NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
272 reportsClear category filter19,776 miles · Mar 3, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
THE CAR REVS FOR NO APPARENT REASON AND THE RPMS GO VERY HIGH. FIRST TIME IN OCT 2008 BACKING OUT OF A PARKING THE REVS SHOT UP. TOYOTA SERVICE FOUND NOTHING. SECOND OCCASION JULY 2009 WHILE AT A LIGHT THE RPMS SHOT UP FOR NO APPARENT REASON. FORTUNATELY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE, SO NO DAMAGE DONE. ALSO NOTICED THAT EVEN AFTER LETT…
Read full complaint
THE CAR REVS FOR NO APPARENT REASON AND THE RPMS GO VERY HIGH. FIRST TIME IN OCT 2008 BACKING OUT OF A PARKING THE REVS SHOT UP. TOYOTA SERVICE FOUND NOTHING. SECOND OCCASION JULY 2009 WHILE AT A LIGHT THE RPMS SHOT UP FOR NO APPARENT REASON. FORTUNATELY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE, SO NO DAMAGE DONE. ALSO NOTICED THAT EVEN AFTER LETTING FOOT OFF THE GAS PEDAL THE REVS WOULD NOT COME DOWN FOR SOME TIME. NON TOYOTA SERVICE STATION LOOKED AT IT, AND CLEANED THE THROTTLE PLATE. THIRD OCCASION IN JAN 2010 MY WIFE WAS DRIVING DOWNHILL WHEN SUDDENLY THERE WAS A SURGE AND THE CAR RPM'S SHOT UP FOR NO APPARENT REASON. SHE HIT THE BRAKES HARD AND EVERYTHING WENT BACK TO NORMAL. I TOOK THE CAR TO TOYOTA AND THEY COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING. THEY BLAMED IT ON THE FLOOR MATS, WHICH I DISAGREED WITH AS THERE IS A REASONABLE CLEARANCE GAP BETWEEN THE GAS PEDAL AND THE MATS. A WEEK LATER I LEFT THE CAR WITH TOYOTA FOR 3 DAYS AND THEY DROVE IT FOR TWO TEST RUNS AND THE MANAGER TOOK IT HOME (158 MILES) AND THEY COULD NOT RECREATE THE PROBLEM. TOYOTA HAVE TOLD ME THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM WITH MY 2005 CAMRY AS IT'S NOT ON THE RECALL LIST. I DISAGREE WITH THIS STATEMENT. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10316020
19 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes, ElectricVehicle Speed Control
WE PURCHASED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY IN 2005. THE FIRST DAY I DROVE IT THE CAR HESITATED ON ACCELERATION TO CHANGE LANES IT WAS LUCKY THAT IT DIDN'T CAUSE A WRECK. I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP (I DON'T REMEMBER WHY) BUT I ASKED THEM TO CHECK IT AND THE GUY I TALKED TO JUST SAID IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE FUEL INJECTION. THE GUY …
Read full complaint
WE PURCHASED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY IN 2005. THE FIRST DAY I DROVE IT THE CAR HESITATED ON ACCELERATION TO CHANGE LANES IT WAS LUCKY THAT IT DIDN'T CAUSE A WRECK. I TOOK THE CAR BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP (I DON'T REMEMBER WHY) BUT I ASKED THEM TO CHECK IT AND THE GUY I TALKED TO JUST SAID IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE FUEL INJECTION. THE GUY DIDN'T OFFER TO CHECK IT, HE JUST MADE THAT STATEMENT. THE HESITATION HAPPENS ANY TIME AND IT ALWAYS FEELS LIKE SOMEONE IS GOING TO REAR END US WHILE THE CAR IS DECIDING WHAT IT WANTS TO DO. ON THE FREEWAYS IN CALIFORNIA PEOPLE GO 70 MILES AN HOUR THAT MAKES IT A HAZARD TO DRIVE A TOYOTA ON THE FREEWAY. THE TOYOTA ALSO HAS A MIND OF ITS OWN, SOMETIMES WHEN I HAVE MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE PREPARING TO STOP THE ENGINE SEEMS TO BE TRYING TO OVERRIDE THE BRAKE TO KEEP GOING. IT FEELS LIKE THE CAR IS TRYING TO INCREASE THE SPEED WHEN I AM TRYING TO SLOW DOWN. I HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT IT BUT I JUST FIGURED TOYOTA WAS NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. NOW MY HUSBAND DOES NOT WANT ME TO DRIVE THE TOYOTA. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10315893
76,000 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 5 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING CAUSING THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO 2 VEHICLES. NO ONE WAS INJURED DURING THE CRASH. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALERSHIP AND THERE WERE NO P…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 5 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WITHOUT WARNING CAUSING THE CONTACT TO CRASH INTO 2 VEHICLES. NO ONE WAS INJURED DURING THE CRASH. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALERSHIP AND THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNINGS. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 76,000.
