I HAVE REPLACED MY HEADLIGHTS 6 TIMES IN THE PAST 2 YEARS. THE HEADLIGHTS GO OUT WITH NO WARNING. THE FIRST FEW TIMES I THOUGHT IT WAS POSSIBLY BAD AFTERMARKET BULBS BUT THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A PROBLEM. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE SINCE THERE IS NO WARNING AS TO WHEN THEY GO OUT. *TR
2005 Toyota Prius
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Prius years
Owner complaints for the 2005 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
871 reports with mileage · 180 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 346 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 178 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 128 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
1,051 reportsCPCS:I1410421A. 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS. CONSUMER STATED THE CAR WAS TAKEN IN FOR A WHEEL ALIGNMENT. APPARENTLY, TOYOTA HAS NOT ALLOWED ANY WAY TO ADJUST THE REAR TOE OR CAMBER ON THE PRIUS, WHICH CAN RESULT IN STEERING ISSUES AND PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE OR UNEVEN TIRE WEAR. *LN
12/20/2010 LEFT HEAD LIGHT REPLACED NOT WORKING. 8/30/2011 RIGHT HEADLIGHT REPLACED NOT WORKING. 10/30/12 LEFT HEADLIGHT NOT WORKING. WHEN START CAR LIGHT WOULD TURN ON FLICKER THEN GO OUT, REPLACED HEADLIGHT AT TIME (SECOND REPLACEMENT) WORKED FOR SEVERAL MONTHS THEN WENT TO FLICKER MODE THEN OFF WHEN CAR LIGHTS TURNED ON. LEF…
Read full complaint
12/20/2010 LEFT HEAD LIGHT REPLACED NOT WORKING. 8/30/2011 RIGHT HEADLIGHT REPLACED NOT WORKING. 10/30/12 LEFT HEADLIGHT NOT WORKING. WHEN START CAR LIGHT WOULD TURN ON FLICKER THEN GO OUT, REPLACED HEADLIGHT AT TIME (SECOND REPLACEMENT) WORKED FOR SEVERAL MONTHS THEN WENT TO FLICKER MODE THEN OFF WHEN CAR LIGHTS TURNED ON. LEFT HEADLIGHT STILL NOT WORKING, LIGHT GOES ON WHEN CAR STARTED BUT FLICKS OFF IN 30 SECONDS. 1/14/2014 RIGHT HEADLIGHT NOT WORKING, REPLACED. NEW BULB PLACED LIGHT WORKS 50% TIME. NO FLICKER EITHER IT WILL GO ON OR NOT. BOTH HEADLIGHTS REPLACED TWICE SO FAR. RETURNING TO MECHANIC AGAIN. *TR
AROUND 105,000 WE STARTED GETTING INTERMITTENT HEADLIGHT LOSS. IT USUALLY COMES BACK ON IF WE TURN THE LIGHTS OFF THEN BACK ON. IT ONLY DID IT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE FOR ABOUT A YEAR BUT NOW IT DOES IT ON BOTH SIDES. *TR
MY VEHICLE LIGHTS SPONTANEOUSLY GO OUT. IT USED TO BE ONE HEADLIGHT, THEN I HAD A MECHANIC TAKE IT OUT TO DIAGNOSE AND HE SAID IT MAY BE THE BALLAST. AFTER THAT, IT IS NOW BOTH HEADLIGHTS GO OUT SPONTANEOUSLY, AND THEREFORE SOMETIMES AT THE SAME TIME, LEAVING IN THE DARK AT NIGHT ON THE ROAD. FLICKING THEM OFF AND BACK ON USU…
Read full complaint
MY VEHICLE LIGHTS SPONTANEOUSLY GO OUT. IT USED TO BE ONE HEADLIGHT, THEN I HAD A MECHANIC TAKE IT OUT TO DIAGNOSE AND HE SAID IT MAY BE THE BALLAST. AFTER THAT, IT IS NOW BOTH HEADLIGHTS GO OUT SPONTANEOUSLY, AND THEREFORE SOMETIMES AT THE SAME TIME, LEAVING IN THE DARK AT NIGHT ON THE ROAD. FLICKING THEM OFF AND BACK ON USUALLY FIXES IT ON THE FIRST TRY, BUT SOMETIMES IT TAKES A COUPLE OF TRIES. *TR
FOR SEVERAL MONTHS, THE DRIVER'S SIDE HEAD LIGHT OF MY 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS WOULD SPONTANEOUSLY BLINK OUT. BECAUSE IT WAS BLINKING OUT AND COMING BACK ON, I TOLD THE DEALER I SUSPECTED SOME KIND OF WIRING PROBLEM, BUT WAS ASSURED THAT THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE PRIUS HEAD LAMPS. I WAS THEN TOLD THAT WE HAD THE "SPECIAL" HID…
Read full complaint
