← New search

2009 Toyota Matrix

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Matrix years

Owner complaints for the 2009 Toyota Matrix are substantially higher than the model-year median of 70.5.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Matrix 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

114 reports with mileage · 78 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.

  • Air Bags. Review the 78 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 45 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Steering. Review the 22 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

34 crash reports1 fire reports18 injury reports

Vehicle Speed Control complaints

45 reports
Clear category filter
81,000 miles · Mar 26, 2017
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash

MY MATRIX 2009 HAS HAD INTERMITTENT SUDDEN ACCELERATION PROBLEMS. I MENTION IT AT MY REGULAR MAINTENANCE CHECK UPS, BUT RECEIVE NON-COMMITTAL REPLIES. I FIGURE I MUST BE LOSING IT. OVER THE LAST 8 MONTHS OR SO, IT GOT EXTREME: THE CAR WILL LURCH FORWARD AT DIFFERENT TIMES: WHEN I START UP THE CAR, IDLING AT A LIGHT, OR SLOWING T…

Read full complaint

MY MATRIX 2009 HAS HAD INTERMITTENT SUDDEN ACCELERATION PROBLEMS. I MENTION IT AT MY REGULAR MAINTENANCE CHECK UPS, BUT RECEIVE NON-COMMITTAL REPLIES. I FIGURE I MUST BE LOSING IT. OVER THE LAST 8 MONTHS OR SO, IT GOT EXTREME: THE CAR WILL LURCH FORWARD AT DIFFERENT TIMES: WHEN I START UP THE CAR, IDLING AT A LIGHT, OR SLOWING TO A STOP. TODAY, SUNDAY MORNING, AS I WAS PULLING INTO A PARKING SPOT AT WALMART, I BEGAN TO BRAKE SLOWLY WHEN THE TRANS ROARED AND LURCHED FORWARD. IT JUMPED THE CURB AND PLOWED INTO THE FRONT END OF THE CAR FACING ME. AT FIRST, I THOUGHT I MUST HAVE HIT THE GAS - BUT NO. MY FOOT WAS STILL ON THE BRAKE - ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR. I STILL OWE MONEY ON THIS CAR. I RUINED THE FRONT END OF ANOTHER CAR. I AM A SINGLE MOM OF 2 AND A TEACHER. I DON'T KNOW HOW I AM GOING TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE THIS. I DO NOT INTEND TO REPAIR THIS CAR. IT IS NOT SAFE. THANK GOD THE OTHER CAR WAS EMPTY. THIS CAR COULD HAVE KILLED SOMEONE. AND, NO: NO TICKETS/ACCIDENTS/AGEISM. JUST A REGULAR MIDDLE-AGE LADY WHO BOUGHT A USED CAR 4.5 YEARS AGO, TOOK GOOD CARE OF IT, AND AM NOW SERIOUSLY STUCK AND STRESSED. SO, THANK YOU TOYOTA. I SAW ON OTHER BLOGS TODAY THAT THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED INCIDENT, BUT A RECURRING PROBLEM. YOU HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS FOR YEARS, AND HAVE DONE NOTHING. YOUR COMPANY WILL CAUSE INNOCENT PEOPLE TO KILL SOMEONE OR THEMSELVES.

NHTSA ODI #10968536

62,465 miles · Nov 18, 2015
Vehicle Speed ControlCrashInjury

TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2009 TOYOTA MATRIX. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 55 MPH, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BECAME STUCK. EACH TIME THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS APPLIED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT DROVE OVER THREE CURBS, A YIELD SIGN, AND A STOP SIGN. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED BACK PAIN AND RECEIVED MEDICAL ATTENTION. A POLICE REPORT WAS…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2009 TOYOTA MATRIX. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 55 MPH, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL BECAME STUCK. EACH TIME THE BRAKE PEDAL WAS APPLIED, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT DROVE OVER THREE CURBS, A YIELD SIGN, AND A STOP SIGN. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED BACK PAIN AND RECEIVED MEDICAL ATTENTION. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT WAS TREATED AND RELEASED THE SAME DAY. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED AND TOWED TO AN IMPOUND YARD. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 62,465. UPDATED 01/21/16*LJ *CN

