2004 Toyota Tacoma
Problems, recalls and owner-reported issues
Structure is the leading concern among 414 owner complaints filed for this model year. This is the 6th highest complaint count among 26 Tacoma model years with reports.
Of the 2004 reports, 27 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
Seat belts, frontMay 5, 2004
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS FAIL TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 209, 'SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES.' THE DRIVER'S SIDE SEAT BELT HAS INCORRECT MARKINGS.
THIS DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARD.
DEALERS HAVE REPLACED THE SEAT BELTS. NO VEHICLES WERE SOLD TO CONSUMERS.
Campaign 04V214000 on NHTSA.gov
Representative owner complaints: structure
203 reports, newest first. Show all
Power train, Structure, May 18, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TRANSMISSION REAR DIFFERENTIAL WAS CORRODED AND LEAKING TRANSMISSION FLUID WHILE THE LOCAL MECHANIC PERFORMED ROUTINE MAINTENANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 190,000. UPDATED 7/14/15*CN
Suspension, Structure, May 1, 2015
A TECH WAS PERFORMING AN OIL CHANGE AND DISCOVERED THAT THE FRAME ON MY TRUCK HAS RUSTED THROUGH AT THE POINT THAT THE REAR LEAF SPRING ATTACHES ON THE DRIVES SIDE. I AM BEING TOLD THE VEHICLE IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND THEY TELL ME THAT THEY WILL NOT PROVIDE A RESOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM. *TR
Steering, Suspension, Structure, Mar 29, 2015
MY 2004 TACOMA HAS ~127,500 MILES AND HAS BEEN SUBJECT TO FRAME CORROSION AND SPARE TIRE RETAINER CORROSION RECALLS. MY DEALER RECENTLY ADVISED THAT THE LEFT REAR LEAF SPRING IS BROKEN WHICH IS RESULTING IN AN UNPREDICTABLE RESPONSE WHEN DRIVING, ESPECIALLY IN 4WD IN SNOWY WEATHER. THIS LACK OF STEERING CONTROL IS A SAFETY ISSUE. I BELIEVE THIS FRACTURE IS DIRECTLY LINKED TO THE CORROSION ISSUES IN THE TACOMA FRAME AND SUSPENSION DESIGN ON THE TACOMA. TOYOTA USA HAS REVIEWED THE CASE AND IS UNWILLING TO COVER THE COST OF THE LEAF SPRING REPAIRS. THIS IS DESPITE AN EXTENSIVE RECALL ON 2005+UP TACOMA'S FOR DISTRESSED LEAF SPRINGS. *TR
Structure, Mar 23, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE REGULAR MAINTENANCE WAS BEING PERFORMED, THE TECHNICIAN NOTIFIED THE CONTACT THAT THE REAR SUBFRAME WAS FRACTURED WHICH PREVENTED THE VEHICLE FROM BEING LIFTED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY ANOTHER MECHANIC, WHO CONFIRMED THAT THE SUBFRAME FRACTURED DUE TO CORROSION AND THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO BE DRIVEN. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE AND DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 50,000. ..UPDATED 05/19/15*BF UPDATED 11/10/2015*JS
Structure, Mar 4, 2015
2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE FRAME RUST RECALL NOTICE. *SMD THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONSUMER, THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. HOWEVER, THE RECALL HAD ENDED AND THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO. *JB
Structure, Feb 27, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE REAR FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER. THE TECHNICIAN DIAGNOSED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
Structure, Feb 5, 2015
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED FOR AN UNRELATED REPAIR, THE MECHANIC DISCOVERED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME HAD RUST CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ISSUE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 56,000. UPDATED 04/07/15*LJ UPDATED 11/3/2015*JS
Structure, Jan 28, 2015
