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
401 reports, newest first.
Structure, Jun 17, 2009
I AM FILING A COMPLAINT ON A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH A RUSTY PERFORATED FRAME. WE HAVE DOCUMENTS AND PICTURES OF TWO HOLES AND FLAKING ON OUR FRAME. MANY MECHANICS HAVE TOLD US THAT OUR FRAME WAS UNSAFE, BUT WHEN BROUGHT TO TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS WE ARE TOLD THAT IT PASSES THEIR 2001-2004 RUST PERFORATION PROGRAM AND THEY SENT US AWAY. WE ARE LEFT WITH AN UNSAFE VEHICLE AND WE KNOW THAT IT CONTAINS PERFORATION IN THE FRAME. WE HAVE REQUESTED TO SEE THE TOYOTA REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR SOUTH TEXAS, BUT WE ARE GETTING THE RUN AROUND. WE REQUESTED TO SEE THE REP A MONTH AGO AND HAVE HEARD NOTHING SINCE. WE DO HAVE A CASE MANAGER AND # BUT OUR CASE KEEPS GETTING CLOSED AND OUR CASE MANAGER DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT PICTURES OF THE PERFORATION OR TO CONTACT THE REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE. WE WOULD APPRECIATE A FACE TO FACE TALK WITH A TOYOTA REPRESENTATIVE WHO COULD EXPLAIN WHY OUR HALF DOLLAR SIZED PERFORATION DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR FURTHER INSPECTION BY TOYOTA. *TR
Structure, Apr 29, 2009
2001 TOYOTA TACOMA RUSTED FRAME. CALLED THE SERVICES DEPT WHERE I BOUGHT THE TRUCK AND THEY SAID THAT THERE'S NO RECALL OR ANYTHING TO EVALUATE THE PROBLEM. THAT MY YR DID NOT QUALIFY FOR THE RUSTED FRAME ISSUE. MY INSPECTION STATION SAID THAT IT'S SO RUSTED THAT HE SHOULDN'T PASS ME. THAT HE WOULD FOR THIS YR BUT FORGET FOR NEXT YR. *TR
Structure, Apr 27, 2009
RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE LETTER FOR MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA (LETTER STATED VEHICLES COVERED WERE 2001-2004). THE REASON WAS TO INSPECT FRAME FOR RUST PERFORATION. UPON INSPECTION THE VEHICLE WAS FOUND TO HAVE THE PERFORATION. THEIR OFFER OPTION WOULD BE TO HAVE THE FRAME REPLACED. THE REPLACEMENT WOULD COME WITH A WARRANTY OF THE FRAME FOR AN ADDITIONAL 15 YEARS(...ON THE NEW ONE.....FRAME ONLY...) BUT NO OTHER WARRANTY OF THE AFFECTED COMPONENTS REMOVED, HANDLED, OR REPLACED DURING THE FRAME REPLACEMENT WOULD BE WARRANTIED. I HAVE OPENED A CASE WITH TOYOTA STATING THAT I WOULD BE BETTER SERVED WITH THE OPTIONAL BUYOUT, MENTIONED IN THE RECALL LETTER, WHICH IS AVAILABLE AT THEIR OPTION. IT IS UNDER REVIEW. *TR
Suspension, Apr 16, 2009
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN AT 15 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A POPPING NOISE COMING FROM THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE WHEEL. THE TIRE DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT THE BALL JOINTS FAILED, WHICH CAUSED THE WHEEL TO DETACH AND THE AXLE TO FAIL. THE INSURANCE COMPANY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND CONFIRMED THE BALL JOINT FAILURE. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING REPAIRED, THE INSURANCE COMPANY NOTIFIED THE CONTACT OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 05V225000 (SUSPENSION:FRONT:CONTROL ARM:LOWER BALL JOINT). THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THE VIN WAS EXCLUDED FROM THE RECALL. HE BELIEVES THAT THE RECALL SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED HIS VEHICLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 134,000.
Structure, Apr 15, 2009
2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH DIAGNOSED RUST PERFORATION TO FRAME. TOYOTA INSTITUTED A BUYBACK PROGRAM FOR 1995 THROUGH 2000 FOR THIS ISSUE, BUT WILL NOT HONOR THIS COMMITMENT TO VEHICLES POST THIS WINDOW THAT EXPERIENCE THIS SAME SAFETY ISSUE. TOYOTA WILL ONLY REPLACE FRAMES AS COUNTERMEASURE TO THIS ISSUE AND WILL NOT WARRANT THIS TEARDOWN/REASSY PROCESS THAT WILL BE PERFORMED AT DEALERSHIPS (NOT RETURN TO FACTORY FOR REWORK) WHICH WILL LEAVE THE CONSUMER OPEN TO ADDITIONAL VEHICLE (SAFETY) CONCERNS AND NO COMMITMENT FROM TOYOTA THAT THIS PROCESS WILL NOT AFFECT RESALE VALUE AS WELL. THIS IS AN UNACCEPTABLE AND UNSAFE STANCE. I HAVE CONTACTED TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE AND ASSIGNED CASE NUMBER 0904119004 AND AWAITING FEEDBACK. *TR
Suspension, Apr 8, 2009
2001-2004 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAME RUST PERFORATION THAT IS NOW AN ONGOING ISSUE WITH THESE TRUCKS. TOYOTA WANTS TO REPAIR FRAMES INSTEAD OF BUYING BACK TRUCKS LIKE THEY DID WITH THE 1995-2000 MODELS. ITS AN UNSAFE REPAIR AND UNSAFE TO DRIVE TRUCK WITH A PERFORATED FRAME. SEEMS LIKE A "QUIET" RECALL. *TR