NHTSA ODI #10794573

70,000 miles · Apr 19, 2015
EngineService BrakesVehicle Speed Control

2009 TOYOTA MATRIX FIRST PROBLEM STARTED STALLING SUDDENLY IN TRAFFIC LAST YEAR, BUT NOW VERY FREQUENTLY STALLS EVEN ON HIGHWAYS AT HIGH SPEEDS. NO WARNINGS. WHEN STALLED ALL LIGHTS COMES ON IN DASH, INCLUDING "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT. COMPLETELY TURN OFF IGNITION AND RESTARTING IS THE ONLY WAY TO FIX THIS ISSUE AT THAT TIME. AFTER …

Read full complaint

2009 TOYOTA MATRIX FIRST PROBLEM STARTED STALLING SUDDENLY IN TRAFFIC LAST YEAR, BUT NOW VERY FREQUENTLY STALLS EVEN ON HIGHWAYS AT HIGH SPEEDS. NO WARNINGS. WHEN STALLED ALL LIGHTS COMES ON IN DASH, INCLUDING "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT. COMPLETELY TURN OFF IGNITION AND RESTARTING IS THE ONLY WAY TO FIX THIS ISSUE AT THAT TIME. AFTER RESTARTING THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT GOES OUT. OCCURRED SEVERAL TIMES IN ALL SORTS OF WEATHER, BUT MORE FREQUENTLY IN HOT SUMMER DAYS. YESTERDAY STALLED 4 TIMES WITHIN 90 MINUTES DRIVE. RESTART CLEARED ENGINE COMPUTER DEALERSHIP HAD DIFFICULT TIME REPLICATING FAILURE. BUT, ADVISED REPLACEMENT OF THE ENGINE CONTROL MODULE AT A COST OF OVER $1000. SINCE THIS YEAR MODEL NOT RECALLED BY TOYOTA YET. I DO NOT KNOW HOW OR WHERE TO COMPLAIN SO THAT TOYOTA ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE AND FIX THIS AT THEIR EXPENSE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10706554

Mileage unknown · Apr 1, 2014
Vehicle Speed Control

I WAS DRIVING ON A SECONDARY HIGHWAY GOING BETWEEN 80 AND 100 KPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED. I WAS TRAVELING ALONG IN TOP GEAR AT AN RPM OF 2000-2500 - WHEN I NOTICED THAT I WAS ENTERING A CONSTRUCTION ZONE WHERE TRAFFIC WAS HALTED. I HAD JUST BEGUN TO TRAVEL UP A HILL TOWARD THE HALTED TRAFFIC. AS THE CAR STARTED UP THE H…

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING ON A SECONDARY HIGHWAY GOING BETWEEN 80 AND 100 KPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED. I WAS TRAVELING ALONG IN TOP GEAR AT AN RPM OF 2000-2500 - WHEN I NOTICED THAT I WAS ENTERING A CONSTRUCTION ZONE WHERE TRAFFIC WAS HALTED. I HAD JUST BEGUN TO TRAVEL UP A HILL TOWARD THE HALTED TRAFFIC. AS THE CAR STARTED UP THE HILL, I NOTICED THAT THE RPMS HAD DROPPED AND CAUSED THE GEARS TO SHIFT DOWN INTO A LOWER GEAR WITH HIGHER RPM TO PULL THE CAR UP THE HILL. ALMOST SIMULTANEOUSLY OF THE CAR SHIFTING GEARS, I PRESSED THE BRAKES HARD TO BEGIN STOPPING. I WAS ALARMED AS I FELT THE CAR STRUGGLING TO ACCELERATE HARD AGAINST MY BRAKING. THE BRAKING HAD NOT DISENGAGED THE CRUISE CONTROL. I PRESSED THE BRAKES HARDER. THEN, THINKING THE CAR MIGHT BE CONFUSED, I TOOK MY FOOT OFF THE BRAKES BEFORE PRESSING THE BRAKES HARD AGAIN. I STILL FELT THE CAR STRUGGLING TO ACCELERATE HARD AGAINST THE HARD BRAKING. I HAD THE PRESENCE OF MIND THE TURN OFF THE CRUISE CONTROL BY PRESSING THE BUTTON ON THE END OF THE CRUISE CONTROL STICK. IMMEDIATELY, THE UNINTENDED ACCELERATION STOPPED AND THE BRAKING WAS EFFECTIVE TO STOP THE CAR. I HAVE NEVER AGAIN EXPERIENCED THIS PROBLEM OF CRUISE CONTROL NOT DISENGAGING UPON BRAKING. I SUSPECTED THAT THE SEQUENCE OF BRAKING BEGINNING ALMOST SIMULTANEOUSLY TO THE GEARS SHIFTING MAY HAVE CAUSED THE CONFUSION IN THE CRUISE CONTROL. THAT COULD MAKE THE ISSUE A SOFTWARE PROBLEM IN CRUISE CONTROL AS OPPOSED TO A MECHANICAL BRAKING PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10576471

