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, Feb 17, 2009
I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA THAT HAS FRAME RUST THROUGH, AND HAVE RECEIVED NO HELP FROM TOYOTA ABOUT A FAIR BUY BACK AS THEY DO WITH THE 95-2000 TRUCKS. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN INSPECTED BY TOYOTA SERVICE, THE SERVICE PERSON SAID IT FAILED BUT THE FACTORY DISTRICT GUY SAYS IT ISN'T BAD ENOUGH. I NOW HAVE A TRUCK WITH A RUSTED FRAME THAT I CAN'T SELL AND THEY WON'T BUY BACK. *TR
Structure, Jan 23, 2009
TOYOTA TACOMA 2001 PERFORATED FRAME TOYOTA REFUSES TO PUBLICLY DECLARE THESE CARS ARE UNSAFE TO DRIVE. MY FRAME IS PERFORATED AND DEEMED BY THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER AS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THEY ADMITTED THIS IS A "KNOWN" PROBLEM AND I NOW MUST ACCEPT COMPLETE LIABILITY IF I TAKE THE CAR OFF THE LOT. MY CASE MANAGER KEVIN INSISTED THAT "TOYOTA HAS PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED A WARRANTY EXTENSION ON DECEMBER 8TH, BUT IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO NOTIFY ALL THE OWNERS." YET HE COULD NOT MAKE ANY REFERENCE TO WHERE I COULD FIND THIS PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT. TOYOTA INSISTS THAT THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A RECALL, YET HIS EXPLANATION FOR A RECALL WAS A FAULTY COMPONENT THAT CAUSES A SAFETY ISSUES THAT WILL BE REPLACED BY THE MANUFACTURER. THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT THE CASE MANAGER STATED TOYOTA IS PREPARING TO DO. HOW CAN TOYOTA BE AWARE OF SUCH A SAFETY HAZARD AND NOT INFORM THE OWNERS. HAD I NOT PERFORMED ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, I WOULD STILL BE COMMUTING 130 MILES A DAY AT 65 MILES AND PLACE OTHERS AT RISK. MY DEALER STATED THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE 2001 TACOMAS IN OUR SMALL TOWN THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN FOUND TO BE UNSAFE OTHER THAN NHTSA, WHAT AUTHORITY EXISTS IN THE UNITED STATES THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO PUBLICLY ANNOUNCE THIS SAFETY ISSUES AND FORCE TOYOTA TO RECALL THESE VEHICLES. *TR
Structure, Jan 17, 2009
2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH FAILING FRAME DUE TO RUST ISSUES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT TOYOTA IS NOW OFFERING TO REPLACE FAILING FRAMES ON 2001 AND NEWER MODELS AS OPPOSED TO THEIR BUYBACK OF 95-200 MODELS. UNACCEPTABLE DUE TO THE OBVIOUS DECREASED RETAIL VALUE CAUSED BY THIS MAJOR ISSUE, NOT TO MENTION THAT MANY CERTIFIED MECHANICS STATE THAT THE FRAME REPLACEMENT IS A TERRIBLE IDEA DUE TO THE ELECTRICAL, ALIGNMENT, AND STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT ARE COMMON WHEN THIS IS DONE. NEVER A GOOD IDEA AND TOYOTA KNOWS IT. I AM IN LIMBO, WANTED TO TRADE IN MY TRUCK, BUT AM NOT BEING OFFERED THE SAME PLAN THAT 95-2000 OWNERS WERE. *TR
Structure, Jan 14, 2009
