IllustrationPRIUS 2004 HEADLIGHT GOES OUT PERIODICALLY. TURNS BACK ON ONLY WHEN ALL LIGHTS ARE SHUT DOWN AND TURNED ON AGAIN. *TR
2004 Toyota Prius
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Prius years
Owner complaints for the 2004 Toyota Prius are substantially higher than the model-year median of 164.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Prius 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
1480–25K
5625–50K
5350–75K
7575–100K
106100–150K
65150K+
503 reports with mileage · 107 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.
- Exterior Lighting. Review the 184 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 177 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 89 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
38 crash reports2 fire reports21 injury reports
What owners actually said
610 reportsI OWN A 2004 TOYOTA PRIUS. I JUST PAID $332.50 TO HAVE MY 2 HEADLIGHTS' HIB BULBS REPLACED - AND THAT DIDN'T INCLUDE THE PARTS COST BECAUSE I PROVIDED THE HID BULBS FROM AN ONLINE AUTO PARTS SUPPLIER. THE SYMPTOMS WERE THE SAME AS NOTED BY SO MANY OTHER PRIUS OWNERS: FREQUENT LOSS OF LIGHT FROM THE HEADLIGHT, AND RECOVE…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2004 TOYOTA PRIUS. I JUST PAID $332.50 TO HAVE MY 2 HEADLIGHTS' HIB BULBS REPLACED - AND THAT DIDN'T INCLUDE THE PARTS COST BECAUSE I PROVIDED THE HID BULBS FROM AN ONLINE AUTO PARTS SUPPLIER. THE SYMPTOMS WERE THE SAME AS NOTED BY SO MANY OTHER PRIUS OWNERS: FREQUENT LOSS OF LIGHT FROM THE HEADLIGHT, AND RECOVERY BY ROTATING THE LIGHT SWITCH OFF THEN ON AGAIN...ONLY TO HAVE IT RE-OCCUR A FEW MINUTES LATER. EACH HEADLIGHT HAD ITS OWN PATTERN OF INCONSISTENCY, BUT BOTH HAD THE DYSFUNCTION. I HAVE RECEIVED TWO TRAFFIC CITATIONS FOR DRIVING WITH A HEADLIGHT OUT. THE DEALERSHIPS IN GLEN BURNIE, MARYLAND AND IN LAUREL, MARYLAND BOTH QUOTED ME A PRICE FOR ONE HID BULB OF $351.02 I WAS ABLE TO FIND THE EXACT BULB ONLINE AT PARTSQUICK.COM FOR A PRICE OF $57.27 THAT'S RIGHT, THE DEALERSHIP WANTED TO CHARGE ME $293.75 MORE PER BULB. I PURCHASED TWO ONLINE, WHICH - WITH FREE SHIPPING - COST ME $114.54 FOR BOTH. DO THE MATH...FOR TWO LIGHT BULBS ONLY (NOT COUNTING LABOR) ONLINE I SAVED $587.50 HAD I NOT PURCHASED THE BULBS ONLINE, THE TOTAL OUT-OF-POCKET TO REPLACE BOTH HEADLAMP BULBS WOULD HAVE BEEN: $ 702.04 PARTS ($351.02 X 2) $ 332.50 LABOR $1,034.54 TOTAL THE DEALERSHIP TOLD ME THEY COULDN'T GUARANTEE THAT THE BULBS WERE THE PROBLEM, NOR THAT REPLACING THE BULBS WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM, BUT THAT TOYOTA INSTRUCTS THEM TO REPLACE THE BULBS FIRST. THIS IS INSANE, AND CERTAINLY UNSAFE. *TR
RIGHT HEADLIGHT QUIT WORKING I GOT A TICKET OUT OF THE DEAL AND THE TOYOTA DEALER WANTS ALMOST $1000 TO FIX THE PROBLEM. RIDICULOUS THE FRONT BUMPER HAS TO BE REMOVED. MANY OTHERS HAVE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM SOUNDS LIKE A DEALER RECALL TO ME. *TR
