NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine And Engine Cooling complaints
112 reportsClear category filter65,000 miles · Aug 5, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE, 4 CYL., AUTOMATIC, APPROX 60,000 MILES. PROBLEM: UNCOMMANDED FULL ACCELERATION. DRIVING CONDITIONS: CLEAR WEATHER, DAYTIME, DRY SURFACE HIGHWAY, CRUISE CONTROL - OFF, TRANSMISSION GEAR SELECTED - DRIVE. CONSEQUENCE: MAJOR LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL. CORRECTIVE ACTION: THROTTLE / SENSOR CHECKED FOR FAILURE AT S…
Read full complaint
2003 TOYOTA CAMRY LE, 4 CYL., AUTOMATIC, APPROX 60,000 MILES. PROBLEM: UNCOMMANDED FULL ACCELERATION. DRIVING CONDITIONS: CLEAR WEATHER, DAYTIME, DRY SURFACE HIGHWAY, CRUISE CONTROL - OFF, TRANSMISSION GEAR SELECTED - DRIVE. CONSEQUENCE: MAJOR LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL. CORRECTIVE ACTION: THROTTLE / SENSOR CHECKED FOR FAILURE AT SHOP - NO DEFECT NOTED - COULD NOT DUPLICATE FAILURE. REPLACEMENT THROTTLE $1100 WITH LABOR. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10279469
73,000 miles · Jul 29, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
VEHICLE ENGINE OIL SLUDGE AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS CAUSED VEHICLE TO STOP COMING OFF BRIDGE OVERPASS ON BUSY STREET. THOUGH THE ENGINE IS COVERED UNDER EXTENDED WARRANTY, CLAIM WAS DENIED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10278645
86,000 miles · Jul 28, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
2003 CAMRY, 4 CYLINDER, 2.4L ENGINE, XLE MODEL. FLUTTERING NOISE UNDER LIGHT ACCELERATION FROM THE ENGINE AREA. DEALER DETERMINED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $760.00. ENGINE HAD 86,000 MILES. VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS FAILURE WHICH SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED WITH A CAR OF THIS SUPPOSED QUALI…
Read full complaint
2003 CAMRY, 4 CYLINDER, 2.4L ENGINE, XLE MODEL. FLUTTERING NOISE UNDER LIGHT ACCELERATION FROM THE ENGINE AREA. DEALER DETERMINED THAT THE INTAKE MANIFOLD NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $760.00. ENGINE HAD 86,000 MILES. VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS FAILURE WHICH SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED WITH A CAR OF THIS SUPPOSED QUALITY. I RATE THIS CAR A 2 OUT OF 5. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10278519
32,000 miles · Jul 6, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
03 CAMRY 4 CYL. 2.4L. ONLY 32000 MILES. WHILE DRIVING TO WORK IN THE MORNING, COOLANT LEAKING FROM A HOSE ATTACHED TO THE THROTTLE BODY. ENGINE BECAME OVERHEATED. NO WARNING LIGHT WAS ON. HAD TO STOP THE CAR SEVERAL TIMES ON THE WAY TO WORK. THROTTLE BODY NEEDS TO BE REPLACED AT SUCH LOW MILEAGE. IT COSTS MORE THAN $1200 TO REPL…
Read full complaint
03 CAMRY 4 CYL. 2.4L. ONLY 32000 MILES. WHILE DRIVING TO WORK IN THE MORNING, COOLANT LEAKING FROM A HOSE ATTACHED TO THE THROTTLE BODY. ENGINE BECAME OVERHEATED. NO WARNING LIGHT WAS ON. HAD TO STOP THE CAR SEVERAL TIMES ON THE WAY TO WORK. THROTTLE BODY NEEDS TO BE REPLACED AT SUCH LOW MILEAGE. IT COSTS MORE THAN $1200 TO REPLACE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10275888
96,000 miles · Jun 24, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
