NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
54 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Dec 2, 2005
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED DEFECTIVE BRAKING SYSTEM,A BECAUSE PRESSING THE BRAKES VERY HARD OVER A PERIOD OF MONTHS RESULTED IN THE CONTACT SUFFERED FROM PAIN FOOT, LEG AND HIP PAIN. THE DEALERSHIP AND THE MANUFACTURER HAVE BEEN CONTACTED, AND THEY STATED NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. ALSO, THE AMOUN…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED DEFECTIVE BRAKING SYSTEM,A BECAUSE PRESSING THE BRAKES VERY HARD OVER A PERIOD OF MONTHS RESULTED IN THE CONTACT SUFFERED FROM PAIN FOOT, LEG AND HIP PAIN. THE DEALERSHIP AND THE MANUFACTURER HAVE BEEN CONTACTED, AND THEY STATED NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. ALSO, THE AMOUNT OF PRESSURE REQUIRED TO STOP THE VEHICLE OR TO PRESS THE BRAKES WAS CAUSING DIMENSION STOPPING CAPACITY. SHE KNOW LONGER DROVE THE VEHICLE BECAUSE OF THE PAIN, AND THE CONSTANT FEAR OF BEING IN AN ACCIDENT. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10144347
Mileage unknown · Aug 18, 2005
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
DT: THE GAS PEDAL AND THE BRAKE PEDAL ARE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER. THIS HAS CAUSED THE CONSUMER AT LEAST FOUR ACCIDENTS. BECAUSE WHEN THE CONSUMER GOES TO PRESS ON THE BRAKE T WILL ACCIDENTALLY HIT THE GAS PEDAL. THE CONSUMER WAS SO SURPRISED EVERY TIME THIS OCCURRED THAT SHE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE UNTIL SHE HIT SOMETHING…
Read full complaint
DT: THE GAS PEDAL AND THE BRAKE PEDAL ARE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER. THIS HAS CAUSED THE CONSUMER AT LEAST FOUR ACCIDENTS. BECAUSE WHEN THE CONSUMER GOES TO PRESS ON THE BRAKE T WILL ACCIDENTALLY HIT THE GAS PEDAL. THE CONSUMER WAS SO SURPRISED EVERY TIME THIS OCCURRED THAT SHE WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE UNTIL SHE HIT SOMETHING. THREE TIMES THIS OCCURRED. THE CONSUMER WAS TRYING TO STOP IT WHILE BETWEEN OTHER VEHICLES. THE CONSUMER WAS TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL IN MAY 2005. SHE OBTAINED INJURIES BECAUSE OF THIS ACCIDENT. A POLICE REPORTS WERE TAKEN. ON 8-17-05 THE CONSUMER HIT A LIGHT POLE. PREVIOUSLY, THE CONSUMER HAD CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER, AND RECEIVED NO ASSISTANCE FROM THEM. ALSO, THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED THAT THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH LEG ROOM IN THE DRIVER SIDE. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10133333
1,000 miles · Jul 20, 2005
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
(1) PERMANENT BEHAVIOR (2) BRAKES FADE - BRAKING FORCE IS NOT CONSTANT WITH APPLICATION OF PEDAL AND THE PEDAL SINKS AS THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED. CONSEQUENCE: NOT ENOUGH BRAKING PRESSURE IS APPLIED AND EMERGENCY APPLICATION OF MORE BRAKING IS REQUIRED. (3) ATTEMPTED TO GET MANUFACTURER TO REPAIR UNDER WARRANTY. FOLLOWED ARBITR…
Read full complaint
(1) PERMANENT BEHAVIOR (2) BRAKES FADE - BRAKING FORCE IS NOT CONSTANT WITH APPLICATION OF PEDAL AND THE PEDAL SINKS AS THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED. CONSEQUENCE: NOT ENOUGH BRAKING PRESSURE IS APPLIED AND EMERGENCY APPLICATION OF MORE BRAKING IS REQUIRED. (3) ATTEMPTED TO GET MANUFACTURER TO REPAIR UNDER WARRANTY. FOLLOWED ARBITRATION PROCEDURE WHEN THAT FAILED.