RIGHT HEADLIGHT INTERMITTENT TOOK IT TO THE DEALER SAID I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM FUNCTIONS PERFECTLY. WELL I NOW HAVE A TICKET TO PROVE OTHER WISE. TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF IT WILL COME ON THEN DIE. NOW THE LIGHT JUST PLAIN DOESN'T WORK. DEALER WANTS $886 TO REPLACE. SOUNDS LIKE A DEALER RECALL PROBLEM WITH A MAJORITY OF PRIUS…
Read full complaint
RIGHT HEADLIGHT INTERMITTENT TOOK IT TO THE DEALER SAID I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM FUNCTIONS PERFECTLY. WELL I NOW HAVE A TICKET TO PROVE OTHER WISE. TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF IT WILL COME ON THEN DIE. NOW THE LIGHT JUST PLAIN DOESN'T WORK. DEALER WANTS $886 TO REPLACE. SOUNDS LIKE A DEALER RECALL PROBLEM WITH A MAJORITY OF PRIUS HID SYSTEMS. IT IS ALSO A SAFETY ISSUE. *TR
THE MULTI-FUNCTION DISPLAY (MFD) FAILED. (CROSS REFERENCE NHTSA COMPLAINT #10173892). THIS IS A KNOWN DESIGN DEFECT (CROSS REFERENCE ANALYSIS ON WEB: HTTP://TECHNO-FANDOM.ORG/~HOBBIT/CARS/MFD/COMPARE.HTML AND HTTP://TECHNO-FANDOM.ORG/~HOBBIT/CARS/MFD/). TOYOTA ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (EITHER EL-002-04 OR EL-002-05 - …
Read full complaint
THE MULTI-FUNCTION DISPLAY (MFD) FAILED. (CROSS REFERENCE NHTSA COMPLAINT #10173892). THIS IS A KNOWN DESIGN DEFECT (CROSS REFERENCE ANALYSIS ON WEB: HTTP://TECHNO-FANDOM.ORG/~HOBBIT/CARS/MFD/COMPARE.HTML AND HTTP://TECHNO-FANDOM.ORG/~HOBBIT/CARS/MFD/). TOYOTA ISSUED A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (EITHER EL-002-04 OR EL-002-05 - CONFLICTING INFO ON THIS) ON JAN 10, 2005. WHEN THE MFD FAILS, ONE CANNOT CONTROL THE AMOUNT OF AIRFLOW TO THE WINDSHIELD (DEFROSTER). THIS PRESENTED ME WITH VISIBILITY PROBLEMS DURING THE MORNING COMMUTE. AS SUCH, I CONSIDER IT A SAFETY ISSUE. TOYOTA HAS BEEN AWARE OF THIS FOR 3 YEARS, GIVEN THE DATE OF THEIR TSB. THE ROOT CAUSE APPEARS TO BE AN UNDERSIZED SOLDER PAD ON ONE OF THE ELECTRONIC CARDS OF THE MFD. THIS RESULTS IN A CRACKING OF THE SOLDER JOINT. BECAUSE MY PROBLEM WAS INTERMITTENT, COMING AND GOING ON A FREQUENT BASIS, I PRESUME IT WAS A MICRO CRACK. THIS DOES NOT HELP WHEN THE WINDSHIELD IS FOGGING OVER. ALL OF THE VARIOUS ERROR MESSAGES THAT WERE DISPLAYED ON THE MFD WERE CONSISTENT WITH THE INFORMATION ON THE ABOVE REFERENCED WEB URL'S. THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE RELEASE F OF THE ELECTRONIC CARD ASSEMBLY AND WAS CORRECTED WITH RELEASE G. THERE ARE PICTORIAL COMPARISONS BETWEEN THE TWO RELEASES ON ONE OF THE WEB URL'S. GIVEN THAT THIS HAS AN IMPACT ON VISIBILITY DURING THE WINTER MONTHS, I AM SHOCKED THAT TOYOTA CHOSE TO SIT ON THIS PROBLEM. THE SUPPLIER OF THIS PART TO TOYOTA IS FUJITSU. *TR
I WAS QUOTED $466 JUST FOR THE PRICE OF MY BULB FOR THE HEADLIGHT OF MY TOYOTA PRIUS. FOR A NON LUXURY CAR IT SO EXPENSIVE THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL CHOOSE TO MAKE DUE WITH THEIR FLICKERING ONE. IT IS OUTRAGEOUS THAT TOYOTA DID NOT GIVE A MORE AFFORDABLE CHOICE. IT IS GOING TO BE MORE DANGEROUS OUT THERE. *TR