I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA AND HAD IT INSPECTED BY TOYOTA REP. AND IT FAILED THE ROT TEST AT FIRST THEY OFFERED ME 100% BUYBACK BUT I REFUSED BECAUSE OLDER TRUCKS 95-2000 WERE GETTING 150% BUYBACK AND THAT ABSOLUTELY DID NOT SEEM FAIR WITH ME HAVING A NEWER TRUCK SO I REFUSED. AND THEY ARE ONLY OFFERING FRAME REPLACEMENT TO THE 2001-2005 WHICH SCARES ME TO DEATH JUST THINKING ABOUT IT!!! SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS FRAME ISSUE BEFORE SOME INNOCENT PERSON IS KILLED!!! *TR
Structure, Jan 13, 2009
ON 12/23/08 WHEN MY VEHICLE WAS IN FOR NORMAL SERVICE I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT MY FRAME WAS ROTTING AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. I WAS TOLD TO CALL TOYOTA CORP AND A CASE WAS ASSIGNED (200812230213). ON 12/24 A CASE MGR CALLED ME AND SAID THAT MY ENTIRE FRAME HAD TO BE REPLACED AND THAT THEY WOULD BE EXTENDING MY WARRANTY. HE STATED THAT THE FRAME IS ROTTED AND UNSAFE SO I WAS TO BE PROVIDED A LOANER FROM MY DEALER - BUT NOT A LIKE VEHICLE. I WAS TOLD I WOULD GET A LETTER OUTLINING THE PROGRAM TOYOTA WAS INTRODUCING. THE PROGRAM AS TOLD IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE TOYOTA HAS FOR PRE-2001 TACOMAS. I WAS TOLD THAT PROGRAM WAS DIFFERENT AND NOT AVAILABLE BECAUSE PARTS (FRAME) ARE AVAILABLE. I SPOKE AGAIN WITH THE CASE MGR ON 1/6/09 AND WAS TOLD THEY DO NOT KNOW WHEN PARTS WILL BE AVAILABLE, HE COULD NOT PROVIDE ME THE LETTER DETAILING THE PROGRAM, AND I HAD TO WAIT. MY VEHICLE IS DEEMED UNSAFE TO DRIVE BY TOYOTA AND THEY HAVE IT AT THE LOCAL DEALER YET THEY HAVE NOT PROVIDED ME DOCUMENTED DETAILS ON THE ISSUE OR THE PROGRAM TO REMEDY IT. THIS IS THE SAME ISSUE AS PRE-2001 TACOMA'S HAVE YET TOYOTA IS NOT OFFERING THE SAME PROGRAM. THEY HAVE NOW HAD MY TRUCK FOR 3 WEEKS AND WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE DEALER TODAY THEY THEMSELVES HAVE NOT GOTTEN OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM TOYOTA, HAVE NO IDEA OF PARTS AVAILABILITY, HAVE NOT BEEN TOLD WHAT PART NUMBERS TO ORDER, AND DO NOT KNOW WHEN THEY MAY GET INFO. 3 WEEKS WITHOUT MY VEHICLE, IN A NON-LIKE REPLACEMENT, AND WITH NO DOCUMENTED INFO FROM TOYOTA IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. *TR UPDATED 02/05/09. *JB
Structure, Jan 7, 2009
I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA EXTD. CAB AND THE FRAME HAS HOLES ROTTED IN IT. OBVIOUSLY MY '01 DOESN'T QUALIFY FOR THE '95-'00 BUYBACK PROGRAM. TOYOTA SAYS THEY WILL REPLACE THE FRAME BUT I DON'T LIKE THIS OPTION. I PERSONALLY KNOW THE TRUCK WILL NEVER BE THE SAME AND THE RESALE VALUE IS GOING TO DROP SIGNIFICANTLY. I WANT TO BE OFFERED THE SAME BUYBACK OPTION AS THE OLDER TACOMAS. *TR
Structure, Jan 6, 2009
