2001 Toyota Tacoma
Problems, recalls and owner-reported issues
Structure is the leading concern among 401 owner complaints filed for this model year. This is the 7th highest complaint count among 26 Tacoma model years with reports.
Of the 2001 reports, 41 involved a crash and 4 involved a fire. 36 people were injured and 7 people died.
What owners report most often
Recalls and investigations
Tires, temporary/emergency spare tireNov 23, 2012
Toyota is recalling certain model year 2001 through 2004 Tacoma light trucks manufactured from August 28, 2000, through August 27, 2004, and originally sold, or currently registered, in the following cold climate states with high road salt usage: Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. The spare tire in the subject vehicles is located underneath the rear of the vehicle and held by a spare tire carrier. A lift plate on the carrier is used to help raise, lower and retain the tire. During its manufacture, the lift plate may not have been sufficiently coated with anti-corrosion materials. If the plate is insufficiently coated and the vehicle is operated in cold climate regions where road salts are frequently used, road spray can reach the carrier assembly and corrode the lift plate.
Corrosion of the plate could cause it to break, which could result in detachment of the spare tire from the vehicle. Detachment of the spare tire could result in a road hazard which may increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
Toyota will notify owners, dealers will inspect the vehicle and replace the spare tire carrier lift plate as necessary, free of charge. The recall began in February 2013. Owners may contact their Toyota dealer or the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.
Campaign 12V542000 on NHTSA.gov
Exterior lightingJul 17, 2006
CERTAIN AJ MOTORSPORT COMBINATION LAMPS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON THE ABOVE LISTED PASSENGER VEHICLES. COMBINATION LAMPS NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.
LACK OF AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS IN THE LAMPS WILL DECREASE LIGHTING VISIBILITY TO OTHER DRIVERS AND MAY POSSIBLY RESULT IN A VEHICLE CRASH.
AJ MOTORSPORT WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND OFFER REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE LAMPS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 31, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT AJ MOTORSPORT AT 626-618-2026.
Campaign 06E065000 on NHTSA.gov
Exterior lightingMar 23, 2006
CERTAIN PRO-A MOTORS CORNER LAMPS, TURN SIGNALS, AND HEADLIGHTS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES LISTED ABOVE. SOME COMBINATION LAMPS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM TO FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.
WITHOUT THE AMBER REFLECTORS, THE VEHICLE WILL BE POORLY ILLUMINATED, POSSIBLY RESULTING IN A VEHICLE CRASH WITHOUT WARNING.
PRO-A MOTORS WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND OFFER TO REPURCHASE THE LAMPS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 3, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT PRO-A MOTORS AT 323-838-2988.
Campaign 06E026000 on NHTSA.gov
Suspension, front, control arm, lower ball jointMay 17, 2005
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, DUE TO A MANUFACTURING ISSUE IN THE FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER BALL JOINT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE SURFACE OF THE BALL OF THE JOINT MAY HAVE BEEN SCRATCHED. THE BALL JOINT MAY EVENTUALLY EXPERIENCE EXCESSIVE WEAR AND LOOSENESS, RESULTING IN INCREASED STEERING EFFORT.
THE LOWER BALL JOINT MAY SEPARATE FROM THE KNUCKLE CAUSING LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL AND A CRASH COULD OCCUR.
DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER BALL JOINTS FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 5, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Campaign 05V225000 on NHTSA.gov
Fuel system, gasoline, delivery, hoses, lines/piping, and fittingsMay 19, 2003
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, DURING SIDE IMPACT NCAP TEST (I.E. LINCAP TEST), A FLANGE AT THE REAR END OF THE DOUBLE CAB BODY DEFORMED AND INTERFERED WITH THE FUEL INLET HOSE THAT CONNECTS THE FUEL FILLER PIPE AND FUEL TANK, RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO THE FUEL INLET HOSE.
THIS DAMAGE COULD RESULT IN FUEL LEAKAGE, WHICH COULD RESULT IN A FIRE IF IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE.
DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUEL HOSE PROTECTOR ON THE BODY FLANGE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN JUNE 3, 2003. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Campaign 03V189000 on NHTSA.gov
Tires, sidewallJun 7, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: 4X2 TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH TU4 WHITE LETTER TIRE UPGRADE OPTION AND DISTRIBUTED BY SOUTHEAST TOYOTA DISTRIBUTORS IN THE STATES OF ALABAMA, FLORIDA, GEORGIA, NORTH AND SOUTH CAROLINA. TIRE DAMAGE MAY HAVE OCCURRED DUE TO IMPROPER INSTALLATION, WHICH COULD CAUSE THE TIRE TO DEFLATE OR A BULGE APPEARING IN THE SIDEWALL OF THE TIRE.
