NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
21 reportsClear category filter15,000 miles · Apr 14, 2016
EngineVehicle Speed Control
2005 CAMRY PURCHASED USED AS A PROGRAM CAR IN NOV 2005 WITH 12K MILES ON IT. WHEN STARTING UP VEHICLE, THEN DRIVING AT LESS THAN 10 MPH IN REVERSE (TO BACK UP OUT OF A DRIVEWAY OR PARKING SPACE), APPLYING THE BRAKE AND THEN PUTTING CAR INTO DRIVE, THE CAR WILL ACCELERATE INTERMITTENTLY ON ITS OWN BEFORE DRIVER DEPRESSES THE GAS …
Read full complaint
2005 CAMRY PURCHASED USED AS A PROGRAM CAR IN NOV 2005 WITH 12K MILES ON IT. WHEN STARTING UP VEHICLE, THEN DRIVING AT LESS THAN 10 MPH IN REVERSE (TO BACK UP OUT OF A DRIVEWAY OR PARKING SPACE), APPLYING THE BRAKE AND THEN PUTTING CAR INTO DRIVE, THE CAR WILL ACCELERATE INTERMITTENTLY ON ITS OWN BEFORE DRIVER DEPRESSES THE GAS PEDAL. DRIVER ALWAYS HAS HAD TO CONTINUE TO APPLY THE BRAKE FOR SEFVERAL SECONDS, TO BE CERTAIN THE VEHICLE WILL NOT SURGE FORWARD, ESP IF APPROACHING A CORNER LESS THAN 100 FT AWAY. THE DEALER WAS INFORMED OF THIS PHENOMENA IN EARLY 2006, WHILE VEHICLE WAS STILL UNDER WARRANTY. DEALER EXAMINED THE VEHICLE BUT COULD NOT REPLICATE THE PROBLEM. OWNER HAS "LEARNED TO LIVE WITH" THE SAFETY DEFECT. DRIVER NEVER KNOWS WHEN EVENT WILL HAPPEN. MOST RECENT OCCURENCE WAS 4/10/16. NO ONE BUT OWNER IS ALLOWED TO DRIVE THE CAR. VEHICLE NOW HAS 120K MILES ON IT, AND HAS OTHERWISE BEEN RELIABLE.
NHTSA ODI #10855593
147,000 miles · Jul 30, 2015
Engine
WE NOTICED WHITE SMOKE COMING OUT OF THE CAR SO WE TOOK IT INTO OUR MECHANIC WHO TOLD US THAT COOLANT WAS LEAKING INTO THE ENGINE. HE NOTED THAT UPON DOING SOME RESEARCH THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THAT YEAR MODEL AND REPAIRING IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY COSTLY. WE WERE TOLD WE SHOULD NOT DRIVE IT ANYMORE BECAUSE THE ENGINE COULD …
Read full complaint
WE NOTICED WHITE SMOKE COMING OUT OF THE CAR SO WE TOOK IT INTO OUR MECHANIC WHO TOLD US THAT COOLANT WAS LEAKING INTO THE ENGINE. HE NOTED THAT UPON DOING SOME RESEARCH THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THAT YEAR MODEL AND REPAIRING IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY COSTLY. WE WERE TOLD WE SHOULD NOT DRIVE IT ANYMORE BECAUSE THE ENGINE COULD QUIT ON US AT ANYTIME. MY HUSBAND CHECKED THE CRANK CASE DIPSTICK AND THE RADIATOR, BOTH WERE CONTAMINATED WITH RUST.AT THIS POINT IT WAS DETERMINED THAT WE COULD NO LONGER DRIVE THE CAR. .
