2002 Toyota Tacoma
Problems, recalls and owner-reported issues
Structure is the leading concern among 360 owner complaints filed for this model year. This is the 9th highest complaint count among 26 Tacoma model years with reports.
Of the 2002 reports, 30 involved a crash and 3 involved a fire. 23 people were injured.
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
Representative owner complaints: structure
181 reports, newest first. Show all
Structure, Feb 12, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME HAD STARTED TO DETERIORATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN APPLIED AN UNDERCOATING TO THE FRAME. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE COATING EVENTUALLY WORE OFF. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 130,000.
Structure, Tires, Jan 28, 2014
SOMETIME IN 2012, MY SPARE TIRE AND RIM WERE LOST ON THE HIGHWAY DUE TO A FAILED SPARE TIRE CARRIER. THE LIFT PLATE ON THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER, FAILED DUE TO CORROSION AND RELEASED THE SPARE TIRE (AND RIM) ON THE HIGHWAY. NO CRASH OF INCIDENT OCCURRED BECAUSE NO ONE WAS FOLLOWING THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME. *TR
Structure, Jan 24, 2014
INFORMED BY DEALER THAT FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH AND TRUCK IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. ALSO INFORMED THAT THERE HAD BEEN A SERVICE BULLETIN FOR THIS PROBLEM. BUT MY TRUCK IS NO LONGER ELIGIBLE FOR REPAIR UNDER THE VOLUNTARY SERVICE RECALL (OF WHICH I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED), AS IT HAD EXPIRED. I THINK TOYOTA SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE. THEY RECOGNIZED THEIR DEFECTIVE PRODUCT; HOWEVER MY TRUCK IS INELIGIBLE FOR REPAIR BECAUSE THEY GET TO LIMIT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE THEIR REMEDY IS NOT TECHNICALLY A "RECALL". I, AND I'M SURE MANY OTHERS, ARE BY NECESSITY, DRIVING UNSAFE VEHICLES. *TR
Structure, Dec 11, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR UNRELATED REPAIRS WHEN HE WAS ADVISED THAT THE SUB-FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. AS A RESULT, THE TECHNICIAN ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 110,000.
Structure, Dec 3, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR SERVICE UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES). THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE COULD NOT BE SERVICE UNDER THE RECALL BECAUSE OF EXCESSIVE CORROSION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE WAS NEVER ADVISED OF CORROSION WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED IN 2010 FOR A MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 95,000.
Structure, Dec 2, 2013
2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE SEVERE FRAME RUST ISSUE AND NO WARNING OF RECALLS. *SMD TOYOTA USA INFORMED THE CONSUMER, A RECALL WAS NOT ISSUED, BUT A CUSTOMER SERVICE PROGRAM WAS OFFERED, BUT IT EXPIRED AT THE END OF 2011. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED SIX LETTERS WERE MAILED INFORMING HER OF THE ISSUE. HOWEVER, THE CONSUMER STATED SHE NEVER RECEIVED ANY LETTERS.
Structure, Nov 26, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE REAR FRAME WAS DETERIORATED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT REPAIR THE PROBLEM. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DEALER INFORMED HIM THAT THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN A MANUFACTURER'S RECALL AND SEVERAL NOTICES HAD BEEN SENT HOWEVER, THE CONTACT FAILED TO HAVE THE VEHICLE SERVICED PER THE RECALL. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 220,000.
Structure, Nov 15, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN FOR STATE INSPECTION WHEN HE WAS ADVISED THAT THE FRONT AREA OF THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND ADVISED THAT THE FRAME WAS NOT SAFELY COATED THEREFORE, THEY DENIED ASSISTANCE WITH ANY REPAIRS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 161,250.