AN IMPROPERLY INFLATED TIRE COULD RESULT IN VEHICLE HANDLING PROBLEMS OR A BLOW OUT OF AN IMPROPERLY INSTALLED TIRE.
DEALERS WILL CHECK ALL FOUR TIRES, REBALANCE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE ANY DAMAGED TIRE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN JULY 3, 2001. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
Campaign 01V186000 on NHTSA.gov
Representative owner complaints: structure
227 reports, newest first. Show all
Structure, Jan 5, 2017
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. AFTER THE DEALER REPLACED THE FRAMES, THE HOSE TO THE CENTER SUPPORT BEARING MOLD DID NOT MATCH AND CAUSED THE U-JOINT TO BE CROOKED. THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO INSTALL A NEW BEARING, BUT IT DID NOT ALIGN WITH THE FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND REFERRED THE CONTACT BACK TO THE DEALER THE DEALER STATED THAT THE BEARING WAS FINE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS NOT REMEDIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 208,000. UPDATED 03/16/17*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED TOOK TRUCK IN FOR FRAME WARRANTY WORK, IT WAS RELEASED 85 DAYS LATER IN A "REPAIRED CONDITION." THE CONSUMER STATED FORD MADE THE REPLACE BEARING HOLES THE WRONG SIZE. *TR
Structure, Dec 12, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH, THE SPARE TIRE FELL FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED BADLY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 200,000.
Suspension, Structure, Other or unspecified, Nov 21, 2016
I AM UNSURE WHEN THIS HAD HAPPENED BUT THE FRAME ON MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA IS CORRODED AND BROKEN INTO 2 PIECES IN 2 DIFFERENT AREAS. THE PLACE WHERE IT IS BROKEN IS NOT CORRODED BUT JUST BROKE. WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THIS TRUCK IS UNDER A SAFETY ISSUE THAT TOYOTA SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OR IF IT IS JUST AN EXPENSIVE PAPER WEIGHT.
Structure, Other or unspecified, Nov 16, 2016
I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA AND THE FRAME IS BROKEN IN TWO ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE TRUCK AND RUSTED IN TWO ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TRUCK. THE TRUCK IS VERY UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND I AM LEARNING THERE WAS A RECALL ON THESE TRUCKS FOR FAULTY FRAMES. I HAVE ALSO LEARNED THAT THEY STOPPED THE RECALL IN 2012 BEFORE I OWNED THE TRUCK. HOW IS THIS GOING TO HELP ME IF I BOUGHT THE TRUCK AFTER THE RECALL IS OVER BUT THE ISSUE JUST HAPPENED? I PAID TOO MUCH FOR THIS TRUCK TO ONLY GET TO USE IT FOR A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME BEFORE THE FRAME FELL APART. THIS IS A RECALL THAT SHOULD NEVER BE DISCONTINUED, IF I WAS NOT TOLD OF THIS PROBLEM BY MY MECHANIC SOMETHING BAD COULD HAVE HAPPENED TO MY FAMILY WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. I AM UNSURE HOW THE FRAME BROKE BUT I WAS TOLD ABOUT IT AFTER I TOOK IT TO A MECHANIC TO HAVE THE BRAKES WORKED ON. THE SPOT THAT IS BROKEN ON THE PASSENGER SIDE IS NOT EVEN RUSTY JUST BROKE LIKE IT WAS A WEAK FRAME. MY MECHANIC INFORMED ME TO NOT EVEN DRIVE IT HOME SO I HAD TO HAVE IT TOWED HOME ON A FLATBED.