TOYOTA ISSUED A RECALL ON 95-2000 TACOMA PICKUP TRUCKS DUE TO FRAME ROT. I HAVE A 2001 TACOMA AND WAS CONCERNED THAT I MIGHT HAVE THE SAME ISSUE. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP I PURCHASED MY TRUCK AT 3 SEPARATE TIMES IN THE LAST 6 MONTHS TO "DOUBLE CHECK AND MAKE SURE" MY TRUCK WAS OKAY AND WAS ASSURED ALL THREE TIMES, BY THREE DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS, THAT NO SUCH ISSUE PERTAINED TO MY VEHICLE AND THAT MY TRUCK WAS FINE. LAST FRIDAY (1-2-09) I WAS UNABLE TO PASS THE STATE INSPECTION BECAUSE OF FRAME ROT. THE DEALERSHIP CONFISCATED MY TRUCK BUT DID PROVIDE A RENTAL VEHICLE AND I AM NOW WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM TOYOTA ABOUT THE RESOLUTION FOR MY TRUCK. THE 95-2000 OWNERS WERE OFFERED A VERY FAIR BUY-BACK PROGRAM. THE 2000-2004 OWNERS WHO ARE EXPERIENCING THE SAME PROBLEM ARE IN A "GRAY AREA" RIGHT NOW. THE SERVICE PEOPLE AT THE DEALERSHIP SAY THAT TOYOTA WILL BE REPLACING THE FRAMES OF THESE TRUCKS RATHER THAN "BUYING THEM BACK." ALTHOUGH THAT SOUNDS FAIR AT FIRST, WHEN NUMEROUS ASE CERTIFIED MECHANICS (MANY TOYOTA TACOMA OWNERS THEMSELVES) ARE COMING OUT SAYING THAT THE FRAME REPLACEMENT IS A HORRIBLE IDEA, I HAVE A CONCERN. THEY CITE ONGOING PROBLEMS THAT OCCUR AS IS THE CASE WITH A MAJOR FRAME SWAP, MENTIONING ELECTRICAL ISSUES, MISALIGNMENT, UNEVEN WEAR, RATTLES AND SQUEAKS, ETC. THE TRUCK WILL NEVER BE THE SAME AGAIN. I PURCHASED A TOYOTA FOR THEIR RELIABILITY, DEPENDABILITY AND HIGH RESALE VALUE. THE KBB VALUE FOR MY TRUCK HAS PLUMMETED IN JUST THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS, AND EVEN WITH A FRAME SWAP, I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT THE VALUE WILL DROP STILL FURTHER, THUS MAKING IT NEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO GET EVEN CLOSE TO WHAT MY TUCK SHOULD BE WORTH. IF THE MECHANIC WHO PERFORMED MY INSPECTION HAD NOT INSPECTED THE FRAME AS WELL, I WOULD BE RIDING AROUND WITH THE POTENTIAL TO INJURE OR KILL MYSELF AND OTHERS WITHOUT KNOWING THAT TOYOTA IS AWARE OF THESE ISSUES AND HAS YET TO ISSUE ANY OFFICIAL STATEMENT TO OWNERS LIKE ME THAT A SERIOUS PROBLEM EXISTS. *TR
Structure, Jan 4, 2009
IN 2007 I NOTICED THE FRAME ON MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA DOUBLE CAB LIMITED FOUR WHEEL DRIVE WAS RUSTING BADLY. I NOTIFIED THE GAULT TOYOTA DEALERSHIP WHERE I BUY ALL MY VEHICLES ABOUT THE PROBLEM AND THEY STATED THEY WOULD MONITOR THE RUSTING ISSUE. ON 01/02/2008 I HAD MY VEHICLE IN FOR AN OIL CHANGE AND THEY ADVISED MY THE FRAME OF MY TRUCK WAS RUSTED THROUGH. THEY ARE NOW TELLING ME THAT THERE WAS A BUY BACK PROGRAM FOR THE RUSTED FRAMED VEHICLES FROM 1990'S TO THE YEAR 2000. I HAVE DONE SOME RESEARCH AND HAD FOUND A NUMBER OF TRUCKS LIKE MINE YEAR 2001 AND NEWER ARE ALSO RUSHING OUT. I WAS TOLD BY GAULT TOYOTA THE TOYOTA CO. IS LOOKING AT EACH INDIVIDUAL CASE AND THEY ARE MORE LIKELY ARE GOING TO REPLACE THE FRAME AND IT PROBABLY WOULD NOT BE BOUGHT BACK LIKE THE OLDER MODELS WERE. I FEEL THIS FRAME SWAP COULD CAUSE ME MORE PROBLEMS AND MORE MONEY LOSS. I DO NOT FEEL IT IS FAIR THAT TOYOTA IS NOT GIVING THE OWNERS OF THE NEWER VEHICLES THE OPTION TO HAVE THE VEHICLES BOUGHT BACK. THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED! *TR
Structure, Dec 9, 2008
