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
371 reports, newest first.
Structure, Feb 5, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING THE VEHICLE INSPECTED, THE MECHANIC STATED THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED AND WAS PERFORATED. THE MECHANIC ADVISED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 96,000.
Structure, Jan 18, 2013
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED, EXHIBITING AA LARGE HOLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER WHERE THEY ADVISED HIM THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 80,000. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 84,000. ...UPDATED 06-19-13 *BF
Fuel/propulsion system, Jan 14, 2013
THE FUEL TANK STRAP BROKE WHILE I WAS GROCERY SHOPPING. I HEARD THE TANK RUBBING AGAINST THE DRIVE SHAFT WHEN I PULLED OUT OF MY PARKING SPACE. THE VEHICLE IS NOT DRIVE ABLE, AND I BELIEVE THIS TO BE A SERIOUS ISSUE. *TR
Structure, Dec 27, 2012
MY 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH 105K MILES WAS FOUND DURING AN INSPECTION TO HAVE A RUSTED FRAME TOYOTA HAS ADMITTED TO THE DEFECT AND REFUSES TO CORRECT I OWN AND BOUGHT NEW A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA FROM ROCKINGHAM TOYOTA IN SALEM, NH. I WAS JUST INFORMED BY MY MECHANIC ON 12/5/2012 THAT MY TRUCK WOULD NOT PASS MASS STATE INSPECTION DUE TO A TROUBLE CODE (CHECK ENGINE LIGHT) AND MOST IMPORTANTLY THAT MY FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED THROUGH AND THAT MY TOYOTA TRUCK WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I PERSONALLY VERIFIED THIS BY CRAWLING UNDER MY TOYOTA TRUCK AND POKING MY FINGERS THROUGH THE FRAME. MY TOYOTA TACOMA IS READY TO FOLD IN HALF DUE TO THE EXTENT OF FRAME RUST. AFTER CONTACTING TOYOTA IN CALIFORNIA (PHONE 800 331 4331) AND DISCUSSING THE SAFETY ISSUE WITH THE ASSIGNED CASE MANAGER [XXX], I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THAT COULD BE DONE TO RECTIFY THIS UNSAFE CONDITION. I ALSO CONTACTED ROCKINGHAM TOYOTA IN SALEM, NH. AND THEY WOULD TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS UNSAFE CONDITION. THEY MENTIONED THAT THE SAFETY RECALL "PROGRAM" HAD EXPIRED. TOYOTA CORPORATE CLAIMS THAT I RECEIVED SEVEN RECALL NOTICES REGARDING RUSTED FRAME ISSUES. I NEVER RECEIVED ANY RECALL OR NOTICE FROM TOYOTA REGARDING THE FRAME ISSUE. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
Suspension, Power train, Structure, Dec 27, 2012
TOYOTA HAS RECALLED MY TRUCK DUE TO A RUSTED OUT FRAME. THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP HAS ELECTED TO REPLACE MY FRAME WITH A NEW FRAME. THIS LARGE PROCEDURE HAS LEFT ME INSECURE ABOUT THE OUTCOME. THIS TRUCK IS NOW 10 YEARS OLD AND AS SOON AS THE START WRENCHING ON ALL THE SYSTEM COMPONENTS TO DISASSEMBLE AND RE ASSEMBLE MY TRUCK I AM AFRAID THAT THEY SHORTEN THE LIFE OF EXISTING COMPONENTS DUE TO ADDED WEAR AND TEAR. THE DEALER WILL NEED TO REMOVE AND REINSTALL BRAKE LINES AND GAS LINES THAT HAVE BEEN SET IN PLACE AND HAVE EXTENSIVE CORROSION THIS