Structure, Nov 14, 2016
LAST YEAR, 2015, I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FROM TOYOTA CONCERNING AN ISSUE WITH THE SPARE TIRE HANGER. I WENT TO THE TOYOTA RECALL WEB PAGE AND TYPED IN MY VIN, TWO RECALLS WERE OUTSTANDING, THE SPARE TIRE AND THE FRAME. I CONTACTED TOYOTA CONCERNING THE FRAME RECALL AND WAS TOLD THAT THE FRAME RECALL HAD BEEN CLOSED. I INFORMED THE TOYOTA REP THAT I NEVER RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR A FRAME ISSUE. SHE STATED THAT THE NOTICED HAD BEEN SENT AND RETURNED DUE TO INCORRECT ADDRESS. TOYOTA THAN RESENT THE NOTICE TO THE CORRECT ADDRESS BASED ON 911 CHANGING MY ADDRESS FROM 132 CENTER ST, TO 338 CENTER ST. I THAN TOLD THE REP. THAT I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW TOYOTA COULD CLOSE OUT A RECALL WHICH IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE AND ASKED TO SPEAK TO SOMEONE ELSE. LONG STORY SHORT I WAS TOLD THE RECALL HAD ENDED AND THERE WAS NOTHING TOYOTA WOULD DO TO CORRECT THE ISSUE. AFTERWARDS I CRAWLED UNDER MY TRUCK AND LOOKED AT THE FRAME AND DID NOT NOTICE ANY RUSTED OUT AREAS. ON MONDAY NOVEMBER 7, 2016 AS I WAS DRIVING TO WORK I LOST THE BRAKES. I WAS ABLE TO RETURN HOME AS THE BRAKE FAILURE OCCURRED AT THE END OF THE STREET I LIVE ON. I CRAWLED UNDER THE TRUCK TO SEE IF I COULD LOCATE THE DAMAGED BRAKE LINE. I FOUND AN AREA COVERED WITH BRAKE FLUID AND DETERMINED THE LINE HAD FAILED. WHILE I WAS UNDER THE TRUCK, I NOTICED THE FRAME HAD RUSTED THROUGH JUST IN FRONT OF THE PASSENGER SIDE REAR LEAF SPRING. THIS IS A DEFINITE SAFETY ISSUE WHICH IN MY OPINION COULD BE A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH. I ALSO NOTICED ON THE NEWS THIS MORNING THAT TOYOTA ONCE AGAIN HAS MADE A MULTI BILLION SETTLEMENT DUE TO FRAME RUST ISSUES ON THEIR 2005 TO 2010 TOYOTA. I WANT TOYOTA HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR NOT REPAIRING AND OF REPLACING THE DAMAGE THEY KNOW EXISTS ON MY TRUCK!!
Structure, Oct 31, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT INSPECTED THE CAB AND NOTICED THAT THE SUBFRAME WAS EXTREMELY CORRODED. IN 2010, THE DEALER DETERMINED THAT THE SUBFRAME SHOWED NO RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE; HOWEVER, THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO ASSISTANCE IN REPLACING THE SUBFRAME. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 120,000.
Structure, Oct 31, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 160,000.
Structure, Oct 28, 2016
MY SON PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE FROM A PRIVATE SALE. THERE WAS A RECALL ON THE VEHICLE FOR THE FRAMES. FRAME WAS INSPECTED IN 2010 AND AN UNDERCOATING WAS APPLIED-SEALING IN THE EXISTING RUST ON THE FRAME. THIS EXISTING RUST HAS SINCE GOTTEN WORSE TO THE POINT WHERE IT IS NOW UNSAFE AND STARTING TO BREAK. WE HAVE CONTACTED TOYOTA BUT THEY REFUSE TO DO ANYTHING BECAUSE THE 15 YEAR EXTENSION WAS UP IN JULY. WE WERE UNAWARE OF THIS AND NOW THE TRUCK MY SON HAS ONLY DRIVEN FOR 7 MONTHS IS NOW WORTHLESS AND UNSAFE. TOYOTA DID NOT PROPERLY ADDRESS THE SAFETY ISSUE OF THIS FRAME BACK IN 2010 AND NOW REFUSES TO FIX THEIR MISTAKE. THEY FEEL THAT JUST BECAUSE THE 15 YEARS IS UP THAT THEY ARE NO LONGER RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY OF THE VEHICLES THEY PUT ON THE ROAD. PLEASE HELP ME TELL THEM THAT THEY ARE STILL RESPONSIBLE.
Structure, Oct 26, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED THROUGH AND THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER'S REPAIR INITIATIVE FROM APPROXIMATELY 2012 WAS COMPLETED ON THE VEHICLE, BUT HAS NOW FAILED AND RUSTED THROUGH. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 270,000.
Structure, Sep 11, 2016
MY FRAME HAS ROTTED AWAY LEAVING THE REAR END HANGING ON A FRAME DISAPPEARING!
