I TURNED ON THE MOTOR OF MY CAR WHICH WAS PARKED AT A HOME DEPOT. WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE (AND NOT ON THE GAS), THE CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED AND DID NOT STOP UNTIL IT HAD TRAVELED ABOUT 15 YARDS. *JS
2004 Toyota Camry
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Camry years
Owner complaints for the 2004 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
516 reports with mileage · 122 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 238 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 80 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Air Bags. Review the 79 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
54 reportsI WAS SLOWLY PULLING MY 2004 CAMRY INTO A PERPENDICULAR PARKING SPACE IN A PUBLIC PARKING LOT, WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL. AS I APPROACHED THE CURB TO COME TO A STOP, THE CAR SUDDENLY LEAPED FORWARD AT WHAT SEEMED LIKE FULL THROTTLE, JUMPED THE CURB, LUNGED UP A FLIGHT OF THREE CONCRETE STEPS, AND CRASHED THROUGH THE GLASS …
Read full complaint
I WAS SLOWLY PULLING MY 2004 CAMRY INTO A PERPENDICULAR PARKING SPACE IN A PUBLIC PARKING LOT, WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE PEDAL. AS I APPROACHED THE CURB TO COME TO A STOP, THE CAR SUDDENLY LEAPED FORWARD AT WHAT SEEMED LIKE FULL THROTTLE, JUMPED THE CURB, LUNGED UP A FLIGHT OF THREE CONCRETE STEPS, AND CRASHED THROUGH THE GLASS DOORS OF THE ENTRY OF THE BUILDING. MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, AT THE HOUR OF THE DAY WHEN THIS INCIDENT OCCURRED (3:30 PM), THERE ARE SMALL GROUPS OF YOUNG PEOPLE WAITING FOR RIDES OR CHATTING IN FRONT OF THIS FACILITY. BY SOME MIRACLE THERE WERE NO PEOPLE PRESENT ON THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THE CAR OR COMING OUT OF OR GOING INTO THE BUILDING WHEN THIS HAPPENED. TRULY A MIRACLE THAT NO ONE WAS HURT OR WORSE. THERE WERE NO WITNESSES. THE POLICE HAD THE CAR REMOVED BY FLATBED TO A BODY SHOP YARD. I LATER LEARNED THAT THE POLICE HAD DRIVEN THE CAR IN THE BODY SHOP YARD AND COMMENTED THAT THE CAR DROVE WITHOUT ISSUES. I SUBSEQUENTLY RECEIVED A CARELESS DRIVING CITATION IN THE MAIL. A LOCAL MEDIA REPORT OF THE INCIDENT, CRIBBED FROM THE POLICE BLOTTER, STATED THAT THE POLICE BELIEVED THE CAUSE OF THE INCIDENT WAS DRIVER ERROR. THERE IS NOT THE LEAST DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT MY FOOT WAS FIRMLY ON THE BRAKE PEDAL, WHICH WENT TO THE FLOOR AND DID NOT STOP THE CAR! THE CAR ACTED ON ITS OWN AS IF POSSESSED! I WILL NEVER DRIVE THIS CAR AGAIN! I BOUGHT A NEW CAR AND TOOK A HUGE LOSS ON THE VALUE OF THE TOYOTA BY SELLING IT FOR PARTS TO A LOCAL MECHANIC FOR A TENTH OF ITS RETAIL VALUE SO IT WOULD NEVER FIND ITS WAY BACK ONTO THE ROAD TO THREATEN OTHER PEOPLE WITH INJURY OR DEATH! *TR
2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER STATES THAT BRAKES HAVE BEEN SQUEALING FOR YEARS. HE STATES THAT THE DEALER HAS WORKED ON THE VEHICLE AND NOTHING HAS HELPED. HE ALSO STATED THAT THE SQUEALING IS EXTREMELY LOUD AND CONSTANT. *KB
MY 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY HAS STARTED TO "HOLD BACK" WHEN I DRIVE IT. THEN THE ABS LIGHT CAME ON AND STARTED FLASHING AND WHEN I STEPPED ON THE BRAKES, THE FLASHING LIGHT WENT OFF. I CALLED THE LANCASTER PA TOYOTA DEALER AND THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT SAID THAT AS LONG AS IT IS INTERMITTENT AND NOT CONSTANT, IT IS NOTHING TO WORRY ABOU…
Read full complaint
