2001 TOYOTA TACOMA Complaints

WHEELS ARE TWO PIECE CONSTRUCTION RUST BUILD-UP BETWEEN THE TWO PIECES DOES NOT ALLOW ME TO CLEAN. IMPOSSIBLE TO SERVICE RUST BUILD-UP IS EXCESSIVE.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP TRUCK. THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND THEY ADVISED HIM THERE WAS A HOLE IN THE FRAME. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE DEFECT. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 95,000. UPDATED 08/20/13*LJ

UPON MAKING A TURN INTO MY DRIVEWAY THE LOWER LEFT(DRIVERS SIDE) BALL JOINT SEPERATED FROM THE KNUCKLE CAUSING LOSS OF STEERING. THIS IN TURN MADE THE FRONT WHEEL FALL INTO THE VEHICLE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SUB FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND DENIED SERVICING THE VEHICLE UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 12V542000 (TIRES) DUE TO THE CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 98,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT UPON INSPECTION, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME HAD CORRODED DUE TO RUST. THE MANUFACTURER PREVIOUSLY ISSUED A VOLUNTARY RECALL RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE BUT THE RECALL EXPIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO WELDED THE AREA WHICH EXHIBITED A HOLE AS A TEMPORARY FIX. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 134,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.

THE FRAME WAS RUSTED, AND WE WERE AWARE OF RECALLS. 2 WEEKS AGO WE HAD IT INSPECTED AT THE DEALER WHERE WE BOUGHT IT. THE MECHANIC TOLD US THE VEHICLE WAS UN-DRIVEABLE. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT SENT THE INFORMATION TO TOYOTA BUT THE RECALL CLAIM WAS DENIED. THE MECHANIC GAVE US A NUMBER TO CALL TO PLACE A CLAIM. THE REPRESENTATIVE TOLD US WE HAD BEEN MAILED A LETTER IN 2011 SAYING THE VEHICLE NEEDED UNDERCOATING. SHE ADMITTED THAT IT WAS SOMETHING TOYOTA WAS DOING LEGALLY TO AVOID HAVING TO HONOR THE RECALL CLAIM. SHE ALSO SAID THAT THE UNDERCOATING WOULD HAVE BEEN USELESS SINCE DEFECTIVE STEEL WAS USED TO CONSTRUCT THE FRAME. AGAIN, THE CASE MANAGER TOLD US THE CLAIM WAS BEING DENIED. *TR

THE BRAKES FAILED DUE TO LOSS OF HYDRAULIC FLUID. THIS OCCURRED SUDDENLY. THE STEEL HYDRAULIC BRAKE LINE HAS CORRODED AND RUPTURED WITHIN AN INCH OF WHERE IT CONNECTS TO THE BRAKE BIAS VALVE NEAR THE LEFT REAR WHEEL. UPON INSPECTION OF THE AREA AROUND THE BRAKE BIAS VALVE, THE BIAS VALVE ITSELF, THE BOLTS SECURING THE BIAS VALVE, AND THE BRAKE LINES SEVERE CORROSION WAS OBSERVED. THE INSPECTOR WHO HAS 35 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WORKING ON TOYOTAS REGARDS THIS CORROSION AS ABNORMAL FOR ANY VEHICLE OF THIS AGE. THE VEHICLE'S FRAME WAS COATED WITH A SUBSTANCE THAT IS SUPPOSED TO PREVENT CORROSION UNDER A TOYOTA RECALL IN OCT. 2010. THIS SUBSTANCE WAS SPRAYED ON THE BRAKE LINE WHICH RUPTURED AS WELL. THE INSPECTOR FEELS THAT THE COATING IS ACTUALLY ACCELERATING THE CORROSION. THE INSPECTOR OBSERVED THE COATING PEALING OFF OF THE TRUCK'S FRAME IN LARGE SHEETS. *TR

LOUD NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR END. IT APPEARS THE DIFFERENTIAL CASE ROTTED OUT LEAVING THE REAR END WITH NO GEAR FLUID. WHEN THEY REPLACED THE FRAME (AS IT ROTTED OUT TO)... THEY SHOUD HAVE REPLACED THE DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING. LUCKY THIS HAPPEN AROUND TOWN AND NOT ON THE HIGHWAY. I CAN IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THE DIFFERENTIAL BLEW APART AT HIGH SPEED (WITH FLYING METAL AND NO CONTROL OF ACCELERATION IF NEEDED TO AVOID OR CAUSE AN ACCIDENT). I CALLED TOYOTA CAR CARE AND THEY SAID THEY WOULD GO IN HALF ON THE REPAIR AND GET BACK TO ME IN A FEW DAYS WITH THE DETAILS. THEY DIDN'T... I CALLED THEM A FEW DAYS LATER AND THEY SAID THEY COULDN'T HELP ME. LOOKED TO BE A +/- $2,000 REPAIR. *TR