NHTSA ODI #10129464
Mileage unknown · Apr 20, 2005
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury
2004 TOYOTA CAMRY EXPERIENCED SUDDEN BRAKE FAILURE.*MR THE CONSUMER WAS UNALE TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN THE BRAKE FAILURE RESULTED IN AN ACCIDENT WHICH INVOLVED 4 VEHICLES. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10119171
13,751 miles · Feb 24, 2005
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash
I HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKES SINCE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED. IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE DEALER FOR COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE BRAKES ON THE FOLLOWING DATES: 4/26/04, 6/11/04, 7/8/04, 7/31/04 AND 11/8/04. ON 4/26/04 THE MASTER CYLINDER WAS REPLACED. ON 11/2/04 MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING IN A PARKING LOT AT ABOUT 10 MPH SHE USED THE BRAKES …
Read full complaint
I HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKES SINCE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED. IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE DEALER FOR COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE BRAKES ON THE FOLLOWING DATES: 4/26/04, 6/11/04, 7/8/04, 7/31/04 AND 11/8/04. ON 4/26/04 THE MASTER CYLINDER WAS REPLACED. ON 11/2/04 MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING IN A PARKING LOT AT ABOUT 10 MPH SHE USED THE BRAKES TO STOP THE CAR AND THE BRAKES FAILED CAUSING A CRASH. THE DEALERSHIP INSPECTED THE CAR AND A MR. TROY HIGA, CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR, WROTE ME A LETTER STATING THAT TOYOTA COULD FIND NO PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEM. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10112126
Mileage unknown · Feb 18, 2005
EquipmentPower TrainService Brakes, HydraulicCrash
WHILE PARKING HIS 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED SUDDENLY AND HIT A PARKED CAR. *NM WHEN TURNING SHARPLY TO THE RIGHT THE VEHICLE FELT AS IF IT WERE GOING TO FLIP, SHIFTING GEARS WERE NOT SMOOTH, THE BRAKE PEDAL FELT SOFT AND WOULD GO TO THE FLOOR AND THERE WAS AN ERRATIC EFFECT WHEN CHANGING THE RADIO STATIONS. …
Read full complaint
WHILE PARKING HIS 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED SUDDENLY AND HIT A PARKED CAR. *NM WHEN TURNING SHARPLY TO THE RIGHT THE VEHICLE FELT AS IF IT WERE GOING TO FLIP, SHIFTING GEARS WERE NOT SMOOTH, THE BRAKE PEDAL FELT SOFT AND WOULD GO TO THE FLOOR AND THERE WAS AN ERRATIC EFFECT WHEN CHANGING THE RADIO STATIONS. *SC *JB
NHTSA ODI #10113721
Mileage unknown · Feb 16, 2005
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrashInjury
BRAKES FAILED TO WORK WHEN GOING OVER BUMPY ROADS, ASLO BRAKES DO SEEM TO WROK AS\ DESIGN (TO STOP) WHEN IMMEDIATE ACTION IS REQUIRED. I PRESS THE BRAKES WHEN TRYING TO STOP AND AVOID AN ACCIDENT HOWVER THE BRAKES DID NOT APPEAR TO WORK AND THE CAR JST KEPT ON GOING AS I THE BRAKES DID NOT EXIST. I PRESS HARD WITH MORE THAN AD…
Read full complaint
BRAKES FAILED TO WORK WHEN GOING OVER BUMPY ROADS, ASLO BRAKES DO SEEM TO WROK AS\ DESIGN (TO STOP) WHEN IMMEDIATE ACTION IS REQUIRED. I PRESS THE BRAKES WHEN TRYING TO STOP AND AVOID AN ACCIDENT HOWVER THE BRAKES DID NOT APPEAR TO WORK AND THE CAR JST KEPT ON GOING AS I THE BRAKES DID NOT EXIST. I PRESS HARD WITH MORE THAN ADEQUATE TIME, HOWEVER THE BRAKES DID NOT EVEN SLOW DOWN THE VEHICLE. SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE BEFORE SOMEONE GETS SERIOUSLY INJURED. I WAS TRAVELING AT ABOUT 25-30 MILES PER HOUR AND THE BRAKES AILED TO REACT AS EXPECTED.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10110650
15,000 miles · Jan 14, 2005
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
THE CONSUMER WENT THROUGH A RED LIGHT DUE TO FAULTY BRAKES. *TC THE BRAKES WERE SPONGY AND WERE FADING AND OR DIMINISHING. *SC *JB
NHTSA ODI #10108929
21,950 miles · Jan 3, 2005
Service Brakes, HydraulicSteeringTires
WHILE DRIVING BRAKES AND/OR STEERING WAS OVER RIDING HIS JUDGMENT. VEHICLE STARTED THE PULL TO THE RIGHT CONSUMER HAD A HARD TIME TRYING TO KEEP THE VEHICLE IN LINE. *AK....WHILE DRIVING ON DRY FLAT ROAD ABOUT 70 MPH VEHICLE BEGAN TO PULL TO THE RIGHT. CONSUMER TRIED TO CORRECT BACK STRAIGHT BUT STEERING DID NOT RESPOND. TURN…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING BRAKES AND/OR STEERING WAS OVER RIDING HIS JUDGMENT. VEHICLE STARTED THE PULL TO THE RIGHT CONSUMER HAD A HARD TIME TRYING TO KEEP THE VEHICLE IN LINE. *AK....WHILE DRIVING ON DRY FLAT ROAD ABOUT 70 MPH VEHICLE BEGAN TO PULL TO THE RIGHT. CONSUMER TRIED TO CORRECT BACK STRAIGHT BUT STEERING DID NOT RESPOND. TURNED HARDER AND TO LEFTAND CAR STARTED LEF TOFF THE ROAD. TRIED TO CORRECT BACK RIGHT LIGHTLY AND STEERING DID NOT RESPOND. TURNE DHARDER RIGHT AND CAR WENT HARD RIGHT ALMOST OFF THE ROAD. CONSUME RHIT THE BRAKES TO KEEP FROM LEAVING THE ROAD. ALSO, VEHICLE HAS BAD VIBRATION A THIGHWAY SPEEDS FROM TIRES. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10106601
9,450 miles · Dec 21, 2004
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash
WHILE DRIVING AND ATTEMPTING TO STOP THE VEHICLE THE ABS FAILED. THE CONSUMER DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL COMPLETELY TO THE FLOOR BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT STOP. THE ABS DID NOT KICK IN WHEN IT SHOULD HAVE. *AK *NM
NHTSA ODI #10103129
Official recalls
3Nov 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.
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..
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