Steering, Suspension, Structure, Sep 22, 2013
AFTER HAVING MY 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA OFF THE ROAD AND GARAGED FOR THE PAST 3 YEARS, I WAS GETTING THE TRUCK READY TO BE DRIVEN ON THE ROAD AGAIN. I AM THE ORIGINAL OWNER. I TOOK THE TRUCK OFF THE ROAD BECAUSE MY JOB WAS ELIMINATED IN OCTOBER 2010. AFTER CHANGING THE OIL LAST WEEKEND IN MY GARAGE I NOTICED AN ABNORMAL AMOUNT OF RUST ON THE FRAME. IN FACT, SO MUCH RUST THAT THE RUBBER BODY MOUNT BLOCK ON TOP OF THE REAR LEAF SPRING SNAPPED OFF IN MY HAND. THE LEAF SPRINGS, BRAKE LINES, AND FRONT SUSPENSION AND FRAME ARE ALL IN QUESTION REGARDING VEHICLE SAFETY. I IMMEDIATELY DID RESEARCH ONLINE TO CHECK OUT WHAT I THOUGHT WAS ABNORMAL AMOUNTS OF RUST ON THE FRAME AND TO SEE IF ANYONE ELSE HAD EXPERIENCED THIS TOO. I WAS SHOCKED AT WHAT I FOUND. A HUGE SAFETY ISSUE WITH TOYOTA TACOMA RUSTED FRAMES. I COME TO FIND OUT ONLINE THAT TOYOTA HAS A HISTORY OF RUSTED FRAMES, BREAKING FRAMES, UNSAFE FRAMES, AND A RECALL CURRENTLY FOR A REAR SPARE TIRE MOUNT ISSUE DUE TO RUST. I ALSO FOUND OUT TOYOTA WAS REPLACING FRAMES ON MY MODEL. I CALLED MY DEALERSHIP TO SET UP AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THIS TRUCK INSPECTED FOR PENNSYLVANIA STATE REQUIREMENTS AND TO HAVE THE RUST CHECKED. THEY TOLD ME MY VEHICLE WAS NOT VALID FOR THE RUST INSPECTION AND THE FRAME REPLACEMENT BECAUSE THE PROGRAM EXPIRED, I WAS TOLD TO CALL TOYOTA. I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED BY TOYOTA OR MY DEALER THERE WAS AN ISSUE, NOT BY MAIL, PHONE CALLS OR CERTIFIED MAIL. I HAD THE TRUCK PARKED IN MY GARAGE FOR THREE YEARS SO IT WASN'T EVEN ON THE ROAD DURING THIS TIME. SEVERAL PHONE CALLS LATER TO TOYOTA AND THEY REFUSE TO REPLACE MY FRAME UNDER THE CUSTOMER CARE PROGRAM CITING I DID NOT HAVE THE UNDERCOATING APPLIED BY DECEMBER OF 2012. TOYOTA CUSTOMER SERVICE SAID I COULD WELD REINFORCEMENT PLATES TO MY FRAME MYSELF OR FIND A JUNKYARD FRAME. REALLY TOYOTA?
Structure, May 30, 2013
2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE SPLIT IN HALF DUE TO RUSTED FRAME. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED THE FRAME RUSTED FROM THE INSIDE OUT.
Structure, May 20, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE EXHIBITED SEVERE RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS AND THE CONTACT WAS REFERRED TO THE MANUFACTURER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 140,000.
Structure, May 10, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE REAR BUMPER HAD RUSTED AND THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO TOW ANYTHING WITH THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE MANUFACTURER ABOUT THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 65,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 110,000. *TR
Structure, Apr 30, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME AND THE REAR LEAF SPRINGS CONTAINED MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF RUST AND WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE DUE TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 151,000.
Structure, Mar 25, 2013
THIS VEHICLE WAS ALREADY INVOLVED IN A "CAMPAIGN" BY TOYOTA TO REPLACE SEVERELY RUSTED FRAMES. NOW THE SPARE TIRE LIFT PLATE IS ALSO RUSTED THROUGH ON MANY OF THEM WHICH TOYOTA IS "IMPLEMENTING A REMEDY FOR". MY COMPLAINT IS THAT I HAVE A SEVERELY RUSTED HOUSING OF THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL, NEXT TO AND JUST BELOW THE RUSTED SPARE TIRE CARRIER LIFT PLATE,TOYOTA REFUSES TO PAY FOR THE RUSTED THROUGH HOUSING OF THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL. THIS IS A NEGLIGENT SAFETY ISSUE ON THEIR PART, BECAUSE THOSE OWNERS WHO ARE NOT AWARE OF THE LEAKAGE OF THIS PART MAY FIND THEMSELVES WITHOUT POWER, OR WORSE PERHAPS, A LOCKUP OF THAT PART WHEN THEY ARE GOING 65 MPH ON HIGHWAY POSSIBLY WITH CHILDREN IN THEIR VEHICLE. THE RUST ON THESE VEHICLES IS LEGENDARY AMONG TOYOTA OWNERS AS EVIDENCED BY THEIR COMPLAINTS ON THE INTERNET. TOYOTA DID REPLACE THE FRAME ON MY 2002 TACOMA, BUT IN MY OPINION, IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO REPLACE THE RUSTED OUT HOUSING. IT IS NOT AS IF THAT IS THE ONLY RUST ON THIS VEHICLE, AND NO OTHER VEHICLES THAT I AM AWARE OF HAVE THIS PROBLEM. *TR