FOR SEVERAL MONTHS, THE DRIVER'S SIDE HEAD LIGHT OF MY 2005 TOYOTA PRIUS WOULD SPONTANEOUSLY BLINK OUT. BECAUSE IT WAS BLINKING OUT AND COMING BACK ON, I TOLD THE DEALER I SUSPECTED SOME KIND OF WIRING PROBLEM, BUT WAS ASSURED THAT THIS WAS A COMMON PROBLEM WITH THE PRIUS HEAD LAMPS. I WAS THEN TOLD THAT WE HAD THE "SPECIAL" HID LAMPS THAT COST $150 APIECE, PLUS $75+ IN LABOR BECAUSE OF HOW COMPLICATED THEY WERE TO REPLACE. WHEN I ASKED HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE FOR THIS LABOR INTENSIVE $75+ REPAIR, I WAS TOLD 15 MINUTES (IN OTHER WORDS, I WOULD BE CHARGED $300/HOUR FOR LABOR). AFTER BEING REASSURED AGAIN THAT REPLACING THE HEAD LAMP WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM, I AGREED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE REPAIR. FAST FORWARD 2 WEEKS, AND THE DRIVER'S HEADLAMP WAS ONCE AGAIN BLINKING ON AND OFF. THE DEALERSHIP SEEMED COMPLETELY UNSURPRISED BY THE PERSISTENCE OF THIS PROBLEM, AND AGREED TO A "COURTESY RECHECK." THEY THEN INFORMED ME THAT SINCE THE $225 HEAD LAMP REPAIR THEY TALKED ME INTO DIDN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM, THE CAUSE OF THE BLINKING WAS "DEFINITELY" THE ECU (THE COMPUTER THAT CONTROLS THE HEAD LAMP), AND IT WOULD COST ~$700 TO REPLACE THIS COMPONENT. AT NO POINT DID THE DEALER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE HID LAMPS AND ASSOCIATED ECUS HAVE BEEN DEFECTIVE IN HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PRIUS CARS, AS I QUICKLY LEARNED ONLINE. *TR
AFTER A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME HEADLIGHT FLICKERS THEN GOES OUT. HAVE TO TURN OFF THEN ON, ONLY TO LAST A SHORT TIME. BRAND NEW BULBS. *TR
INITIALLY IT WAS THE DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT THAT WENT OUT. TURNING THE SWITCH OFF AND ON RESET THE HEADLIGHT TO ILLUMINATE AGAIN. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO MY MECHANIC TO REPLACE THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT. THE MECHANIC SAID THE HEADLIGHTS WORKED FINE AND TO CONTINUE TO DRIVE UNTIL IT FAILED OR OTHER ISSUE REPORTED. AFTER A COUPLE WE…
Read full complaint
INITIALLY IT WAS THE DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT THAT WENT OUT. TURNING THE SWITCH OFF AND ON RESET THE HEADLIGHT TO ILLUMINATE AGAIN. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO MY MECHANIC TO REPLACE THE DRIVER SIDE HEADLIGHT. THE MECHANIC SAID THE HEADLIGHTS WORKED FINE AND TO CONTINUE TO DRIVE UNTIL IT FAILED OR OTHER ISSUE REPORTED. AFTER A COUPLE WEEKS THE ISSUE PROGRESSED TO BOTH HEADLIGHTS GOING OUT. TURNING OFF AND ON WOULD RESTORE ILLUMINATION. THIS WOULD HAPPEN RANDOMLY SOMETIMES RECURRING AGAIN AFTER 5-10MINUTES. FINALLY THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT WENT OUT COMPLETELY AND WOULD NOT ILLUMINATE. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO MY MECHANIC AND HAD THE PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT REPLACE. A FEW DAYS LATER THE DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT STARTED TURNING OFF AGAIN. MY NEXT STEP IS TO TAKE THE VEHICLE INTO THE DEALERSHIP AND SEE IF THEY CAN FIX THE ISSUE. I'VE RESEARCHED THE ISSUE AND HAVE SEEN PLENTY OF COMPLAINTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE. I'M CONCERNED THIS IS A PERSISTENT DEFECT, LIGHT SHUTTING OFF RANDOMLY, WILL HAVE A DEVASTATING EFFECT ONCE MY LUCK RUNS OUT. *TR
THE HID HEADLIGHTS WILL OCCASIONALLY GO OUT. OVER TIME I REALIZED THAT BY TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF AND ON, THE LIGHTS CAME BACK ON. WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, THIS EVENT CAN HAPPEN AS OFTEN AS EVERY COUPLE MINUTES. SOMETIMES IT MAY NOT OCCUR FOR AN HOUR. BUT THERE IS NO RHYME OR REASON AS TO THE FREQUENCY OF LOSING THE LIGHT. MAYBE …