I HAVE A 2004 PRIUS AND THE FRONT RIGHT HEADLIGHT IS WORKING ONLY INTERMITTENTLY. THIS HAPPENS AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR TIMES A WEEK; I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY PATTERN. I HAD MY DEALER CHECK THE LIGHT AND ITS CONNECTIONS AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE HID LIGHT BULB WAS NOT WORKING AND THAT IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AND THAT I COULD ONLY REPLACE…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2004 PRIUS AND THE FRONT RIGHT HEADLIGHT IS WORKING ONLY INTERMITTENTLY. THIS HAPPENS AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR TIMES A WEEK; I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY PATTERN. I HAD MY DEALER CHECK THE LIGHT AND ITS CONNECTIONS AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE HID LIGHT BULB WAS NOT WORKING AND THAT IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AND THAT I COULD ONLY REPLACE THEM AS A PAIR. THE REASON BEING THAT THEY ARE SOMEHOW CONNECTED TO EACH OTHER AND THAT ONE FAILING WOULD LEAD TO THE OTHER FAILING AS WELL. THE COST WAS AN OUTRAGEOUS $452 EACH WITH LABOR AND THAT MY EXTENDED WARRANTY DOESN'T COVER IT! *TR
BRAKE FAILURE, THIS HAPPENED TO ME TODAY 8/5/08. I PURCHASED THIS 2004 PRIUS 2 WEEKS AGO(90,000 MILES), AND I'VE ONLY HAD PROBLEMS UP TILL NOW. I WAS DRIVING AT ABOUT 25 MPH, WHEN ALL OF THE SUDDEN THE ABS WARNING LIGHT WENT OFF, AND THE BRAKE LIGHT TURNED ON(AND A BUZZER WAS HEARD). I HAD TO DEPRESS THE BREAK PEDAL HARD IN ORDE…
Read full complaint
BRAKE FAILURE, THIS HAPPENED TO ME TODAY 8/5/08. I PURCHASED THIS 2004 PRIUS 2 WEEKS AGO(90,000 MILES), AND I'VE ONLY HAD PROBLEMS UP TILL NOW. I WAS DRIVING AT ABOUT 25 MPH, WHEN ALL OF THE SUDDEN THE ABS WARNING LIGHT WENT OFF, AND THE BRAKE LIGHT TURNED ON(AND A BUZZER WAS HEARD). I HAD TO DEPRESS THE BREAK PEDAL HARD IN ORDER TO GET THE CAR TO BREAK. IT FELT JUST LIKE WHEN A CONVENTIONAL CAR LOOSES ITS BREAKS. THANKS GOD I WAS ONLY 1 MILE FROM THE TOYOTA DEALER. I HAD A SCHEDULED EVAPORATOR REPLACEMENT ($450)SCHEDULED FOR TOMORROW SO I DECIDED TO LEAVE THE CAR AT THE DEALER (THIS IS WHAT THE MANUAL SAYS TO DO WHEN BOTH WARNINGS GO OFF). *TR
2004 TOYOTA PRIUS AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROBLEMS. CONSUMER STATES THAT TRANSMISSION CONTROL LEVER BECAME WORN. SOMETIMES THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO THE ROLL WITH THIS DEFECT. *KB THE CONSUMER STATED THE INTERNAL SPRING THAT MOVES THE TRANSMISSION LEVER BACK TO THE PREVIOUS POSITION BECAME WORN AND NOW IT DOESN'T RETURN TO I…
Read full complaint
2004 TOYOTA PRIUS AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROBLEMS. CONSUMER STATES THAT TRANSMISSION CONTROL LEVER BECAME WORN. SOMETIMES THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO THE ROLL WITH THIS DEFECT. *KB THE CONSUMER STATED THE INTERNAL SPRING THAT MOVES THE TRANSMISSION LEVER BACK TO THE PREVIOUS POSITION BECAME WORN AND NOW IT DOESN'T RETURN TO IT'S NORMAL POSITION WHEN PUTTING IT IN REVERSE OR DRIVE. THE SHIFTER LEVER WAS STICKING IN DRIVE OR REVERSE. *JB
DRIVER'S SIDE HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE HEADLAMP BEGAN SWITCHING OFF ABOUT A MONTH AGO. LAST WEEKEND WHILE TRAVELING AT NIGHT, THE HEADLAMP WENT OUT ABOUT 15 TIMES IN 3 HOURS. EACH TIME TURNING THE HEADLAMP SWITCH OFF AND BACK ON TEMPORARILY SOLVED THE PROBLEM. I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND THEY REPLACED THE HID BULB FOR…