NHTSA ODI #10315802
83,300 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
MY 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY HAS HAD NO PROBLEMS AND HAS BEEN MAINTAINED AS RECOMMENDED FOR 5 YEARS UP TO THE DATE OF THE ACCIDENT WHICH OCCURRED ON JANUARY 17, 2010. I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SPOT AT APPROXIMATELY 1 MILE PER HOUR, LIGHTLY TOUCHED THE BRAKE AND INSTEAD OF STOPPING THE CAR LUNGED FORWARD (SELF-ACCELERATED) UP OVER A …
Read full complaint
MY 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY HAS HAD NO PROBLEMS AND HAS BEEN MAINTAINED AS RECOMMENDED FOR 5 YEARS UP TO THE DATE OF THE ACCIDENT WHICH OCCURRED ON JANUARY 17, 2010. I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SPOT AT APPROXIMATELY 1 MILE PER HOUR, LIGHTLY TOUCHED THE BRAKE AND INSTEAD OF STOPPING THE CAR LUNGED FORWARD (SELF-ACCELERATED) UP OVER A CONCRETE BLOCK ONTO A SIDEWALK AND CAME TO A STOP WHEN IT HIT A HEAVY METAL RAILING. AN 8' SECTION OF THE RAIL WAS BROKEN OFF AND FELL 4' AWAY FROM THE CAR. I REPORTED THE ACCIDENT TO THE POLICE AND TO MY INSURANCE COMPANY. A TOW TRUCK DRIVER GOT THE CAR MOVED, CHECKED THE BRAKES - WHICH HE SAID WERE WORKING PROPERLY - AND SUGGESTED THAT THE ACCIDENT MAY HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY A STUCK THROTTLE. NEITHER THE FLOOR MATS OR THE GAS PEDAL CAUSED THE PROBLEM. THE DAMAGE TO THE CAR CAME TO $2200.00 BUT NOTHING WAS DONE TO FIX THE PROBLEM BECAUSE TOYOTA HAS NOT RECALLED THIS YEAR VEHICLE AND THE FORENSIC MECHANIC WHO INSPECTED IT FELT THAT IT WAS A COMPUTER PROBLEM AND THE SOLUTIONS OFFERED BY TOYOTA WOULD NOT ADDRESS THE RANDOM ACCELERATION PROBLEM. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10315786
44,316 miles · Mar 2, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
VEHICLE WILL EXCEL AFTER LIGHTLY TOUCHING THE GAS PEDAL FROM STOPPED POSITION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10315349
Mileage unknown · Mar 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
2005 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH SUDDEN ACCELERATION ISSUE. *KB THE CONSUMER STATED AT THE EXIT OF A CAR WASH, HE PUT THE VEHICLE IN GEAR AND IT SHOT OUT OF THE BUILDING. THE ACCELERATOR WAS NOT APPLIED AND IT WAS NOT TRAPPED UNDER THE MAT. THE CONSUMER STATED IT ONLY HAPPENED ONCE. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10315407
Mileage unknown · Mar 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control
LTR FM (MD) RE HIS MOTHER'S CONCERN W/HER 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY, SHE EXPERIENCED SUDDEN ACCELERATION WHILE DRIVING, REPLY TO ROCKVILLE, MD OFC. *KB THE CONSUMER WROTE IN ON BEHALF OF HIS MOTHER. HIS MOTHER PREVIOUSLY OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY, BUT TRADED IT IN FOR A NEW CAMRY. THE CONSUMER WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PERSON WHO MAY OW…
Read full complaint
LTR FM (MD) RE HIS MOTHER'S CONCERN W/HER 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY, SHE EXPERIENCED SUDDEN ACCELERATION WHILE DRIVING, REPLY TO ROCKVILLE, MD OFC. *KB THE CONSUMER WROTE IN ON BEHALF OF HIS MOTHER. HIS MOTHER PREVIOUSLY OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY, BUT TRADED IT IN FOR A NEW CAMRY. THE CONSUMER WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PERSON WHO MAY OWN THE VEHICLE THAT SHE HAD. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10315403
