NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
66 reportsClear category filter27,777 miles · Dec 4, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH, THE BRAKE PEDAL EXTENDED TO THE FLOOR WHEN IT WAS DEPRESSED. THE ROAD CONDITIONS WERE SLIPPERY FROM SNOW. THE BRAKES FELT VERY LOOSE AND MADE A GRATING SOUND. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO MOVE FORWARD FOR A DISTANCE BEFORE COMING TO A STOP. THE DEALER STATED THAT TH…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH, THE BRAKE PEDAL EXTENDED TO THE FLOOR WHEN IT WAS DEPRESSED. THE ROAD CONDITIONS WERE SLIPPERY FROM SNOW. THE BRAKES FELT VERY LOOSE AND MADE A GRATING SOUND. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO MOVE FORWARD FOR A DISTANCE BEFORE COMING TO A STOP. THE DEALER STATED THAT THIS WAS A NORMAL OCCURRENCE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 27,777.
NHTSA ODI #10210754
4 miles · Aug 23, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL, BUT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP. THE VEHICLE DROVE INTO SOME BUSHES AND CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE FAILURE HAS OCCURRED NUMEROUS TIMES WHILE DRIVING. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT NOTHING COULD BE DONE BECAUSE THEY ARE UNSURE OF WHAT CAUSED THE FAILU…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL, BUT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP. THE VEHICLE DROVE INTO SOME BUSHES AND CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE FAILURE HAS OCCURRED NUMEROUS TIMES WHILE DRIVING. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT NOTHING COULD BE DONE BECAUSE THEY ARE UNSURE OF WHAT CAUSED THE FAILURE. THE SPEED, ENGINE SIZE, VALID VIN, AND POWERTRAIN WERE UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 19,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 4.
NHTSA ODI #10200621
64,400 miles · Jul 28, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
BRAKES ARE SOFT, GRINDING DOWN IN ONE DAY. I'VE HAD TO REPLACE THEM TWICE SINCE I PURCHASED CAR IN 2005. I HAVE TO PUSH BRAKE TO THE FLOOR BEFORE CAR WILL STOP. ALSO CAR SURGES. I'LL BE DRIVING AND THE CAR WILL ALL OF A SUDDEN GO FORWARD. TOYOTA SAID IT WAS DUE TO BRAKES. HAS THE BRAKE SYSTEM BEEN RECALLED.? I NOTICED A …
Read full complaint
BRAKES ARE SOFT, GRINDING DOWN IN ONE DAY. I'VE HAD TO REPLACE THEM TWICE SINCE I PURCHASED CAR IN 2005. I HAVE TO PUSH BRAKE TO THE FLOOR BEFORE CAR WILL STOP. ALSO CAR SURGES. I'LL BE DRIVING AND THE CAR WILL ALL OF A SUDDEN GO FORWARD. TOYOTA SAID IT WAS DUE TO BRAKES. HAS THE BRAKE SYSTEM BEEN RECALLED.? I NOTICED A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ON LINE DUE TO SAME PROBLEMS. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10197728
13,000 miles · May 29, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
FAULTY BRAKE SYSTEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10191937
Mileage unknown · Apr 10, 2007
Power TrainService Brakes, Hydraulic
WHENEVER I APPLIED THE BRAKE PEDAL AT LOW SPEEDS BETWEEN 1-30 MPH AS APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION, A STOP SIGN OR AN IMMEDIATE BRAKE THE TRANSMISSION SWITCHES GEARS, AND THE RPMS INCREASED. THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR AND THE CAR JOLTED FORWARD, AND DID NOT STOP UNTIL THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED AGAIN. F…
Read full complaint
WHENEVER I APPLIED THE BRAKE PEDAL AT LOW SPEEDS BETWEEN 1-30 MPH AS APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION, A STOP SIGN OR AN IMMEDIATE BRAKE THE TRANSMISSION SWITCHES GEARS, AND THE RPMS INCREASED. THE BRAKE PEDAL DEPRESSED ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR AND THE CAR JOLTED FORWARD, AND DID NOT STOP UNTIL THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED AGAIN. FORTUNATELY, I HAVE NOT HAD AN ACCIDENT. OTHERS HAVE. I HAVE HAD THE DEFECTIVE BRAKE PROBLEM SINCE I BOUGHT THE CAR NEW IN 2004. I HAD THE DEALER'S REPAIR TECHNICIANS DRIVE THE CAR ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, THEY SAID THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO RECREATE THE PROBLEM. THIS WAS NOT HOW ANTI-LOCK BRAKES WERE SUPPOSED TO WORK. TOYOTA NEEDED TO RESEARCH THIS DEFECT THOROUGHLY AND ANNOUNCE A RECALL BEFORE OTHERS GET HURT OR KILLED.*AK
NHTSA ODI #10187480
20,433 miles · Mar 17, 2007
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
MY CAR ACCERATED WHEN THE BRAKE WENT DOWN ALMOST TO THE FLOOR. I HAVE NOTED THAT PRIOR TO THIS THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT IN THE LA AREA. IN THAT ACCIDENT THERE WHERE PEOPLE INJURED. LAST WEEK THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT INVOLVING THE SAME TYPE AND YEAR CAR AND THERE WAS ONE DEATH IN THIS ONE. WHAT HAPPENED TO ME AS I WAS PULLING INTO A PA…
Read full complaint
MY CAR ACCERATED WHEN THE BRAKE WENT DOWN ALMOST TO THE FLOOR. I HAVE NOTED THAT PRIOR TO THIS THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT IN THE LA AREA. IN THAT ACCIDENT THERE WHERE PEOPLE INJURED. LAST WEEK THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT INVOLVING THE SAME TYPE AND YEAR CAR AND THERE WAS ONE DEATH IN THIS ONE. WHAT HAPPENED TO ME AS I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SPACE I APPLIED THE BRAKE AND THE BRAKE WENT DOWN AND MY EDGE OF MY SHOE CAUGHT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND MY CAR WENT PART WAY ON THE CURB. HAD THERE BEEN A CAR IN FRONT OF ME I WOULD HAVE HIT IT. I TOOK MY CAR TO TOYOTA AND THEY CHECKED IT OUT AND SAID IT WAS OK. I NOW TRY TO WATCH OUT FOR ANY BRAKE PROBLEMS BUT THIS A WORRIE TO ME AND MY WIFE.