Structure, Jan 29, 2013
UPON BRINGING 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA TO MECHANIC FOR TIRE ROTATION AND OIL CHANGE, THE FRAME BROKE IN HALF DUE TO RUST AND CORROSION. CONTACTED TOYOTA WHO SAID IT WAS NOT COVERED UNDER 2008 EXTENDED CORROSION WARRANTY SINCE IT HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT IN FOR THE UNDERCARRIAGE COMPOUND APPLICATION BEFORE 2011. WE WERE NEVER NOTIFIED BY ANY RECALL THAT IT SHOULD BE BROUGHT IN. *TR
Structure, Jan 23, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME NEAR THE REAR PASSENGER'S SIDE TIRE WAS RUSTED. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A MECHANIC AND WAS TOLD THAT THE FRAME COULD NOT BE REPAIRED AND THAT THE VEHICLE SHOULD NOT BE DRIVEN. THE VEHICLE WAS THEN TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE VEHICLE COULD BE REPAIRED AT THE CONTACT'S EXPENSE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED BUT PROVIDED NO ASSISTANCE. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 120,000.
Structure, Jan 17, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN FOR REGISTRATION INSPECTION AND WAS ADVISED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS RUSTED AND ROTTED. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE MANUFACTURER BUT NO ASSISTANCE WAS PROVIDED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 111,000 UPDATED 02/22/13. *JB
Suspension, Structure, Wheels, Jan 11, 2013
MY TACOMA WAS RECALLED 2 YEARS AGO FOR FRAME RUST. THEY TOLD ME IT WAS OK + UNDERCOATED IT TO PREVENT FUTURE RUSTING. ALL THAT UNDERCOATING IS FALLING OFF. THAT CAN ONLY BE DUE TO IMPROPER APPLICATION OR FAULTY PRODUCT. THE DEALER THAT APPLIED THE PRODUCT (FERRIS TOYOTA) SAYS THE PRODUCT IS FAULTY + THEY'VE SEEN IT MANY TIMES. THEY'VE ALSO CONFIRMED THE SAME WITH OTHER DEALERSHIPS. TOYOTA, OTOH, SAYS THERE'S NOTHING WRONG. IF THE FRAME DOESN'T NEED UNDERCOATING, THEN WHY'D THEY DO IT? ARE THEY SUGGESTING IT WORKS WHEN 50% HAS FALLEN OFF? THIS IS THE SAME VEHICLE WHICH IS NOW BEING RECALLED FOR SPARE TIRES FALLING OFF ON THE HIGHWAY + MY EMERGENCY BRAKES HAVE BEEN SEIZED WITH CORROSION SINCE I'VE OWNED THE TRUCK. I'VE CONTACTED TOYOTA MANY TIMES + THEY REFUSE TO PUT THEIR CORRESPONDENCE IN WRITING, BUT THE REPRESENTATIVE, TIFFANY BISHOP, SAYS SHE TYPES A TRANSCRIPT OF OUR CONVERSATIONS, JUST WON'T GIVE ME COPIES. SHE ALSO CALLS FROM A PHONE WITH A BLOCKED NUMBER. WHAT KIND OF BULL IS THIS? THESE VEHICLES ARE OBVIOUS HAZARDS ON THE ROAD + TOYOTA IS PLAYING GAMES INSTEAD OF MAKING SERIOUS EFFORTS TO MAKE THE VEHICLES SAFE. PLEASE BRING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF SOMEONE AT TOYOTA OTHER THAN [XXX], I AM FINISHED CORRESPONDING WITH HER! INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
Structure, Dec 21, 2012
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS COVERED WITH RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE A RUST UNDER COATING WAS APPLIED TO THE FRAME. TWO YEARS LATER, THE FRAME EXHIBITED SEVERE RUST AND CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE PROBLEM. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 53,871. UPDATED 01/18/13*LJ UPDATED 01/24/13
Structure, Oct 23, 2012
10/22/2012 RECENTLY HAD OCCASION TO LOOK AT THE FRAME ON MY TRUCK, IT IS RUSTED THROUGH IN MANY SPOTS MAKING VEHICLE UNSAFE, 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA, APPARENTLY I MISSED SOME "COURTESY" FRAME PROGRAM. I AM STUCK WITH A 10,000.00 TRUCK THAT I CAN'T AFFORD TO FIX AND TOYOTA HAS SAID THAT THEY WILL NOT OFFER ANY HELP.I THINK THIS NEEDS TO GO BEYOND A "COURTESY " RECALL, WITH THE LARGE AMOUNTS OF THESE TRUCKS ON THE ROAD IN UNSAFE CONDITIONS NEW YORK STATE HAS FORCED AN EXTENSION OF THIS PROGRAM, TRAFFIC SAFETY SHOULD FORCE A RECALL AS THERE ARE THOUSANDS OUT THERE IN THIS SHAPE BY TOYOTAS OWN ADMISSION I WOULD LIKE REPAIRS OR FAIR MARKET VALUE. *TR
Structure, Sep 10, 2012
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE CHASSIS WAS PREMATURELY RUSTING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHICH CONFIRMED THAT THE CHASSIS WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 175,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 176,000.
