← New search

2003 Toyota Camry

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Camry years

Owner complaints for the 2003 Toyota Camry are substantially higher than the model-year median of 295.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

575 reports with mileage · 205 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 259 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 112 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 91 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

228 crash reports10 fire reports71 injury reports

Air Bags complaints

72 reports
Clear category filter
50,000 miles · Oct 15, 2014
Air BagsStructure

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DASHBOARD DEVELOPED A CRACK, EXPOSING THE PASSENGER'S SIDE AIR BAG. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 50,000.

NHTSA ODI #10644816

80,000 miles · Aug 20, 2014
Air BagsStructureCrash

I WAS INVOLVED IN A CRASH WHERE I WAS HIT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. ALTHOUGH THE IMPACT WAS SEVERE ENOUGH TO CAUSE DAMAGE TO THE FRAME OF THE CAR, NONE OF THE SIX (6) AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. AS MENTIONED IN A PREVIOUS COMPLAINT, THERE IS NOW A GAP ON THE DASHBOARD AROUND THE AREA FOR THE PASSENGER AIR BAG. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10626599

Mileage unknown · Jul 14, 2014
Air Bags

SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I WENT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ABOUT A CONCERN WITH MY PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG. I WAS TOLD WITHOUT THEM TOUCHING MY VEHICLE THAT I NEEDED A NEW DASHBOARD WHICH IS OVER $2000.00. I LEFT BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE $2000.00 PLUS TO PURCHASE A DASHBOARD. I WENT ONLINE TO TOYOTA.COM AND SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT ON 6/…

Read full complaint

SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I WENT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ABOUT A CONCERN WITH MY PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG. I WAS TOLD WITHOUT THEM TOUCHING MY VEHICLE THAT I NEEDED A NEW DASHBOARD WHICH IS OVER $2000.00. I LEFT BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE $2000.00 PLUS TO PURCHASE A DASHBOARD. I WENT ONLINE TO TOYOTA.COM AND SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT ON 6/24/2014. I SPOKE WITH [XXX], A DAY OR SO LATER AND SHE ADVISED ME TO GO BACK AND HAVE THEM CHECK IT, WHICH I DID AND I WAS TOLD WHEN I GOT THERE IT WOULD BE AN HOUR/HOUR AND A HALF BEFORE THEY GET TO MY CAR. I TOLD[XXX] (ADVISOR) THAT I'LL WAIT IN THE LOUNGE AREA, IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 2:01PM, AT 2:30PM HE TOLD ME MY CAR WAS READY. I WAS GIVEN A COUPLE OF PRINT OUTS AND WAS TOLD ONCE AGAIN I NEEDED A NEW DASHBOARD BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WAS OLD, PER [XXX]. HE ALSO ASKED ME IF I COULD READ WHEN I ASKED IF IT WAS STATED ON THE PRINT OUTS, VERY RUDE! I SPOKE WITH [XXX] AGAIN AND SHE SAID SHE WOULD HAVE TO SPEAK WITH MY LOCAL DEALERSHIP FIRST AND SHE'D CONTACT ME IN A FEW DAYS, WHICH SHE DID AND SAID THE SERVICE MANAGER NAMED [XXX] SAID HE TOLD ME IT WAS A COSMETIC ISSUE. I NEVER SPOKE WITH A TIM. SHE ALSO TOLD ME THAT TOYOTA WILL NOT HELP ME BECAUSE IT'S A COSMETIC ISSUE, PER [XXX] AT BEV SMITH TOYOTA. I ATTACHED PHOTOS WITH MY COMPLAINT TO TOYOTA. I WENT ONLINE AND FOUND A COMPLAINT SITE AND POSTED MY COMPLAINT ON THERE AND FOUND OUT I COULD CONTACT NHTSA. AS I STATED TO TOYOTA CORPORATION, I'M NOT SEEKING A NEW VEHICLE OR MONEY, I JUST WANT THIS PROBLEM FIXED. I WOULD HATE FOR SOMETHING TRAGIC TO HAPPEN WHEN THE ISSUE COULD'VE BEEN RESOLVED! BASICALLY, TOYOTA IS SAYING THAT THEIR DASHBOARDS DON'T LAST OVER TEN YEARS. VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH THEM AND I WAS CONSIDERING PURCHASING ANOTHER CAMRY, NOT AFTER THIS!! MY COMPLAINT ISN'T THE ONLY ONE FOR THAT PARTICULAR VEHICLE. SHAMEFUL!! INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10610366

