NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
238 reportsClear category filter34,000 miles · Jan 29, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY WHICH WAS PURCHASED BRAND NEW. WHILE EXITING HER DRIVEWAY AT SPEEDS OF LESS THAN 5 MPH, SHE PROCEEDED TO DEPRESS THE BRAKES DUE TO A DECLINE IN THE DRIVEWAY. SHE WAS AWARE THAT HER FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE PEDAL; HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE INTO ONCOMING TWO-WAY TRAFFIC AT NO…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY WHICH WAS PURCHASED BRAND NEW. WHILE EXITING HER DRIVEWAY AT SPEEDS OF LESS THAN 5 MPH, SHE PROCEEDED TO DEPRESS THE BRAKES DUE TO A DECLINE IN THE DRIVEWAY. SHE WAS AWARE THAT HER FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE PEDAL; HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE INTO ONCOMING TWO-WAY TRAFFIC AT NO FAULT OF THE DRIVER AND AT AN UNKNOWN SPEED. SHE PROCEEDED OVER AN EMBANKMENT AND CRASHED INTO A TREE TO AVOID CRASHING INTO A VEHICLE OR PEDESTRIAN. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY AT THE TIME OF THE CRASH. THE CONTACT DID NOT SUSTAIN ANY INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED FROM THE SCENE AND IS AWAITING REPAIRS. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE UNDER 34,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10303154
35,493 miles · Jan 28, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE TRAVELING AT SPEEDS OF 50 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO SPEEDS OF 100 MPH. THE CONTACT ASSUMED SHE WAS AT FAULT. ON A SEPARATE OCCASION, THE INCIDENT OCCURRED AGAIN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO RELEASED THE VEHICLE ADVISING HER THAT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED.…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE TRAVELING AT SPEEDS OF 50 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO SPEEDS OF 100 MPH. THE CONTACT ASSUMED SHE WAS AT FAULT. ON A SEPARATE OCCASION, THE INCIDENT OCCURRED AGAIN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO RELEASED THE VEHICLE ADVISING HER THAT THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. LATER, SHE WAS TOLD THAT THE FLOOR MATS WERE PROBABLY WHAT CAUSED THE ACCELERATION, HOWEVER SHE DID NOT HAVE FLOOR MATS IN THE VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT HER PARTICULAR VEHICLE WAS NOT UNDER RECALL. THE CONTACT WAS NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE MANUFACTURER AND A SECOND DEALER DIAGNOSED THE FAILURE AND CONFIRMED THAT IT COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. ON ANOTHER OCCASION, WHILE THE DRIVER WAS AT A STOP LIGHT, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING. THE CONTACT WAS NOT IN THE VEHICLE AND COULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DETAILS REGARDING THE MOST RECENT FAILURE. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE TO THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 35,493 AND THE CURRENT WAS 38,089.
NHTSA ODI #10303073
55,000 miles · Jan 28, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THERE WAS MINOR DAMAGE TO THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED. THE CONTACT DID NOT CALL THE MANUFACTURER OR A DEALER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CRASH OCCURRED DUE TO THE ACCE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THERE WAS MINOR DAMAGE TO THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED. THE CONTACT DID NOT CALL THE MANUFACTURER OR A DEALER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CRASH OCCURRED DUE TO THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BEING STUCK. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 55,000.
NHTSA ODI #10303068
13,000 miles · Jan 27, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED HE WAS PARKING AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED IN TO A BUILDING. CONTACT STATED HE DEPRESS THE BRAKES BUT THE VEHICLE NEVER STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THERE IS A POLICE REPORT IF NEEDED. THE CONTACT HAD NOT CALLED THE MANUFACTURE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED HE WAS PARKING AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED IN TO A BUILDING. CONTACT STATED HE DEPRESS THE BRAKES BUT THE VEHICLE NEVER STOP. THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THERE IS A POLICE REPORT IF NEEDED. THE CONTACT HAD NOT CALLED THE MANUFACTURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 13,000. UPDATED 11/03/10. *LJ UPDATED 11/04/10
NHTSA ODI #10302528
73,000 miles · Jan 25, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH THE CONTACT TRIED TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN BY APPLYING THE BRAKES. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SLOW DOWN AND CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED AND THE CONTACT WAS INJURED BY THE AIR BAG. THE CONTACT FEELS THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STICKING AND THAT CAUS…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH THE CONTACT TRIED TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN BY APPLYING THE BRAKES. THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SLOW DOWN AND CRASHED INTO ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED AND THE CONTACT WAS INJURED BY THE AIR BAG. THE CONTACT FEELS THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STICKING AND THAT CAUSE THE CRASH. THE CONTACT DID NOT CALLED THE MANUFACTURER REGARDING THIS ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 73,000.