Read full complaint
DRIVER'S SIDE HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE HEADLAMP BEGAN SWITCHING OFF ABOUT A MONTH AGO. LAST WEEKEND WHILE TRAVELING AT NIGHT, THE HEADLAMP WENT OUT ABOUT 15 TIMES IN 3 HOURS. EACH TIME TURNING THE HEADLAMP SWITCH OFF AND BACK ON TEMPORARILY SOLVED THE PROBLEM. I BROUGHT THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND THEY REPLACED THE HID BULB FOR $355. I HAD THE SAME PROBLEM WITH THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLAMP SIX MONTHS AGO AND REPLACING THE BULB HAS SOLVED THE PROBLEM (TO DATE). THIS IS A DISCONCERTING ISSUE. I HAVE NOT RECEIVED AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THIS OCCURS AS OPPOSED TO A NORMAL HEADLAMP JUST BURNING OUT AND THEN BEING ABLE TO REPLACE IT FOR TWENTY BUCKS. *TR
Official recalls
612V536000 · Engine And Engine Cooling; Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Hybrid Propulsion System: Inverter
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Engine And Engine Cooling
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 6, 2003, through March 30, 2009 and FCHV-adv vehicles manufactured December 12, 2008, through September 13, 2011. During manufacturing, a scratch may have occurred inside of the electrically driven water pump at the coil wire. The coil wire may corrode at the scratched portion.
Consequence: The corroded coil wire may break and the water pump could stop. The corroded coil wire could cause a short circuit between coil wires and a possible open fuse, creating a stall-like condition of the hybrid system while the vehicle is being driven. This may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify its owners, and dealers will replace the electric water pump, free of charge. The recall began on January 17, 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
12V537000 · Steering; Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Nov 14, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Steering:gear Box:shaft Sector
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Steering
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2004-2009 Prius vehicles manufactured August 5, 2003, through March 30, 2009. The affected vehicles have a steering intermediate extension shaft assembly built with metal splines that complete the connection from the steering wheel to the steering gear. These splines may have been manufactured with an insufficient hardness.
Consequence: Over time, the splines may wear and eventually fail resulting in a loss of steering ability, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the extension shaft and replace it if it is one with insufficient hardness, free of charge. The recall began during December 2012. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
09V388000 · Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
Oct 5, 2009
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2010 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.
