2003 Toyota Tacoma
Problems, recalls and owner-reported issues
Structure is the leading concern among 371 owner complaints filed for this model year. This is the 8th highest complaint count among 26 Tacoma model years with reports.
Of the 2003 reports, 31 involved a crash and 1 involved a fire. 22 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
182 reports, newest first. Show all
Structure, Aug 14, 2012
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO STATED THAT THE FAILURE WAS A MANUFACTURING DEFECT AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE WHO DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE EITHER. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 75,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 85,000.
Structure, Tires, Aug 14, 2012
AFTER GETTING OFF THE HIGHWAY, AS I WAS PULLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE EXIT RAMP I NOTICED THE SPARE TIRE HAD FALLEN FROM THE TRUCK AND WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. I WAS ABLE TO QUICKLY BACK UP AND LOAD THE SPARE ONTO THE BACK OF THE TRUCK. I NOTICED PART OF THE CARRIER WAS RUSTED TO THE SPARE, BUT THE MIDDLE OF THE CARRIER HAD RUSTED THROUGH. I HAD PARTICIPATED IN TOYOTA'S FRAME RECALL A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO AND BELIEVE THEY SHOULD HAVE SEEN HOW BAD THE SITUATION WAS AT THAT TIME, AND DONE SOMETHING TO RECTIFY THE PROBLEM. I HAD JUST SPENT A HALF-HOUR DRIVING HOME ON THE HIGHWAY. I CAN'T IMAGINE THE DAMAGE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN CAUSED HAD THE TIRE DROPPED AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS DURING RUSH HOUR RATHER THAN AT 10 MPH!! IN SEARCHING THE INTERNET, THIS IS AN ALL TOO COMMON OCCURRENCE FOR OLDER TACOMAS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS ISN'T CONSIDERED A SAFETY ISSUE AND SUBJECT TO RECALL. *TR
Structure, Jul 9, 2012
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE. WHILE AT THE DEALER, THE CONTACT INQUIRED ABOUT AN UNKNOWN FRAME RECALL. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE RECALL DID NOT APPLY TO HIS VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS THEN NOTIFED AND INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS COVERED UNDER A PRIOR VOLUNTARY CAMPAIGN FOR THE FRAME, BUT THE CAMPAIGN EXPIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 68,000.
Structure, Mar 28, 2012
WAS DRIVING AND ENTERING A FREEWAY ONRAMP WHEN THE DOOR SWUNG WIDE OPEN AFTER THE LATCH FAILURE. HAD TO SECURE A REPLACEMENT (USED) AND FOUND SEVERAL OTHERS WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. IT OBVIOUSLY APPEARS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM DUE TO THE LATCH BEING CONSTRUCTED FROM PLASTIC. TO ME THIS CONSTITUTES A SAFTEY ISSUE. *TR
Steering, Suspension, Service brakes, Hydraulic, Structure, Feb 5, 2012