MY 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY HAS STARTED TO "HOLD BACK" WHEN I DRIVE IT. THEN THE ABS LIGHT CAME ON AND STARTED FLASHING AND WHEN I STEPPED ON THE BRAKES, THE FLASHING LIGHT WENT OFF. I CALLED THE LANCASTER PA TOYOTA DEALER AND THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT SAID THAT AS LONG AS IT IS INTERMITTENT AND NOT CONSTANT, IT IS NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. BUT I WONDER HOW MANY OTHER TOYOTA CUSTOMERS HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THEIR ANTI-LOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH ON WET ROAD CONDITIONS AND ATTEMPTING TO APPLY THE BRAKES, THE VEHICLE WAS MOVING TO THE LEFT THEN TO THE RIGHT. THE CONTACT TURNED THE HAZARD LIGHTS ON AND MAINTAINED A SIGNIFICANT DISTANCE BETWEEN THE OTHER VEHICLES. THE VEHICLE EVENTUALLY CAME TO A ST…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH ON WET ROAD CONDITIONS AND ATTEMPTING TO APPLY THE BRAKES, THE VEHICLE WAS MOVING TO THE LEFT THEN TO THE RIGHT. THE CONTACT TURNED THE HAZARD LIGHTS ON AND MAINTAINED A SIGNIFICANT DISTANCE BETWEEN THE OTHER VEHICLES. THE VEHICLE EVENTUALLY CAME TO A STOP. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE FAILURE ONLY OCCURRED WHEN THE ROAD WAS WET. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHO COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. SHE CALLED THE MANUFACTURER BUT RECEIVED NO ASSISTANCE WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT PREVIOUSLY FILED COMPLAINTS FOR SIMILAR MODELS SHE OWNED UNDER THE SAME MANUFACTURER REGARDING BRAKE FAILURES; SHE COULD NOT RECALL THE YEAR, MAKE AND MODEL OF THE VEHICLES. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 100. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 20,000.
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) I OWN A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY VIN#[XXX] ON JANUARY 6, 2010 I WAS DRIVING UP FIRST AVE IN MANHATTAN GOING TO RANDALLS ISLAND. AT 1ST AVE AND ABOUT 10 ST I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 20 MILES PER HOUR, PRESSED THE BRAKE APPROACHING A RED LIGHT. INSTE…
Read full complaint
INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6) I OWN A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY VIN#[XXX] ON JANUARY 6, 2010 I WAS DRIVING UP FIRST AVE IN MANHATTAN GOING TO RANDALLS ISLAND. AT 1ST AVE AND ABOUT 10 ST I WAS DRIVING ABOUT 20 MILES PER HOUR, PRESSED THE BRAKE APPROACHING A RED LIGHT. INSTEAD THE ENGINE REVVED (VROOM) AND CAR ACCELERATED FORWARD. I FLOORED THE BRAKE AND PULLED UP THE EMERGENCY BRAKE AND STILL I TAPPED THE COMMERCIAL VEHICLE IN FRONT BEFORE BEING ABLE TO STOP BY PUTTING CAR INTO PARK. 2 HOURS LATER I WAS RETURNING HOME AND DRIVING DOWN 9TH STREET BETWEEN BROADWAY AND UNIVERSITY AND AGAIN APPROACHING A RED LIGHT BRAKED TO SLOW DOWN THE CAR (I WAS ALREADY GOING 20MPH) AGAIN, INSTEAD THE VEHICLE REVVED AND ACCELERATED FORWARD AND THIS TIME NO MATTER HOW HARD I PUSHED THE BRAKE THE CAR WOULDN'T STOP. I SLAMMED THE TRANSMISSION INTO PARK , PULLED UP THE EMERGENCY BRAKE AND THAT STOPPED THE CAR. I CALLED AAA AND HAD THE CAR TOWED TO TOYOTA OF MANHATTAN WHERE THEY SAID MY BRAKE PINS WERE FROZEN AND THERE WAS A THROTTLE PROBLEM AND CHARGED $1300 FOR REPAIR. (MY PERSONAL MECHANIC IN NJ LATER TOLD ME BRAKE PINS AND UNCONTROLLED ACCELERATION WERE NOT RELATED. ON MONDAY FEBRUARY 22, 2010 WHILE DRIVING TO MY SUMMER APARTMENT IN VENTNOR NJ THE SAME THING HAPPENED. WE WERE AGAIN ABLE TO STOP THE CAR BY PULLING INTO PARK MODE AND EMERGENCY BRAKE. WE RESTARTED THE CAR AND DROVE 10 MILES PER HOUR TO OUR PARKING LOT WHERE THE CAR STILL SITS. CALLS TO TOYOTA OF MANHATTAN SIMPLY STATED THAT THIS MODEL WAS NOT UNDER RECALL AND THE CAR WAS TOO FAR FOR THEM TO SEND A TOW. ATTEMPTS TO BRING THE CAR TO A LOCAL TOYOTA (SHORE TOYOTA) CALLS WERE NOT ANSWERED AND I WAS TOLD I COULD NOT BRING THE CAR IN WITHOUT AN APPOINTMENT. AND I SHOULD BRING THE CAR BACK TO WHERE THE REPAIR WAS DONE. SO THERE IT SITS IN A PARKING LOT. I HAD TO RENT A CAR TO GET HOME. THE REPAIR WAS CLEARLY BOGUS AND THIS PROBLEM IS ACCELERATION UPON HITTING THE BRAKE PEDAL. *TR UPDATED IVOQ 09/01/10