82,400 miles · Jun 24, 2014
Air Bags

I HAVE A 2003 CAMRY LE, AND I AM CONCERNED THE AIRBAG ON THE PASSENGER SIDE IS SHOWING GAPS AROUND THE CAVITY ON THE DASHBOARD. I USE THE CAR FOR DAILY TRANSPORTATION FOR PERSONAL USE, AND I'M AFRAID IT MIGHT EXPLODE FROM THE HIGH HEAT. I RESIDE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. WHAT IS MY RECOURSE TO SOLVE THIS MATTER? I HEARD AND R…

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2003 CAMRY LE, AND I AM CONCERNED THE AIRBAG ON THE PASSENGER SIDE IS SHOWING GAPS AROUND THE CAVITY ON THE DASHBOARD. I USE THE CAR FOR DAILY TRANSPORTATION FOR PERSONAL USE, AND I'M AFRAID IT MIGHT EXPLODE FROM THE HIGH HEAT. I RESIDE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. WHAT IS MY RECOURSE TO SOLVE THIS MATTER? I HEARD AND READ THAT THERE IS A RECALL FOR TOYOTA VEHICLE OF THAT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE AIRBAG PROBLEM IN FLORIDA. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10605764

Mileage unknown · Mar 12, 2014
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE SUDDEN ACCELERATION. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED AS SHE WAS DRIVING INTO A COVERED PARKING GARAGE, RETRIEVED HER PARKING TICKET AND PROCEEDED UP THE RAMP, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY REVVED TO A SPEED SHE COULD NOT CONTROL. SHE TRIED TO PUMP THE BRAKES, BUT TO NO AVAIL. SHE HIT A…

Read full complaint

2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE SUDDEN ACCELERATION. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED AS SHE WAS DRIVING INTO A COVERED PARKING GARAGE, RETRIEVED HER PARKING TICKET AND PROCEEDED UP THE RAMP, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY REVVED TO A SPEED SHE COULD NOT CONTROL. SHE TRIED TO PUMP THE BRAKES, BUT TO NO AVAIL. SHE HIT A PARKED TRUCK AND THAT STOPPED THE VEHICLE, MOVING THE TRUCK APPROXIMATELY 6-8 FEET. THE CONSUMER STATED IT WAS PRACTICALLY A FRONT END COLLISION AND THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE INSURANCE COMPANY TOTALED THE VEHICLE. UPDATED 05/13/14*JB

NHTSA ODI #10568456

Mileage unknown · Dec 4, 2013
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE SUDDEN ACCELERATION AND AIR BAGS MALFUNCTION. *SMD THE CONSUMER WAS DRIVING WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATED, AND AS HE WAS PREPARING TO EXIT THE PARKWAY, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED, DESPITE THE APPLICATION OF THE BRAKE. HE LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE, AND CONSEQ…

Read full complaint

2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE SUDDEN ACCELERATION AND AIR BAGS MALFUNCTION. *SMD THE CONSUMER WAS DRIVING WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ACTIVATED, AND AS HE WAS PREPARING TO EXIT THE PARKWAY, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED, DESPITE THE APPLICATION OF THE BRAKE. HE LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE, AND CONSEQUENTLY HE HIT A GUARD RAIL AND THE VEHICLE ROLLED OVER. THE CONSUMER SUSTAINED A DEEP LACERATION TO HIS KNEE.