I BOUGHT A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA FROM A TOYOTA DEALER IN DECEMBER 2011 WITH 81,841 MILES ON IT. UPON DRIVING THE VEHICLE FROM TENNESSEE TO OREGON A LEAK IN THE OIL PAN APPEARED. I LOOKED UNDER THE VEHICLE AND TO MY SURPRISE THE WHOLE UNDERCARRIAGE OF THE VEHICLE WAS EXTREMELY RUSTING. THE LEAK WAS FROM THE OIL PAN THAT WAS CORRECTED BADLY. I WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT FROM THERE TO MY HOME IN OREGON HAVING TO ADD ABOUT ONE QUART OF OIL. THE DISTANCE WAS ABOUT 700 MILES. I TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER AND HE INFORMED ME THAT I HAD MAJOR RUST PROBLEMS UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE GAS TANK SHIELD IS GONE DUE TO RUST. THE FRONT END SUSPENSION WAS SO RUSTY THEY COULDN,T GET SOME OF THE BOLTS OUT. THEY HAD TO REMOVE SOME OF THE FRONT END SUSPENSION TO REPLACE THE OIL PAN. BOTH FRONT BACKING PLATES FOR THE ROTORS WHERE RUSTED AWAY. NO ALIGNMENT COULD BE DONE BECAUSE OF THE RUST. I HAD THE FRONT END REPLACE WITH GOOD USED PARTS AND WHEN THEY ATTEMPTED TO ALIGN THE VEHICLE THE FRONT TIE ROD BROKE DUE TO RUST. THE WHOLE FRAME ASSEMBLY IS VERY RUSTY. I FIND OUT NOW THAT THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY RECALL OF FRAME WHICH I DID NOT KNOW ABOUT. THIS VEHICLE WAS BOUGHT FROM A TOYOTA DEALER IN TENNESSEE IN DECEMBER OF 2011. THEY NEVER SAID A WORD TO ME ABOUT THE RUST PROBLEM. THEY DID A OIL CHANGE AND THEY ALSO REPLACED THE EMERGENCY BRAKE CABLE SO THEY HAD TO BE AWARE OF THE RUST PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE A FIND OUT CAME FROM NEW YORK ORIGINALLY. THEY SAY THEY WILL HELP OUT WITH REPAIR COSTS SO FAR BUT WHAT ABOUT THE FRAME RUST. THIS DEALERSHIP WITHHELD VITAL INFORMATION FROM ME. TOYOTA OF AMERICA SAYS THE FRAME RECALL WAS VOLUNTARY AND HAS EXPIRED. I FEEL THIS IS A SAFETY PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TAKEN CARE OF. *TR
Structure, Feb 2, 2012
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR AN INSPECTION AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FRAME WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED DUE TO CORROSION. THE DEALER WOULD NOT ASSIST THE CONTACT WITH ANY REPAIRS OUTSIDE OF THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED, BUT AGREED WITH THE DEALER'S DECISION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 116,000.
Air bags, Structure, Tires, Aug 31, 2011, crash
LETTER TO THE SECRETARY FROM RE COMPLAINT REGARDING THE SAFETY OF THE 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED WHILE DRIVING, ANOTHER VEHICLE SLID INTO HIS VEHICLE AND HE HIT THE PASSENGER FRONT TIRE OF THE OTHER VEHICLE AT 40 MPH. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONSUMER ALSO STATED THE TIRES AND FRONT FENDER RATIO HAD A DESIGN DEFECT. THE CONSUMER WAS INJURED IN THE ACCIDENT. *JB..UPDATED 01/31/12..UPDATED 11/19/13 *BF
Structure, Jul 28, 2011
RUST PERFORATION ON 1998 TO 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAMES AND UNDERCARRIAGES, THE DEALER STATED WAS DUE TO IMPROPERLY MANUFACTURED FRAMES. TOYOTA CUSTOMER CARE TOLD ME THAT THE VOLUNTARY FRAME RECALL ON MY 2003 TACOMA FOR FRAME RUST EXPIRED IN MARCH OF 2011 AND THEY WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THE FRAMES OF CERTAIN YEAR TOYOTA TACOMA ARE DEFECTIVE AND WERE NOT PROPERLY MADE AND ARE SUBJECT TO RAPID RUST PERFORATION. TOYOTA SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THEIR VOLUNTARY PROGRAM SHOULD BE MADE MANDATORY. *TR
Structure, Jul 22, 2011