2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHEN RECALL CAME OUT FOR VEHICLE, IT WAS SENT TO WRONG ADDRESS AND THAT CAMPAIGN ENDED IN 2012 AND THEY (TOYOTA) WON'T DO ANYTHING FOR CUSTOMER. *TA THE CONSUMER STATED DURING A SAFETY INSPECTION, HE WAS THE FRAME ON HIS VEHICLE WAS SEVERELY RUSTED. AT THAT TIME, HE WAS INFORMED A RECALL HAD BEEN ISSUED FOR THE PROBLEM. TOYOTA INFORMED THE CONSUMER IT WAS NOT A RECALL, BUT A CAMPAIGN. *JB
Suspension, Structure, Jan 26, 2015, crash
FRAME SLIGHTLY BENT IN ACCIDENT. WHEN BODY SHOP WENT TO PULL FRAME TO STRAIGHTEN OUT THEY WOULD NOT DO IT BECAUSE HOW BADLY RUSTED THE FRAME WAS. TRUCK HAD 88,000 MILES ON IT. TOYOTA WILL DO NOTHING. THIS IS MY SECOND TACOMA THIS HAS HAPPENED TOO. THEY RECALLED MY 97 TACOMA BECAUSE OF THE SAME ISSUE, AT LEAST THEY TREATED ME FAIRLY ON THAT. I WAS ASSURED WHEN I BOUGHT THE SECOND TRUCK RUST PROBLEM WAS FIXED. *TR
Structure, Jan 23, 2015
MY LOW MILEAGE TOYOTA TRUCK HAS BOTH FRONT AND REAR BUMPERS ROTTING THROUGH FROM THE BACK TO THE FRONT . THERE IS A HOLE COMING THROUGH THE CHROME AND THE BACK SIDE IS COMPLETELY FULL OF CRUMPLING RUST. THESE BUMPERS ARE GOING TO OFFER LITTLE TO NO PROTECTION IN A ACCIDENT SITUATION . I BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE RUST RECALLS OF THESE TRUCKS PLEASE MAKE IT HAPPEN BEFORE SOMEONE GETS SERIOUSLY INJURED. THANKS , [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
Structure, Jan 13, 2015
CALLED TOYOTA AFTER PA STATE INSPECTION WAS TOLD THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTING OUT. GOT THE RUN AROUND FROM TOYOTA STATING THAT THERE WAS A PREVENTATIVE COATING RECALL THAT MY FIANC DIDN'T HAVE PERFORMED. WHEN I CALLED TOYOTA THEY DIDN'T HAVE HER INFORMATION AND SHE OWNED THE TRUCK FOUR YEARS PRIOR TO THE CALL. AFTER THEY BLEW ME OFF. SHE GOT HER FIRST RECALL NOTICE FOR THE SPARE TIRE, TOOK IT TO TOYOTA ON 1/13/15. THEY CAN NT PERFORM THE RECALL SAYING THE FRAME IS ROTTING TO BAD AND THE TRUCK IS UNSAFE. LOOK AT THE POST ON LINE LOOK AT EDMUNDS LOOK ON GOOGLE THIS IS A HUGE SAFETY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ISSUE WHY WONT THE GOVERNMENT STEP IN AND ADDRESS THIS OR DO PEOPLE NEED TO DIE FIRST. *TR
Suspension, Structure, Dec 26, 2014
PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE IN JUNE OF 2014. THE CARFAX REPORT ONLY LISTED A RECENT RECALL DEALING WITH THE SPARE TIRE HANGER. THE CARFAX REPORT DID NOT SHOW ANY OTHER RECALLS, INCLUDING THE FRAME TREATMENT, THE FRAME REPLACEMENT OR THE TRUCK BUY BACK OFFERED BY TOYOTA. WE COMPLETELY UNAWARE OF THE RECALLS. TWO WEEKS AGO, THE REAR RIGHT SHOCK ROTTED/COMPLETELY BROKE AWAY FROM THE SEVERELY RUSTED FRAME. TOYOTA SAYS THEY WILL DO NOTHING BECAUSE "WE" DIDN'T HAVE IT TREATED. HOWEVER, WE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE RECALL AND HAD NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT THERE WAS A FRAME PROBLEM BECAUSE THE DEALER INDICATED NO ISSUES, THE CARFAX REPORT SHOWED NOTHING AND WE HAVE ONLY OWNED THE TRUCK FOR 6 MONTHS. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. ARE WE STUCK WITH THIS OR CAN WE HOLD SOMEONE ACCOUNTABLE FOR HELP? *TR
Structure, Dec 2, 2014
