IllustrationDEFECTIVE GAS PEDAL SENSOR PREVENTED THE VEHICLE FROM MOVING. *TR
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
1700–25K
11225–50K
7950–75K
6075–100K
63100–150K
32150K+
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.
199 crash reports11 fire reports96 injury reports
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
238 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER HE PULLED ONTO THE HIGHWAY AND ATTEMPTED TO ENAGED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO MERGE TO THE SHOULDER SAFELY. ALSO, THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE ENGINE LIGHT HAD ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS LATER TOWED TO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER HE PULLED ONTO THE HIGHWAY AND ATTEMPTED TO ENAGED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL THE VEHICLE FAILED TO ACCELERATE. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO MERGE TO THE SHOULDER SAFELY. ALSO, THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE ENGINE LIGHT HAD ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS LATER TOWED TO THE DEALER WHO DIAGNOSE THAT THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE BODY FAILED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND THEY OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 94,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 94,200.
2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER STATES VEHICLE LOST POWER WHILE DRIVING *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THE THROTTLE BODY WAS REPLACED. THE CONSUMER STATED TOYOTA UPDATED THE PART, BUT NEVER INFORMED HER. *JB
PLEASE NOTE THAT I FILED A COMPLAINT THROUGH PHONE ON 9/4. THE COMPLAIN NUMBER IS 10473713. BUT IT WAS TOO BRIEF. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ADD ADDITIONAL COMMENT (SEE BELOW). AND JUST FOUND OUT I CAN FILE IT THROUGH ONLINE. SO, I DID. BELOW IS THE LETTER WHICH BRIEFLY DESCRIBES THE SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION HAPPENED ON 7/…
Read full complaint
PLEASE NOTE THAT I FILED A COMPLAINT THROUGH PHONE ON 9/4. THE COMPLAIN NUMBER IS 10473713. BUT IT WAS TOO BRIEF. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ADD ADDITIONAL COMMENT (SEE BELOW). AND JUST FOUND OUT I CAN FILE IT THROUGH ONLINE. SO, I DID. BELOW IS THE LETTER WHICH BRIEFLY DESCRIBES THE SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION HAPPENED ON 7/20/2012. NOTE THAT THIS SUA ALSO HAPPENED IN EARLY 2010 WHEN MY WIFE WAS DRIVING THIS SAME CAR. HERE ARE THE EVENTS: 1. I WAS DRIVING MY CAR TO A PARKING SLOT. JUST A COUPLE OF FEET BEFORE I REACHED THE PARKING POSITION, THE CAR ALL OF A SUDDEN MOVED FORWARD VIOLENTLY WITH "FULL THROTTLE" FOR A FEW FEET THEN STOPPED BY ME. THE CAR HIT THE RIGHT PILLAR OF THE PAVILION. (THE LEFT PILLAR WAS ABOUT ONE TO TWO FEET BEFORE MY LEFT REAR MIRROR.) 2. I WAS ABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE AND SAID TO MY WIFE (SHE WAS ON THE PASSENGER SEAT), "WHAT'S GOING ON THIS CAR?" AT THE SAME TIME I WAS PLANNING TO BACK IT OUT. 3. IT THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR MOVED FORWARD AGAIN WITH FULL THROTTLE. (AT THAT MOMENT, MY LEFT HAND WAS STILL ON THE STEERING WHEEL AND THE RIGHT HAND WAS ON THE GEAR HANDLE.) BEFORE I HAD A CHANCE TO SHIFT THE GEAR, THIS SUDDEN ACCELERATION CAUGHT ME COMPLETELY OFF GUARD. THE CAR HIT THE MAILBOX AND VEERED TOWARD THE LEFT. IT WENT DOWN THE SLOPE AND STOPPED AT THE STREET FACING LEFT. 4. BETWEEN THE FIRST STOP AND THE SECOND SUDDEN ACCELERATION IT PROBABLY LASTED TWO SECONDS. 5. NOTE THAT THIS SUDDEN ACCELERATION ALREADY HAPPENED ONCE IN EARLY 2010 WHILE MY WIFE WAS PARKING THE CAR TO A PARKING SLOT. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING 2 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT ANY WARNINGS. AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A MAILBOX. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE CRASH CAUSED NO INJURIES AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER. THE MANUFACTU…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TRAVELING 2 MPH, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT ANY WARNINGS. AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A MAILBOX. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE CRASH CAUSED NO INJURIES AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 83,000.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TURNING LEFT AT 5 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO PARK, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED ACROSS A CEMENT MEDIAN. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO AVOID A CRASH WHEN THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP ON ITS OWN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO DIA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE TURNING LEFT AT 5 MPH AND ATTEMPTING TO PARK, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED ACROSS A CEMENT MEDIAN. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO AVOID A CRASH WHEN THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP ON ITS OWN. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER SENT AN ENGINEER TO EXAMINE THE VEHICLE, WHO COULD ALSO NOT LOCATE A FAILURE. THE CONTACT ALSO EXPERIENCED SUDDEN ACCELERATION WHILE STOPPED AND WHILE SHIFTING INTO DRIVE. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO SAFELY TURN THE ENGINE OFF. THE DEALER REPLACED THE THROTTLE CONTROL ASSEMBLY, BUT THE FAILURE CONTINUED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 47,280 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 53,312. THE CONSUMER STATED THE DRIVERS SIDE DOORS WERE DAMAGED. THE VEHICLE GRAZED THE CONCRETE BASE OF A LAMPPOST IN ORDER TO AVOID A COLLISION WITH A PARKED VEHICLE. THREE (3) OTHER INCIDENTS OF UNINTENDED ACCELERATION OCCURRED IN MARCH 2008, FEBRUARY 2008, AND MARCH 18, 2012. UPDATED 09/18/2012 *JS
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER WAS TRAVELING 15 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE UNCONTROLLABLY. THE DRIVER ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE, BUT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO RESPOND. THE DRIVER ATTEMPTED TO TURN OFF THE VEHICLE. HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE WAS UNRESPONSIVE. THE DRIVER CRASHED AGAINST …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER WAS TRAVELING 15 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE UNCONTROLLABLY. THE DRIVER ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE, BUT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO RESPOND. THE DRIVER ATTEMPTED TO TURN OFF THE VEHICLE. HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE WAS UNRESPONSIVE. THE DRIVER CRASHED AGAINST THE PAVEMENT, A FENCE AND THEN DOVE INTO A CREEK. THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED A CONCUSSION AND INJURIES TO THE BACK AND NECK. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE POLICE WERE CALLED AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CURRENT AND THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 75,000. UPDATED 08/16/12*LJ ...UPDATED 03-10-16 *BF *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN ACCELERATION THAT CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO JUMP A CURVE AND CRASH INTO BRICK STEPS. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED AWAY AND REPAIRED. THE CONTACT HURT THEIR WRIST IN THE CRASH. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND IT WAS REPORTED THAT NOTHING WAS WRO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED A SUDDEN ACCELERATION THAT CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO JUMP A CURVE AND CRASH INTO BRICK STEPS. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED AWAY AND REPAIRED. THE CONTACT HURT THEIR WRIST IN THE CRASH. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED AND IT WAS REPORTED THAT NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE PER THE DEALER. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 70,200. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE BUT THE VEHICLE STALLED A SECOND TIME. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT R…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 15 MPH THE VEHICLE STALLED. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE BUT THE VEHICLE STALLED A SECOND TIME. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 74,300.
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 …
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
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