO JUST PUT PREMIUM GAS IN IT. CERTAINLY NOT WHAT I EXPECTED FROM TOYOTA BUT I HAVE BEEN PUTTING PREMIUM GAS IN THE CAR AND IT DOES SEEMS TO TAME THE SMELL SOMEWHAT. IN ADDITION WE H…
Read full complaint
ROTTEN EGG SMELL SINCE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED. COMPLAINED TO TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND THE REGIONAL REP WITHOUT A RESOLUTION. THE REP SUGGESTION WAS TO JUST PUT PREMIUM GAS IN IT. CERTAINLY NOT WHAT I EXPECTED FROM TOYOTA BUT I HAVE BEEN PUTTING PREMIUM GAS IN THE CAR AND IT DOES SEEMS TO TAME THE SMELL SOMEWHAT. IN ADDITION WE HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE FRONT ALIGNMENT AND THE CAR PULLS TO THE LEFT. HAVE PURCHASED A LIFE TIME ALIGNMENT WARRANTY BUT IT STILL SEEMS TO GO OUT OF ALIGNMENT QUICKLY. ALSO HAVE A CONSTANT WIND PROBLEM WITH THE DRIVER SIDE FRONT DOOR. BEEN REPAIRED ONCE, GOING INTO THE SHOP AGAIN TO REPAIR. ALSO THE ORIGINAL TIRES HAD TO BE REPLACED AT 24,000 MILES. I WOULDN'T CONSIDER A TOYOTA IN FUTURE CAR PURCHASES.*AK
AT 1,500 MILES THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WENT ON. I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE DEALER ON NOVEMBER 8, 2002 AND WAS TOLD THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE CAR AND THEY RESET THE COMPUTER. THE CAR WAS FINE UNTIL I ARRIVED AT HOME AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON AGAIN. I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE DEALER ON NOVEMBER 11TH AND THEY SAID THEY …
Read full complaint
AT 1,500 MILES THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WENT ON. I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE DEALER ON NOVEMBER 8, 2002 AND WAS TOLD THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE CAR AND THEY RESET THE COMPUTER. THE CAR WAS FINE UNTIL I ARRIVED AT HOME AND THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON AGAIN. I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE DEALER ON NOVEMBER 11TH AND THEY SAID THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE CAR. THEY WERE GOING TO REMOVE THE TRANSMISSION BUT NEEDED A PART. IT IS NOW NOVEMBER 25TH AND THE PART STILL HASN'T ARRIVED AND THE CAR HASN'T BEEN REPAIRED.
I OWN A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH BRIDGESTONE TIRES WHICH WERE ON THE CAR WHEN WE PURCHASED IT IN FALL OF 2002. WE HAVE TAKEN THE CAR INTO DEALERSHIP, HIGH COUNTRY TOYOTA IN SCOTTSBORO, AL, 3 TIMES AND PHONED OUR SALES REPRESENTATIVE APPROXIMATELY 6 TIMES FOR 3 PROBLEMS. #1 - RATTLING - WHICH WE WERE TOLD ON THE FIRST VISIT TO D…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH BRIDGESTONE TIRES WHICH WERE ON THE CAR WHEN WE PURCHASED IT IN FALL OF 2002. WE HAVE TAKEN THE CAR INTO DEALERSHIP, HIGH COUNTRY TOYOTA IN SCOTTSBORO, AL, 3 TIMES AND PHONED OUR SALES REPRESENTATIVE APPROXIMATELY 6 TIMES FOR 3 PROBLEMS. #1 - RATTLING - WHICH WE WERE TOLD ON THE FIRST VISIT TO DEALER IT WAS THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER HEAT SHIELD COVER AND THEY HAD FIXED IT BY BENDING IT OUT. IT'S RATTLING AGAIN, NOW. #2 - SMELL OF SULFER/ROTTEN EGGS - WHICH WE WERE TOLD THEY COULD NOT RECREATE THE PROBLEM, SO THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT COULD BE. IT STILL SMELLS! #3 - MY HUSBAND TOOK THE CAR TO WAL-MART TO HAVE THE OIL CHANGED AND THE TIRES BALANCED AND ROTATED BECAUSE WE NOTICED ALOT OF WEAR ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE TIRES AND THE STEERING WHEEL WAS VIBRATING WHEN DRIVING. MY HUSBAND WAS PAGED BACK TO THE AUTOMOTIVE SECTION BY AN EMPLOYEE TO SEE THE TIRES HIMSELF BEFORE THEY TOOK THEM ALL OFF THE CAR AND TO WARN MY HUSBAND ABOUT DRIVING ON THE TIRES IF WE DIDN'T REPLACE THEM IMMEDIATELY. MY HUSBAND SAID THE INSIDE