Tires, Apr 2, 2009
WHILE DRIVING ON TX US-59 NB RIGHTHAND LANE GOING APPROX. 65 MPH, THE RIGHT REAR TIRE FAILED. I MANAGED TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND STOP ON THE HIGHWAY SHOULDER. WHAT I FOUND WAS A VERY HOT TIRE WHICH HAD REMAINED INFLATED, BUT HAD LOST APPROX. 75% OF THE TREAD CIRCUMFERENCE DOWN TO THE STEEL BELT. APPROX. 25% OF THE TREAD REMAINED WITH THE TIRE, OF WHICH APPROX. 10% REMAINED ATTACHED TO THE STEEL BELT. THE SITUATION DESCRIBED ALLOWED THE TIRE TO BECOME A ROTATING METAL EATING MACHINE, CAUSING CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE WHEEL WELL, TRUCK BED, SUSPENSION AND EXHAUST SYSTEM (3 INCH STAINLESS STEEL PIPE BEND TO 90 DEGREES). INSURANCE ESTIMATES ARE APPROX. $2400.00. AFTER WAITING FOR THE TIRE TO COOL, I DEFLATED AND REMOVED THE TIRE. I WAS THEN ABLE TO BEND AND MOVE DAMAGED SHEET METAL AWAY FROM THE WHEEL WELL AREA TO ALLOW CLEARANCE FOR MY FULL SIZE SPARE, WHICH I INSTALLED AND DROVE APPROX. 5 MILES HOME WITHOUT CAUSING FURTHER DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE. *TR
Tires, Apr 2, 2009
WHILE DRIVING ON TX US59 NB RIGHTHAND LANE AND VEHICLE SPEED APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE RIGHT REAR TIRE FAILED. I MANAGED TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND STOP ON THE SHOULDER. WHAT I FOUND WAS A VERY HOT TIRE WHICH HAD REMAINED INFLATED BUT HAD LOST APPROX. 75% OF THE TIRE TREAD CIRCUMFERENCE DOWN TO THE STEEL BELT. APPROX. 25% OF TREAD REMAINED WITH THE TIRE OF WHICH APPROX.10% REMAINED ATTACHED TO THE STEEL BELT. THE SITUATION DESCRIBED ALLOWED THE TIRE TO BECOME A ROTATING METAL EATING MACHINE, DOING CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE WHEEL WELL, TRUCK BED, SUSPENSION AND EXHAUST (3 INCH STAINLESS STEEL PIPE BENT TO 90 DEGREES). AFTER WAITING FOR THE TIRE TO COOL, I DEFLATED AND REMOVED THE TIRE. I WAS THEN ABLE TO BEND AND MOVE SOME DAMAGED SHEET METAL AWAY FROM THE WHEEL WELL TO ALLOW CLEARANCE FOR MY FULL SIZE SPARE, WHICH I INSTALLED AND DROVE APPROX. 5 MILES HOME, WITHOUT FURTHER DAMAGING THE VEHICLE. *TR
Structure, Mar 31, 2009
2001 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAME RUST PERFORATION. TOYOTA SHOULD BE FORCED INTO A RECALL ON THE TACOMA TRUCK FRAMES. MINE IS PERFORATED TO THE POINT WHERE THE VEHICLE IS NOT SAFE, ONLY 70,000 MILES. *TR
Structure, Mar 28, 2009
I OWN A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP TRUCK THAT HAS EXCESSIVE FRAME ROT. RECENTLY THE FRAME BROKE WHERE THE REAR BUMPER MOUNTS TO THE FRAME. THERE IS ROT LOCATED ALL OVER THE FRAME. THIS VEHICLE FALLS INTO THE SCOPE OF TOYOTA MOTOR COMPANY RUSTED FRAME PROBLEM. *TR
Structure, Feb 20, 2009
I HAD MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA CHECKED AND THE FRAME IS RUSTED OUT, THE DEALER DEEMED IT UNSAFE TO DRIVE, I CONTACTED TOYOTA THAT SAME NIGHT AND THEY SAID TO TAKE IT HOME IF YOU DON;T HAVE A RIDE. DEALER SAID ALL THEY CAN DO IS A FRAME REPLACEMENT AND I SAID THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE, WHY ISN'T TOYOTA TREATING THIS THE SAME WAY AS IT DID THE 1995-2000 MODELS??.. I KNOW THAT THE TRUCK WILL NEVER BE THE SAME ONCE THE MECHANICS ARE DONE,, THIS IS LIKE GOING BACK INTO PRODUCTION , AND I KNOW THEY'RE NOT TRAINED FOR THAT.. TOYOTA DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TYPE OF WARRANTY I WOULD HAVE AFTER THE WORK WAS DONE,, THEY SAID THAT THE SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM WAS DECIDED ON 02/06/09 , MY TRUCK WAS EVALUATED ON 02/18/09 A MATTER OF 12 DAYS,, I NEVER RECEIVED ANY TYPE OF NOTICE ON THIS. MY MECHANIC SAY THE PROBLEM WHEN I WENT FOR MY 3000 MILE OIL CHANGE WHICH I'VE DONE SINCE I'VE OWNED THIS TRUCK ,,IT ONLY HAS 84000 MILES ON IT AND IS IN PRISTINE CONDITION.. *TR
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
Seat belts, Seats, Jan 20, 2009, crash
MY SON WAS IN AN ACCIDENT WITH MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. IT IS A TOTAL LOSS. IT ROLLED OVER AND HIS PASSENGER WAS INJURED. HE HAS TOLD ME THE PASSENGER SEAT BELT FAILED AND THE PASSENGER SEAT BROKE. MY QUESTION IS THERE ANY WAY SOME ONE COULD CHECK THIS OUT FOR US? I DO HAVE PICTURES OF THE BROKEN SEAT. *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