I LIVE IN VIRGINIA. THERE WAS A SAFETY RECALL FOR INSPECTION OF THE TRUCK FRAME FOR RUST CORROSION. AT THE TIME VEHICLE HAD THE RECALL I WAS BEING TREATED FOR A MENTAL DISABILITY AND IN MENTAL HOSPITALS. I WAS NOT OF SOUND MIND OR JUDGMENT TO UNDERSTAND THE "RECALL NOTICE". WHILE HAVING OIL CHANGED BY THE TOYOTA DEALER THE FRAME OF THE TRUCK WAS NOTED TO HAVE HOLES IN THE FRAME CAUSED BY RUST. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION HAS REFUSED TO REPLACE THE FRAME OF THE TRUCK HONORING THE RECALL EVEN THOUGH I PROVIDED THE NECESSARY INFORMATION FROM DOCTORS PROVIDING DOCUMENTATION OF MY ILLNESS AT THE TIME OF THE RECALL. ON MARCH 14, 2013, THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN IN FOR A SAFETY RECALL FOR RUST OF THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER; WHICH COULD FALL OFF CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. THE TOYOTA DEALER REPLACED THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER CONSISTING OF TWO METAL PLATES WITH FOUR BOLTS THAT WAS BOLTED TO A DEFECTIVE FRAME THAT HAS HOLES DUE TO CORROSION; ALSO, THEY REPLACED SUPPORTS THAT RUNS BETWEEN THE TWO FRAME RAILS; THEY DID NOT REPLACE THE CABLE NOR THE RUSTED PART THAT HOLDS THE WHEEL TO THE PREVIOUS ASSEMBLY PARTS. THIS HAS NOT FIXED THE ISSUE BECAUSE THEY HAVE ONLY REPLACED THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER PLATE ONTO A FRAME THAT HAS HOLES DUE TO RUST THAT IS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. I NEED THIS VEHICLE AS I AM ON DISABILITY AND LIMITED INCOME; I WANT THE FRAME REPLACED OR A NEW TRUCK WITH THE SAME OPTIONS AS I HAVE ON THE 2001 TACOMA. TOYOTA RECEIVED A 25 MILLION DOLLAR SETTLEMENT FROM DANA CORPORATION, SUPPLIER OF THE TACOMA TRUCK FRAMES, PROPER ANTIRUST PREVENTATIVE WAS NOT APPLIED TO PREVENT CORROSION, WHICH WAS A COST SAVING FOR ONE OR BOTH COMPANIES. FROM 1995 TO 2004 THE TACOMA TRUCKS HAVE HAD THIS PROBLEM. BY REPLACING THE FRAME TOYOTA WOULD NOT BE LOSING ANY MONEY BECAUSE THEY GOT THEIR MONEY FROM DANA CORP SUPPLIER OF THE TACOMA FRAMES. *TR

I PURCHASED THE BEST TRUCK I COULD EVER WISH FOR, 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA; IT'S AN XTRA CAB WITH TRD WITH THE SR5. TODAY AT 113500 MILES IT STILL LOOKS AND RUNS SHOWROOM NEW. BUT IT HAS THE RUST ON THE FRAME AND BAD TOO. TOYOTA REFUSES TO HELP IN ANY WAY. IN 2012 THE FRAME WAS PERFECT, NOW IT IS ALMOST EATEN THROUGH. I LOVE THIS TRUCK BUT IT IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND I AM VERY DISPLEASED WITH HOW THEY ARE HANDLING THE SITUATION. AT 113500 MILES I OPT TO GO WITH TOYOTA COMPARED TO CHEVROLET BECAUSE TOYOTA HAD A WONDERFUL REPUTATION ON RELIABLE VEHICLES AND I WAS SOLD ON THAT. WHEN THE RECALL WAS SENT OUT, I WAS LIVING IN VIRGINIA AND BATTLING CANCER SO I MISSED THE RECALL. I BELIEVE TOYOTA SHOULD WARRANT THEIR PRODUCT OR CLOSE DOWN THEIR PLANTS IF THEY WON?T HONOR THE ISSUES AT HAND. I WANT A NEW FRAME OR AT LEAST ANOTHER TRUCK WITH MY ENGINE AND TRANSMISSION, MY BABY IS GORGEOUS. I AM NOW ON A FIXED INCOME WITH BLOOD CLOTS IN MY LUNGS DUE TO THE CANCER I NEED MY TRUCK. *TR