NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
953 reports60,468 miles · Aug 4, 2010
Electrical SystemVehicle Speed Control
ONE OF TWO ELECTRONIC ACCELERATOR POSITION SENSORS MALFUNCTIONED ON MY 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. I EXPERIENCED A SLUGGISH RESPONSE TO PEDAL ACTION (I.E. I HAD TO PUSH THE PEDAL FARTHER THAN NORMAL TO GAIN ANY ACCELERATION - CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ALSO ILLUMINATED). I IMMEDIATELY DROVE TO MY MECHANIC'S SHOP FOR EVALUATION AND REPAIR. …
Read full complaint
ONE OF TWO ELECTRONIC ACCELERATOR POSITION SENSORS MALFUNCTIONED ON MY 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. I EXPERIENCED A SLUGGISH RESPONSE TO PEDAL ACTION (I.E. I HAD TO PUSH THE PEDAL FARTHER THAN NORMAL TO GAIN ANY ACCELERATION - CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ALSO ILLUMINATED). I IMMEDIATELY DROVE TO MY MECHANIC'S SHOP FOR EVALUATION AND REPAIR. AFTER RUNNING DIAGNOSTICS, HE DETERMINED THAT THE SENSOR HAD MALFUNCTIONED AND ADVISED ME NOT TO DRIVE THE CAR ANY FURTHER UNTIL IT WAS REPAIRED. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, FROM MY MECHANIC'S EXPLANATION, THE SENSOR DETERMINES THE POSITION OF THE ACCELERATOR AND SENDS A REQUEST FOR ACCELERATION AS A VOLTAGE RANGING FROM 0-5V, WHERE 0V IS NO ACCELERATION AND 5V IS FULL-THROTTLE. THROUGH FURTHER TESTING, HE DETERMINED THAT THE SENSOR THAT HAD MALFUNCTIONED WAS READING 5V. I FIND IT VERY CONCERNING THAT IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE THE SENSOR DOES NOT "FAIL SAFE" (I.E. FAIL TO 0V, RATHER THAN 5V). THE TECHNICIAN EXPLAINED THAT THE SECOND SENSOR WAS THERE AS A SAFETY REDUNDANCY, BUT EITHER WAY, "FAIL SAFE" IS ONE OF THE MOST BASIC DESIGN CONCEPTS IN AN APPLICATION WHERE SAFETY IS CRITICAL AS IS THE CASE HERE. IN MY CONVERSATION WITH TOYOTA, THEY WOULD NOT STAND BEHIND THE PART (MY WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED AND IT WAS NOT ON RECALL), NOR COULD THEY GIVE ME ANY ASSURANCE THAT THE REPLACEMENT PART HAD BEEN REDESIGNED IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT WOULD "FAIL SAFE." I AM A WIFE, MOTHER OF TWO SMALL CHILDREN, AND THE PRIMARY INCOME GENERATOR FOR OUR FAMILY. I DO NOT FEEL GOOD ABOUT WHAT I NOW KNOW ABOUT THE SAFETY OF MY CAR AND DO NOT FEEL THAT TOYOTA TOOK MY CONCERNS TO HEART. I WOULD APPRECIATE ANYTHING YOU COULD DO TO HELP. I SUSPECT I MAY NOT BE THE ONLY ONE TO EXPERIENCE THIS SAFETY FAILURE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10347331
110,000 miles · Aug 3, 2010
Electrical System
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE CONTACT OBSERVED THAT THE ODOMETER AND TRIP ODOMETER DISPLAYED AN INACCURATE CALCULATION. THE ODOMETER READING WOULD INCREASE BY 1.6 MILES FOR EVERY MILE BEING TRAVELED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 110,000. UPD…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE CONTACT OBSERVED THAT THE ODOMETER AND TRIP ODOMETER DISPLAYED AN INACCURATE CALCULATION. THE ODOMETER READING WOULD INCREASE BY 1.6 MILES FOR EVERY MILE BEING TRAVELED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 110,000. UPDATED 11/03/10. *LJ
NHTSA ODI #10347074
113,495 miles · Aug 1, 2010
Latches/locks/linkages
PASSENGER FRONT DOOR LATCH NO LONGER CLOSES. THE DOOR NEEDED TO BE TAPED SHUT TO DRIVE IT HOME. THE LATCH FAILED IN THE OPEN STATE INSTEAD OF THE CLOSED STATE AND I'M CONCERNED THIS COULD HAPPEN TO SOMEONE WHILE ON THE ROAD. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10346642
78,000 miles · Jul 26, 2010
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON MY CAMRY 2002 SE ENGINE STALLS AND/OR ROUGH IDLES ANYTIME WHILE COLD OR AFTER BEING WARMED UP. PREMATURE AND UNJUSTIFIED THROTTLE BODY FAILURE IS SUSPECTED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10345264
58,000 miles · Jul 21, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH UP HILL THE VEHICLE LOST POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER. THE DIAGNOSTIC TEST IDENTIFIED THE ACCELERATOR POSITION SENSOR CAUSED THE FAILURE TO OCCUR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED, BUT THEY WOULD NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH UP HILL THE VEHICLE LOST POWER WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER. THE DIAGNOSTIC TEST IDENTIFIED THE ACCELERATOR POSITION SENSOR CAUSED THE FAILURE TO OCCUR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED, BUT THEY WOULD NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 58,000.