2003 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS RECALLED IN APRIL 2010 FOR FRAME REPLACEMENT. THE TRUCK FAILED AND THE "ENTIRE" FRAME WAS REPLACED. JULY 18, 2011, WHILE DRIVING THIS TRUCK THE SPARE TIRE FALLS OUT FROM BENEATH THE VEHICLE. THANKFULLY I WAS ON A SIDE ROAD GOING ABOUT 35 MPH AND THE OTHER VEHICLES ON THE ROAD WERE ABLE TO AVOID ANY IMPACT. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK THE PLATE THAT WAS " HOLDING" THE SPARE TIRE TO THE TOYOTA SERVICE CENTER THAT REPLACED THE FRAME. DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE PLATE LOOKED LIKE IT COULD HAVE BEEN A PIECE FROM THE TITANIC, I WAS TOLD THAT THIS PARTICULAR PART WAS NOT PART OF THE TACOMA RECALL. I ASKED IF THEY HAD TO REMOVE THIS PART WHILE REPLACING THE FRAME, WHICH THEY ACKNOWLEDGED THEY DID, AND THEN I ASKED WHY THEY WOULD PUT A WORN PIECE BACK ON... THE RESPONSE WAS "IT PROBABLY DIDN'T LOOK THAT BAD A YEAR AGO"....!!! I CALLED THE TOYOTA 800 PHONE NUMBER AND OPENED A CASE. AS A RESULT, I HAVE LEARNED THAT THIS PART WAS RECALLED ON THE 2003 TUNDRA, BUT NOT THE TACOMA... TOYOTA WILL HOWEVER REIMBURSE ME THE COST $233 IF I WISH TO HAVE THE PIECE REPLACED. I AM DISGUSTED AND SHOCKED AT THE FACT THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS COULD HAPPEN. THANKFULLY NO ONE WAS INJURED...HOWEVER I COULD NOT GET THIS VERY SAME TRUCK INSPECTED IN THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR UNTIL I REPLACED THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER ($1600)...YET IT IS OKAY TO PUT SAFETY INSPECTION STICKER ON A VEHICLE THAT IS A HAZARD TO OTHERS DUE TO A SPARE TIRE PROJECTILE THAT COULD OCCUR AT ANY MOMENT. THIS IS INSANITY TO ME. I ALSO HAVE A 1994 TOYOTA WHICH WOULD NOT PASS DUE TO RUST ON THE EXTERIOR "BUMPER"... EXTERIOR RUST WAS CONSIDERED A HAZARD.. AND I HAD TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE BUMPER "OR REMOVE IT" BEFORE IT WOULD PASS. PERHAPS THE "INSPECTION" REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE ENHANCED TO INCLUDE TRUE LIFE THREATENING PROBLEMS... I HAVE NEVER HAD ANYONE HARM THEMSELVES ON MY RUSTY BUMPER....BUT I NEARLY TOOK OUT 4 VEHICLES WITH MY FAULTY SPARE TIRE MOUNT.. *TT
Structure, May 9, 2011
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 10 MPH THE CONTACT FELT A BUMP AND NOTICED THE SPARE TIRE DETACHED FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE ONTO THE GROUND. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER AND THE CONTACT NOTICED THE CHAIN WHICH HELD THE SPARE TIRE UNDER THE VEHICLE WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 85,036.
Power train, Structure, Jan 12, 2011
2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER IS HAVING A NUMBER OF ISSUES WITH THE VEHICLE. FRONT DRIVE SHAFT BROKE DUE TO RUST, FRAME RUSTING, AND TRANSMISSION COOLER WAS LEAKING. *KB
Structure, Aug 30, 2010
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THE IT WITH A SPRAYED WITH A RUST COMPOUND, HOWEVER 3 MONTHS AFTER THE REPAIR THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE COMPOUND WOULD NOT DRY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED AND THERE WERE NO PRIOR WARNINGS. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 30000 AND THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 29000.