NHTSA ODI #10554540

115,000 miles · Sep 24, 2013
Air BagsCrashInjury

2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE AIR BAG MALFUNCTION. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED SHE WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT. IN WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A FENDER-BENDER, BECAUSE THE OTHER VEHICLE WAS ACCELERATING, TURNED INTO A RATHER SERIOUS ACCIDENT. THE OTHER VEHICLE MADE A LEFT TURN AND CRASHED INTO THE CONSUMERS …

Read full complaint

2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE AIR BAG MALFUNCTION. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED SHE WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT. IN WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A FENDER-BENDER, BECAUSE THE OTHER VEHICLE WAS ACCELERATING, TURNED INTO A RATHER SERIOUS ACCIDENT. THE OTHER VEHICLE MADE A LEFT TURN AND CRASHED INTO THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE, AS SHE WAS PROCEEDING STRAIGHT AHEAD, AND SENT HER TWO LANES OVER INTO A DITCH. THE CONSUMER RECEIVED SERIOUS INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED. THE CONSUMER STATED HAD THE AIR BAG DEPLOYED, HER INJURIES, MAY NOT HAVE BEEN AS SERIOUS. UPDATED 10/28/13

NHTSA ODI #10545780

Mileage unknown · Aug 11, 2013
Air BagsPower TrainStructureCrash

I WAS IN THE DRIVER SEAT WAITING TO TURN LEFT, WHEN SUDDENLY I GOT HIT FROM THE REAR RIGHT PART OF MY CAR. FROM THAT MOMENT THE CAR COULD NOT DRIVE.. THE REAR LEFT PART OF THE CAR BODY AND THE TIRE WAS TOTALLY DAMAGED. THE REPAIR SHOP DECLARED THAT THE CAR COULD NOT BE REPAIRED ANY MORE. ONLY LATER OF THE INCIDENT DID I REMEMB…

Read full complaint

I WAS IN THE DRIVER SEAT WAITING TO TURN LEFT, WHEN SUDDENLY I GOT HIT FROM THE REAR RIGHT PART OF MY CAR. FROM THAT MOMENT THE CAR COULD NOT DRIVE.. THE REAR LEFT PART OF THE CAR BODY AND THE TIRE WAS TOTALLY DAMAGED. THE REPAIR SHOP DECLARED THAT THE CAR COULD NOT BE REPAIRED ANY MORE. ONLY LATER OF THE INCIDENT DID I REMEMBER THAT THE AIRBAGS DID NOT WORK AT ALL. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10534701

43,911 miles · Jun 7, 2013
Air BagsVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 1 MPH IN A PARKING LOT , THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO A PROTECTED BARRIER TO AVOID CRASHING INTO PEDESTRIANS AND THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED A CONTUSION AND A BURN MARK CAUSED BY SEAT BELT. A POL…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 1 MPH IN A PARKING LOT , THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED INDEPENDENTLY. THE CONTACT CRASHED INTO A PROTECTED BARRIER TO AVOID CRASHING INTO PEDESTRIANS AND THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED A CONTUSION AND A BURN MARK CAUSED BY SEAT BELT. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A COLLISION CENTER BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INSPECTED TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF FAILURE. THE FAILURE WAS REPORTED TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 43,911. UPDATED 7/17/13 *CN

NHTSA ODI #10515643

77,000 miles · Jun 2, 2013
Air BagsCrashInjury

WE WERE TRAVELING IN THE CENTER LANE OF I-5 AT 55MPH AND A CAR (A JEEP WAGONEER) SPUN OUT OF CONTROL ON THE ADJACENT CLOVERLEAF AND HIT US ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. THE IMPACT WAS ON OUR FRONT RIGHT SIDE TEARING THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL A-ARM CRUMBLING THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CAR ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE REAR DOOR OF THE 4 DOOR SEDAN. …

Read full complaint

WE WERE TRAVELING IN THE CENTER LANE OF I-5 AT 55MPH AND A CAR (A JEEP WAGONEER) SPUN OUT OF CONTROL ON THE ADJACENT CLOVERLEAF AND HIT US ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. THE IMPACT WAS ON OUR FRONT RIGHT SIDE TEARING THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL A-ARM CRUMBLING THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CAR ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE REAR DOOR OF THE 4 DOOR SEDAN. BOTH FRONT AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. BUT NEITHER SIDE AIR BAG DEPLOYED. MY WIFE WAS THROWN AGAINST HER SEAT BELT CAUSING BRUISING AND THE DOOR CREATING LARGE BRUISES ON HER RIGHT HIP, KNEE, AND PAIN ACROSS THE CHEST (FROM THE SEAT BELT). *TR

NHTSA ODI #10514754

Official recalls

1

04V346000 · 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.

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

3

DP06003 · 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.

Go deeper into Toyota Camry problems