NHTSA ODI #10344534
140,000 miles · Jul 13, 2010
Engine And Engine CoolingFire
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING LESS THAN 40 MPH, THERE WAS A NOISE COMING FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE OIL TEMPERATURE GAUGE INDICATED THE ENGINE WAS OVERHEATING. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND INSPECTED UNDERNEATH THE HOOD AREA. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING LESS THAN 40 MPH, THERE WAS A NOISE COMING FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE OIL TEMPERATURE GAUGE INDICATED THE ENGINE WAS OVERHEATING. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND INSPECTED UNDERNEATH THE HOOD AREA. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS AND REPAIR. THE TECHNICIAN RECOMMENDED THAT THE ENGINE BE REPLACED DUE TO THE DEFECTIVE CYLINDER HEAD BOLTS. THE TECHNICIAN ORDERED A NEW REPLACEMENT ENGINE AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 140,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10343001
95,000 miles · Jul 7, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
I HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING MUCH DIFFICULTY WITH ACCELERATION WHEN DRIVING MY 02 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE..I STEP ON THE GAS AND THE CAR HESITATES TO ACCELERATE..THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT GOES HARD..THIS IS NOW ON A DAILY BASIS WHENEVER I DRIVE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10341743
Mileage unknown · Jun 22, 2010
Power Train
2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER STATES PROBLEM WITH BUCKING AND HESITATION *TGW THE DEALER DID NOTE THE TRANSMISSION FLUID HAD A SLIGHT METALLIC ODOR. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10340034
30,000 miles · Jun 22, 2010
Electrical System
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. SHE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILED CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO LOSE POWER AND THE ABS SYSTEM FAILED. THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE COMPUTER SYSTEM WAS DAMAGED CAUSING THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT PR…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA CAMRY. SHE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH, THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM FAILED CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO LOSE POWER AND THE ABS SYSTEM FAILED. THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE COMPUTER SYSTEM WAS DAMAGED CAUSING THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 30,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 50,000.
NHTSA ODI #10339560
173,000 miles · Jun 15, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
WE WERE LEAVING A GAS STATION AND PROCEEDED TO GO AROUND THE BACK OF THE GAS STATION BUT DECIDED THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF AREA TO GO THROUGH BETWEEN THE GAS STATION AND AN IGA STORE.. THE WIFE PUT THE CAMRY IN REVERSE AND THE ENGINE ACCELERATED AND BACKED INTO A TELEPHONE POLE ..IT THREW US FORWARD AND AGAIN BACKED INTO …
Read full complaint
WE WERE LEAVING A GAS STATION AND PROCEEDED TO GO AROUND THE BACK OF THE GAS STATION BUT DECIDED THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF AREA TO GO THROUGH BETWEEN THE GAS STATION AND AN IGA STORE.. THE WIFE PUT THE CAMRY IN REVERSE AND THE ENGINE ACCELERATED AND BACKED INTO A TELEPHONE POLE ..IT THREW US FORWARD AND AGAIN BACKED INTO THE POLE.. MY WIFE AUTOMATICALLY PUT THE CAR IN DRIVE AND THE CAR SHOT THROUGH BETWEEN THE STORE AND THE GAS STATION.. IT BROKE BOTH SIDE MIRRORS AND SCRATCHED DOWN THE SIDES OF THE CAR.. WE PROCEEDED INTO THREE LANES OF TRAFFIC, HITTING A HONDA VAN IN THE PASSENGER DOOR.. THE CAR KEPT GOING ACROSS TWO MORE LANES OF TRAFFIC AND INTO THE GAS STATION ACROSS THE STREET BEFORE I FINALLY REACTED AND TOLD THE WIFE TO APPLY THE EMERGENCY BRAKE...THE CAR STOPPED ABOUT TWO FEET FROM HITTING ANOTHER VEHICLE..AND THE OTHER GAS STATION.. BOTH VEHICLES WERE TOTALED IN THE ACCIDENT.. THE CAR WOULD NOT STOP EVEN WITH MY WIFE RIDING THE BRAKE UNTIL WE HIT THE VAN.. WITNESSES SAID THEY HEARD THE BRAKES SQUEALING AS WE WERE COMING OUT OF THE GAS STATION AREA.. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10336344
Official recalls
4Jul 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.
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.
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.
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