NHTSA ODI #10302176
80,000 miles · Jan 25, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY ON 26 DECEMBER 2009 TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY 5 MILES PER HOUR INTO A PARKING SPACE IN FRONT OF THE US POST OFFICE HAD AN UN-COMMANDED ACCELERATION. WITHIN A SPAN OF FOUR FEET INTO THE PARKING SPOT, THE CAR ACCELERATED AND THE BRAKE COULD NOT STOP THE FORWARD MOVEMENT. THE CAR JUMPED THE SIDEWALK AND DROVE …
Read full complaint
A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY ON 26 DECEMBER 2009 TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY 5 MILES PER HOUR INTO A PARKING SPACE IN FRONT OF THE US POST OFFICE HAD AN UN-COMMANDED ACCELERATION. WITHIN A SPAN OF FOUR FEET INTO THE PARKING SPOT, THE CAR ACCELERATED AND THE BRAKE COULD NOT STOP THE FORWARD MOVEMENT. THE CAR JUMPED THE SIDEWALK AND DROVE INTO THE WINDOW AND CORNER OF THE BUILDING WHILE THE ENGINE CONTINUED TO RACE WITH ONLY THE BUILDING HOLDING THE CAR AS IT TRIED TO RACED FURTHER. MOVING THE TRANSMISSION LEVER FROM DRIVE TO PARK THE DOORS DID NOT AUTOMATICALLY UNLOCK. TURNING THE IGNITION KEY TO OFF POSITION WAS THE ONLY SOLUTION TO STOPPING THE RACING ENGINE. THE FLOOR MAT WAS CHECKED ON EXITING THE CAR AND WAS NOT TO BE ANYWHERE NEAR THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL..THE CAR WAS TOTALED AND NO LIFE TREATING INJURY WAS SUSTAINED. *TR THE CONSUMER EXPERIENCED NECK AND BACK PAIN. UPDATED 03/17/10
NHTSA ODI #10302122
76,000 miles · Jan 21, 2010
Engine And Engine CoolingSteeringVehicle Speed Control
ACCELERATION ON MY 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY BEGAN TO FLUCTUATE WILDLY WHILE I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. CAR WOULD SUDDENLY ACCELERATE, THEN DECELERATE ALMOST NON-STOP. I SHUT ENGINE OFF, CALLED TOYOTA AND HAD THE CAR TOWED IN. I WAS TOLD THAT THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE (ECM) WAS DEFECTIVE AND WOULD BE REPLACED UNDER A FEDERALLY MAND…
Read full complaint
ACCELERATION ON MY 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY BEGAN TO FLUCTUATE WILDLY WHILE I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. CAR WOULD SUDDENLY ACCELERATE, THEN DECELERATE ALMOST NON-STOP. I SHUT ENGINE OFF, CALLED TOYOTA AND HAD THE CAR TOWED IN. I WAS TOLD THAT THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE (ECM) WAS DEFECTIVE AND WOULD BE REPLACED UNDER A FEDERALLY MANDATED WARRANTY - CAR HAD 76,000 MILES, AND WARRANTY WAS GOOD TO 80,000 MILES. HOWEVER THEY ALSO TOLD ME THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ASSEMBLY HAD SIMULTANEOUSLY FAILED. THAT WOULD COST ME $681. TOYOTA'S OWN TECHNICIAN SAID THAT THE ECM FAILURE CAUSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ASSEMBLY TO FAIL. TOYOTA CORPORATE, HOWEVER, TOLD ME THAT THE TWO INCIDENTS WERE UNRELATED. AFTER READING ABOUT THE "ACCELERATOR PEDAL STICKING" PROBLEM IN THE NEWS LATELY, I WONDER IF MY PROBLEM IS NOT PART OF A MUCH LARGER PROBLEM INVOLVING THE ECM ON TOYOTAS CARS. IF I WAS NOT WISE ENOUGH TO SHUT OFF MY ENGINE WHEN THE PROBLEM OCCURRED, A SERIOUS ACCIDENT COULD EASILY HAVE OCCURRED. PLEASE CONTINUE TO INVESTIGATE THE ECM PROBLEM, AS I BELIEVE THAT TOYOTA IS NOT FORTHCOMING WITH THE FULL STORY HERE. *TR THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED THERE WEAS AN ENGINE KNOCK COMING FROM THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER REPALCED THE TENSIONER, AND BELT. THE WATER PUMP WAS WEARING PREMATURELY, THERE WAS A NOISE COMING FROM THE STEERING COLUMN WHEN TURNING THE WHEEL. THE DEALER REPLACED THE INTERMEDIATE STEERING SHAFT. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON ALL THE TIME. THE DEALER REPLACED THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER. THE ECM AND ACCELERATOR PEDAL WERE REPLACED. UPDATED IVOQ 04/15/11
NHTSA ODI #10301768
4,000 miles · Jan 7, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
1/28/04, I WAS PULLING HEAD ON, AT A LOW RATE OF SPEED, ALMOST A CRAWL, INTO A PARKING SPACE, IN FRONT OF A BUSINESS AND THE CAR "JUMPED" OR SURGED FORWARD. MY FOOT WAS OFF THE BRAKE AND THE ACCELERATOR WHEN THIS OCCURRED. THE CAR HIT THE BUILDING. 8/11/05, I WAS PULLING HEAD ON INTO A PARKING SPACE IN A PARKING LOT, AT A …
Read full complaint
1/28/04, I WAS PULLING HEAD ON, AT A LOW RATE OF SPEED, ALMOST A CRAWL, INTO A PARKING SPACE, IN FRONT OF A BUSINESS AND THE CAR "JUMPED" OR SURGED FORWARD. MY FOOT WAS OFF THE BRAKE AND THE ACCELERATOR WHEN THIS OCCURRED. THE CAR HIT THE BUILDING. 8/11/05, I WAS PULLING HEAD ON INTO A PARKING SPACE IN A PARKING LOT, AT A LOW RATE OF SPEED, WHEN THE CAR "JUMPED" OR SURGED FORWARD. THE CAR HIT A TREE IN FRONT OF ME. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10298634
45,000 miles · Dec 31, 2009
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. SHE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING NOT MORE THAN 5 MPH THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN WHILE HER FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO HER GARAGE AND A TREE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED MINOR INJURIES AFTER SHE HIT THE STEERING WHEEL DURING THE CRASH. SH…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. SHE STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING NOT MORE THAN 5 MPH THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ON ITS OWN WHILE HER FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO HER GARAGE AND A TREE. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED MINOR INJURIES AFTER SHE HIT THE STEERING WHEEL DURING THE CRASH. SHE WAS TRANSPORTED TO A HOSPITAL. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED; HOWEVER, THE RECORDING MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR TO SPEAK WITH SOMEONE. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE INSURANCE COMPANY WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WERE 45000. UPDATED 01/27/10. *LJ UPDATED 01/28/10
NHTSA ODI #10297706
Mileage unknown · Dec 27, 2009
Vehicle Speed Control
DRIVING HOME FROM WORK THIS MORNING, MY 2004 CAMRY SUDDENLY ACCELERATED TO MORE THAN 80 MILES/HOUR. I WAS VERY SCARED. BRAKES WOULD NOT WORK. I STOPPED THE CAR BY CHANGING GEARS TO NEUTRAL. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10297078
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