IllustrationCHANGING LANES, CAR ACCELERATED, UNABLE TO CONTROL VEHICLE. CRASHED INTO FRONT END OF WAITING CAR AND INTO STOP SIGN. *TR
2005 Toyota Camry
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Camry years
Owner complaints for the 2005 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
1860–25K
14725–50K
10650–75K
5375–100K
57100–150K
26150K+
575 reports with mileage · 146 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 272 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 84 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 71 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
223 crash reports10 fire reports91 injury reports
Vehicle Speed Control complaints
272 reportsFATAL LIFE THREATENING ACCIDENT IN AUGUST 2009. TOYOTA CAMRY 2005. CAR HYDROPLANED WHILE CHANGING LANE. VEHICLE SPEED WAS CHANGED WHILE CHANGING LANE AND IT GOT OVER ACCELERATED. VEHICLE LOST CONTROLLED TUMBLED, FLIPPED COUPLE OF TIMES AND HIT THE MAJOR HIGHWAY RAMP. POLICE ARRIVED AND ALL FOUR ADULTS AND TODDLER IS ADMITTED TO …
Read full complaint
FATAL LIFE THREATENING ACCIDENT IN AUGUST 2009. TOYOTA CAMRY 2005. CAR HYDROPLANED WHILE CHANGING LANE. VEHICLE SPEED WAS CHANGED WHILE CHANGING LANE AND IT GOT OVER ACCELERATED. VEHICLE LOST CONTROLLED TUMBLED, FLIPPED COUPLE OF TIMES AND HIT THE MAJOR HIGHWAY RAMP. POLICE ARRIVED AND ALL FOUR ADULTS AND TODDLER IS ADMITTED TO HOSPITAL USING AMBULANCE SERVICE. LATER ON INSURANCE COMPANY DECLARED CAR AS TOTAL LOSS. *TR
MY FATHER WAS DRIVING A 2006 CAMRY. HE WAS BACKING INTO A PARKING SPOT AT A SUPERMARKET SHOPPING CENTER IN PALISADES PARK, NJ. HE DECIDED TO GO FORWARD AND THEN BACK UP AGAIN. WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO GO FORWARD SLOWLY AND BRIEFLY, THE ACCELERATOR OPENED FULL-THROTTLE. HE ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE AS HARD AS HE COULD BUT THE CAR KEPT A…
Read full complaint
MY FATHER WAS DRIVING A 2006 CAMRY. HE WAS BACKING INTO A PARKING SPOT AT A SUPERMARKET SHOPPING CENTER IN PALISADES PARK, NJ. HE DECIDED TO GO FORWARD AND THEN BACK UP AGAIN. WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO GO FORWARD SLOWLY AND BRIEFLY, THE ACCELERATOR OPENED FULL-THROTTLE. HE ATTEMPTED TO BRAKE AS HARD AS HE COULD BUT THE CAR KEPT ACCELERATING. HE HIT TWO PEOPLE WHILE TRYING TO BRING THE CAR UNDER CONTROL AND THEN SLAMMED INTO A LONG ROW OF SHOPPING CARTS. THE CAR SHUT OFF ONCE IT COLLIDED WITH THE CARTS. ONE OF THE PERSONS WAS KILLED. THE OTHER SUSTAINED A BROKEN ARM. THE CAR WAS EXAMINED BY THE PALISADES PARK POLICE AND FOUND TO HAVE NO OBSERVABLE DEFECT WITH THE ACCELERATOR. MY FATHER HAD THE CAR FIXED AND ENDED UP SELLING IT, SO IT IS STILL ON THE ROAD. I WOULD HAVE TO SEARCH HIS FILES AND SEE IF ANY INFORMATION WAS SAVED ABOUT THE CAR. PERHAPS HIS VIN # WOULD BE TRACEABLE THROUGH HIS FORMER INSURANCE COMPANY, ALL-STATE, OR THE PALISADES NJ POLICE DEPT. *TR UPDATED 03/14/10 *BF *TR UPDATED 08/06/10 UPDATE 9/19/2011*CW
I HAVE A 2005 CAMRY. THE CAR STARTED OFF FINE AND WITHIN A MINUTE IT DID NOT ACCELERATE EVEN WITH THE GAS PEDAL DOWN ALL THE WAY. THE ENGINE CHECK LIGHT WAS ON AND I LET IT IDLE FOR 10 MINS. IT STARTED RUNNING FINE AND THERE WAS NO LONGER THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT. NOW THE CAR WAS ABLE TO ACCELERATE. 4 DAYS LATER, I STOPPED AT A …