NHTSA ODI #10745077
108,000 miles · Jun 25, 2015
Engine
MY CAR STARTED MAKING CLICKING NOISES UNDERNEATH THE HOOD WHEN I TURNED A CORNER. I TOOK IT TO GATEWAY TOYOTA TO FIND OUT WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS AND FOUND OUT THAT THAT I NEED A NEW TRANSMISSION. MY PROBLEM WITH NEEDING A TRANSMISSION IS THAT THE CAR WAS MADE TO BE IN AUTOMATIC OVERDRIVE. IN THE MANUAL IS STATES THAT THE OVERDR…
Read full complaint
MY CAR STARTED MAKING CLICKING NOISES UNDERNEATH THE HOOD WHEN I TURNED A CORNER. I TOOK IT TO GATEWAY TOYOTA TO FIND OUT WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS AND FOUND OUT THAT THAT I NEED A NEW TRANSMISSION. MY PROBLEM WITH NEEDING A TRANSMISSION IS THAT THE CAR WAS MADE TO BE IN AUTOMATIC OVERDRIVE. IN THE MANUAL IS STATES THAT THE OVERDRIVE SHOULD ALWAYS BE ON. I BELIEVE THAT DRIVING WITH THE OVERDRIVE ON AT ALL TIMES CAUSED THE TRANSMISSION TO EVENTUALLY FAIL BEFORE ITS TIME. I ALSO BELIEVE THERE IS A DEFECT IN THE TRANSMISSION BECAUSE WHEN I TURN OFF THE OVERDRIVE, THE CAR DRIVES FINE. IN ADDITION, MANY MECHANICS I HAVE TALKED TO STATED THAT THE OVERDRIVE REALLY SHOULDN'T BE USED THAT OFTEN AND IT IS STRANGE THAT THE TOYOTA CAMRYS WERE BUILT TO HAVE THE OVERDRIVE ON CONTINUOUSLY. I KNOW THAT THERE IS NO RECALL,BUT I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THIS PROBLEM HAPPENS OFTEN, BUT MAY NOT BE REPORTED DUE TO THE MILEAGE.
NHTSA ODI #10730340
78 miles · Feb 24, 2015
EngineSteering
I WAS DRIVING ON A CITY STREET AT ABOUT 35MPH WHEN ROUGH, SOMEWHAT GRINDING NOISES CAME FROM UNDER THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CAR HOOD OF THE 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THESE NOISES CONTINUED FOR ABOUT 15 MINUTES WHILE I WAS DRIVING. I STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT. WHEN I HAD THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ATTEMPTED TO PROCEED, I FOUND I COULD NOT TURN T…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING ON A CITY STREET AT ABOUT 35MPH WHEN ROUGH, SOMEWHAT GRINDING NOISES CAME FROM UNDER THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CAR HOOD OF THE 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THESE NOISES CONTINUED FOR ABOUT 15 MINUTES WHILE I WAS DRIVING. I STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT. WHEN I HAD THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ATTEMPTED TO PROCEED, I FOUND I COULD NOT TURN THE STEERING WHEEL. I THOUGHT THE CAR WAS INOPERABLE BUT WHEN I EXERTED GREAT EFFORT, THE WHEEL DID TURN. FORTUNATELY, I WAS ABLE TO TURN A CORNER AND MOVE INTO A PUBLIC PARKING LOT. AGAIN WITH GREAT STEERING DIFFICULTY AND NOISE FROM BELOW THE CAR HOOD, I DROVE THE CAR ABOUT A QUARTER OF A MILE TO MY HOME AND THE CAR WAS TOWED TO A SERVICE CENTER. *TR UPDATED 4/14/16 *JS
NHTSA ODI #10690484
86,000 miles · Dec 28, 2014
EngineVehicle Speed ControlCrash
THIS IS A DELAYED RESPONSE, AS I WAS NOT AWARE THAT TOYOTA FINALLY ACCEPTED RESPONSIBILITY FOR SPONTANEOUS ACCELERATIONS. I WAS IN SLOW, STOP AND GO TRAFFIC AND MY CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. I RECALL LOOKING DOWN AS I PRESSED THE BRAKE AS HARD AS I COULD BECAUSE THE CAR WAS NOT STOPPING OR DECELERATING. I THOUGHT THAT MY FOOT MUS…
Read full complaint