CAR:2004 TOYOTA CAMRY XLE MODEL WHEN I DRIVE ON A CITY ROAD WITH POT HOLES/ROUGH SURFACE INTERSECTION MY BRAKES DOES NOT SEEMS TO EFFECTIVE. YOU ALMOST SEEMS TO FEELS ITS NOT GOING TO STOP, BUT WHEN YOU PUSH HARD AND KEEP IT EVENTUALLY STOP. OTHER WISE BRAKES PERFORM AS EXPECTED IN HIGHWAYS. *TR
ALTHOUGH MY TOYOTA XLE V6 IS NOT PART OF THE RECALL, I HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH MY BRAKES SINCE 2004, THE YEAR OF MY CAMRY. WHEN I'M DRIVING SLOWLY, (APPROXIMATELY 15MPH) GOING OVER A BUMP AND I NEED TO BRAKE, MY BRAKES DO NOT RESPOND. I HAVE TO DEPRESS THE BRAKES WITH GREAT FORCE AND THE ANTI-LOCKS KICK IN. . I BROUGHT THIS TO …
Read full complaint
ALTHOUGH MY TOYOTA XLE V6 IS NOT PART OF THE RECALL, I HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH MY BRAKES SINCE 2004, THE YEAR OF MY CAMRY. WHEN I'M DRIVING SLOWLY, (APPROXIMATELY 15MPH) GOING OVER A BUMP AND I NEED TO BRAKE, MY BRAKES DO NOT RESPOND. I HAVE TO DEPRESS THE BRAKES WITH GREAT FORCE AND THE ANTI-LOCKS KICK IN. . I BROUGHT THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF MY DEALER IN 2004. I WAS TOLD THEY COULD DO SOMETHING MINOR (OF WHICH I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND) BUT IT WOULD CONTINUE TO OCCUR. I HAVE BEEN UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE BRAKING ON THIS CAR FOR YEARS. THIS IS A CONTINUAL PROBLEM. ALTHOUGH THIS HAPPENS CONSTANTLY, IN ORDER TO PROCEED, I NEED TO INPUT A DATE. *TR
THIS COMPLAINT DEALS WITH ALL TOYOTA CARS WITH REAR WHEEL DRUM BRAKES. ON MY CAR AND MANY OTHERS POSSIBLY THE PEDAL IS SOFT HAS TO GO DOWN QUITE A WAYS TO ACTIVATE BRAKES. ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS ALTHOUGH I DRIVE CONSERVATIVELY I FEEL MY BRAKING WAS COMPROMISED WHEN I NEED QUICK BRAKING RESPONSE. I BELIEVE THE REASON IS THE AUTOM…
Read full complaint
THIS COMPLAINT DEALS WITH ALL TOYOTA CARS WITH REAR WHEEL DRUM BRAKES. ON MY CAR AND MANY OTHERS POSSIBLY THE PEDAL IS SOFT HAS TO GO DOWN QUITE A WAYS TO ACTIVATE BRAKES. ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS ALTHOUGH I DRIVE CONSERVATIVELY I FEEL MY BRAKING WAS COMPROMISED WHEN I NEED QUICK BRAKING RESPONSE. I BELIEVE THE REASON IS THE AUTOMATIC ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM ON MY REAR BRAKES WAS AND IS NOT WORKING. THIS MECHANISM ON ALL MODERN CARS WITH REAR DRUM BRAKES ADJUSTS FOR WEAR BY BRINGING THE BRAKE SHOES CLOSER TO THE DRUM WHEN BACKING AND BRAKING. AN AUTOMATIC ADJUSTMENT. WHEN THE MECHANISM ISN'T WORKING THE REAR BRAKE SHOES GET FARTHER AND FARTHER FROM THE DRUM DUE TO WEAR AND ONE MUST PUSH THE BRAKE PEDAL FARTHER AND FARTHER DOWN ON BRAKING TO GET THE SHOES TO CONTACT THE DRUMS BEFORE BRAKING CAN BEGIN. THIS DELAYS THE BRAKING TIME OF THE DRIVER CONSIDERABLY. RECENTLY GETTING NEW TIRES THE MECHANIC NOTED MY SOFT BRAKE PEDAL AND REMOVED THE REAR BRAKE DRUMS AND MANUALLY ADJUSTED THE SHOES TO BRING THEM IN LIGHT CONTACT WITH THE DRUM. MY BRAKE PEDAL GOT HARD AGAIN AND ACTIVATED AT THE TOP. TOYOTA SHOULD BRING THE CARS IN TO CHECK THIS LACK OF ADJUSTMENT PROBLEM AS I WOULDN'T DOUBT THERE HAVE BEEN ACCIDENTS BECAUSE OF IT. WITH THE NEW CARS WITH DISK BRAKES THE PADS ARE ALWAYS AGAINST THE DISK AND THE IS NO SOFT PEDAL PROBLEM. *TR