OF THE TIRES WERE SHOWING THE WIRES FROM SEVERE WEARING. MY HUSBAND TOOK THE CAR TO THE DEALER WHERE WE PURCHASED IT TO HAVE THEM INSPECT THE FRONT END FOR DAMAGE THAT COULD CAUSE THE TIRES TO WEAR IN SUCH A WAY SO QUICKLY. OUR VEHICLE IS 1 YR. OLD WITH 30,000 MILES ON IT. HE WAS TOLD IT WAS OK, BUT THE TIRES ON THE CAR AT TIME OF PURCHASE WEREN'T MEANT TO LAST VERY LONG, ANYWAY. HE TOOK THE CAR TO A LOCAL - TRUSTED - TIRE COMPANY AND HAD THE TIRES REPLACED. WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT OUR DEALER ISN'T AWARE OF ANY RECALLS AND/OR COMPLAINTS ON ANY OF THESE ISSUES, BUT AFTER RESEARCHING THE INTERNET, I HAVE COME ACROSS MORE THAN ENOUGH COMPLAINTS TO MAKE ME WONDER IF I'VE MADE A HUGE/COSTLY MISTAKE IN TRUSTING THE TOYOTA NAME AND PAST REPUTATION, ESPECIALLY WITH 3 CHILDREN WHO WERE PUT AT RISK AND A MONTHLY CAR PAYMENT!*AK
Official recalls
404V346000 · Air Bags:side/window
Jul 13, 2004
ON CERTAIN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAGS (CSA), ONE OR BOTH OF THE CURTAIN AIR BAGS MAY BE TWISTED NEAR THE INFLATOR DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS, THE CSA MAY NOT DEPLOY RAPIDLY ENOUGH WHEN ACTIVATED IN A SIDE IMPACT COLLISION. THIS MAY RESULT IN FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE INTENDED HEAD PROTECTION, INCREASING THE RISK OF INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE CSAS AND REPLACE THE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 6, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
01V372000 · Air Bags:frontal
Dec 11, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A THREE-SPOKE STYLE STEERING WHEEL. DURING AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE BOTTOM SEAM OF THE FRONT DRIVER'S SIDE AIR BAG MODULE COVER (HORN PAD) COULD BE TORN AWAY ALLOWING THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THE COVER TO COMPLETELY DETACH FROM THE AIR BAG MODULE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS SHOULD OCCUR, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE DETACHED BOTTOM PORTION MAY STRIKE THE DRIVER CAUSING PERSONAL INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE DRIVER'S SIDE AIR BAG MODULE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN DECEMBER 28, 2001. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331 OR LEXUS AT 1-888-333-9376.
01V302000 · Tires
Oct 1, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH CONTINENTAL TOURING TIRES, P205-65R15 92S, INSTALLED AT THE PORTS IN JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. THE INCORRECT TIRES WERE INSTALLED ON VEHICLES THAT HAD DAMAGED TIRES. THE TIRES WERE DAMAGED DURING A PORT UPGRADE TO ALUMINUM WHEELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE TIRES DO NOT CONFORM TO THE SPEED RATING FOR THE VEHICLE. IF THE VEHICLE EXCEEDED THE MAXIMUM SPEED RATING (112 MPH), POSSIBLE TIRE FAILURE COULD OCCUR.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE ALL FIVE TIRES. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN SEPTEMBER 13, 2001. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
01V306000 · Air Bags:frontal
Sep 25, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. INCOMPLETE DEPLOYMENT OF THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG COULD OCCUR IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: UNEXPECTED AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT CAN RESULT IN OCCUPANT INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY. BOTH OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED BY TELEPHONE AND ARRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM. THIS CAMPAIGN IS 100% COMPLETED. BOTH OWNERS HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED AND THEIR VEHICLES REPAIRED.