WILL LEAD TO PREMATURE FAILURE AND UNSAFE OPERATION. MOST MECHANIC KNOW THAT A RUSTED AND SET BOLT THAT HAS NOT BEEN MOVED FOR 10 YEARS HAS A 50% CHANCE OF REMOVAL. IN ORDER TO REMOVE SUCH A "STUCK" BOLT THEY WILL NEED TO APPLY HEAT AND IMPACT AND MAY WEAKEN THE EXISTING PARTS, STEEL, AND BOLTS TO LOWER LEVELS OUT OF TOLERANCE THAT THE VEHICLE AS DESIGNED ORIGINALLY. ADDITIONALLY, THIS SERVICE IS COMPLETED IN A LOCATION WITH OUT THE CONTROLS, QUALITY ASSURANCE AND TESTING THAT IS IN PLACE IN A FACTORY WHERE NEW VEHICLES ARE BUILT. THERE IS UNCERTAINTY THAT THIS VEHICLE WILL BE ASSEMBLED, TESTED, AND INSPECTED ACCORDING THE MANUFACTURER'S GUIDELINES FOR A FACTORY PRODUCED VEHICLE. THIS LEADS TO UNCERTAINTY THAT THE VEHICLE WILL NOT OPERATE WITHIN THE INTENDED MANUFACTURES GUIDELINES FOR SAFETY, ROLL OVER PROTECTION, AND CRASH PERFORMANCE. I PROPOSE THAT A TOTAL FRAME RECALL AND REPLACEMENT (OR ANY LARGE INTEGRAL PART THAT WILL IMPACTED THE VEHICLE OPERATION) ON ANY VEHICLE SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED GIVEN THE UNCERTAINTY DESCRIBED. *TR THE CONSUMER STATED THERE APPEARED TO BE AN OIL LEAK COMING FROM THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL BOOT THAT WAS NOT APPARENT PRIOR TO THE FRAME REPLACEMENT PROCEDURE.
Structure, Dec 6, 2012
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS SERVICED IN 2010 FOR THE SAME FAILURE WHERE THE DEALER APPLIED A SOLUTION TO THE FRAME TO PREVENT IT FROM RUSTING. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 140,000. UPDATED 07/02/13*LJ UPDATED 12/24/13*CN
Suspension, Engine and engine cooling, Nov 23, 2012
PURCHASED USED VEHICLE FROM PRIVATE SELLER. ON THE FIRST DAY OF USE, AFTER OBTAINING NEW TITLE, TAGS, INSURANCE COVERAGE, THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON. THE FOLLOWING DAY SCHEDULED SERVICE W/ THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER. UPON INSPECTION WAS TOLD THAT THE TRUCK NEEDED A CATALYTIC CONVERTER AND THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THE LOWER FRONT BALL JOINTS THAT THE DEALER WILL REPLACE FOR FREE. THE DEALER HAD TO ORDER THE PARTS. AFTER RECEIVING THE PARTS AND UPON START OF THE REPAIRS, I RECEIVED A PHONE INFORMING ME THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED AND THE VEHICLE IS DEEMED UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I WAS GIVEN AN 800 PHONE NUMBER TO CALL AND DEAL DIRECTLY WITH TOYOTA CORPORATE OFFICE. I AM PATIENTLY AWAITING FOR A RESPONSE. *TR
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.
Seats, May 2, 2012
THE FOAM INSIDE THE DRIVER'S HEAD REST HAS DETERIORATED SO A STEEL BAR IS COVERED BY ONLY FABRIC AND NO FOAM. IT CREATES A HAZARD BECAUSE IN CASE OF A REAR END CRASH, THE DRIVER'S HEAD WILL IMPACT A STEEL BAR INSTEAD OF A FOAM PAD. I CONTACTED TOYOTA. THEY CONSIDER IT OUT OF WARRANTY AND WANT ALMOST $500 FOR A NEW HEAD RESTRAINT. THIS IS LIKE SAYING THE SEATBELTS OR AIRBAGS DON'T HAVE TO WORK FOR THE LIFE OF THE VEHICLE. *JS
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.