Suspension, Structure, Aug 12, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING AT A SLOW SPEED, THERE WAS AN ABNORMAL SOUND COMING FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. WHILE INSPECTING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE FUEL TANK STRAP FRACTURED DUE TO EXCESSIVE CORROSION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SUBFRAME THAT SUPPORTED THE REAR SUSPENSION WAS ALSO EXCESSIVELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO BE DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED PER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 05V225000 (SUSPENSION); HOWEVER, THE REPAIR FAILED TO REMEDY THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 133,613.
Structure, Aug 2, 2016
WE RECENTLY HAD OUR TOYOTA TACOMA 2001 BROUGHT TO A MECHANIC TO FIX THE ALTERNATOR & CHANGE OIL. WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE FRAME OF THE BODY WAS SO RUSTED IT WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE & THAT DUE TO THE STEEL USED IN MANUFACTURING THE VEHICLE IT HAD RUSTED EASILY FROM ROAD SALT USED IN COLD CLIMATES. APPARENTLY THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM FOR THIS YEAR & MAKE OF TOYOTA HOWEVER WE WERE UNAWARE OF THIS. WE CONTACTED TOYOTA & THEY SAID THAT ANY FIX TO THE VEHICLE WAS EXPIRED. APPARENTLY THERE IS SOME SORT OF A REVIEW FOR THE TIRE LIFT BUT DUE TO THE RUST OUR LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER SAYS IT CAN NOT BE FIXED AND THERE IS NOTHING THEY CAN DO. WE REALIZE THIS IS AN OLDER VEHICLE BUT IT DOES RUN WELL & IT SEEMS UNFAIR TO LOSE THE USE OF OUR TRUCK DUE TO AN ISSUE THAT TOYOTA HAS KNOWN ABOUT FOR MANY YEARS. THE RUST TO THE VEHICLE FRAME IS SO EXTREME THAT IT WAS DESCRIBED BY OUR MECHANIC AS LOOKING LIKE "SWISS CHEESE" & THAT HAS BEEN YEARS IN THE MAKING. WE ARE GRATEFUL THAT THE ALTERNATOR WENT OUT OR WE WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN HOW UNSAFE THIS VEHICLE IS & THAT NO ACCIDENT OCCURRED DUE TO THIS CONDITION. IT SEEMS WRONG TO PURCHASE A VEHICLE & BECAUSE POOR MATERIALS WERE USED HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO SALVAGE IT. I AM WRITING YOU TO SEE IF THERE IS AN OPTION THAT WE ARE UNAWARE OF. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. *TR
Structure, Aug 1, 2016
2001 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS SEVERE RUST ALL OVER THE FRAME OF TRUCK. HOLES SO LARGER THAT YOU CAN PASS A HAND THROUGH. TOYOTA HAD A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM BUT DID NOT GET LITERATURE ETC. TO THE OWNERS OF THE VEHICLES. THEY STATED PROGRAM WAS A 15 YEAR WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM AND IT WAS SUPPOSED TO LAST FROM THE ORIGINAL DATE OF SERVICE ON THE VEHICLE FOR 15 YEARS. THEY CLAIM TO HAVE CLOSED THE PROGRAM, BUT THIS WAS OPEN TO TACOMAS ALL THE WAY THROUGH 2004. 15 YEARS AFTER 2004 IS 2019. WHY THEY WOULD CLOSE THE PROGRAM BEFORE THE STATED 15 YEARS WAS UP IS BEYOND ME. I OWN 3 TACOMAS. THE 1997 MODEL IS FINE, BUT ONE 2001 MODEL'S FRAME LOOKS LIKE SWISS CHEESE AND IS NOT DRIVABLE. THE OTHER 2001 MODEL IS VERY CLOSE TO BEING NOT DRIVABLE. WE ARE AT A LOSS AS TO WHAT TO DO AND TOYOTA ISN'T BACKING THEIR WORD OR PRODUCT.