63,085 miles · Jan 17, 2013
Service BrakesVehicle Speed Control

MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING HOME ON A SNOWY NIGHT AND SUDDENLY THE BRAKES BECAME UNRESPONSIVE, THE ABS AND BRAKE LIGHTS CAME ON, AND LUCKILY SHE DIDN'T NEED TO COME TO A FULL STOP AT THAT TIME. AFTER THAT THE BRAKES WORKED FOR THE REST OF THE DRIVE HOME, BUT WERE SPONGY AND SHE NEEDED TO GIVE ADDITIONAL TIME TO STOP. TOYOTA ISSUED…

Read full complaint

MY DAUGHTER WAS DRIVING HOME ON A SNOWY NIGHT AND SUDDENLY THE BRAKES BECAME UNRESPONSIVE, THE ABS AND BRAKE LIGHTS CAME ON, AND LUCKILY SHE DIDN'T NEED TO COME TO A FULL STOP AT THAT TIME. AFTER THAT THE BRAKES WORKED FOR THE REST OF THE DRIVE HOME, BUT WERE SPONGY AND SHE NEEDED TO GIVE ADDITIONAL TIME TO STOP. TOYOTA ISSUED A TSB-0205-09 ON 7/6/2009 ABOUT THIS - C0215. WE SPENT 671.10 TO REPAIR THE REAR LEFT AND THE MECHANIC SAID WE WILL MOST LIKELY NEED TO DO THE REAR RIGHT IN THE FUTURE. I CALLED TOYOTA REIMBURSEMENT DEPT. ABOUT THIS AND THEY SAID THEY WOULD DO NOTHING SINCE IT'S OUT OF THE WARRANTY PERIOD OF 36K. THEY SAID IT'S NOT A SAFETY ISSUE AS WELL. MY POINT TO THEM WAS HOW CAN YOU ISSUE A TSB IN 2009 ON A 2009 MODEL AND NOT BACK THIS PROBLEM UP FOR THE LIFE OF THE CAR? THEY KNOW THE SENSOR IS GOING TO GO BAD MOST LIKELY, IT COULD CAUSE A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE, BUT NO RECALL WAS EVER ISSUED. THIS IS A DANGEROUS BUSINESS PRACTICE! WE ALREADY HAD 2 RECALLS (FLOOR MAT INTERFERENCE WITH ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND ACCELERATOR PEDAL REINFORCEMENT BAR) ON THIS VEHICLE. THIS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED AND THE CONSUMER SHOULDN'T NEED TO BEAR THE COST! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10493329

Mileage unknown · Mar 31, 2012
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes, AirVehicle Speed ControlCrash

INVESTIGATION RESULTS OF REPORT#-426903 GIVEN 2/12 OF UNINTENDED ACCELER: WAS INVESTIGATED BY SPX CORP. INVESTIGATOR HIRED FROM TOYOTA. AT MY APT. SETTING, IN MY RESERVED PARKING SPOT BECAUSE CAR COULD NOT BE DRIVEN DUE TO SEVERE FRONT END DAMAGE. I WAS GIVEN A MEMORY STICK WITH EDR DOWNLOAD INFO., TELLING ME TOYOTA WILL RESPO…