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2005 CAMRY. THE CAR STARTED OFF FINE AND WITHIN A MINUTE IT DID NOT ACCELERATE EVEN WITH THE GAS PEDAL DOWN ALL THE WAY. THE ENGINE CHECK LIGHT WAS ON AND I LET IT IDLE FOR 10 MINS. IT STARTED RUNNING FINE AND THERE WAS NO LONGER THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT. NOW THE CAR WAS ABLE TO ACCELERATE. 4 DAYS LATER, I STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT AND MADE A TURN TO THE LEFT AND THE CAR SLOWED DOWN AND DID NOT ACCELERATE THEREAFTER. *TR
I OWN A 2005 CAMRY. I WAS DRIVING ON I 95 AT 60 MPH WHEN THE CAR LUNGED TWICE, THEN STOPPED ACCELERATING AND WENT FROM 60 TO 0 IN TEN SECONDS MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO COAST TO A STOP ON THE SIDE OF THE VERY BUSY HIGHWAY. AFTER TOWING CAR TO THE DEALER NEAREST ME, IT WAS DIAGNOSED AS THE THROTTLE BODY FAILURE. I WA TOLD IT WOULD C…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2005 CAMRY. I WAS DRIVING ON I 95 AT 60 MPH WHEN THE CAR LUNGED TWICE, THEN STOPPED ACCELERATING AND WENT FROM 60 TO 0 IN TEN SECONDS MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO COAST TO A STOP ON THE SIDE OF THE VERY BUSY HIGHWAY. AFTER TOWING CAR TO THE DEALER NEAREST ME, IT WAS DIAGNOSED AS THE THROTTLE BODY FAILURE. I WA TOLD IT WOULD COST 1,000 TO REPLACE IT. MY CAR ONLY HAS 39,000 MILES ON IT. THE WARRANTY DID NOT COVER THIS PART. THEN THE DEALER REPAIRMAN SAID HE WOULD CLEAN IT OUT FOR 145.00 WHICH HE DID. HE SAID THIS HAS TO BE DONE EVERY 30,000 MILES BECAUSE OF A DESIGN PROBLEM. I DID SOME RESEARCH AND HAVE FOUND TOYOTA CAMRY 02-06 HAVE THIS FLAWED PART AND THERE ARE MANY COMPLAINTS OVER THE INTERNET DOCUMENTED. I FELT VERY UNSAFE WHEN THE INCIDENT HAPPENED AND NOW AM ANXIOUS THAT IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. MY QUESTION IS: WHY DID THE DEALER WANT TO SEE IF IT WAS COVERED UNDER OUR WARRANTY WE PAID FOR EXTRA BY ANOTHER INSURANCE COMPANY (IE., NOT TOYOTAL MFR. WARRANTY) AND WHEN THEY FOUND OUT IT WAS NOT COVERED, THEY JUST CLEANED IT AND SAID IT WAS FINE NOW? AS A CONSUMER, I AM NOT WANTING TO GO THROUGH THE EXPERIENCE OF MY CAR JUST ABRUPTLY STOPPING LIKE THAT AND BEING LEFT ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AGAIN. *TR
MY 5 MONTH OLD TOYOTA CAMRY SE V6 2005 WITH 5,200 MILES ON ODOMETER SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WHEN APPROACHING SLOWLY INTO DRIVEWAY AS USUAL FOR NEARLY 20 YEARS OF MY RESIDENCE. THE CAMRY WAS ONLY STOPPED ON ITSELF AFTER IT HIT THE WALL OF ROCKY LEDGE STANDING AT DRIVEWAY'S END. I FELT VERY LUCKY AND GOD BLESSED BECAUSE IF THIS ACCI…
Read full complaint
MY 5 MONTH OLD TOYOTA CAMRY SE V6 2005 WITH 5,200 MILES ON ODOMETER SUDDENLY ACCELERATED WHEN APPROACHING SLOWLY INTO DRIVEWAY AS USUAL FOR NEARLY 20 YEARS OF MY RESIDENCE. THE CAMRY WAS ONLY STOPPED ON ITSELF AFTER IT HIT THE WALL OF ROCKY LEDGE STANDING AT DRIVEWAY'S END. I FELT VERY LUCKY AND GOD BLESSED BECAUSE IF THIS ACCIDENT HAPPENED ON THE ROAD ITS CONSEQUENCES IS VERY HORRIBLE BEYOND ANY IMAGINATION OF FATALITIES.AFTER THIS ACCIDENT,I NOTIFIED THE TOYOTA CORPORATION AND THEY ANSWERED ME THAT THEY FOUND NOTHING DEFECTIVE WITH THIS CAMRY AFTER AN INVESTIGATION. I WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTED AT TOYOTA CORP ACTION. REPAIR OF DAMAGE COST MORE THAN 7,000 DOLLARS AND I MUST PAY SURCHARGE SINCE 2005 UNTIL NOW ON MY INSURANCE POLICY. AT THAT TIME,I WAS COMPLETELY GIVEN UP BECAUSE TOYOTA IS A VERY POWERFUL CORPORATION AND MY VOICE UNHEARD AND UNNOTICED BY ANYONE. *TR