HI I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA IN MINT CONDITION THAT HAS FRAME ROT I TOOK VERY GOOD CARE OF MY TRUCK NOW TOYOTA SAID ITS NOT SAFE AND I HAVE TO TAKE IT OFF THE ROAD . I NOW HAVE TO BUY A NEW CAR I CANT AFFORD I ONLY GOT 7 YEARS OUT OF MY TRUCK I COULD HAVE EASILY GOTTEN 15 I FEEL THIS IS WRONG AND TOYOTA SHOULD REPLACE MY TRUCK. *TR
Structure, Nov 24, 2008
MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS FAILED A FRAME ROT INSPECTION BY TOYOTA THAT HAS BEEN OCCURRING IN TACOMAS SINCE 1995. A RECALL WAS ISSUED ON 1995 THROUGH 2000 TACOMAS HAS BEEN ISSUED AND TOYOTA IS BUYING BACK THE PICKUP AT 1 AND 1/2 TIMES THE SUGGESTED BLUE BOOK ON THE PICKUPS. I WAS TOLD THAT THERE IS NO RECALL ON 2001 AT THIS TIME. I HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AS THE 1995 THROUGH 2000 WHY SHOULD THEY NOT BE MADE TO RECALL THE 2001 TACOMA FOR AN OBVIOUS SAFETY PROBLEM. I HAVE DONE ALOT OF RESEARCH AND FOUND MANY OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS WITH A 2001 TACOMA WITH THE SAME SAFETY PROBLEM HOW CAN TOYOTA ALLOW PEOPLE TO DRIVE A PRODUCT WITH SUCH A SAFETY PROBLEM. THE FRAME CAN SNAP AND THE CAB BECOME SEPARATED FROM THE FRAME. TOYOTA SHOULD BE MADE TO RECALL ALL THE TRUCKS WITH THIS PROBLEM AS IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE SOMEONE IS KILLED BECAUSE OF THIS PROBLEM. I AM IN THE FOURTH WEEK OF DEALING WITH TOYOTA ON THIS PROBLEM AND STILL HAVE NO ANSWER. I HAVE HAD TO RENT A CAR WHILE I WAIT FOR TOYOTA TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH MY TRUCK WHICH THE DEALER SAID IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. IF TOYOTA KNOWS ABOUT THIS PROBLEM HOW COME THEY ARE NOT MADE TO DEAL WITH THE 2001 OWNERS THE SAME AS THE 1995 THROUGH 2000 OWNERS I THINK THIS IS UNFAIR FOR A COMPANY NOT TO STAND BEHIND A SAFETY ISSUE. PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS SAFETY PROBLEM AS SOMEONE WILL BE HURT IN AN ACCIDENT IF TOYOTA DOES NOT OWN UP TO THE PROBLEM. *TR
Structure, Nov 20, 2008
2001 TOYOTA TACOMA NOT COVERED IN 1995-2000 FRAME RUST "SOFT RECALL" OF MARCH, 2008. ON NOVEMBER 7, 2008 VEHICLE FAILED VT STATE SAFETY INSPECTION DUE TO PERVASIVE PENETRATING FRAME RUST. ALTHOUGH TOYOTA KNEW OF THE DEFECTIVE FRAMES PRIOR TO THE MARCH CUSTOMER NOTIFICATION, TOYOTA CHOSE NOT TO ALERT ME (OWNER OF A 2001 MODEL) OF THIS CONDITION. ON NOVEMBER 14, 2008 AND NOVEMBER 19, 2008, TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND CORPORATE STAFF VERIFIED THE RUSTED FRAME AND NOTED THAT VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. ALTHOUGH THIS FAILURE DIDN'T RESULT IN INJURY OR DEATH, I AM CONCERNED OTHER 2001 OWNERS MAY NOT BE SO LUCKY. TOYOTA HAS DONE NOTHING TO ALERT 2001 OWNERS OF THIS SERIOUS SAFETY DEFECT. WE'RE FINDING OUT ONE AT A TIME AS OUR VEHICLES FAIL SAFETY INSPECTIONS. BASED UPON MY OBSERVATIONS OF THE FRAME, I BELIEVE THE DEFECT IS NOT SIMPLY THE ABSENCE OF A CORROSION INHIBITING COATING, BUT RATHER INAPPROPRIATE METALLURGY - I.E. THE FRAME ITSELF COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED FROM THE CORRECT QUALITY OF STEEL FOR THIS TYPE OF SERVICE. *TR