Read full complaint

INVESTIGATION RESULTS OF REPORT#-426903 GIVEN 2/12 OF UNINTENDED ACCELER: WAS INVESTIGATED BY SPX CORP. INVESTIGATOR HIRED FROM TOYOTA. AT MY APT. SETTING, IN MY RESERVED PARKING SPOT BECAUSE CAR COULD NOT BE DRIVEN DUE TO SEVERE FRONT END DAMAGE. I WAS GIVEN A MEMORY STICK WITH EDR DOWNLOAD INFO., TELLING ME TOYOTA WILL RESPOND. 22 PDF PAGES, 19 WERE BIZARRE MATH EQUATIONS, NEVER TO BE UNDERSTOOD. MY EVENT SHOWED WHEN IGNITION TURNED ON ENGINE AT 1600RPM, TO 800RPM, AS I BEGAN TO MOVE, THEN WENT TO 2000RPM, IN LESS THEN 60 SECONDS, WITHIN A SMALL LANE, PLUNGING ME INTO BRICK WALL. LETTER FROM TOYOTA ADMINISTRATOR SAID NO FAULTS WERE FOUND, SORRY CANNOT BE OF ASSISTANCE. IN THE 3RD PARAGRAPH WAS FALSE INFO. RE: EXTENSIVE TEST DRIVE DONE TO TEST BRAKES, ETC. EVERYTHING WORKING WELL. I CALLED HIS DIRECT # LEAVING A MESSAGE IN REGARD TO I HAD SERIOUS QUESTIONS "TEST DRIVE"? LEAVING MY NAME & #. HE CALLED NEXT DAY TO APOLOGIZE, "I MISSTATED THE TEST DRIVE", AT THE SERVICE CENTER IT WAS DRIVEN A SHORT DISTANCE, I SAID SERVICE CENTER? TM- YES!, I SAID STREET OUTSIDE MY APT. DOOR? TM- YES!. THEN SAID PARKING LOT? TM- WITH HESITATION, YES! ASKED IF HE WAS SURE OF THE OUTCOME, YES! NEXT DAY VIA FAX I WROTE TO HIM TELLING HIM THAT HE MADE MANY MISSTATEMENTS! THERE IS NO STREET BY MY APT., CAR NEVER WENT TO A SERVICE CENTER, HAVE LO JACK TELLING ME THE CAR WAS NEVER MOVED SINCE COLLISION.WHICH I KNEW SINCE FRAME IS SEVERELY BENT, BUMPER RESTS ON GROUND, ALL OIL LEAKED OUT. IF THIS IS HOW A ADMINISTRATOR OF TOYOTA CLAIMS RESPONDS WITH OUTRIGHT LIES, HOW MANY TOYOTA OWNERS HAVE BEEN DECEIVED. I TOLD HIM; LET'S CUT TO THE CHASE, I WANT A REPLACEMENT CAR THAT IS SAFE! 2000RPM- THAT IS HWY. SPEED, 1600RPM AT STARTUP WITH FOOT ON BREAK, TOYOTA CALLS THIS SAFE? HE NEVER KNEW THE CAR COULD NOT BE DRIVEN OR WHERE IT WAS INVESTIGATED, AM I TO TRUST HIS RESPONSE? NOT AT ALL! *JS

NHTSA ODI #10453650

25,000 miles · Apr 16, 2011
Vehicle Speed Control

WHILE DRIVING WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED AND TRAVELING IN THE RIGHT LANE ON AN INTERSTATE, I APPLIED THE BRAKES TO SLOW DOWN FROM 65 TO 55 AS I APPROACHED A TRUCK IN FRONT OF ME. THIS WAS DONE TO ALLOW A CAR IN THE PASSING LANE TO PASS ME. WHEN THAT CAR HAD PASSED, I RELEASED THE BREAK TO PASS THE TRUCK AHEAD OF ME AFTER HA…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED AND TRAVELING IN THE RIGHT LANE ON AN INTERSTATE, I APPLIED THE BRAKES TO SLOW DOWN FROM 65 TO 55 AS I APPROACHED A TRUCK IN FRONT OF ME. THIS WAS DONE TO ALLOW A CAR IN THE PASSING LANE TO PASS ME. WHEN THAT CAR HAD PASSED, I RELEASED THE BREAK TO PASS THE TRUCK AHEAD OF ME AFTER HAVING HAD THE BREAK APPLIED FOR 5 OR 6 SECONDS (FAR LONGER THAN NECESSARY FOR THE CRUISE CONTROL TO HAVE SHUT OFF.). WHEN I RELEASED THE BREAK, THE CRUISE CONTROL RE-INITIATED ITSELF AND THE VEHICLE RETURNED TO 65 MPH WITHOUT MY TOUCHING ANY FURTHER PEDALS. MY FEET WERE ON THE FLOOR AND THERE WERE NO FLOOR MATS NEAR THE PEDALS. THE CRUISE CONTROL ALONE WAS ACCELERATING THE CAR. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10396081