I OWN A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP WITCH WAS INCLUDED IN THE FRAME RECALL. AT THE TIME OF THIS RECALL I WAS HAVING HEALTH ISSUES THAT PREVENTED ME FROM FOLLOWING THOUGH ON THE RECALL. AFTER I GOT BACK ON MY FEET I CALLED THE TOYOTA DEALER IN BERLIN VERMONT AND WAS TOLD IT WAS TO LATE TO HAVE IT DONE. I THEN CALLED TOYOTA AND SPOKE WITH A GENTLEMAN, I TOLD THIS PERSON ALL ABOUT MY HEALTH ISSUES THAT HAD PREVENTED ME FROM GETTING THIS TAKEN CARE OF. HE ALSO TOLD ME IT WAS TO LATE TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT AND REPAIRED. I THEN ASKED HIM WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE FRAME BROKE WHEN DRIVING AND CAUSED A CRASH OR A DEATH AND HE TOLD ME THAT WAS MY PROBLEM. I NOW HAVE A RECALL ABOUT A SPARE TIRE HANGER THAT MAY RUST OFF ALLOWING THE SPARE TIRE TO FALL OFF. IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT THIS IS JUST A CONTINUATION OF THE FRAME PROBLEM THAT I WAS TOLD I WAS TO LATE FOR..I HAVE RUN MY OWN AUTO REPAIR SHOP FOR OVER 30 YEARS SO I AM NOTE UNFAMILIAR WITH AUTOS OR DEALER. THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME OUT AND ANY HELP YOU COULD GIVE ME WOULD BE VERY NICE. *TR UPDATED 1/7/16
Structure, Nov 19, 2014
THE TOYOTA TACOMA TRUCKS HAD A CUSTOMER SERVICE ADVISORY FOR THE FRAME RUSTING ON THE VEHICLE. THE CSA ADVISED THE CURRENT OWNER THAT THE FRAME COULD RUST AND NEEDED TO BE INSPECTED. IF THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED TOYOTA WOULD EITHER SPRAY THE FRAME OR REPLACE IT IF RUSTED. I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE FROM AN AUTHORIZED TOYOTA DEALER I WAS ASSURED THE FRAME HAD BEEN CHECKED AND TAKEN CARE OF. A WEEK LATER I HAD TO INSTALL A BLOWN OUT MUFFLER AND COME TO FIND OUT THE FRAME WAS NOT LOOKED AT AND THE FIX WAS NOT COMPLETED. BEING THE NEW OWNER OF THE TRUCK I WAS TOLD THAT THE CSA HAD EXPIRED DECEMBER 2011 AND THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE. I WAS HOPING TOYOTA WOULD HAVE A PROGRAM IN PLACE FOR PEOPLE THAT PURCHASE A VEHICLE LIKE I DID THAT DID NOT HAVE THE FRAME FIXED. THEY DO NOT. THEREFORE I NOW OWN A TRUCK THAT IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. TOYOTA NEEDS TO MAKE THIS A RECALL INSTEAD OF A CSA. *TR
Structure, Nov 11, 2014
THE FRAME IS SO ROTTED IT WONT PASS STATE INSPECTION, THIS TRUCK WAS RECALLED FOR THIS PROBLEM A FEW YEARS AGO, I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION AT THAT TIME AND THEY SAID IT WAS FINE, NOW LIKE TWO YEARS LATER ITS TOTALLY ROTTEN, I CONTACTED TOYOTA HEAD QUARTERS AND FILED A CASE # 1411101661 AND THEY BASICALLY TOLD SORRY ITS TO LATE RECALL IS OVER, I TOLD THEM IT WAS AT THE DEALER FOR THIS RECALL AND THEY DID NOTHING BUT LOOK AT IT, CAN YOU HELP AND THERE ARE 1000S OF THESE ROTTEN TRUCKS ON THE ROAD TODAY A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE THANKS [XXX]. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
Suspension, Structure, Nov 1, 2014
THE FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH.I CALLED TOYOTA THEY SAID THEY SENT A RECALL.I TOLD THEM I DIDN'T RECEIVE ONE.THEY SAID IT WAS NOT THERE FAULT.IT WAS THE POST OFFICE FAULT.I CAN'T HAVE ANY WORK DONE ON THE TRUCK BECAUSE OF THE RUST.I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF MONEY I EXPECTED THIS TRUCK TO LAST A WHILE.THEY KNEW THEY WERE MAKING SUBSTANDARD FRAMES.BY JUST LOOKING AT MY FRAME. *TR
Structure, Oct 21, 2014
THE FRAME ON THE TRUCK IS RUSTED THROUGH.I HAVE OPENED 2 COMPLAINT CASES AND TOYOTA WILL NOT REPAIR OR REPLACE. *TR
Structure, Oct 2, 2014
I WAS DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AND NOTICED SOME UNUSUAL RATTLING. I STOPPED AND UPON INSPECTION FOUND THAT THE FRAME ON BOTH SIDES HAD CRACKED ALL THE WAY THROUGH DIRECTLY ABOVE THE REAR TIRES. THIS RENDERED THE VEHICLE EXTREMELY UNSAFE TO DRIVE. I HAD IT TOWED TO A REPAIR SHOP AND THEY TOLD ME THAT A COMPLETE FRAME REPLACEMENT NEEDS TO BE DONE AND THAT THE VEHICLE IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AS IS. THEY SAID THE FRAME IS COMPLETELY RUSTED OUT. I UNDERSTAND THE VEHICLE CAME OUT OF NEW YORK AND HAS HIGH SALT CONCENTRATIONS BUT THE REST OF THE TRUCK IS VIRTUALLY RUST FREE. I CAN?T BELIEVE THAT A FRAME RUSTING COMPLETELY OUT IS NORMAL IN JUST 10 YEARS. I HAVE CONTACTED TOYOTA (CASE NUMBER 1409290440) AND THEY ARE TELLING ME THAT ANY RECALLS PERTAINING TO THIS HAVE EXPIRED. I CAN?T BELIEVE THEY WILL NOT STEP UP AND FIX WHAT IS OBVIOUSLY SHODDY CRAFTSMANSHIP. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THIS COULD HAVE CAUSED A SERIOUS ACCIDENT. THEY STEPPED UP TO THE PLATE WITH THE 1995-2000?S THAT HAD THE EXACT SAME ISSUE AND OBVIOUSLY WAS NOT FIXED IN THE 2001-2004 MODELS. I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH TOYOTA AND VERY CONCERNED FOR THE SAFELY OF OTHER TACOMA OWNERS AS THIS SEEMS TO BE A PRETTY COMMON ISSUE WITH THESE TRUCKS. *TR
Structure, Oct 2, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTIFICATION FOR NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES). THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME WHERE THE SPARE TIRE WAS LOCATED WAS CORRODED. AS A RESULT, THE DEALER DECLINED THE RECALL REPAIR DUE TO THE FRAME BEING RUSTED. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPAIRED PRIOR TO THE RECALL REMEDY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 110,000. UPDATED 11/14/14*CN UPDATED 4/29/2015 *JS
Structure, Sep 28, 2014
I WAS AT SHELL STATION GETTING A OIL CHANGE, WHEN THEY WENT TO LIFT MY TRUCK ON THEIR LIFT THE TECHNICIAN NOTICED FRAME CORROSION IN 2 PLACES. THE TECHNICIAN TOLD ME IF I DO NOT FIX IT THE SPRING LEAF COULD FALL OFF. FURTHER MORE IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE. I DO NOT THE MONEY FOR A NEW VEHICLE. JUST BECAUSE I DID NOT GET A NOTICE DOES NOT MEAN THEY SHOULD INCLUDE A CERTAIN BATCH OF TRUCKS IT SHOULD BE ALL TOYOTA'S REGARDLESS. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAID FORGET ABOUT IT IF I DID NOT A LETTER. I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO DIE JUST TO GET THIS FIXED. *TR
Structure, Sep 5, 2014
I JUST WANTED TO TELL HOW UTTERLY USELESS I THINK THIS ADMINISTRATION IS. I WROTE IN WITH A COMPLAINT ON MY 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA WHICH HAS A RUSTED FRAME AND TOO DANGEROUS TO DRIVE. THERE WERE NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS JUST LIKE MINE AND STILL ARE ALL OVER THE INTERNET AND YOU HAVE DONE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. TOYOTA REFUSES TO FIX MY TRUCK AND I NEVER RECEIVED A NOTICE FOR MY TRUCK FRAME AS WELL AS A LOT OF OTHERS. IF I HAD KEPT DRIVING THIS TRUCK ME OR OTHERS COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED. I HAVE A CONSCIOUS UNLIKE THIS OFFICE AND TOYOTA. I CONTACTED MY SENATOR AND ASKED HIM HOW MANY COMPLAINTS DO YOU PEOPLE NEED TO DO SOMETHING. I GUESS SOMEBODY HAS TO DIE FIRST WHICH IS SINFUL AND SAD!!! *TR
Structure, Sep 2, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT DURING A ROUTINE INSPECTION, IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE SUB FRAME HAD HOLES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING HOWEVER NO RESULTS WERE AVAILABLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 124,000.
Structure, Aug 21, 2014
FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH IN MANY PLACES. IT WILL NOT PASS STATE INSPECTION. *TR
Structure, Aug 20, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING MAINTENANCE PERFORMED ON THE VEHICLE, THE INDEPENDENT MECHANIC DISCOVERED RUST AND CORROSION ON THE SUB FRAME OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT INDICATED THAT THE RUSTING AND CORROSION HAD CREATED 4 HOLES THAT EXTENDED APPROXIMATELY 5-6 FEET AND WERE APPROXIMATELY 4-6 INCHES WIDE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 147,000.
Structure, Jul 14, 2014
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS EXTREMELY RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 136,000.