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 FILED AN AMENDED DEFECT REPORT ON NOVEMBER 25, 2009, STATING THAT DEALERS WILL MODIFY THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND, ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, ALTER THE SHAPE OF THE FLOOR SURFACE UNDER THE PEDAL. THESE CHANGES ADDRESS THE RISK OF PEDAL ENTRAPMENT DUE TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE FLOOR MAT. REDESIGNED ACCELERATOR PEDALS WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BEGINNING IN APRIL 2010 AND DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY MODIFIED PEDAL WITH THE NEW PEDAL IF DESIRED. ALSO, DEALERS WILL REPLACE ANY GENUINE TOYOTA OR LEXUS ALL-WEATHER FLOOR MATS WITH REDESIGNED ALL-WEATHER MATS, OR REPURCHASE THE PREVIOUS MATS FROM OWNERS WHO DO NOT WANT THE NEW ONES. ADDITIONALLY, SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE INSTALLED ON CAMRY, AVALON AND LEXUS ES 350, IS 350 AND IS 250 MODELS THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE BRAKE OVERRIDES THE ACCELERATOR IN THE EVENT BOTH BRAKE AND ACCELERATOR PEDALS ARE APPLIED. TOYOTA WILL BEGIN MAILING LETTERS TO OWNERS ON DECEMBER 31, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331, LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
06V188000 · Steering:electric Power Assist System
May 31, 2006
THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND SLIDING YOKE IN THE ELECTRIC POWER STEERING SYSTEM CAN CRACK WHEN LARGE FORCES ARE APPLIED AND THE CONNECTION MAY SEPARATE OR THE SLEEVE MAY FRACTURE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL REPLACE THE STEERING INTERMEDIATE SHAFT AND INSPECT THE SLIDING YOKE AND REPLACE IT IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 9, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
06V096000 · Air Bags
Apr 3, 2006
ON CERTAIN VEHICLES, DUE TO IMPROPER ASSEMBLY OF THE AIR BAG INFLATOR, WHICH IS USED IN THE SIDE AIR BAG, THE CURTAIN SHIELD AIR BAG, AND THE KNEE AIR BAG ASSEMBLY, SOME INFLATORS WERE PRODUCED WITH AN INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF THE HEATING AGENTS NECESSARY FOR PROPER AIR BAG DEPLOYMENT. IN THIS CONDITION, THE EXPANSION FORCE OF THE GAS MAY BE INSUFFICIENT TO PROPERLY INFLATE THE AIR BAG WHEN THE SRS SYSTEM IS ACTIVATED DURING A CRASH.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT IN THE INVOLVED SEATING POSITION IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SPECIFIC SRS AIR BAG. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-888-270-9371, SCION AT 1-866-548-1851, OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987.
04V558000 · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
Nov 22, 2004
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES MAY BE EQUIPPED WITH AN IMPROPERLY DESIGNED BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH. A SILICON OXIDE BUILD-UP OCCURS ON THE CONTACTS INSIDE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH, WHICH CAN MAKE IT INOPERABLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE SWITCH IS INOPERABLE, THE BRAKE LIGHTS WILL NOT ILLUMINATE AND CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH. THE RECALL BEGAN DURING DECEMBER 2004. OWNERS SHOULD 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
3DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System
NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.
DP13001 · Intermediate Steering Shaft Separation
Opened Feb 21, 2013 · Closed Apr 8, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering; Steering:column; Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Additional source detail variants (3)
Steering:column
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering:linkages
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
Steering
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a January 2013 defect petition requesting that it open an investigation on Model Year (MY) 2004-2009 Toyota Prius vehicles to address a possible manufacturing safety defect related to the steering column intermediate shaft.During the defect petition evaluation, ODI: 1.Reviewed the petition and its enclosures; 2.Reviewed the subject steering system layout; 3.Examined the Petition Vehicle?s history, including its repair history; 4.Reviewed and followed-up potentially related consumer complaints; 5.Assessed Safety Recalls 06V-188 and 12V-537; and, 6.Requested and examined complaint, claim, field report, service history, and warranty information from Toyota.ODI's review revealed that the petition vehicle had been recalled (Recall 06V188) to remedy a defect in the system identified in the petition with the remedy taking place