19,000 miles · Mar 17, 2011
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2009 TOYOTA MATRIX. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED, SHE CAME UPON A LARGE ROAD GRADER. SHE BRAKED TO SLOW DOWN, DISENGAGING THE CRUISE CONTROL. WHEN SHE COULD SAFELY PASS, SHE ACCELERATED QUICKLY TO GET AROUND ANOTHER VEHICLE. AFTER SHE PASSED THE VEHICLE, THE …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2009 TOYOTA MATRIX. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED, SHE CAME UPON A LARGE ROAD GRADER. SHE BRAKED TO SLOW DOWN, DISENGAGING THE CRUISE CONTROL. WHEN SHE COULD SAFELY PASS, SHE ACCELERATED QUICKLY TO GET AROUND ANOTHER VEHICLE. AFTER SHE PASSED THE VEHICLE, THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO ACCELERATE VERY FAST, AFTER SHE REMOVED HER FOOT FROM THE ACCELERATOR AND APPLIED THE BRAKES TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN, IT ACCELERATED OUT OF CONTROL. SHE RESPONDED BY CONTINUOUSLY PRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL VERY HARD AND SHE ALSO PRESSED THE BUTTON TO TURN OFF THE CRUISE CONTROL. ALTHOUGH THE ENGINE WAS FIGHTING THE BRAKES, SHE MANAGED TO SLOW THE VEHICLE DOWN AND PULLED TO THE SIDE, PUT THE VEHICLE IN NEUTRAL, BUT THE ENGINE CONTINUED TO ROAR. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO TURN THE VEHICLE OFF. THE CONTACT INSPECTED THE MAT AND IT WAS NOT IN ANY POSITION TO HOLD THE ACCELERATOR DOWN. THE NEXT DAY, THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED, BUT NOTHING WAS FOUND. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 19,000. UPDATED 04/15/11*LJ UPDATED 11/28/11

NHTSA ODI #10390536

40,000 miles · Jan 21, 2011
Vehicle Speed Control

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2009 TOYOTA MATRIX. WHILE STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND FELT RESISTANCE TO STOP. THE FAILURE OCCURRED TWICE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED PER RECALL NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 10V023000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL). THE FAIL…

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2009 TOYOTA MATRIX. WHILE STOPPED AT A TRAFFIC LIGHT, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT APPLIED PRESSURE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND FELT RESISTANCE TO STOP. THE FAILURE OCCURRED TWICE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED PER RECALL NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 10V023000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL). THE FAILURE OCCURRED SIX MONTHS AFTER THE RECALL REPAIR. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED AND STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER NEEDED TO BE NOTIFIED. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THEY WOULD PERFORM A TEST DRIVE AND CALL BACK TO SCHEDULE THE DATE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000.

NHTSA ODI #10378109

Mileage unknown · Dec 1, 2010
Vehicle Speed Control

2009 TOYOTA MATRIX. CONSUMER STATES PROBLEMS WITH VEHICLE THROTTLE *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THE THROTTLE WAS OVERLY SENSITIVE UPON THE SLIGHTEST APPLICATION. THE CONSUMER STATED HIS WIFE BARELY AVOIDED AN ACCIDENT, WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. IN ORDER TO GET THE VEHICLE TO STOP, SHE TURNED OFF THE IGNITION. THE CONSU…

Read full complaint

2009 TOYOTA MATRIX. CONSUMER STATES PROBLEMS WITH VEHICLE THROTTLE *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THE THROTTLE WAS OVERLY SENSITIVE UPON THE SLIGHTEST APPLICATION. THE CONSUMER STATED HIS WIFE BARELY AVOIDED AN ACCIDENT, WHEN THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. IN ORDER TO GET THE VEHICLE TO STOP, SHE TURNED OFF THE IGNITION. THE CONSUMER STATED THE UNWANTED ACCELERATION HAS OCCURRED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS.