65,000 miles · Mar 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY PURCHASED NEW. THE DRIVER ENTERED THE VEHICLE, TURNED ON THE IGNITION AND PROCEEDED TO PLACE THE VEHICLE INTO REVERSE TO LEAVE A PARKING SPACE. THE VEHICLE THEN BEGAN TO SPIN AROUND REPEATEDLY AS IT ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED AND SHE ATTEMPTED TO DEPRESS THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE BRAKES WOULD NOT R…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY PURCHASED NEW. THE DRIVER ENTERED THE VEHICLE, TURNED ON THE IGNITION AND PROCEEDED TO PLACE THE VEHICLE INTO REVERSE TO LEAVE A PARKING SPACE. THE VEHICLE THEN BEGAN TO SPIN AROUND REPEATEDLY AS IT ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED AND SHE ATTEMPTED TO DEPRESS THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE BRAKES WOULD NOT RESPOND. THE DRIVER NOTICED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WAS STUCK DOWN INTO THE FLOORBOARD. THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO SEVERAL OTHER PARKED VEHICLES AND BEGAN TO SLOW DOWN AFTER EACH CRASH. EVENTUALLY, THE VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP ON ITS OWN. THE DRIVER SUSTAINED MINOR BRUISING AND SEAT-BELT BURNS. A WITNESS CALLED THE POLICE TO THE SCENE AND A REPORT WAS FILED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND BECAUSE THERE WERE NO RECALLS ON THE VEHICLE, THEY WOULD NOT ASSIST. THE VEHICLE SUFFERED SEVER BODY DAMAGE. NO REPAIRS WERE MADE TO THE VEHICLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE UNDER 65,000.
NHTSA ODI #10315160
45,000 miles · Mar 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE ALMOST COMING TO A COMPLETE STOP, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED OVER THE FENCE, HIT SOME BOULDERS AND THEN CRASHED INTO A TREE. THERE WAS FRONT END DAMAGE TO THE FRONT BUMPER AND UNDER CARRIAGE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE POLICE WERE NOT N…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH INTO A PARKING SPACE ALMOST COMING TO A COMPLETE STOP, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED OVER THE FENCE, HIT SOME BOULDERS AND THEN CRASHED INTO A TREE. THERE WAS FRONT END DAMAGE TO THE FRONT BUMPER AND UNDER CARRIAGE. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE POLICE WERE NOT NOTIFIED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL DEALER WHERE SHE WAS ABLE TO PURCHASE ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CALLED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 45,000. UPDATED 04/16/10. *LJ UPDATED 07/07/10.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10315155
40,000 miles · Mar 1, 2010
Service Brakes, HydraulicVehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury
TL*THE CONTACT OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. HE STATED THAT THE BRAKES CONTINUED TO LOCK WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMPLAINTS SIMILAR TO HIS. ON A SEPARATE OCCASION, WHILE DRIVING AT S…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNED A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. HE STATED THAT THE BRAKES CONTINUED TO LOCK WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMPLAINTS SIMILAR TO HIS. ON A SEPARATE OCCASION, WHILE DRIVING AT SPEEDS OF APPROXIMATELY 25 MPH THROUGH A SCHOOL ZONE, THE VEHICLE ABNORMALLY ACCELERATED TO THE RIGHT AND CRASHED INTO A POLE. THE DRIVER ATTEMPTED TO STOP THE VEHICLE BY DEPRESSING THE BRAKES, TO NO AVAIL. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED ON SCENE. THE CONTACT WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL AND SUFFERED MODERATE INJURIES AND BRUISES. THE MANUFACTURER INVESTIGATED THE VEHICLE FURTHER AND COULD NOT FIND ANY TECHNICAL ERRORS IN THE VEHICLE. THE CAUSE OF THE CRASH WAS INCONCLUSIVE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. UPDATED 04/27/10. *LJ UPDATED 07/08/10.*JB
NHTSA ODI #10315132
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