Steering, Structure, Nov 12, 2008
THE FRAME ON MY TOYOTA TACOMA HAS EXTENSIVE RUST. TOYOTA HAS RECALLED VEHICLES WITH RUSTED FRAMES FOR THE YEARS 1995 TO 2000. THE SAME THING IS HAPPENING TO NEWER VEHICLES AND THE DANGER IS STILL THE SAME. RUST KEEPS GETTING WORSE AND SOON IT WILL BE A SAFETY HAZARD. *TR
Structure, Nov 6, 2008
PURCHASED A NEW TOYOTA TACOMA AND WAS TOLD OUR 2001 THAT WE WERE TRADING WAS NOT PART OF THE RECALL FOR FRAME RUST. THE DEALER OFFERED US $1K FOR IT SO WE GAVE IT AS A GIFT TO OUR DAUGHTERS BOYFRIEND. IT NEEDED A NEW MUFFLER AND HE TOOK IT IN TO HAVE IT REPLACED ONLY TO FIND THAT THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED OUT AND IT DID NOT PASS INSPECTION. CALLED TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE AND GOT A CASE NUMBER BUT THIS POOR KID HAS NOW BEEN WITHOUT A VEHICLE FOR OVER A MONTH. CAN NOT GET A RENTAL AS THOSE FOLKS WITH 1995 TO 2000 GOT. SEEMS UNFAIR BUT MORE THAN THAT, WHAT ABOUT THE SAFETY OF ALL THOSE PEOPLE DRIVING AROUND IN 2001'S THAT HAVE NOT BEEN RECALLED!! *TR
Structure, Nov 6, 2008
I OWN A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. RECENTLY I BECAME AWARE THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED AND THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND WAS INFORMED THAT MY 2001 WAS NOT COVERED BY THEIR CONSUMER PROTECTION PROGRAM THAT BOUGHT BACK 1995-2000 TACOMAS WITH THE SAME PROBLEM, AT 150% OF THE KELLY BLUE BOOK VALUE. THEY HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY WILL MAKE ME AN OFFER PROBABLY AT 100% OF THE KBB VALUE. I HAVE TWO CHILDREN IN COLLEGE AND 529 PLANS ROCKED BY THE ECONOMY AND NO EXTRA MONEY TO SPARE. I WAS COUNTING ON THE 'BULLET PROOF' RELIABILITY CLAIMS OF TOYOTA AND TO KEEP THE VEHICLE FOR SEVERAL MORE YEARS. I HAVE ENJOYED AND APPRECIATED THE VEHICLE UNTIL NOW AND CANNOT REPLACE THE TRUCK AT THE CURRENT KBB VALUE. I THINK THIS ISSUE HAS IMPACTED THE RESALE VALUE OF THESE VEHICLES. MORE IMPORTANTLY HOWEVER IS THAT IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT TOYOTA HAD NOTIFIED THE VEHICLE OWNERS OF THE 1995-2000 TACOMAS COVERED BY THEIR PROGRAM, OF THE POSSIBLE FRAME PROBLEMS. THEY HAVE NOT NOTIFIED ANY OF THE OWNERS OF THE NEWER VEHICLES THAT HAVE, OR MAY HAVE THE PROBLEM. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FRAMES COULD BRAKE IN SOME INSTANCES WHICH COULD CAUSE A SERIOUS ACCIDENT AND INJURY. *TR
Structure, Oct 9, 2008
MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA TRUCK WAS SHOWING EXCESSIVE FRAME RUST. I NOTICED THIS WHEN CHANGING THE OIL. I HAD MENTIONED THIS TO A FEW FRIENDS OF MINE WHO RECENTLY TOLD ME OF A RECALL FOR 1995 THROUGH 2000 TACOMAS FOR THE SAME REASON. I TOOK MY TRUCK TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE I PURCHASED THE TRUCK NEW IN NOVEMBER OF 2000. THE SERVICE MANAGER INSPECTED THE FRAME AND FILED A REPORT WITH TOYOTA. THEY SENT OUT AN INSPECTOR WHO LOOKED AT THE FRAME AND FILED A REPORT. I WAS TOLD THEY WOULD BE IN CONTACT