NHTSA ODI #10368936

Official recalls

3

16V340000 · Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

May 23, 2016

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2008-2011 Scion xB and Lexus IS F, 2009-2011 Toyota Corolla and Corolla Matrix, 2006-2011 Toyota Yaris, Lexus IS250 and Lexus IS350, 2010-2011 Toyota 4Runner, Lexus IS250C, Lexus IS350C and Lexus GX460, 2011 Sienna, 2007-2011 Lexus ES350, and 2009-2010 Pontiac Vibe vehicles, originally sold, or ever registered, in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands (Saipan), and the U.S. Virgin Islands, or "Zone A." Additionally, unless included in "Zone A" above, Toyota is recalling certain model year 2008 Scion xB and Lexus IS F, 2007-2008 Toyota Yaris, 2006-2008 Lexus IS250 and Lexus IS350 and 2007-2008 Lexus ES350 vehicles, originally sold, or ever registered, in Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia, or "Zone B." Vehicles of these model years and models that were not originally sold or ever registered in either Zones A or B are not subject to this safety recall. These vehicles are equipped with certain air bag inflators assembled as part of the passenger frontal air bag modules, and used as original equipment or replacement equipment. In the event of a crash necessitating deployment of the front air bags, these inflators may rupture due to propellant degradation occurring after long-term exposure to absolute humidity and temperature cycling.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: An inflator rupture may result in metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants resulting in serious injury or death.

Remedy: Toyota will notify the Toyota and Lexus owners. General Motors will contact the Pontiac owners. Depending on the model, dealers will replace the passenger frontal air bag inflator or the air bag assembly, free of charge. The recall began on December 6, 2016. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331. Toyota's numbers for interim notification for this campaign are G1P (Toyota Zone A), G1R (Toyota Zone B), G2G (Lexus Zone A), and G2H (Lexus Zone B). Toyota's numbers for final remedy for this campaign are G0P (Toyota Zone A), G0R (Toyota Zone B), GLG (Lexus Zone A), and GLH (Lexus Zone B).

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.

10V023000 · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal

Jan 27, 2010

TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2008-2010 HIGHLANDER, MODEL YEAR 2009-2010 COROLLA, VENZA AND MATRIX PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL CAN GET STUCK IN THE WIDE OPEN POSITION DUE TO ITS BEING TRAPPED BY AN UNSECURED OR INCOMPATIBLE DRIVER'S FLOOR MAT. THIS RECALL IS AN EXPANSION OF A CAMPAIGN OF 3.8 MILLION OTHER TOYOTA VEHICLES ANNOUNCED IN 2009 FOR THE SAME ISSUE (SEE 09V-388).

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: A STUCK OPEN ACCELERATOR PEDAL MAY RESULT IN VERY HIGH VEHICLE SPEEDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO STOP THE VEHICLE, WHICH COULD CAUSE A CRASH, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.

Remedy: TOYOTA WILL MODIFY OR REPLACE THE ACCELERATOR PEDALS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES. FLOOR SURFACE MODIFICATIONS ARE ALSO BEING CONSIDERED AND WILL BE INCLUDED FOR ANY MODEL FOR WHICH IT IS DEEMED APPROPRIATE. INITIALLY, DEALERS WILL BE INSTRUCTED ON HOW TO RESHAPE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL FOR THE REPAIR. AS REPLACEMENT PARTS WITH THE SAME SHAPE AS THE MODIFIED PEDAL BECOME AVAILABLE, THEY WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE DEALERS FOR THE REPAIR. CUSTOMERS WHO HAVE HAD THE PEDAL RESHAPE REMEDY COMPLETED WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RECEIVE A NEW PEDAL IF THEY DESIRE, AFTER REPLACEMENT PEDALS BECOME AVAILABLE. IN ADDITION, TOYOTA WILL REPLACE ANY TOYOTA ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MAT IN A SUBJECT VEHICLE WITH A NEWLY DESIGNED MAT, FREE OF CHARGE. FOR THOSE CUSTOMERS WHO HAVE THE PREVIOUS DESIGN ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MAT BUT DO NOT NEED OR WANT THE NEWLY DESIGNED ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MAT, TOYOTA WILL RECOVER THE PREVIOUS DESIGN ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MAT AND REIMBURSE ITS PRICE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN MARCH 30, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

1

EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture

Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied

Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.