prior to the failure that prompted the petition. Circumstances point to incorrect reassembly of the petitioner's vehicle by those who performed the recall remedy.ODI examined the issues raised by this petition to identify any related safety defect trend in the general subject vehicle population.That review identified a low rate of related consumer complaints (twenty-five over a eight year period from a population of over 600,000 vehicles) and no pattern that would identify either a safety defect not already covered by the two existing steering safety recalls by Toyota or a systematic problem with either recall remedy.Based on this evaluation, ODI does not believe that additional investigation will lead to a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles. Therefore, 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. The denial of this petition does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For more information, see the Federal Register notice in the public file for this action (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle, select NHTSA ID, enter: DP13001)The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed on-line (https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#vehicle) under the following NHTSA ID numbers:10407520, 10418710, 10429551, 10473654, 10478195, 10478053, 10437229, 10489425, 10510722, 10639984, 10648277, 10499778, 10712626, 10723196, 10787530, 10808124, 10838803, 11071646, 11098144, 11099507, 11102659, 11160767, 11192607, 11287550, 11287606
PE05029 · Engine Stalling
Opened May 31, 2005 · Closed Oct 12, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Unknown Or Other
ODI OPENED PE05-029 BASED ON 33 REPORTS OF ALLEGED GASOLINE ENGINE STALLING ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE GASOLINE/ ELECTRIC HYBRID VEHICLES THAT CAN BE OPERATED IN GASOLINE OR ELECTRIC MODES, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH DEPENDING ON THE POWER DEMAND.ALL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE GASOLINE ENGINE SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING.SOME OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO OPERATE USING THE ELECTRIC MODE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE GAS ENGINE STALLED AND SOME REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY FELT THE GAS ENGINE STALLED.SOME CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER ALLOWING THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A SHORT TIME, WHEREAS OTHERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD THEIR VEHICLE TOWED.DURING PE05-029, ADDITIONAL FAILURE DATA WAS IDENTIFIED AS NOTED IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY ABOVE.THE COMPLAINT DATA REPRESENTS INCIDENTS WHERE ENGINE STALLING WAS ALLEGED OR WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE ONE OF THE VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT CAUSES THE GAS ENGINE TO STALL.IN ITS AUGUST 26, 2005 RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST, TOYOTA IDENTIFIED VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TO EXPERIENCE A GAS ENGINE STALL.IF THIS HAPPENS, THE DRIVER IS ALERTED BY AN AUDIBLE SOUND AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS.THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE ELECTRIC MODE AND THE ELECTRICALLY-POWERED BRAKE AND STEERING OPERATION WILL CONTINUE TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. ANALYSIS OF THE WARRANTY DATA INDICATED THAT OVER 97% OF VEHICLES EXPERIENCING A GAS ENGINE STALL RESULTED FROM AN ISSUE WITH THE PROGRAM LOGIC IN THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE (ECM) SYSTEM, WHICH MAY CAUSE THE ECM SYSTEM TO NOT START THE GAS ENGINE WHEN REQUIRED.AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE WILL ENTER THE LIMITED OPERATION MODE DESCRIBED ABOVE.THE MAJORITY OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE DRIVER EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENGINE STALL. DURING OCTOBER 2005, TOYOTA INFORMED ODI THAT IT WOULD INITIATE A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN (SSC) TO REPROGRAM THE ECM SOFTWARE ON APPROXIMATELY 75,000 MY 2004 AND EARLY 2005 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS THE GAS ENGINE STALLING CONDITION.DURING THIS SSC, DEALERS WILL ALSO APPLY SPECIAL DIELECTRIC GREASE TO A TRANSAXLE CONNECTOR TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION WHICH MAY ALSO CAUSE SIMILAR LIMITED OPERATION CONDITIONS.BASED ON ODI'S ANALYSIS, THIS REMEDY SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTING IN A LIMITED OPERATION MODE.GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER USE OF THE AGENCY