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
4DP06003 · 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
PE04021 · Throttle Control System
Opened Mar 3, 2004 · Closed Jul 22, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
THE LEXUS MODELS WERE THE SUBJECT OF DEFECT PETITION (DP) 04-003.TWELVE ODI COMPLAINTS ARE DUPLICATIVE TO TOYOTA REPORTS, INCLUDING THE TWO MINOR CRASHES.THE V6 EQUIPPED SOLARA MODELS HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED BECAUSE THEY DO NOT CONTAIN THE SUBJECT THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM.TOYOTA INTRODUCED ELECTRONIC THROTTLE CONTROL (ETC) ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES BEGINNING IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002.ODI OPENED THE INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE IF THE SYSTEM COULD BE THE CAUSE OF COMPLAINTS ALLEGING THE ENGINE SPEED INCREASED, OR FAILED TO DECREASE, (FOR A SHORT DURATION) WHEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS NOT DEPRESSED (THE ALLEGED DEFECT).DURING THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION, ODI ANALYZED AGENCY DATA AND REVIEWED VEHICLE OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE (VOQ) REPORTS, CONDUCTED INTERVIEWS INVOLVING 113 VOQ AND 36 TOYOTA REPORTS, INSPECTED TWO COMPLAINANT VEHICLES, REVIEWED RELEVANT TOYOTA SERVICE AND NEW CAR FEATURE DOCUMENTATION, REVIEWED AND ANALYZED TOYOTA?S RESPONSES TO ODI?S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER, CONDUCTED A LIMITED CONTROL PEDAL ASSESSMENT, AND ATTENDED A TOYOTA TECHNICAL PRESENTATION THAT INCLUDED THE ASSESSMENT OF TWO DEMONSTRATION VEHICLES.THROUGH INTERVIEWS, ODI IDENTIFIED 14 VOQ AND 6 TOYOTA REPORTS (20 UNIQUE VEHICLES) WHERE COMPLAINANTS REPORT MULTIPLE OCCURRENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.IN SOME CASES THE CONDITION WAS EXPERIENCED BY DIFFERENT VEHICLE OPERATORS OR WAS WITNESSED BY OTHER OCCUPANTS.ODI WAS UNABLE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO THE CAUSE OF 9 TOYOTA AND AN ADDITIONAL 37 VOQ REPORTS (WHICH DESCRIBE 28 UNIQUE INCIDENTS) DUE TO INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION.THE REMAINING COMPLAINANTS INTERVIEWED (62 VOQ, 21 TOYOTA) DESCRIBED CONDITIONS NOT CAUSED BY A FAILURE OF THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM AND WERE THUS CONSIDERED UNRELATED TO THE INVESTIGATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS INTERVIEWED REPORTED A COMPONENT FAILURE (OR OTHER INDICATOR OF A SYSTEM FAILURE) AS THE POTENTIAL CAUSE OF INCIDENTS RELEVANT TO THIS INVESTIGATION.IN MANY CASES, THE COMPLAINT VEHICLES WERE SUBSEQUENTLY INSPECTED BY DEALERSHIP OR MANUFACTURER REPRESENTATIVES WHO ALSO FAILED TO IDENTIFY A FAULT WITHIN THE VEHICLE.TOYOTA IDENTIFIED 43 RELATED WARRANTY CLAIMS, 24 OF WHICH WERE FOR DIAGNOSTIC PURPOSES ONLY (NO REPAIRS PERFORMED).ODI FOUND NOTHING ABNORMAL IN THE CONTROL PEDAL CONFIGURATION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.A DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE THE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR FURTHER DETAIL.
PE02079 · Engine Compartment Fire
Opened Oct 22, 2002 · Closed Mar 18, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling
ODI'S DATA ANALYSIS FOUND THE FIRES RATES TO BE CONSISTENTLY LOW AND EVENLY DISTRIBUTED AMONG SIX MODEL YEARS AND SIX DIFFERENT ENGINE CONFIGURATIONS.ODI EXAMINED A VARIETY OF ROOT CAUSES, THOSE BEING DETONATION (RESULTING IN OIL PAN PUNCTURE FROM CONNECTING ROD), STARTER FIRES, VARIOUS FUEL RELATED FIRES, LEAKING OIL FILTERS, WIRING ISSUES, IMPROPER REPAIRS AND BRAKE FLUID LEAKS.NONE OF THE ISSUES EXAMINED HAD REPORTS THAT INDICATED A TREND WHEN NORMALIZED FOR POPULATON AND EXPOSURE.SEE ATTACHED REPORT FOR FULL DETAILS.
Illustration