Fuel system, Gasoline, Structure, Aug 25, 2010
GAS TANK FELL OFF, TILL IT WAS 2 TO 3 INCHES OFF GROUND. *TR
Structure, Aug 5, 2010
EXCESSIVE RUST HAS APPEARED ON THE FRAME AND UNDERBODY COMPONENTS OF MY 2003 TACOMA MAKING ME QUESTION THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY AS IT AGES. I AM CONCERNED FOR THE SAFETY OF MYSELF AND PASSENGERS AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS KNOWING THAT PROPER EXAMINATION OF THE METAL'S STRENGTH REQUIRES MORE THAN JUST A VISUAL INSPECTION AND THE USE OF A HAMMER. I BEGAN NOTICING EXCESSIVE RUST APPROXIMATELY ONE YEAR AFTER PURCHASE IN JANUARY 2004. *TR
Structure, Tires, Apr 17, 2010
WEDNESDAY APRIL 14,2010 AT APPROXIMATELY 8:30 AM WHILE I WAS GETTING ONTO A HIGHWAY (101 E/B IN BEDFORD NH) MY SPARE TIRE BROKE OFF FROM THE UNDERBED CARRIER. THERE WAS A MOTORCYCLIST RIGHT BEHIND ME THAT HAD TO MAKE A EVASIVE ACTION TO AVOID BEING HIT BY MY SPARE TIRE. THE PLATE HAD RUSTED OUT. *TR
Structure, Mar 12, 2010
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED SEVERE RUST AND FLAKING ON THE FRONT AND REAR PASSENGER SIDE FRAME ON THE VEHICLE. THE DEALER STATED THAT THERE WERE NO RECALLS ASSOCIATED WITH THE VIN. THE DEALER ALSO STATED THAT THE VEHICLE COULD BE REPAIRED AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE. THE MANUFACTURER HAD NOT BEEN CONTACTED AND NO REPAIRS WERE MADE TO THE VEHICLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 158,000. UPDATED 05/06/10.*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE FRAME WAS CHECKED BY THE DEALER. THEY USED A BALL PIN HAMMER AND TAPPED ALL OVER THE FRAME AND SAID IT PASSED INSPECTION. UPDATED 06/25/10*JB
Structure, Dec 28, 2009
I AM THE OWNER OF A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH APPROXIMATELY 29,000 MILES, LIVING IN THE NORTHEAST. THE FRAME AND THE UNDERCARRIAGE OF THE VEHICLE HAVE EXTENSIVE RUST FROM FRONT TO REAR. I BELIEVE THE FRAME IS RUSTING FROM THE INSIDE OUT AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. AT THIS POINT, THE TRANSMISSION SHIELD AND THE FUEL TANK SHIELD ARE IN DANGER OF FALLING OFF OF THE VEHICLE. THE LEAF SPRINGS ARE SO CORRODED THAT THEY NO LONGER FUNCTION PROPERLY. THE EXHAUST SYSTEM AND MUFFLER ARE COMPLETELY RUSTED OUT. *TR
Structure, Aug 14, 2009
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE CONTACT WAS HAVING HIS VEHICLE SERVICED, HE WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTING. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALER. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 53,000.
Structure, Other or unspecified, Jul 22, 2009
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THERE WERE 14 MILES ON THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PAINT WAS CHIPPING ON THE VEHICLE. HE FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE MANUFACTURER AND THEY DECLINED ANY LIABILITY FOR THE FAILURE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE LESS THAN 36,461. THE VEHICLE ALSO HAD FRAME RUST. UPDATED 09/09/09.*JB
Structure, Jun 1, 2009
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHEN ENTERING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT NOTICED RUST ON THE FRAME. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THEY PREDICTED THAT THE FRAME WOULD FAIL WITHIN THE YEAR. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FROM THE MANUFACTURER REGARDING THE FRAME FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THEY CONDUCTED A TEST BY TAKING A HAMMER AND STRIKING THE RUST SPOTS TO SEE IF THE HAMMER WOULD GO COMPLETELY THROUGH. THE FAILURE COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED, WHICH MEANT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT COMPLETELY FAILING. THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED TO BRING THE VEHICLE BACK FOR INSPECTION BY A REGIONAL INSPECTOR. THE CONTACT FEELS THAT THE ISSUE NEEDS TO BE REMEDIED BEFORE A CRASH OCCURS. HE CALLED THE MANUFACTURER AND WAS INFORMED THAT A REGIONAL INSPECTOR WOULD CALL HIM TO SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT FOR FURTHER INSPECTION. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 45,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 61,200.