RESOURCES IN THIS MATTER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ODI OPENED PE05-029 BASED ON 33 REPORTS OF ALLEGED GASOLINE ENGINE STALLING ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE GASOLINE/ ELECTRIC HYBRID VEHICLES THAT CAN BE OPERATED IN GASOLINE OR ELECTRIC MODES, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH DEPENDING ON THE POWER DEMAND.ALL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE GASOLINE ENGINE SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING.SOME OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO OPERATE USING THE ELECTRIC MODE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE GAS ENGINE STALLED AND SOME REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY FELT THE GAS ENGINE STALLED.SOME CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER ALLOWING THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A SHORT TIME, WHEREAS OTHERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD THEIR VEHICLE TOWED.DURING PE05-029, ADDITIONAL FAILURE DATA WAS IDENTIFIED AS NOTED IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY ABOVE.THE COMPLAINT DATA REPRESENTS INCIDENTS WHERE ENGINE STALLING WAS ALLEGED OR WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE ONE OF THE VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT CAUSES THE GAS ENGINE TO STALL.IN ITS AUGUST 26, 2005 RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST, TOYOTA IDENTIFIED VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TO EXPERIENCE A GAS ENGINE STALL.IF THIS HAPPENS, THE DRIVER IS ALERTED BY AN AUDIBLE SOUND AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS.THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE ELECTRIC MODE AND THE ELECTRICALLY-POWERED BRAKE AND STEERING OPERATION WILL CONTINUE TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. ANALYSIS OF THE WARRANTY DATA INDICATED THAT OVER 97% OF VEHICLES EXPERIENCING A GAS ENGINE STALL RESULTED FROM AN ISSUE WITH THE PROGRAM LOGIC IN THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE (ECM) SYSTEM, WHICH MAY CAUSE THE ECM SYSTEM TO NOT START THE GAS ENGINE WHEN REQUIRED.AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE WILL ENTER THE LIMITED OPERATION MODE DESCRIBED ABOVE.THE MAJORITY OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE DRIVER EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENGINE STALL. DURING OCTOBER 2005, TOYOTA INFORMED ODI THAT IT WOULD INITIATE A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN (SSC) TO REPROGRAM THE ECM SOFTWARE ON APPROXIMATELY 75,000 MY 2004 AND EARLY 2005 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS THE GAS ENGINE STALLING CONDITION.DURING THIS SSC, DEALERS WILL ALSO APPLY SPECIAL DIELECTRIC GREASE TO A TRANSAXLE CONNECTOR TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION WHICH MAY ALSO CAUSE SIMILAR LIMITED OPERATION CONDITIONS.BASED ON ODI'S ANALYSIS, THIS REMEDY SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTING IN A LIMITED OPERATION MODE.GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER USE OF THE AGENCY RESOURCES IN THIS MATTER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ODI OPENED PE05-029 BASED ON 33 REPORTS OF ALLEGED GASOLINE ENGINE STALLING ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE GASOLINE/ ELECTRIC HYBRID VEHICLES THAT CAN BE OPERATED IN GASOLINE OR ELECTRIC MODES, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH DEPENDING ON THE POWER DEMAND.ALL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE GASOLINE ENGINE SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING.SOME OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO OPERATE USING THE ELECTRIC MODE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE GAS ENGINE STALLED AND SOME REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY FELT THE GAS ENGINE STALLED.SOME CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER ALLOWING THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A SHORT TIME, WHEREAS OTHERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD THEIR VEHICLE TOWED.DURING PE05-029, ADDITIONAL FAILURE DATA WAS IDENTIFIED AS NOTED IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY ABOVE.THE COMPLAINT DATA REPRESENTS INCIDENTS WHERE ENGINE STALLING WAS ALLEGED OR WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE ONE OF THE VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT CAUSES THE GAS ENGINE TO STALL.IN ITS AUGUST 26, 2005 RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST, TOYOTA IDENTIFIED VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TO EXPERIENCE A GAS ENGINE STALL.IF THIS HAPPENS, THE DRIVER IS ALERTED