THIS IS A DELAYED RESPONSE, AS I WAS NOT AWARE THAT TOYOTA FINALLY ACCEPTED RESPONSIBILITY FOR SPONTANEOUS ACCELERATIONS. I WAS IN SLOW, STOP AND GO TRAFFIC AND MY CAR SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. I RECALL LOOKING DOWN AS I PRESSED THE BRAKE AS HARD AS I COULD BECAUSE THE CAR WAS NOT STOPPING OR DECELERATING. I THOUGHT THAT MY FOOT MUST HAVE BEEN INADVERTENTLY ON THE GAS PEDAL BUT IT WAS FIRMLY PLANTED ON THE BRAKE. THE BRAKE WORKED AS THERE WERE DEFINITE SKID MARKS. I SLAMMED INTO THE BACK OF A TAHOE, TOTALING MY CAR AND CAUSING A PULLED SHOULDER, WHIP LASH, AND A DEVIATED SEPTUM IN MY NOSE FROM THE AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT. I WAS AFRAID THAT THE POLICEMAN WOULD NOT EVEN BELIEVE MY ACCOUNT OF THE ACCIDENT SO I DID NOT REPORT THE INCIDENT AS CLEARLY AS IT OCCURRED (THOUGH I DEFINITELY ACCEPTED RESPONSIBILITY). I JUST RECEIVED A CHECK FOR APPROXIMATELY $23.00 A FEW WEEKS AGO FOR A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT. I AM FURIOUS THAT I LOST AN OTHERWISE (PAID FOR) GREAT CAR, SUSTAINED INJURIES AND MORE IMPORTANT, ENDANGERED PEOPLE AROUND ME. I ALSO NOW HAVE AN "ACCIDENT" ON MY INSURANCE RECORD. THE FINANCIAL, PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL TOLL THIS HAS TAKEN CAN CERTAINLY NOT BE "BOUGHT OUT" WITH $23.00. I WISH THAT I HAD TOLD MY EXPERIENCE TO THE OFFICER AS I CLEARLY PERCEIVED IT, REGARDLESS OF HOW IMPLAUSIBLE IT SEEMED. NOW, I HAVE FOOLISHLY ALREADY PURCHASED ANOTHER CAMRY, AND, ONCE AGAIN THEY HAVE A MAJOR SAFETY RECALL. AT LEAST THEY HAVE OPENLY ACKNOWLEDGED THIS ONE. HOWEVER, I CANNOT GET THEM TO RETURN MY CALLS WITH AN APPOINTMENT FOR A REPAIR. WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO IN THE MEANTIME? WAIT UNTIL ANOTHER "ACCIDENT" HAPPENS? HOW CAN I GET IN TO GET A REPAIR? PLEASE LET ME KNOW. I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE IT BUT CANNOT AFFORD TO RENT A CAR INDEFINITELY. I AM GRATEFUL TO HAVE FOUND THIS SITE. THANK YOU. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10668623
100,000 miles · May 18, 2014
Engine
ENGINE OIL CONSUMPTION I HAVE THIS ISSUE SINCE 2 YRS AGO, I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS THIS TO OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS , I'M LOOKING FOR HELP AND POSSIBLY TO GET AN OFFICIAL RECALL FROM TOYOTA , THANK YOU. *JS
NHTSA ODI #10592274
Mileage unknown · Feb 26, 2014
Electrical SystemEngineEquipment
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE ENGINE BEING DEFECTIVE. *SMD THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. A DIAGNOSIS REVEALED WATER WAS IN THE ENGINE AND IT WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $1,858.33 THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED, THE HEADS COULD NOT BE REMOVED, BECAUSE OF AN ENGINE DEFECT. THE SCREWS ON T…
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE ENGINE BEING DEFECTIVE. *SMD THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. A DIAGNOSIS REVEALED WATER WAS IN THE ENGINE AND IT WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED AT A COST OF $1,858.33 THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED, THE HEADS COULD NOT BE REMOVED, BECAUSE OF AN ENGINE DEFECT. THE SCREWS ON THE MANIFOLD OR HEADS WERE COMING LOOSE AND THAT'S HOW WATER ENTERED THE ENGINE, AND THE HEAD GASKET HAD BLOWN. THE CONSUMER STATED ABOUT A MONTH AGO, SHE STARTED HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE VEHICLE. SHE WAS INFORMED THE IGNITION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. ALSO, THE WATER PUMP, AND ALTERNATOR WERE REPLACED. THE AIR COMPRESSOR AND HEATER SENSOR ELEMENT FAILED. *JB UPDATED 05/12/14. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10566142
88,000 miles · Sep 12, 2013
Engine
MY CAR IS 88000 MILES, ITS 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY STANDARD AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION. ONE FINE DAY, WHEN DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, I GOT AN ENGINE LIGHT CHECK. I COULDN'T STOP ON THE ROAD, SO TOOK AN EXIT AND WHEN I SLOWED DOWN WHILE ON THE EXIT RAMP THE ENGINE STOPPED SUDDENLY. I THOUGH ITS ONE OFF INCIDENT AND START IT AGAIN AND STAR…
Read full complaint