Power train, Sep 28, 2011
I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE REAR AXLE HOUSING ON MY 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE METAL ON THE REWARD SIDE OF THE RING GEAR HOUSING IS VERY THIN AND WILL RUST OUT AND BEGIN TO LEAK. I HAVE PERSONALLY SEEN GEAR OIL LEAKING THROUGH PINHOLES IN THE REAR AXLE ON TWO OTHER TOYOTA TRUCKS. THE THIN METAL AND LACK OF ANTI-CORROSION TREATMENT ON THE AXLE HOUSING CREATES SEVERAL SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS. 1. EVENTUAL FAILURE OF THE MECHANICAL COMPONENTS IF LEAK IS NOT DETECTED. IF THE FAILURE OCCURS WHILE IN MOTION THIS CAN CAUSE AN ACCIDENT IF IT IS A SEVERE FAILURE THAT LOCKS UP THE REAR WHEELS. 2. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE REAR AXLE HOUSING. THE METAL IS WEAKENED DUE TO THE CORROSION AND CAN POSSIBLE CAUSE THE HOUSING TO BEND OR BREAK. AGAIN CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. 3. POLLUTION. THE LEAKING GEAR OIL THROUGH THE RUSTED AXLE HOUSING CAUSES POLLUTION OF GROUND WATER AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. *TT
Power train, Sep 6, 2011
RUST OUT OF THE DIFFERENTIAL COVER. ALL OF THE OIL IN THE DIFFERENTIAL LEAKED OUT. NO PARTS ARE AVAILABLE FROM TOYOTA. THE COMPLETE DIFFERENTIAL MUST BE REPLACED AT A COST OF OVER $ 1,000.00. THIS IS A MAJOR PROBLEM AS PER MANY TOYOTA FORUMS ON THE NET. TOYOTA WILL NOT STAND BY THIS REPAIR AND WILL NOT ADMIT TO ANY PROBLEM ABOUT RUST.
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
Vehicle speed control, Aug 5, 2011
I BOUGHT THIS TRUCK BRAND NEW IN MARCH 2003 AND HAVE HAD MANY PROBLEMS, BUT NOTHING YOU DON'T EXPECT WITH VEHICLES TODAY OR ANYTHING TOYOTA DID NOT EVENTUALLY FIX, UNTIL NOW. ABOUT A YEAR AGO WHILE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AT ABOUT 45 THE TRUCK JUST LOST POWER AND STALLED ON ME. I WAS ALMOST NOT ABLE TO GET IT OFF THE ROAD AND OF COURSE THE PERSON BEHIND ME ALMOST REAR ENDED ME AND WAS HIGHLY AGITATED I HAD STOPPED IN THE MIDDLE OF TRAFFIC AND APPEARED TO BE DRIVING LIKE A TEENAGER LEARING TO DRIVE A MANUAL SHIFT TRANSMISSION. WHEN I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER I WAS TOLD IT WAS A BAD MAF SENSOR WHICH WAS REPLACED ALONG WITH OTHER ITEMS WHICH COST $400. THIS DID NOT FIX IT AND AFTER MUCH TRIAL AND ERROR AND RESEARCH I HAVE FOUND IT WAS THE THROTTLE BODY AND ONE OF IT'S SENSORS THAT CAN'T BE REPLACED. WHEN I MENTIONED THIS TO TOYOTA, THEY DISAGREED AND SAID THIS WAS IMPOSSIBLE. IT IS FUNNY HOW MANY COMPLAINTS ARE HERE AND HOW MANY MORE ARE HAVING THIS ISSUE WHO DON'T EVEN KNOW TO FILE A COMPLAINT HERE. MY LOCAL TOYOTA SPECIALIST (NOT THE DEALERSHIP), WHO I TRUST AND HAS SPENT A WEEK WITH MY TRUCK DRIVING IT AND TESTING IT AND STILL ONLY CHARGED ME $80, HAS ALSO CONFIRMED THE PROBLEM, A BAD SENSOR AND THE ONLY FIX IS TO COMPLETELY REPLACE THE THROTTLE BODY ASSEMBLY AT A COST OF ABOUT $1,000 OR SO DEPENDING ON AVAILABLITY OF PARTS. THIS IS AN OBVIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE 2003 AND 2004 MODELS ONLY AND HAVE HEARD CLAIMS FROM TOYOTA MECHANICS "OFF THE RECORD" THAT TOYOTA KNOWS ABOUT THE PROBLEM AND REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT. IT HAS COME TO THE POINT THAT I DON'T LET ANYONE IN MY FAMILY DRIVE THIS TRUCK BUT ME, IT IS TOO DANGEROUS. MY KIDS DON'T RIDE IN IT WITH ME EITHER BECAUSE IT COULD STALL AS I AM TRYING TO CROSS TRAFFIC AND THE RESULTS COULD BE DEADLY. PLEASE, PLEASE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS, I AM GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND THE MONEY BECAUSE I CAN'T WAIT TO FIX THIS, BUT MAYBE, JUST MAYBE YOU CAN SAVE OTHERS THE MONEY AND POSSIBLY THEIR FAMILES LIVES! *TT
Power train, Vehicle speed control, Aug 1, 2011
VEHICLE LOSES POWER UNEXPECTEDLY AND IS INCONSISTENT. HAS HAPPENED BEFORE TO ME AND MANY, MANY TIMES BY OTHERS WITH THE SAME VEHICLE. A POORLY DESIGNED/ENGINEERED ACCELERATOR PEDAL POSITION SENSOR APPEARS TO BE THE ISSUE. TOYOTA HAS BEEN NOTIFIED BY ME MULTIPLE TIMES BUT REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS SERIOUS FLAW IN THEIR VEHICLE. MOST RECENTLY, I WAS NEARLY REAR ENDED WHEN ON THE FREEWAY, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY LOST POWER. FORTUNATELY THE DRIVER BEHIND ME WAS CONSCIOUS AND WAS ABLE TO MAKE AN EMERGENCY MANEUVER TO THE OTHER LANE. SOMEONE WILL DIE FROM THESE PROBLEMS! THIS HAS BEEN WELL DOCUMENTED BY MANY AT HTTP://WWW.TTORA.COM/FORUM/SHOWTHREAD.PHP?T=13283&HIGHLIGHT=APPS+FIX I ASK THAT THE NTHSA PLEASE INVESTIGATE AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. IT APPEARS MANY OF US, INCLUDING MYSELF, HAVE SUBMITTED COMPLAINTS ON THIS ISSUE AND NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. ONE MAY ARGUE THAT THIS IS AN 8 YEAR OLD VEHICLE SO NO REASON TO INVESTIGATE. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOUR'S AND TOYOTA'S ATTENTION SINCE 2005. IT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED! PLEASE. *KB
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
Air bags, Jun 15, 2011, crash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING OUT IN AN INTERSECTION WHEN A VEHICLE CRASHED INTO HIM AT 45 MPH. THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE CONTACTS HOME AND HAD NOT BEEN INSPECTED. THE CONTACT WAS CONCERNED THAT THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 80,000.
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
Vehicle speed control, Dec 29, 2010
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HOOK THAT HELD THE FLOOR MAT IN PLACE LOOSENED AND CAUSED THE FLOOR MAT TO BECOME STUCK UNDER THE ACCELERATOR AND BRAKE PEDALS. THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO STOP THE VEHICLE WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH IN THE RAIN. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHO HAD PREVIOUSLY REPLACED THE HOOK. THE DEALER DID NOT HAVE ANY RECORD OF THE PREVIOUS REPAIR AND STATED THE THE CONTACT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS OF A REPLACEMENT HOOK. THE FLOOR MAT HAD NOT BEEN REMOVED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 120,000. UPDATED 03/03/11 *BF UPDATED 03/07/11