Structure, Aug 1, 2016
2001 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS SEVERE RUST ALL OVER THE FRAME OF TRUCK. HOLES SO LARGER THAT YOU CAN PASS A HAND THROUGH. TOYOTA HAD A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM BUT DID NOT GET LITERATURE ETC. TO THE OWNERS OF THE VEHICLES. THEY STATED PROGRAM WAS A 15 YEAR WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM AND IT WAS SUPPOSED TO LAST FROM THE ORIGINAL DATE OF SERVICE ON THE VEHICLE FOR 15 YEARS. THEY CLAIM TO HAVE CLOSED THE PROGRAM, BUT THIS WAS OPEN TO TACOMAS ALL THE WAY THROUGH 2004. 15 YEARS AFTER 2004 IS 2019. WHY THEY WOULD CLOSE THE PROGRAM BEFORE THE STATED 15 YEARS WAS UP IS BEYOND ME. I OWN 3 TACOMAS. THE 1997 MODEL IS FINE, BUT ONE 2001 MODEL'S FRAME LOOKS LIKE SWISS CHEESE AND IS NOT DRIVABLE. THE OTHER 2001 MODEL IS VERY CLOSE TO BEING NOT DRIVABLE. WE ARE AT A LOSS AS TO WHAT TO DO AND TOYOTA ISN'T BACKING THEIR WORD OR PRODUCT.
Structure, Jul 29, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE REPLACING A FLAT TIRE, SEVERE RUST WAS NOTICED ON THE FRAME. THE ENTIRE FRAME HAD PERFORATIONS DUE TO COROT ION. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER IN 2009 FOR AN EVALUATION OF THE FRAME AND WAS ADVISED THAT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG AND THE CORROSION RESISTANT TREATMENT WAS NOT NEEDED. IN JULY 2016, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE LOCAL DEALER AND THE DIAGNOSIS WAS THAT THE VEHICLE HAD MISSED THE WARRANTY REPAIR IN 2012. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 160,000.
Structure, Jul 18, 2016
I WAS JUST INFORMED BY MY MECHANIC THAT MY 1001 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE FRAME AT THE POINT WHERE THE REAR SPRINGS ATTACH IS COMPLETELY RUSTED THROUGH AND THAT THE REAR SPRING IS LIKELY TO DETACH AT ANY TIME. MY TOYOTA TACOMA IS READY TO FOLD IN HALF DUE TO THE EXTENT OF FRAME RUST. THE MECHANIC WENT ON TO SAY THAT THE FRAME RUSTED FROM THE INSIDE OUT DUE TO INADEQUATE DRAIN HOLES.
Structure, Jun 27, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR AN UNRELATED REPAIR WHEN IT WAS ADVISED BY THE MECHANIC THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED AND HAD FRACTURES IN THE CENTER. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 158,000. UPDATED 09/29/16*LJ *JS CONSUMER STATED SHE SENT A LETTER AND PICTURES SAME DAY AS RECEIVING VEHICLE OWNER'S QUESTIONNAIRE. UPDATED 06/13/18*JB
Structure, Jun 9, 2016
THE ENTIRE FRAME IS CORRODED AND NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. HENDRICK TOYOTA SAYS THE VEHICLE IS SAFE TO DRIVE, BUT A LOCAL BODY SHOP SAYS THE INTEGRITY OF THE FRAME IS 10-15%. SAYS IT COULD BREAK AT ANYTIME. I PURCHASED IN AUGUST 2015. THE PREVIOUS OWNERS STATE THEY RECEIVED NO RECALL OR NOTICES FROM TOYOTA ON THIS ISSUE.
Structure, May 20, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, THE CONTACT HEARD AN ABNORMAL NOISE IN THE CABIN AREA. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE BRACKET THAT HELD THE CABIN TO THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THERE WAS A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN FOR THE FRAME RUST FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR REPAIR; HOWEVER, THE TECHNICIAN NOTIFIED THE CONTACT THAT THE CAMPAIGN HAD EXPIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 96,000.
Structure, May 19, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE'S FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS CORRODED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 106,000. UPDATED 07/13/16*LJ
Structure, May 10, 2016
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS ON A LIFT FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WHEN THE VEHICLE FRACTURED IN HALF DUE TO CORROSION ON THE FRAME. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 158,000. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
Structure, Mar 10, 2016
THE FRAME HAS CORROSION. THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP INFORMED ME THEY WOULD NOT REPAIR THIS ITEM. THEY SAID THE ONLY REMEDY WAS A FRAME UNDER COATING BUT THAT THIS OFFER HAD EXPIRED. THIS IS THE SAME ISSUE THAT WAS DISCOVERED ON COUNTLESS OTHER TOYOTA TRUCKS. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THIS ITEM IS NOT A REQUIRED REPAIR. THIS TRUCK HAS BEEN KEPT IN EXCELLENT SHAPE. THE PROBLEM IS DUE TO A CONDITION BEYOND MY CONTROL. THE TRUCK WAS STATIONARY WHEN THE CORROSION WAS FOUND. THIS TRUCK WAS ALSO FOUND TO HAVE A CORRODED SPARE TIRE HOLDER, WHICH IS CURRENTLY UNDER RECALL. I BELIEVE THE FRAME CORROSION SHOULD BE REPAIRED AS WELL.