Structure, Jan 13, 2009
SYNOPSIS OF PROBLEM: THE FRAME OF THE TACOMA WAS FABRICATED WITH INSUFFICIENT CORROSION PROTECTION, PARTICULARLY INSIDE THE BOXED SECTION OF FRAME UNDER THE MIDSECTION OF THE TRUCK. THE FRAME IS LITERALLY RUSTING FROM THE INSIDE OUT. WHAT HAPPENS IS, AS THE FRAME RUSTS ON THE INSIDE OF THE BOXED SECTION, THE RUST FLAKES DROP ONTO THE BOTTOM OF THE BOXED SECTION. THESE RUST FLAKES THEN PLUG THE WEEP HOLES IN THE FRAME SO THAT MOISTURE IS NOT ALLOWED TO DRAIN OUT THE INTERIOR OF THE BOXED SECTION, THEREBY EXACERBATING THE POTENTIAL FOR CORROSION. SO WHAT IS HAPPENING IS THE BOTTOM OF THE BOXED SECTION OF FRAME IS RUSTING OUT DUE TO THE BUILD-UP OF MOISTURE AND THE ACCUMULATION OF RUST FLAKES PLUGGING OFF THE WEEP HOLES. THE RUST FLAKES ARE 1/8? DEEP ON THE BOTTOM OF MY BOXED SECTION OF FRAME. BASICALLY THE BOTTOM 20% OF TACOMA FRAMES ARE RUSTING OUT. WHAT IS PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS ABOUT THE BOTTOM OF THE BOXED SECTION OF FRAME BECOMING COMPROMISED BY CORROSION, IS THE BOTTOM OF THE BOXED SECTION IS WHERE THE BRACKET FOR THE REAR LEAF SPRING IS ATTACHED. AS THE BOXED SECTION CORRODES, THERE IS LESS AND LESS MATERIAL SUPPORTING THIS MAJOR SUSPENSION BRACKET. THE DESIGN OF THIS BRACKET MUST BE ANALYZED BY YOUR NHTSA INDEPENDENT ENGINEER. I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT IT DOESN?T TAKE MUCH FRAME CORROSION TO SEVERELY COMPROMISE THE INTEGRITY OF THIS WELDED LEAF SPRING BRACKET. IF THIS BRACKET FAILS, THEN THE FRONT OF THE LEAF SPRING COMES FREE, THE REAR AXLE COMES OUT OF ALIGNMENT, WHICH COULD CAUSE THE OPERATOR TO LOSE CONTROL. THIS IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE! I ALSO CAN'T HELP BUT WONDER THAT SINCE THE FRAME IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE VEHICLE'S SAFETY SYSTEM, WHAT DOES A SEVERELY CORRODED AND WEAKENED FRAME DO TO THE LEVEL OF CRASH PROTECTION OFFERED BY THE VEHICLE? IF NHTSA?S INDEPENDENT ENGINEER FINDS THAT THE FRAME DOES PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN THE CRASH PROTECTION OFFERED BY THE VEHICLE, THEN THE NHTSA WILL HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO FORCE TOYOTA TO DO A RECALL. *TR
Structure, Jul 1, 2008
EXCESSIVE FRAME RUST ON 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. *TR
Structure, Oct 21, 2007
BACK HATCH UNLOCKED AND FLEW OPEN ON HIGHWAY WHILE I HAD CUSTOMERS IN MY 4 RUNNER. PULLED OVER AND TRIED TO SHUT...WOULD NOT SHUT. HAVING TO DRIVE NOW WITH BACK TAILGATE TIED SHUT. EXHAUST COMES IN THROUGH BACK OF VEHICLE. HAVING REPAIRED ON 10/24 FOR A COST OF OVER $400! *TR
Air bags, Structure, Dec 19, 2006