VEHICLE IS 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE - 1ST INCIDENT OCCURRED 10-27-06 - OIL LIGHT CAME ON, STOPPED AT FULL SERVICE STATION, LESS THAN 1/2 QT LOW, CRANKED CAR & LIGHT WAS OFF, WENT APPROX 25 MILES, PULLED UP TO STOP SIGN, CAR DIED, WOULDN'T CRANK, HAD CAR TOWED TO DEALERSHIP, THEY RAN QUICK TEST & GOT CODE P0340, FOUND INTAKE CAM BRO…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE IS 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE - 1ST INCIDENT OCCURRED 10-27-06 - OIL LIGHT CAME ON, STOPPED AT FULL SERVICE STATION, LESS THAN 1/2 QT LOW, CRANKED CAR & LIGHT WAS OFF, WENT APPROX 25 MILES, PULLED UP TO STOP SIGN, CAR DIED, WOULDN'T CRANK, HAD CAR TOWED TO DEALERSHIP, THEY RAN QUICK TEST & GOT CODE P0340, FOUND INTAKE CAM BROKEN, ENGINE DIRTY, PICKUP STOPPED UP,INTAKE& EXHAUST CAM STUCK IN CYLINDER HEAD, GAVE ESTIMATE FOR USED ENGINE, CAR HAD 56,738 MILES & WAS UNDER POWER TRAIN WARRANTY, THEY SAID DUE TO OIL SLUDGE, BLAMED ON NOT CHANGING OIL, HAD ALL MAINTENANCE RECORDS, ACCUSED MY MECHANIC OF FALSIFYING DOCS BUT FINALLY AGREED TO REPAIR. THEY DID NOT REPLACE ENGINE, THEY REPLACED CYLINDER HEADS, CAMS, VALVES, TIMING CHAIN & GUIDES, OIL PICKUP, CLEANED ENGINE & REASSEMBLED. 2ND INCIDENT - MID MAY 2009 - DRIVING, NO LIGHTS CAME ON, CAR STARTED LOSING POWER & SMOKING BAD, PULLED OVER, OIL WAS SPLATTERED CAUSING SMOKING, WAS NOT RUNNING HOT, STILL HAD SOME OIL EVEN AFTER SPLATTERING, TOWED TO MECHANIC, HE SAID DUE TO SLUDGE, DAMAGE INCLUDED 3 HOLES IN BLOCK, 1 HOLE IN OIL PAN, #4 CONNECTING ROD DAMAGED BAD, #4 PISTON SHATTERED, #4 CYLINDER HEAD DAMAGED, ENGINE A TOTAL LOSS, STILL HAVE OLD ENGINE, CAR HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. TOYOTA GAVE ME A CASE #, THEN ON 06-24-09 TOYOTA DENIED ANY KIND OF REPAIR STATING THE 2003'S WERE NOT COVERED UNDER THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT & CAR WAS TOO FAR OUTSIDE WARRANTY. CAR HAS APPROX 96,000 MILES. TOYOTA CLAIMS THEY CORRECTED THE PROBLEM WITH THE NEW ENGINES AFTER 2001, BUT APPARENTLY THE NEW ENGINES HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AS THE ONES IN THE LAWSUIT. THEY SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, TOO MANY TOYOTA OWNERS ARE HAVING THIS SAME PROBLEM. I HAVE ALL MY MAINTENANCE RECORDS SHOWING TIMELY OIL CHANGES. I COULD HAVE HAD AN ACCIDENT CAUSING INJURY AND/OR DEATH TO MYSELF OR PERSONS IN INCOMING TRAFFIC WHEN THIS OCCURRED. THANK GOD NO ONE WAS INJURED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10274884
Mileage unknown · Jun 3, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
2002 ALTIMA 2.5S CATALYTIC CONVERTER BACKFIRED INTO THE ENGINE CAUSING HIGH OIL CONSUMPTION AND OTHER PROBLEMS REQUIRING THE ENGINE TO NEED REPLACEMENT IN MY CAR AT 107,000 MILES THERE WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT BUT A FAILURE ON THE CAR AND NISSAN REFUSAL TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT FINANCIALLY WARRANTY GONE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10272813
160,000 miles · May 26, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
HEARD GURGLING IN THE DASHBOARD AND SOON AFTER THE ENGINE OVERHEATED. TOOK IT IN TO THE AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SHOP WHERE THEY DISCOVERED A BLOWN HEAD GASKET AND WHEN THEY STARTED REMOVING THE HEAD BOLTS, THEY DISCOVERED THE BOLTS HAD PULLED THROUGH THE ALUMINUM BLOCK WHICH CAUSED THE HEAD GASKET TO BLOW. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10269901