Structure, May 2, 2012
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED, HAD HOLES IN IT, AND WAS SEPARATING FROM THE VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND WAS GOING TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 62,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 110,000.
Structure, Mar 12, 2012
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE AT AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THE MECHANIC STATED TO THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE BECAUSE THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTICS. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED IT WAS CAUSED BY SCALING AND NOT RUSTING THERE FOR THEY WOULD NOT COVER THE REPAIRS. THE DEALER REFUSED TO PROVIDE A LETTER STATING THE VEHICLE WAS SAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 161,000.
Structure, Jun 24, 2011
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER TO BE EXAMINED WHEN HE WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRAME UNDER THE VEHICLE WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE, BUT OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 74,000. UPDATED 09/02/11*LJ UPDATED 2/9/12 *CN
Structure, Mar 2, 2011
THE SECOND TOYOTA TACOMA I HAVE OWNED IN ONE YEAR FAILED ON 02/28/2011. BOTH FRAMES FAILED DUE TO RUST. BOTH PROBLEMS WERE DISCOVERED DURING A ROUTINE OIL CHANGE. TOYOTA BOUGHT BACK THE FIRST TRUCK LAST SUMMER, SO I DECIDED TO BUY ANOTHER LATER MODEL TACOMA. THE SECOND TACOMA PROBLEM OCCURRED ON A LIFT AT AUTO CHOICE IN DERRY NH. THE TRUCK BENT IN HALF WHEN THE LIFT WAS RAISED. THE MECHANIC HAS BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR 30 YEARS AND HAD NEVER SEEN SUCH A THING. LUCKILY, HE WAS NOT UNDER THE TRUCK AND FORTUNATELY I WAS NOT DRIVING THE TRUCK FOR MY FRAME REPLACEMENT APPOINTMENT THE NEXT DAY. IRA TOYOTA TOWED THE VEHICLE AND GAVE ME A LOANER. I AM TOLD THAT THEY WILL REPLACE THE ENTIRE FRAME . IN TALKING TO MY FATHER, MECHANIC FRIENDS AND LEGAL FRIENDS AN ISSUE KEPT COMING UP - IF THE FRAME IS THAT CORRODED, IT WOULD FOLLOW THAT PARTS ATTACHED TO THE FRAME WOULD BE CORRODED AS WELL. THIS PRESENTS AN ALARMINGLY SERIOUS SAFETY PROBLEM. I WOULD ADD THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION INTO THE SAFETY OF THIS PROCEDURE AS WELL AS A MEDIA REQUIREMENT MADE THAT TOYOTA RUN ADVERTISEMENTS ON TV, RADIO AND PRINT WARNING THE PUBLIC ABOUT THIS SERIOUS ISSUE. MY TRUCK LOOKS IMMACULATE AND HAS BEEN WELL MAINTAINED. HAD I NOT DONE AN OIL CHANGE, THE OUTCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH DIFFERENT. I CAN THINK OF NO OTHER COMPONENT IN A MOTOR VEHICLE THAT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAT THE FRAME, IT HOLDS EVERYTHING TOGETHER AND SUPPORTS EVERYTHING. THIS ISSUE NEEDS IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. IRA TOYOTA IS THE CURRENT LOCATION OF THE VEHICLE 603-657-2422. *TR