Read full complaint
THE HID HEADLIGHTS WILL OCCASIONALLY GO OUT. OVER TIME I REALIZED THAT BY TURNING THE LIGHTS OFF AND ON, THE LIGHTS CAME BACK ON. WHILE DRIVING AT NIGHT, THIS EVENT CAN HAPPEN AS OFTEN AS EVERY COUPLE MINUTES. SOMETIMES IT MAY NOT OCCUR FOR AN HOUR. BUT THERE IS NO RHYME OR REASON AS TO THE FREQUENCY OF LOSING THE LIGHT. MAYBE 3 OR 4 TIMES OVER THE LAST 2 YEARS BOTH HEADLIGHTS TURNED OFF AT ONCE. HAD I BEEN ON AN INTERSTATE AT THE TIME OR IN INCLEMENT WEATHER, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH MORE DANGEROUS AND LIFE THREATENING. LOSING THE LIGHT FROM A BULB CAN OCCUR TO EITHER HEADLIGHT. ALTHOUGH IT SEEMS TO OCCUR WITH ONE BULB OR THE OTHER FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. IN OTHER WORDS, ON A NIGHT'S DRIVE, IT'S USUALLY ONE BULB THAT WILL OFTEN GO OUT ON THAT NIGHT. THE NEXT EVENING IT MAY BE THE OTHER HEADLIGHT. THE LOCAL TOYOTA SERVICE GARAGE CHARGES ABOUT $175 EACH FOR THE HID LIGHTBULBS AND ANOTHER $95 FOR THE INSTALLATION. LOOKING AT OPINIONS ON LINE CONCERNING THIS PRIUS HEADLIGHT PROBLEM, IS THE VIEW THAT REPLACING THE BULB IS NOT THE ISSUE. THE PROBLEM IS WITHIN THE COMPUTER SYSTEM OF THE CAR. THE PRICE OF REPLACING THE BULBS COMBINED WITH THE POSSIBILITY THAT LIGHT REPLACEMENT MAY NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM, KEEPS ME FROM SPENDING THE MONEY AND INSTEAD KEEPS ME FLICKING THE LIGHTS OFF AND ON WHEN NEEDED. GIVEN THE EXTREME POTENTIAL DANGER OF THIS DEFECT, IT SEEMS THAT TOYOTA OWES IT TO THEIR CUSTOMERS TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS PROBLEM. AND CREATE A FIX. *TR
WHILE CROSSING THE BRIDGE OF THE GODS, CASCADE LOCKS, OREGON AT ABOUT 9PM THE TOLL COLLECTOR TOLD ME MY DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT WAS OUT. I TURNED ON MY HIGH BEAMS AND HAD TWO LIGHTS ON. ON LOW BEAM ONLY ONE LIGHT...DRIVING WITH HIGH BEAMS AT NIGHT IS DANGEROUS TO OTHER DRIVERS ON THE ROAD; DRIVING WITH ONE OR NO HEADLIGHTS AT NI…
Read full complaint
WHILE CROSSING THE BRIDGE OF THE GODS, CASCADE LOCKS, OREGON AT ABOUT 9PM THE TOLL COLLECTOR TOLD ME MY DRIVERS SIDE HEADLIGHT WAS OUT. I TURNED ON MY HIGH BEAMS AND HAD TWO LIGHTS ON. ON LOW BEAM ONLY ONE LIGHT...DRIVING WITH HIGH BEAMS AT NIGHT IS DANGEROUS TO OTHER DRIVERS ON THE ROAD; DRIVING WITH ONE OR NO HEADLIGHTS AT NIGHT IS ALSO DANGEROUS. THE NEXT DAY I TURNED ON THE LIGHTS (LOW BEAM) AND THEY WERE BOTH ON AGAIN....I CHECKED PRIUSCHAT.COM FORUM AND READ 56 PAGES OF PRIUS OWNERS WITH THE SAME PROBLEM...THAT EITHER ONE OR BOTH HEADLIGHTS WILL TURN OFF INTERMITTENTLY AND RANDOMLY, OFTEN AT NIGHT. I CALLED TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE AND [XXX] THE SERVICE REP I TALKED TO LOOKED UP MY CAR AND SAID THERE IS NO REMEDY TOYOTA RECOMMENDS OTHER THAN TAKE IT TO A DEALER AND HAVE IT "REPAIRED" FOR APPROXIMATELY $800-1200 DOLLARS. FURTHER, READING ABOUT THE PRIUS OWNERS HEADLIGHT EXPERIENCES POSTED ON THE FORUM SUGGESTS THAT MORE THAN OFTEN THIS VERY DANGEROUS VEHICLE DEFECT IS NOT "REPAIRED" BY WHAT THE DEALER SERVICE DEPARTMENT DOES AND THE LIGHTS CONTINUE TO TURN OFF RANDOMLY..AS A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER I CONSIDER THIS PRODUCT DESIGN DEFECT TO BE EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND THAT TOYOTA CORP. WILL NOT STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *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.
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.
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.
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.
Illustration