130,000 miles · May 12, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
IT BEGAN WITH THE RUSHING SOUND OF FLUID (COOLANT) SOMEWHERE IN THE DASH. WHEN I TOOK IT IN BECAUSE I WAS SMELLING COOLANT AND NOTICED SOME SMOKE, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE HEAD GASKET BLEW. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME IN 12 MONTHS THAT THIS HAS OCCURRED, I FULLY REPAIRED THE VEHICLE FOR THE IDENTICAL PROBLEM IN MAY 2008...CLEARL…
Read full complaint
IT BEGAN WITH THE RUSHING SOUND OF FLUID (COOLANT) SOMEWHERE IN THE DASH. WHEN I TOOK IT IN BECAUSE I WAS SMELLING COOLANT AND NOTICED SOME SMOKE, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE HEAD GASKET BLEW. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME IN 12 MONTHS THAT THIS HAS OCCURRED, I FULLY REPAIRED THE VEHICLE FOR THE IDENTICAL PROBLEM IN MAY 2008...CLEARLY A DEFECT SOMEWHERE IN THE DESIGN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10268570
115,000 miles · May 12, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
IT BEGAN WITH THE RUSHING SOUND OF FLUID (COOLANT) SOMEWHERE IN THE DASH. SHORTLY THEREAFTER THE ENGINE OVERHEATED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE HEAD GASKET BLEW. THE DEALER SAID THE BOLTS IN THE ENGINE WERE STRIPPED OUT AND THEY REPLACED THE SHORT BLOCK. IT WAS REPLACED AND WITHIN A YEAR THIS IS OCCURRING AGAIN. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10268567
51,200 miles · Apr 30, 2009
Engine And Engine Cooling
A CRACK IS DEVELOPED IN 'OIL SUB PAN' AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ENGINE BODY ON MY TOYOTA CAMRY 2003, WHICH HAVE ONLY 51000 MILES ON IT. AN INDEPENDENT AUTO TECHNICIAN TOLD ME THAT A CRACK IN THE OIL PAN IS UNUSUAL AND IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THERE AT THE TIME OF MANUFACTURE. A MECHANIC AT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN METAIRIE TOLD ME THE SAM…
Read full complaint
A CRACK IS DEVELOPED IN 'OIL SUB PAN' AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ENGINE BODY ON MY TOYOTA CAMRY 2003, WHICH HAVE ONLY 51000 MILES ON IT. AN INDEPENDENT AUTO TECHNICIAN TOLD ME THAT A CRACK IN THE OIL PAN IS UNUSUAL AND IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THERE AT THE TIME OF MANUFACTURE. A MECHANIC AT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP IN METAIRIE TOLD ME THE SAME THING ALONG WITH THE FACT THAT SUCH A CRACK IS HARD TO DETECT. I AM LUCKY THAT THIS FAULT WAS DETECTED EARLY AND FIXED BEFORE A FATAL BREAKDOWN COULD HAVE OCCURRED. I HAVE FIXED THIS PROBLEM AT TOYOTA DEALER'S SHIP AND IT COST $3100, WHEN I RAISED THIS ISSUE THEY AGREED TO SPLIT COST FIFTY FIFTY AND STILL IT COST $1532 AND THAT IS TOO MUCH FOR ME SEEING AS HOW NONE OF THIS WAS MY FAULT. THE OLD PART IS STILL WITH TOYOTA DEALER SHIP THEY DIDN'T HAND OVER TO ME. I REGULARLY CHANGE OIL AT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP, AND I WAS SURPRISED TO LEARN THAT THEY FAILED TO NOTICE THIS FAULT EARLIER. PLEASE INVESTIGATE THIS PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10267326
NHTSA investigations
3DP06003 · 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.