ON OCTOBER 6, 2009, I DROVE MY 2005 CAMRY INTO THE PARKING LOT MAKING A RIGHT TURN AND COASTING INTO MY USUAL PARKING SPACE WITH MY FOOT LIGHTLY ON THE BRAKE. AS I APPROACHED THE CURB, MY CAMRY SUDDENLY ACCELERATED, JUMPING THE APPROXIMATELY SIX-INCH CURB, AND HITTING A TREE APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET FROM THE CURB WHILE CONTINUING …
Read full complaint
ON OCTOBER 6, 2009, I DROVE MY 2005 CAMRY INTO THE PARKING LOT MAKING A RIGHT TURN AND COASTING INTO MY USUAL PARKING SPACE WITH MY FOOT LIGHTLY ON THE BRAKE. AS I APPROACHED THE CURB, MY CAMRY SUDDENLY ACCELERATED, JUMPING THE APPROXIMATELY SIX-INCH CURB, AND HITTING A TREE APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET FROM THE CURB WHILE CONTINUING TO ACCELERATE, AFTER WHICH I TURNED OFF THE CAR WITH MY KEY. I CALLED MY INSURANCE AGENT, THEN AAA TO HAVE THE CAR TOWED TO OUR BODY SHOP, IN-AND-OUT AUTO BODY IN GAITHERSBURG, MD. I TOLD THE INSURANCE COMPANY I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HAD HAPPENED, THAT MY CAMRY HAD SUDDENLY ACCELERATED TOWARD THE TREE, AND ASKED THE BODY SHOP TO CHECK THE BRAKES AND ACCELERATOR. AFTER THEY REPAIRED MY CAMRY (BILL WAS $5321), THE BODY SHOP CONFIRMED THAT THE BRAKES AND ACCELERATOR WERE WORKING AS EXPECTED. I DROVE THE CAMRY HOME BUT LATER MY HUSBAND TOLD ME OF REPORTS HE FOUND ON THE INTERNET OF 'SUDDEN ACCELERATION' BY TOYOTAS, PARTICULARLY 2005 CAMRYS, AND I NO LONGER TRUST THIS CAR AND WILL NOT DRIVE IT. *TR
VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FOR NO REASON. *TR
MY 2005 CAMRY SUDDENLY ACCELERATED FOR NO APPARENT REASON. *TR
MY PARENTS WERE BOTH KILLED IN A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER INFORMED ME THAT MY MOTHER HAD NOT SLOWED DOWN AND WAS TRAVELING AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED WHEN LEAVING THE ROAD. THERE WAS NOT ANY INDICATION THAT SHE TRIED SLOWING DOWN. AT THE TIME I ASKED FOR AN INVESTIGATION OF THE VEHICLE BUT WAS TOLD THE DAMAGE…
Read full complaint
MY PARENTS WERE BOTH KILLED IN A 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY. THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER INFORMED ME THAT MY MOTHER HAD NOT SLOWED DOWN AND WAS TRAVELING AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED WHEN LEAVING THE ROAD. THERE WAS NOT ANY INDICATION THAT SHE TRIED SLOWING DOWN. AT THE TIME I ASKED FOR AN INVESTIGATION OF THE VEHICLE BUT WAS TOLD THE DAMAGE WAS SO SEVERE THERE WAS NO WAY OF DETERMINING IF THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE CAR. I DO HAVE PHOTOS OF THE CAR TAKEN 2 DAYS AFTER THE ACCIDENT UPDATED 02/13/10 *BF UPDATED 02/16/10. UPDATED 03/10/10 *BF UPDATED 07/12/10*JB UPDATE 9/19/2011*CW
Official recalls
516V396000 · Seats:front Assembly:seat Heater/cooler
Jun 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.
11V539000 · 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.
10V035000 · Equipment:other:labels
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.
10V036000 · Equipment:other:labels
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.
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..
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