MY CAR IS 88000 MILES, ITS 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY STANDARD AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION. ONE FINE DAY, WHEN DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, I GOT AN ENGINE LIGHT CHECK. I COULDN'T STOP ON THE ROAD, SO TOOK AN EXIT AND WHEN I SLOWED DOWN WHILE ON THE EXIT RAMP THE ENGINE STOPPED SUDDENLY. I THOUGH ITS ONE OFF INCIDENT AND START IT AGAIN AND STARTED DRIVING, BUT AT THE NEXT IMMEDIATE SIGNAL LIGHT, I HAD TO STOP FOR THE RED LIGHT AND THE ENGINE STOPPED AGAIN. I GOT IT TOWED TO THE NEAREST CAR MECHANIC, THEY SAID, IT'S THE ENGINE LOCKED PROBLEM AND IT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. I WANTED TO GET A SECOND OPINION AND GOT IT TOWED TO ANOTHER MECHANIC, HE TOLD THE SAME, ENGINE LOCKED. IF I WERE TO TAKE IT TO THE DEALER SHOP THEY WOULD TAKE EXORBITANT AMOUNT OF MONEY TO JUST FIGURE OUT THE PROBLEM. I AM EXTREMELY PISSED THAT TOYOTA CAMRY ENGINE WOULD FAIL FOR 88,000 MILES. TR
NHTSA ODI #10543284
61,048 miles · Jan 27, 2013
Engine
AT 60667 MILES, CAR DIAGNOSED WITH OIL PAN AND WATER PUMP LEAKAGE. COST OF REPAIR APPROXIMATELY $900 AT TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. CAR HAS BEEN GARAGE KEPT AND MAINTAINED AT RECOMMENDED INTERVALS WITH NO PREVIOUS PROBLEMS. WHILE TOYOTA HAD A MASSIVE RECALL FOR DEFECTIVE WATER PUMPS AND WITH NO APPARENT MILEAGE LIMIT AND FOR YEARS AS FAR…
Read full complaint
AT 60667 MILES, CAR DIAGNOSED WITH OIL PAN AND WATER PUMP LEAKAGE. COST OF REPAIR APPROXIMATELY $900 AT TOYOTA DEALERSHIP. CAR HAS BEEN GARAGE KEPT AND MAINTAINED AT RECOMMENDED INTERVALS WITH NO PREVIOUS PROBLEMS. WHILE TOYOTA HAD A MASSIVE RECALL FOR DEFECTIVE WATER PUMPS AND WITH NO APPARENT MILEAGE LIMIT AND FOR YEARS AS FAR BACK AS 2001 MODELS, THE 2005 BASE CAMRY DID NOT RECEIVE A RECALL EVEN THOUGH THE WATER PUMP LEAKAGE IN THIS MODEL YEAR IS OBVIOUSLY AN ISSUE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10494854
43,360 miles · Jan 1, 2013
EngineVehicle Speed Control
DEFECTIVE THROTTLE BODY...FOUND OUT THIS IS COMMON WITH CAMRY. OVER 1,000 TO REPLACE. OUTRAGEOUS FOR A CAR WITH 43K MILES AND ORIGINAL OWNER. THOS SHOULD BE A RECALL ITEM BY TOYOTA. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10490631
Official recalls
5Jun 2, 2016
Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain 2005-2011 4Runner, Highlander, Sequoia, and Sienna, 2005-2010 Avalon and Tundra, 2006-2008 Camry Solara, 2006-2010 Highlander hybrid, 2006-2011 Rav4 and Tacoma, 2007-2010 FJ Cruiser, 2007-2011 Camry hybrid, 2009-2010 Venza, 2010-2012 Prius, 1988-1990 and 2005-2010 Camry, and 1989 and 2009-2010 Corolla vehicles equipped with aftermarket accessory seat heaters with a copper strand heating element. The electrical wiring in the seat heaters may be damaged when the seat cushion is compressed.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If damaged, the copper strand heating element may short circuit, increasing the risk of a fire.
Remedy: SET will notify owners, and dealers will disconnect the seat heaters, free of charge, and refund the purchase price of the seat heater accessory. The recall began on July 14, 2016. Owners may contact SET customer service at 1-866-405-4226. SET number for this recall is SET16B.
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.
Feb 3, 2010
GULF STATES TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2010 VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 AND JUNE 2, 2008 WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. DEALERS WILL ALSO CORRECT THE OWNER'S MANUAL. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT GULF STATES TOYOTA AT 713-580-3300.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
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..
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