NHTSA ODI #10185403
28,000 miles · Nov 12, 2006
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash
IF I HAD BEEN DRIVING ANY OF MY OTHER VEHICLES BESIDES THE 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY THAT I HAVE OWNED FOR 4 MONTHS, I WOULD NOT HAVE CRASHED INTO THE BUMPER OF THE STOPPED TRUCK. I SAW THE TRUCK IN TIME TO APPLY THE BRAKES WHILE MOVING AT 15 MILES PER HOUR,ON DRY CLEAN PAVEMENT, TO STOP BEFORE HITTING THE REAR END OF THE TRUCK WHEN IT …
Read full complaint
IF I HAD BEEN DRIVING ANY OF MY OTHER VEHICLES BESIDES THE 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY THAT I HAVE OWNED FOR 4 MONTHS, I WOULD NOT HAVE CRASHED INTO THE BUMPER OF THE STOPPED TRUCK. I SAW THE TRUCK IN TIME TO APPLY THE BRAKES WHILE MOVING AT 15 MILES PER HOUR,ON DRY CLEAN PAVEMENT, TO STOP BEFORE HITTING THE REAR END OF THE TRUCK WHEN IT WAS A GOOD 20 FEET AWAY. NOT ONLY DID MY TOYOTA NOT STOP WHEN I SMASHED ON THE BRAKES, IT LEFT ABSOLUTELY NO SKID MARKS, AND MANAGED TO COMPLETELY RIP THE GRILLE AND HEADLIGHTS OFF THE FRONT BUMPER, AND CURL THE HOOD BACK OVER A FOOT. THE FORCE DID NOT DEPLOY THE AIRBAG, AND ONLY CAUSED MINOR DAMAGE TO THE BUMPER OF THE TRUCK. THE BRAKES ABSOLUTELY WERE AT FAULT, AND I REGRET HAVING TO FIND OUT IN SUCH AN EXPENSIVE WAY THAT THE BRAKES ARE NOT DEPENDABLE AT ALL, ESPECIALLY FOR A CAR WITH ONLY 28,000 MILES ON THE ODOMETER. TOYOTA SHOULD PAY FOR THE DAMAGES IF THE SAME PROBLEM EXISTS FOR ANY OTHER DRIVERS. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10173220
11,000 miles · Nov 7, 2006
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY 4-CYL LE WITH SOFT/SPONGY BRAKE ESPECIALLY AT HIGHWAY SPEED, THE BRAKE GOES DOWN ALL THE WAY ALMOST TO FLOORBOARD. TOYOTA MOTORS INSISTS IT'S NORMAL & WON'T FIX IT. ALREADY LOST ARBITRATION. ALREADY HAD ACCIDENT WHEN BRAKES FAILED TO ENGAGE AS IT SHOULD AT 65 MPH WITH DAMAGE OF ABOUT $500.00. PLEASE GO TO AUTOB…
Read full complaint
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY 4-CYL LE WITH SOFT/SPONGY BRAKE ESPECIALLY AT HIGHWAY SPEED, THE BRAKE GOES DOWN ALL THE WAY ALMOST TO FLOORBOARD. TOYOTA MOTORS INSISTS IT'S NORMAL & WON'T FIX IT. ALREADY LOST ARBITRATION. ALREADY HAD ACCIDENT WHEN BRAKES FAILED TO ENGAGE AS IT SHOULD AT 65 MPH WITH DAMAGE OF ABOUT $500.00. PLEASE GO TO AUTOBYTEL.COM & OTHER TOYOTA OWNER WEBSITES FOR MORE BRAKE PROBLEMS. MY CASE #200602070910 WITH TOYOTA MOTORS. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10172863
13,208 miles · Sep 22, 2006
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE ATTEMPTING TO EXIT THE SNOW COVERED DRIVEWAY AT A LOW SPEED, THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS DEPRESSED AND THE BRAKES LOCKED UP CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO SKID OUT OF CONTROL. THE VEHICLE WAS RECOVERED AND TOWED TO THE DEALER WHO COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM.
NHTSA ODI #10168963
17,300 miles · Jul 20, 2006
Service Brakes, HydraulicSuspension
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE APPLYING BRAKE PRESSURE AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE INTERMITTENTLY PULLED TO THE LEFT OR RIGHT. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY THE DEALER WHO ALIGNED THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. AFTERWARDS, THE PROBLEM PERSISTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT ALERTED. UPDATED 2/26/10 *CN UPDATED 09…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE APPLYING BRAKE PRESSURE AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE INTERMITTENTLY PULLED TO THE LEFT OR RIGHT. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY THE DEALER WHO ALIGNED THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE. AFTERWARDS, THE PROBLEM PERSISTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT ALERTED. UPDATED 2/26/10 *CN UPDATED 09/02/10*JB
NHTSA ODI #10162952
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