PASSENGER SIDE AIR BAG VIBRATION WHEN MOTOR IS RUNNING. RETURNED TO LOCAL DEALERSHIP DUE TO LOUD RATTLE IN DASH BOARD. DEALER INSPECTED AND REPORTED THAT A MAJORITY OF THE CLIPS HOLDING THE PASSENGER SIDE AIRBAG IN PLACE WERE NOT THERE. DEALER ORDERED REPLACEMENT CLIPS AND DASHBOARD BOLTS AND REPAIR WAS MADE. IN OCTOBER 2003 RATTLE RETURNED AND A BOLT APPEARED ON THE PASSENGER FLOOR BOARD. RETURNED VEHICLE TO DEALERSHIP WHERE INSPECTION TOOK PLACE. MECHANIC SUGGESTED THAT SOMEONE HAD HIT THE DASHBOARD TO LOOSEN BOLTS, NOT THE CASE, YET NO ATTEMPT TO REPAIR OR TIGHTEN EQUIPMENT WAS MADE. *NM
Structure, Oct 21, 2006
2 MONTHS AFTER I BOUGHT 03 TACOMA DOUBLE CAB W/ ONLY 3000 MILES ON IT I NOTICED THAT AROUND THE BOTTOM CORNERS OF BOTH REAR DRS AND THE FRONT BOTTOM CORNERS OF THE BED ALL THE PAINT HAD COME OFF ON A FAIRLY SMALL SECTION (BUT VERY NOTICABLE, EVEN FROM A DISTANCE).THE SERVICE WRITER THAT I WAS SPEAKING TO SAID THEIR WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE DOUBLE CABS DOING THIS. AT THIS POINT THE SERVICE MANAGER CAME TO US AND TOLD ME THAT IT WAS CUASED FROM ME NOT INSTALLING RUNNING BOARDS ON THE VEHICLE. NEXT HE SAID THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO GET IN CONTACT WITH THE REGIONAL MANAGER AND DISCUSS IT WITH HIM AND HAVE HIM TAKE A LOOK AT THE VEHICLE. AT THIS TIME I HAD A SCHEDULED APPOINTMENT AND ALL THEY DID WAS GO LOOK AT IT IN THE PARKING LOT REAL QUICK AND NO RO WAS MADE MONTHS WENT BY AND I STILL GOT NO RESPONCE WHEN I WOULD CALL THEY SAID THEY HAD TO WAIT FOR THE REGIONAL MANAGER TO MAKE IT UP HERE. AGAIN MONTHS WENT BY AND STILL NOTHING. CALLED AND GOT THE SAME RESPONCE. AGAIN MONTHS AND I CALLED AND WAS TOLD THAT THE RM WAS GOING TO BE THEIR ON A CERTAIN DATE AND THEY SET ME UP AN APPT. BUT TOLD ME I WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THEIR BODY SHOP FIRST TO GET A QUOTE TO FIX IT. I WENT TO THE BODY SHOP ON THE DAY OF MY APPT. AND GOT TO DEAL WITH THE MANAGER HIMSELF WHILE THEY DID UP THE QUOTE TO REPAIR THE MANAGER WAS TELLING ME THAT THEY HAD REPAIRED AT LEAST A DOZEN OF THESE SAME VEHICLES WITH THE SAME PROBLEM UNDER FACTORY WARRANTY. HE HAD SAID THAT DUE TO THE BODY CONFIGURATION AND THE PLACEMENT OF THE FACTORY MUD FLAPS THAT DEBRIS COMING OFF THE FRONT TIRES WEARS OFF THE PAINT CAUSING IT TO RUST AND ALSO RUINS THE FENDER FLARES WHICH HE LATER SHOWED ME. HE ALSO STATED THAT ALL OF THESE VEHICLES WERE DOING THIS. NEXT I WENT TO THE APPT. AND THE RM AND SERVICE MANAGER WENT TO LOOK AT THE VEHICLE AND I WAS TOLD TO WAIT IN THE SITTING AREA. THEY CAME BACK IN ABOUT TEN MINUTES LATER AND THE RM TOLD ME THAT IT WAS DUE TO ENVIROMENTAL CONDITIONS AND IT WOULD NOT BE COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. *NM