BY AN AUDIBLE SOUND AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS.THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE ELECTRIC MODE AND THE ELECTRICALLY-POWERED BRAKE AND STEERING OPERATION WILL CONTINUE TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. ANALYSIS OF THE WARRANTY DATA INDICATED THAT OVER 97% OF VEHICLES EXPERIENCING A GAS ENGINE STALL RESULTED FROM AN ISSUE WITH THE PROGRAM LOGIC IN THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE (ECM) SYSTEM, WHICH MAY CAUSE THE ECM SYSTEM TO NOT START THE GAS ENGINE WHEN REQUIRED.AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE WILL ENTER THE LIMITED OPERATION MODE DESCRIBED ABOVE.THE MAJORITY OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE DRIVER EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENGINE STALL. DURING OCTOBER 2005, TOYOTA INFORMED ODI THAT IT WOULD INITIATE A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN (SSC) TO REPROGRAM THE ECM SOFTWARE ON APPROXIMATELY 75,000 MY 2004 AND EARLY 2005 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS THE GAS ENGINE STALLING CONDITION.DURING THIS SSC, DEALERS WILL ALSO APPLY SPECIAL DIELECTRIC GREASE TO A TRANSAXLE CONNECTOR TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION WHICH MAY ALSO CAUSE SIMILAR LIMITED OPERATION CONDITIONS.BASED ON ODI'S ANALYSIS, THIS REMEDY SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTING IN A LIMITED OPERATION MODE.GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER USE OF THE AGENCY RESOURCES IN THIS MATTER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Unknown Or Other
ODI OPENED PE05-029 BASED ON 33 REPORTS OF ALLEGED GASOLINE ENGINE STALLING ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE GASOLINE/ ELECTRIC HYBRID VEHICLES THAT CAN BE OPERATED IN GASOLINE OR ELECTRIC MODES, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH DEPENDING ON THE POWER DEMAND.ALL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE GASOLINE ENGINE SHUT DOWN SUDDENLY WITHOUT WARNING.SOME OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO OPERATE USING THE ELECTRIC MODE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE GAS ENGINE STALLED AND SOME REPORTED THAT THE VEHICLE SHUT DOWN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY FELT THE GAS ENGINE STALLED.SOME CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER ALLOWING THE VEHICLE SIT FOR A SHORT TIME, WHEREAS OTHERS REPORTED THAT THEY HAD THEIR VEHICLE TOWED.DURING PE05-029, ADDITIONAL FAILURE DATA WAS IDENTIFIED AS NOTED IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY ABOVE.THE COMPLAINT DATA REPRESENTS INCIDENTS WHERE ENGINE STALLING WAS ALLEGED OR WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE ONE OF THE VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT CAUSES THE GAS ENGINE TO STALL.IN ITS AUGUST 26, 2005 RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST, TOYOTA IDENTIFIED VARIOUS CONDITIONS THAT COULD CAUSE THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TO EXPERIENCE A GAS ENGINE STALL.IF THIS HAPPENS, THE DRIVER IS ALERTED BY AN AUDIBLE SOUND AND VARIOUS WARNING LIGHTS.THE VEHICLE WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE ELECTRIC MODE AND THE ELECTRICALLY-POWERED BRAKE AND STEERING OPERATION WILL CONTINUE TO FUNCTION NORMALLY. ANALYSIS OF THE WARRANTY DATA INDICATED THAT OVER 97% OF VEHICLES EXPERIENCING A GAS ENGINE STALL RESULTED FROM AN ISSUE WITH THE PROGRAM LOGIC IN THE ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE (ECM) SYSTEM, WHICH MAY CAUSE THE ECM SYSTEM TO NOT START THE GAS ENGINE WHEN REQUIRED.AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE WILL ENTER THE LIMITED OPERATION MODE DESCRIBED ABOVE.THE MAJORITY OF THE ODI COMPLAINTS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE DRIVER EXPERIENCED THIS CONDITION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ENGINE STALL. DURING OCTOBER 2005, TOYOTA INFORMED ODI THAT IT WOULD INITIATE A SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGN (SSC) TO REPROGRAM THE ECM SOFTWARE ON APPROXIMATELY 75,000 MY 2004 AND EARLY 2005 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS THE GAS ENGINE STALLING CONDITION.DURING THIS SSC, DEALERS WILL ALSO APPLY SPECIAL DIELECTRIC GREASE TO A TRANSAXLE CONNECTOR TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION WHICH MAY ALSO CAUSE SIMILAR LIMITED OPERATION CONDITIONS.BASED ON ODI'S ANALYSIS, THIS REMEDY SHOULD ADDRESS MOST OF THE INCIDENTS RESULTING IN A LIMITED OPERATION MODE.GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER USE OF THE AGENCY RESOURCES IN THIS MATTER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.