WITHIN 2 TO 3 WEEKS. AFTER NOT HEARING FROM THEM, I CALLED THE SERVICE MANAGER BACK AND ASKED IF HE HAD HEARD ANYTHING AT WHICH TIME HE HAD ME CALL THE CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE NUMBER FOR TOYOTA. THEY GAVE ME A CLAIM NUMBER AND SAID I WOULD BE HEARING BACK WITHIN 24 HOURS. I GOT A CALL FROM TOYOTA TELLING ME THEY WERE AWARE OF THE CLAIM, THAT MY TRUCK WAS NOT PART OF THE RECALL AND SOMEONE MAY CONTACT ME BACK. WHEN I ASKED WHEN, THEY SAID THEY HAD NO ANSWER FOR ME. THEY ALSO TOLD ME MY TRUCK WAS NOT UNDER WARRANTY AT THIS POINT, WHICH I WAS ALREADY AWARE OF THIS FACT. MY TRUCK WAS INSPECTED OVER A MONTH AGO AND I HAVE RECEIVED NOTHING. I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE MY TRUCK AND WITH WINTER COMING ON, I HAVE NO VEHICLE TO DRIVE IN THE SNOW. MY TRUCK HAS LESS THEN 100,000 MILES ON IT AND IS IN EXCELLENT SHAPE OTHER THEN THE FRAME. TOYOTA NEEDS TO MAKE THIS RIGHT. I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IN HOW THEY ARE HANDLING THIS WITH THE OWNERS OF THE 2001 AND UP TRUCKS. THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE VEHICLES IMMEDIATELY AND NOT BY SCREWING PEOPLE WITH OFFERS OF LESS THEN THEY ARE OFFERING THE OWNERS OF 1995 THROUGH 2000. THAT JUST ADDS INSULT TO INJURY. *TR
Service brakes, Hydraulic, Structure, Oct 5, 2008
THERE HAS BEEN NO INCIDENT AS OF YET. THE TRUCK WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP AFTER WE WENT TO HAVE THE BRAKES FIXED AND WERE TOLD THAT THE FRAME OF THE TRUCK WAS RUSTING THROUGH. THE DEALER INFORMED US THAT THE RECALL ON OUR TRUCK WOULD NOT BE PUT THROUGH FOR ANOTHER 30 DAYS. AND THAT OUR TRUCK WAS SAFE TO DRIVE. HOW EVER I FEEL THAT IT IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE SINCE YOU CAN PUT YOUR HAND THROUGH THE FRAME WHERE IT HAS RUSTED. THIS IS OUR ONLY VEHICLE AND WE CANNOT AFFORD TO PURCHASE ANOTHER AT THIS TIME. THE TRUCK IS A 2001 AND THIS IS 2008, THIS TRUCK IS USED FOR DAILY NEEDS AND GENERAL RIDING. *TR
Structure, Sep 27, 2008
I WAS TOLD SEPT 11,2008 THAT MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS RUSTED OUT BEYOND BEING FIXED IN THE FRAME. I WAS CONTACTED AND MADE AN OFFER OF 100% KBB TO BUT THE TRUCK BACK FROM ME AND WHEN I TOLD THEM I OWED MORE THEN WHAT WAS OFFERED THEY REPLIED THAT I HAD TO SAY YES OR NO. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT TO DO. I DON'T HAVE THE EXTRA MONEY TO PAY THE LOAN OFF TO SETTLE. *TR
Structure, Sep 25, 2008
I HEARD ABOUT THE TOYOTA RECALL FOR FRAME 'PERFORATION' ON 1995-2000 TACOMA PICKUPS. I HAVE A 2001 AND DIDN'T THINK TO CHECK MINE UNTIL A FRIEND WITH THE SAME YEAR/MAKE/MODEL DISCOVERED HIS FRAME HAD THE SAME ISSUE. I CHECKED MY FRAME AND IT IS ROTTED IN THE EXACT SAME PLACE HIS WAS. I HAVE OPENED A CASE WITH TOYOTA (#200809250175) AND AM AWAITING RESPONSE. I AM ALREADY BEING MET WITH RESPONSES FROM TOYOTA LIKE "YOUR TRUCK IS OUTSIDE OF THE SERVICE BULLETIN" AND "YOU ARE NOT COVERED". MY TRUCK IS NEWER THAN THE ONES BEING COVERED AND HAS THE SAME ISSUE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT WOULD NOT BE COVERED. SINCE THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH THE FRAME. I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE THE TRUCK. AS FAILURE OF THE FRAME COULD RESULT IN SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH TO MYSELF OR MY FAMILY. *TR