I WAS BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE, BUT SAW A CAR COMING, SO I STEPPED ON THE BRAKE. THE CAR ACCELERATED AT A VERY FAST PACE OUT OF THE PARKING SPACE, INTO THE ROAD, JUST MISSING THE CAR, BEFORE I WAS ABLE TO STOP IT. ON DECEMBER 14, 2009, I HAD BACKED UP MY DRIVEWAY (TO A LEVEL SPOT) . I DECIDED TO STRAIGHTEN OUT THE CAR, S…
Read full complaint
I WAS BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE, BUT SAW A CAR COMING, SO I STEPPED ON THE BRAKE. THE CAR ACCELERATED AT A VERY FAST PACE OUT OF THE PARKING SPACE, INTO THE ROAD, JUST MISSING THE CAR, BEFORE I WAS ABLE TO STOP IT. ON DECEMBER 14, 2009, I HAD BACKED UP MY DRIVEWAY (TO A LEVEL SPOT) . I DECIDED TO STRAIGHTEN OUT THE CAR, SO I DROVE THE CAR FORWARD, PUT MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE TO PUT IT IN REVERSE AND THE CAR WENT SPEEDING DOWN THE DRIVEWAY, THE BRAKES WOULD NOT WORK, UNTIL I GOT OUT INTO THE ROAD, THEN THE CAR STOPPED. PRAYER KEPT ME SAFE! *TW
Official recalls
311V539000 · Engine And Engine Cooling
Nov 9, 2011
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AVALON VEHICLES; 2004 AND 2005 CAMRY, CAMRY SOLARA, HIGHLANDER, AND SIENNA VEHICLES, 2006 HIGHLANDER HYBRID; 2004 AND 2005 LEXUS ES330 AND RX330; AND 2006 LEXUS RX400H VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 2004 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2005, EQUIPPED WITH THE 1MZ-FE OR 3MZ-FE ENGINE. THE AMOUNT OF ADHESIVE AGENT APPLIED BETWEEN THE OUTER RING AND THE TORSIONAL RUBBER DAMPER (INNER RING) IN THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY MAY BE INADEQUATE. IF THE ADHESIVE IS INSUFFICIENT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE OUTER RING MAY BECOME MISALIGNED AND IT MAY NOT PROPERLY ROTATE WITH THE INNER RING, CAUSING NOISE AND/OR ILLUMINATION OF THE BATTERY DISCHARGE INDICATOR LIGHT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN SOME CASES, THE BELT FOR THE POWER STEERING PUMP MAY BECOME DETACHED FROM THE PULLEY WHICH COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF POWER STEERING AND A SUDDEN INCREASE IN STEERING EFFORT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL CHECK THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY TO IDENTIFY WHETHER IT WAS PRODUCED BY THE U.S. SUPPLIER. IF SO, THE DEALER WILL REPLACE THE PULLEY WITH A NEW ONE AT NO CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING EARLY JANUARY 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
04V595000 · Seat Belts:front:buckle Assembly
Dec 15, 2004
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A FRONT PASSENGER POWER SEAT, WHEN INSTALLING CERTAIN REAR-FACING INFANT CHILD SEAT BASES ONTO THE SEAT WITH AN EXCESSIVELY HIGH SEATBELT TENSION, IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO UNSEAT A COMPONENT CALLED THE BUCKLE STATUS SWITCH FROM THE SEAT BELT BUCKLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE SWITCH BECOMES UNSEATED, THE FRONT PASSENGER OCCUPANT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAY MISTAKE THE REAR-FACING CHILD RESTRAINT FOR AN UNBELTED ADULT OCCUPANT, AND MAY NOT SUPPRESS THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT PASSENGER SEATBELT BUCKLE STATUS SWITCH. THIS SAFETY IMPROVEMENT CAMPAIGN (SSC 40M) BEGAN ON DECEMBER 20, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331 OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987..
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
2DP06003 · 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
Illustration