VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS ONE IN DRIVEWAY AFTER SHIFTING INTO DRIVE. *TR
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 →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
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.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
259 reportsMOVING AT 1 TO 2 MPH, WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE, I WAS SLOWING DOWN INTO A HEAD-IN SLIGHTLY DOWNHILL PARKING SPACE. THEN, WITHOUT ANY WARNING THE CAR LAUNCHED FORWARD, ACCELERATING ON ITS OWN AT FULL SPEED OVER AN EMBANKMENT, THROUGH THE AIR OVER A SIDEWALK CRASHING INTO THE SIDE OF A PARKED VEHICLE WHICH, FROM THE EXTREME IMPAC…
Read full complaint
MOVING AT 1 TO 2 MPH, WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE, I WAS SLOWING DOWN INTO A HEAD-IN SLIGHTLY DOWNHILL PARKING SPACE. THEN, WITHOUT ANY WARNING THE CAR LAUNCHED FORWARD, ACCELERATING ON ITS OWN AT FULL SPEED OVER AN EMBANKMENT, THROUGH THE AIR OVER A SIDEWALK CRASHING INTO THE SIDE OF A PARKED VEHICLE WHICH, FROM THE EXTREME IMPACT, RAMMED INTO AN ADJACENT PARKED CAR. MY FOOT WAS STILL ON THE BRAKE, NEVER ON THE ACCELERATOR. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT WAS TAKEN. THE INCIDENT WAS REPORTED TO THE TOYOTA DEALER BUT THEY TOOK NO RESPONSIBILITY AND THEY CLAIMED THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE CAR. THE CAR WAS REPAIRED. BECAUSE OF MY CONCERN FOR PERSONAL SAFETY THE CAR WAS NOT DRIVEN AGAIN UNTIL IT WAS TRADED IN FOR A NEW HONDA. THE MILEAGE WAS 44,080. *TR
I WAS PARKING MY 2003 CAMRY IN A MALL PARKING LOT WHEN IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. I HAD NO CONTROL AND SMASHED INTO A PARKED CAR. I NEVER HAD AN ACCIDENT IN 60+ YEARS OF DRIVING. NOW I KNOW IT WAS THE TOYOTA ACCELERATOR THAT CAUSED THE CRASH. MY ED MORSE TOYOTA DEALER IN DELRAY BEACH FL. TURNED ME AWAY FROM SERVICE SAYING IT IS…
Read full complaint
I WAS PARKING MY 2003 CAMRY IN A MALL PARKING LOT WHEN IT SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. I HAD NO CONTROL AND SMASHED INTO A PARKED CAR. I NEVER HAD AN ACCIDENT IN 60+ YEARS OF DRIVING. NOW I KNOW IT WAS THE TOYOTA ACCELERATOR THAT CAUSED THE CRASH. MY ED MORSE TOYOTA DEALER IN DELRAY BEACH FL. TURNED ME AWAY FROM SERVICE SAYING IT IS NOT THEIR PROBLEM BUT I SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA. I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO REACH ANYONE THERE. I KNOW IT IS NOT IN THE RECALL BUT I TOLD THE DEALER I WANT TOYOTA TO KNOW THIS HAPPENED TO MY 2003 CAMRY AND I WANT THEM TO FIND THE CAUSE AND REMEDY IT. MY WIFE ALSO HAS A 2003 CAMRY AND WE DRIVE THEM BOTH WITH FEAR. *TR
PREVIOUSLY REPORTED ACCELERATION SURGE OF 2003 CAMRY WHILE BACKING OUT OF THE GARAGE. REPORTS OF ACCELERATION SURGES ON YOUR SITE EXCEED 140 FOR THE 2003 CAMRY VERSUS (AS BEST I COULD IDENTIFY) 29 FOR THE MALIBU, 26 FOR THE ACCORD AND 12 FOR THE TAURUS, ALL 2003 MODELS. IN LIGHT OF RECENT TOYOTA FINDINGS ARE YOU GOING TO REOPEN…
Read full complaint
PREVIOUSLY REPORTED ACCELERATION SURGE OF 2003 CAMRY WHILE BACKING OUT OF THE GARAGE. REPORTS OF ACCELERATION SURGES ON YOUR SITE EXCEED 140 FOR THE 2003 CAMRY VERSUS (AS BEST I COULD IDENTIFY) 29 FOR THE MALIBU, 26 FOR THE ACCORD AND 12 FOR THE TAURUS, ALL 2003 MODELS. IN LIGHT OF RECENT TOYOTA FINDINGS ARE YOU GOING TO REOPEN INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 2003 CAMRY?...*TR
I PURCHASED A USED TOYOTA CAMRY, 2003 MODEL, FROM A SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS CAR DEALER IN JANUARY, 2007. AT THE TIME THE CAR HAD ABOUT 103,000 MILES. I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT ABOUT 65 MILES PER HOUR WHEN SUDDENLY THE CAR'S ENGINE REVVED UP, THERE WAS A EASILY PERCEPTIBLE JOLT AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED BY ITSELF. ABOUT 2-…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A USED TOYOTA CAMRY, 2003 MODEL, FROM A SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS CAR DEALER IN JANUARY, 2007. AT THE TIME THE CAR HAD ABOUT 103,000 MILES. I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT ABOUT 65 MILES PER HOUR WHEN SUDDENLY THE CAR'S ENGINE REVVED UP, THERE WAS A EASILY PERCEPTIBLE JOLT AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED BY ITSELF. ABOUT 2-3 SECONDS LATER I STEPPED ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, VERY HARD. THE CAR ACCELERATION RATE WENT SLIGHTLY DOWN, ENGINE RPMS STILL HIGH, AND I COULD BARELY KEEP CONTROL OF THE CAR, SO I BECAME CONCERNED (ALMOST FEARED) OF LOSING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. AFTER ABOUT 30-40 SECONDS, RPMS WENT BACK TO MORE NORMAL LEVELS, ALTHOUGH THE VEHICLE ENGINE WAS STILL ACCELERATED. AT THAT MOMENT I WAS DRIVING AT ABOUT 65 MILES PER HOUR AND IF I HAD LET GO ON THE BRAKE THE CAR WOULD HAVE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN. AFTERWARDS, AND FOR BOUT 15 MINUTES (15-16 MILES) I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE BRAKE AND GAS PEDALS AND THE CAR CRUISED ON ITS OWN AT ABOUT 65 MPH. I FINALLY GOT HOME, PARKED THE CAR AND NEXT TIME I USED IT EXPERIENCED NO PROBLEMS. I DON'T RECALL IF I HAD SIMILAR INCIDENTS LATER ON. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A STORE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT IS AVAILABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER, REPAIRED AND INSPECTED BY A TECHNICIAN WHO WAS UNABLE TO FIND THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A STORE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT IS AVAILABLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER, REPAIRED AND INSPECTED BY A TECHNICIAN WHO WAS UNABLE TO FIND THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE VIN WAS UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 123,000.
ON JANUARY 12, 2010, I HAD MY 2003 CAMRY DETAILED (WASHED INSIDE AND OUT-INCLUDING THE CARPET)AT A CAR WASH. I PROCEEDED TO A NEARBY MALL,WHERE I STOPPED BRIEFLY AT A STORE. UPON EXITING THE PARKING LOT, I MADE A FULL STOP AT THE STOP SIGN. I THEN PROCEEDED TO GO BY STEPPING ON THE ACCELERATOR. AT THIS POINT THE CAR SUDDENLY…
Read full complaint
ON JANUARY 12, 2010, I HAD MY 2003 CAMRY DETAILED (WASHED INSIDE AND OUT-INCLUDING THE CARPET)AT A CAR WASH. I PROCEEDED TO A NEARBY MALL,WHERE I STOPPED BRIEFLY AT A STORE. UPON EXITING THE PARKING LOT, I MADE A FULL STOP AT THE STOP SIGN. I THEN PROCEEDED TO GO BY STEPPING ON THE ACCELERATOR. AT THIS POINT THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED TO A HIGH SPEED, AND I WAS NOT ABLE TO STOP IT, EVEN THOUGH I WAS PRESSING ON THE BRAKE. THE CAR WENT ACROSS 3 LANES & UP, OVER, AND DOWN A MEDIAN,CONTINUED TO GO ACROSS ANOTHER 3 LANES AND FINALLY CAME TO REST AFTER HITTING A TREE ON ANOTHER MEDIAN. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE ACCELERATOR BECAME STUCK IN THE DOWN POSITION, AND PUSHING DOWN ON THE BRAKE TO THE LEFT OF IT DID NOT HELP, NOR DID THE STEERING WHEEL TURN AS I WAS TRYING TO AVOID HITTING THE TREE. ALSO, PLEASE BE AWARE THAT MY FRONT AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. AT THE TIME, I HAD NO VISIBLE SIGNS OF INJURY, BUT INJURIES BECAME APPARENT SOON AFTER, AND CAN BE VERIFIED BY A DOCTOR. A POLICE REPORT IS AVAILABLE, IF NEEDED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A COLLISION SHOP, WAITING TO BE REPAIRED. A CLAIM WAS FILED WITH TOYOTA MANUFACTURING. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS ABOUT 52,000. *JB SEE ODI 10301845 *DSY
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS BACKING OUT OF HER DRIVEWAY. THERE WAS NOT AN APPLICATION TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL OR BRAKE PEDAL, SUDDENLY THERE WAS AN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THE DRIVER APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND WAS ABLE TO SLOW DOWN. THE IDENTICAL FAILURES OCCURRED ON FOUR SEPARATE OC…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT WAS BACKING OUT OF HER DRIVEWAY. THERE WAS NOT AN APPLICATION TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL OR BRAKE PEDAL, SUDDENLY THERE WAS AN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. THE DRIVER APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND WAS ABLE TO SLOW DOWN. THE IDENTICAL FAILURES OCCURRED ON FOUR SEPARATE OCCASIONS. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED FOR THE MALFUNCTION. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 130,000.