Structure, Sep 22, 2008
FAX FROM SENATOR BERNARD SANDERS ON BEHALF OF HIS CONSTITUENT WHO HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THE RUSTED FRAME OF HER 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONSUMER STATED THE FRAME WAS RUSTED TO THE POINT WHERE IT WAS NO LONGER SAFE. *JB
Structure, Sep 11, 2008
2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH FRAME ROT. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN CONFISCATED AS IT WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. IT HAS BEEN 3 WKS NOW AND TOYOTA CAN'T EVEN GIVE ME A COMPLETION DATE. THEY ARE STILL INSPECTING THE VEHICLE. MY RENTAL COVERAGE IS ONLY GOOD FOR 30 DAYS THEN I NEED TO PAY FOR IT. TOYOTA IS TELLING ME TO BE PATIENT AS THEY NEED TO TEND TO THE 1995-2000 CUSTOMERS FIRST AS THEY HAD ISSUED A WARRANTY EXTENSION THAT DID NOT PERTAIN TO MY VEHICLE ALTHOUGH ITS THE SAME FRAME PROBLEM. MY FRAME WAS CORRODED AND WASN'T GOING TO PASS INSPECTION NOR WAS THE VEHICLE SAFE TO DRIVE. I AM LEFT PAYING ON A VEHICLE I NO LONGER HAVE IN MY POSSESSION AND CASE MANAGER TELLING ME TO BE PATIENT!!!! THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE AND TOYOTA NEEDS TO COVER THE ROTTING FRAME ISSUE IN ALL OF THEIR VEHICLES SINCE ITS TOYOTA'S PROBLEM, NOT THE CONSUMERS. PLEASE HELP ME!!!! *TR
Structure, Sep 10, 2008
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE SHOP FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRONT FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE MANUFACTURER INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND CONCLUDED THAT DUE TO THE SEVERE FRAME CORROSION, THE VEHICLE WAS A SAFETY HAZARD ON THE ROAD. THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED NOT TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE. TOYOTA DID NOT INCLUDE THE 2001 TACOMA FRAME INTO THE RECALL; THEREFORE, THEY WOULD NOT ASSIST WITH THE REPAIR. THE NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER WAS UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 121,946 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 122,946. UPDATED 10/03/08 *BF UPDATED 10/07/08. *JB
Structure, Sep 9, 2008
THIS COMPLAINT IS IN REGARDS TO A DEFECTIVE FRAME ON MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA PICK-UP THAT WAS PURCHASED USED IN FEBRUARY OF 2007 WITH 102,000 MILES. A NYS INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED UPON PURCHASE. THE TRUCK NOW HAS 130K. SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2008, WHILE INSTALLING AT A LOCAL TIRE AND BREAK SHOP, THE TECH NOTICED SERIOUS FRAME ROT ON THE BACK PASSENGER SIDE OF MY TRUCK. THE SHOP MANAGER INFORMED ME OF A VOLUNTARY TOYOTA BUY-BACK FOR 1999-2000 MODELS, WARRANTY POLICY BULLETIN POL08-03, DATED 3/7/08. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND HAD THE TRUCK IMMEDIATELY INSPECTED BY LIA TOYOTA SERVICE OF COLONIE NY. I WAS INFORMED THE FRAME WAS SERIOUSLY ROTTED, AND THE TRUCK NO LONGER SAFE TO DRIVE. I WAS TOLD THE FOLLOWING TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION: 1. THE DEALERSHIP COULD NOT 'GO TO BAT FOR ME' TO ASSIST ME WITH DEALING WITH TOYOTA FOR A RECALL REQUEST; 2. 2001 MODELS ARE NOT "USUALLY COVERED" IN THE RECALL. AND; 3. IF COVERED, I WOULD NOT GET A LOANER CAR; I WOULD NOT RECEIVE THE 150% VALUE AS IS STANDARD FOR 1995-2001 MODELS THIS IS A SLAP IN THE FACE. WHY SHOULD THE 2001 MODELS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE WARRANTY AND RECALL COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE 1995-2001 MODELS? MY TRUCK IS NEWER - YET IT HAS THE SAME FRAME ROT. THE FACT THAT THE DEALER REFUSED TO ASSIST ME WITH THIS PROCESS IS ADDITIONALLY INFURIATING. TOYOTA HAS YET TO CONTACT ME VIA THE CASE MANAGER THEY HAVE ASSIGNED ME. I DON'T KNOW IF TOYOTA WILL PAY ME 100% OF THE VALUE OF MY TRUCK FOR MARCH OF 2008 OR AUGUST OF 2008. THE BLUE BOOK VALUE OF MY TRUCK HAS DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE THE RECALL WAS ISSUED. DEFECTIVE FRAMES ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE TO THE 1995-2000 MODEL YEAR TACOMAS - SO WHY IS TOYOTA EXCLUDING NEWER MODELS? THIS IS DANGEROUS, PERHAPS EVEN CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT. TOYOTA SHOULD BE RECALLING TACOMA TRUCKS MANUFACTURED AFTER 2000 THAT ARE EXPERIENCING MASSIVE FRAME RUST - WITHOUT DOING SO THE COMPANY IS ENDANGERING THE LIVES OF TACOMA OWNERS. *TR UPDATED 10/22/08*JB UPDATED 02/24/10
Structure, Aug 30, 2008
I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP WITH RUST HOLES IN THE FRAME. TOYOTA HAS OFFERED TO BUY MY TRUCK BACK BUT AT A FRACTION OF WHAT THEY OFFERED OWNERS OF 1995-2000 LEAVING ME WITH NOTHING TO TRADE AND NOTHING TO PUT DOWN ON A NEW VEHICLE. *TR
Structure, Aug 27, 2008
THE FRAME ON MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA HAS FRAME ROT. IN SOME PLACES ON THE FRAME THE ROT IS 8-10 INCHES LONG. THE ONLY THING THAT I HAVE DONE WITH THE TRUCK HAS BEEN DRIVING IT TO WORK ON A PAVED HIGHWAY. *TR
Structure, Aug 26, 2008
I OWN A 2001 TACOMA PICKUP. IT HAS BEEN CONDEMNED BECAUSE OF A RUST ROTTED BODY. I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO DRIVE IT OFF THE LOT. TOYOTA IS DOING A BUY BACK ON 1995-2000 OWNERS AND GIVING THEM 150% OF THE KELLY BLUE BOOK VALUE PLUS $1,000 INCENTIVE TOWARDS A NEW PURCHASE. ALL OF US, AND THERE ARE MANY, 2001 OWNERS ARE ONLY BEING OFFERED 100% OF THE KBB ON OUR NEWER, LESS USED VEHICLES WITH THE SAME PROBLEMS. WE HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM TOYOTAS ATTORNEYS GIVING US 6 MONTHS TO ACCEPT OR REJECT THEIR OFFER. IF I REJECT IT, I GET NOTHING. I FEEL THIS IS UNFAIR AS MY TRUCK WAS NEWER BUT AM BEING GIVEN LESS THAN 2000 OWNERS. CAN YOU HELP? THANK YOU. *TR