Structure, Other or unspecified, Jan 6, 2016
I RECENTLY PURCHASED A USED 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA AND NOTICED IT NEEDED TO GO IN FOR A RECALL FOR THE SPARE TIRE BEING IN NEED OF REMOUNTING. I NOTICED THE FRAME RUST WAS BAD. AS IN FIST SIZE HOLES ALL DOWN THE FRAME. I CONTACTED THE DEALERSHIP ABOUT THE RECALL AND MENTIONED THE FRAME RUST AND THE RECALL ON THE FRAMES. I WAS INFORMED THAT THEY WOULDNT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE RUST. IM NOW STUCK WITH A VERY UNSAFE TRUCK FOR ME AND MY CHILDREN TO BE IN AND A COMPANY THAT FLAT OUT MADE A MISTAKE AND WONT OWN UP TO IT. I WILL UPLOAD DETAILED PHOTOS OF THE DAMAGE LATER ON.
Structure, Dec 18, 2015
FRAME IN REAR IS RUSTED COMPLETELY OUT TOYOTA REFUSING TO FIX. HAVE BEEN TOLD BY SEVERAL MECHANICS TRUCK IS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE.
Structure, Dec 17, 2015
IN 2012, I DROVE MY TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP TRUCK TO A LOCAL DEALER IN RESPONSE TO A RECALL LETTER. I WAS RESPONDING TO A NOTICE THAT TOYOTA HAD MAILED TO ME. THE RECALL WAS FOR A SPARE TIRE CARRIER THAT MAY FALL OFF THE FRAME AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS BECAUSE OF A KNOWN CORROSION PROBLEM. THE DEALERSHIP TOLD ME THAT THEY COULD NOT PERFORM THE REPAIR BECAUSE THE VEHICLE'S FRAME WAS TOO BADLY CORRODED. THE DEALERSHIP PERFORMED A FRAME INSPECTION, & THEY TOLD ME MY VEHICLE HAD "FAILED". THE DEALERSHIP DID NOTHING, EXCEPT TO CONTACT TOYOTA CORP. REPRESENTATIVES FROM TOYOTA HAVE TELEPHONED ME TWICE TO SAY THAT THEY WILL DO NOTHING. THE COMPANY REPRESENTATIVES SAID THAT MY TRUCK "DID NOT MEET THE PARAMETERS OF THEIR PROGRAM". SINCE THEN, I HAVE RECEIVED THREE MORE NOTICES FROM TOYOTA CONCERNING THE FAULTY SPARE TIRE PLATE. EACH TIME I BRING MY PICKUP TRUCK IN RESPONSE TO THESE RECALL NOTICES, I'M TURNED AWAY. AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH, I DISCOVERED HOW TOYOTA HAD BOUGHT BACK VEHICLES LIKE MINE BECAUSE OF THE FAULTY STEEL USED TO MAKE THE FRAME. MY WIFE AND I ARE BOTH ELDERLY. SHE HAS THREE FORMS OF CANCER, AND WE DEPEND IN THIS VEHICLE. WHEN MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED THE TACOMA NEW IN 2001, WE ALSO PURCHASED A $2,200 EXTRA PROTECTION PACKAGE. WE HAD HOPED THAT TOYOTA WOULD STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT SHOULD ANYTHING GO WRONG. THEY REFUSED. THE FRAME OF MY VEHICLE IS BUCKLING. IT SHAKES AND GROANS WHEN MOVING ALONG THE ROAD. THE DEALERSHIP & TOYOTA BOTH INFORMED US THAT OUR TRUCK IS UNSAFE, & THEN WALKED AWAY WITHOUT OFFERING A REMEDY. WE FEEL WE'VE BEEN TRAPPED BY UNJUST BUSINESS PRACTICES. FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS, EVERYONE INVOLVED HAS REFUSED TO HELP US. NOW THAT THE NHTSA IS INVOLVED, WILL YOU HELP US? [XXX] [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).' *JB*JB