I HAVE A 2003 CAMRY. ON NOV. 8, 2009 I HAD A VERY BIG PROBLEM WITH THE ACCELERATOR. WHEN STEPPING ON THE GAS PEDAL I COULDN'T GET ANY GAS, AND THEN THE CAR WOULD JERK FORWARD AT A RAPID RATE SO THAT I HAD TO APPLY THE BRAKES. IT WAS TOTALLY UNDRIVABLE. THE MECHANIC REPLACED THE GAS PEDAL ASSEMBLY, AND I HAVE THE OLD PART IN…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2003 CAMRY. ON NOV. 8, 2009 I HAD A VERY BIG PROBLEM WITH THE ACCELERATOR. WHEN STEPPING ON THE GAS PEDAL I COULDN'T GET ANY GAS, AND THEN THE CAR WOULD JERK FORWARD AT A RAPID RATE SO THAT I HAD TO APPLY THE BRAKES. IT WAS TOTALLY UNDRIVABLE. THE MECHANIC REPLACED THE GAS PEDAL ASSEMBLY, AND I HAVE THE OLD PART IN MY POSSESSION. THE PART WAS $428.01 PLUS THE LABOR COST. MY OLD CAMRY I DROVE FOR 12 YEARS WITHOUT ANY PROBLEMS. I FEEL THE PART WAS DEFECTIVE AND THAT TOYOTA SHOULD REIMBURSE ME FOR THE COST OF REPLACEMENT. WOULD YOUR AGENCY PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS FOR ME? *TR UPDATED 11/16/10*BF THE MECHANIC REPLACED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ASSEMBLY THE PEDAL POSITION SENSOR. UPDATED 11/19/10 UPDATED 11/24/10*JB UPDATED 01/06/11 *BF UPDATED 04/12/11
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 15 MPH, THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO APPLY THE BRAKES TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN; HOWEVER, IT ACCELERATED RAPIDLY WHILE DRIVING DOWN A HILL. THE CONTACT AND PASSENGER WERE FORCED TO APPLY EXTREME PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL IN ORDER TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN. THE VEHICLE CRASHED…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 15 MPH, THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO APPLY THE BRAKES TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN; HOWEVER, IT ACCELERATED RAPIDLY WHILE DRIVING DOWN A HILL. THE CONTACT AND PASSENGER WERE FORCED TO APPLY EXTREME PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL IN ORDER TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO SOME SMALL TREES WHICH CAUSED DAMAGE TO THE PASSENGER MIRROR, PARKING LENS, AND THE WASHER FLUID CONTAINER. THE CONTACT SHUT THE VEHICLE OFF FOR APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES, RESTARTED IT AND WAS ABLE TO SAFELY DRIVE THE VEHICLE TO HIS RESIDENCE. THE FOLLOWING DAY THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO FIND THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE; HOWEVER, THE DAMAGES WERE REPAIRED. THE CONTACT IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY RISK SINCE THE ACCELERATOR WAS STICKING AND CAUSED THE FAILURE TO OCCUR. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 43,587. UPDATED 03/04/10. *LJ
Official recalls
104V346000 · 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
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.
Illustration