2001 TOYOTA TACOMA Complaints

WHILE DRIVING ON TX US-59 NB RIGHTHAND LANE GOING APPROX. 65 MPH, THE RIGHT REAR TIRE FAILED. I MANAGED TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND STOP ON THE HIGHWAY SHOULDER. WHAT I FOUND WAS A VERY HOT TIRE WHICH HAD REMAINED INFLATED, BUT HAD LOST APPROX. 75% OF THE TREAD CIRCUMFERENCE DOWN TO THE STEEL BELT. APPROX. 25% OF THE TREAD REMAINED WITH THE TIRE, OF WHICH APPROX. 10% REMAINED ATTACHED TO THE STEEL BELT. THE SITUATION DESCRIBED ALLOWED THE TIRE TO BECOME A ROTATING METAL EATING MACHINE, CAUSING CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE WHEEL WELL, TRUCK BED, SUSPENSION AND EXHAUST SYSTEM (3 INCH STAINLESS STEEL PIPE BEND TO 90 DEGREES). INSURANCE ESTIMATES ARE APPROX. $2400.00. AFTER WAITING FOR THE TIRE TO COOL, I DEFLATED AND REMOVED THE TIRE. I WAS THEN ABLE TO BEND AND MOVE DAMAGED SHEET METAL AWAY FROM THE WHEEL WELL AREA TO ALLOW CLEARANCE FOR MY FULL SIZE SPARE, WHICH I INSTALLED AND DROVE APPROX. 5 MILES HOME WITHOUT CAUSING FURTHER DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE. *TR

WHILE DRIVING ON TX US59 NB RIGHTHAND LANE AND VEHICLE SPEED APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE RIGHT REAR TIRE FAILED. I MANAGED TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND STOP ON THE SHOULDER. WHAT I FOUND WAS A VERY HOT TIRE WHICH HAD REMAINED INFLATED BUT HAD LOST APPROX. 75% OF THE TIRE TREAD CIRCUMFERENCE DOWN TO THE STEEL BELT. APPROX. 25% OF TREAD REMAINED WITH THE TIRE OF WHICH APPROX.10% REMAINED ATTACHED TO THE STEEL BELT. THE SITUATION DESCRIBED ALLOWED THE TIRE TO BECOME A ROTATING METAL EATING MACHINE, DOING CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE WHEEL WELL, TRUCK BED, SUSPENSION AND EXHAUST (3 INCH STAINLESS STEEL PIPE BENT TO 90 DEGREES). AFTER WAITING FOR THE TIRE TO COOL, I DEFLATED AND REMOVED THE TIRE. I WAS THEN ABLE TO BEND AND MOVE SOME DAMAGED SHEET METAL AWAY FROM THE WHEEL WELL TO ALLOW CLEARANCE FOR MY FULL SIZE SPARE, WHICH I INSTALLED AND DROVE APPROX. 5 MILES HOME, WITHOUT FURTHER DAMAGING THE VEHICLE. *TR

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA FRAME RUST PERFORATION. TOYOTA SHOULD BE FORCED INTO A RECALL ON THE TACOMA TRUCK FRAMES. MINE IS PERFORATED TO THE POINT WHERE THE VEHICLE IS NOT SAFE, ONLY 70,000 MILES. *TR

I OWN A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA PICKUP TRUCK THAT HAS EXCESSIVE FRAME ROT. RECENTLY THE FRAME BROKE WHERE THE REAR BUMPER MOUNTS TO THE FRAME. THERE IS ROT LOCATED ALL OVER THE FRAME. THIS VEHICLE FALLS INTO THE SCOPE OF TOYOTA MOTOR COMPANY RUSTED FRAME PROBLEM. *TR

I HAD MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA CHECKED AND THE FRAME IS RUSTED OUT, THE DEALER DEEMED IT UNSAFE TO DRIVE, I CONTACTED TOYOTA THAT SAME NIGHT AND THEY SAID TO TAKE IT HOME IF YOU DON;T HAVE A RIDE. DEALER SAID ALL THEY CAN DO IS A FRAME REPLACEMENT AND I SAID THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE, WHY ISN'T TOYOTA TREATING THIS THE SAME WAY AS IT DID THE 1995-2000 MODELS??.. I KNOW THAT THE TRUCK WILL NEVER BE THE SAME ONCE THE MECHANICS ARE DONE,, THIS IS LIKE GOING BACK INTO PRODUCTION , AND I KNOW THEY'RE NOT TRAINED FOR THAT.. TOYOTA DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TYPE OF WARRANTY I WOULD HAVE AFTER THE WORK WAS DONE,, THEY SAID THAT THE SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM WAS DECIDED ON 02/06/09 , MY TRUCK WAS EVALUATED ON 02/18/09 A MATTER OF 12 DAYS,, I NEVER RECEIVED ANY TYPE OF NOTICE ON THIS. MY MECHANIC SAY THE PROBLEM WHEN I WENT FOR MY 3000 MILE OIL CHANGE WHICH I'VE DONE SINCE I'VE OWNED THIS TRUCK ,,IT ONLY HAS 84000 MILES ON IT AND IS IN PRISTINE CONDITION.. *TR

I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA THAT HAS FRAME RUST THROUGH, AND HAVE RECEIVED NO HELP FROM TOYOTA ABOUT A FAIR BUY BACK AS THEY DO WITH THE 95-2000 TRUCKS. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN INSPECTED BY TOYOTA SERVICE, THE SERVICE PERSON SAID IT FAILED BUT THE FACTORY DISTRICT GUY SAYS IT ISN'T BAD ENOUGH. I NOW HAVE A TRUCK WITH A RUSTED FRAME THAT I CAN'T SELL AND THEY WON'T BUY BACK. *TR

TOYOTA TACOMA 2001 PERFORATED FRAME TOYOTA REFUSES TO PUBLICLY DECLARE THESE CARS ARE UNSAFE TO DRIVE. MY FRAME IS PERFORATED AND DEEMED BY THE LOCAL TOYOTA DEALER AS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THEY ADMITTED THIS IS A "KNOWN" PROBLEM AND I NOW MUST ACCEPT COMPLETE LIABILITY IF I TAKE THE CAR OFF THE LOT. MY CASE MANAGER KEVIN INSISTED THAT "TOYOTA HAS PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED A WARRANTY EXTENSION ON DECEMBER 8TH, BUT IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO NOTIFY ALL THE OWNERS." YET HE COULD NOT MAKE ANY REFERENCE TO WHERE I COULD FIND THIS PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT. TOYOTA INSISTS THAT THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A RECALL, YET HIS EXPLANATION FOR A RECALL WAS A FAULTY COMPONENT THAT CAUSES A SAFETY ISSUES THAT WILL BE REPLACED BY THE MANUFACTURER. THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT THE CASE MANAGER STATED TOYOTA IS PREPARING TO DO. HOW CAN TOYOTA BE AWARE OF SUCH A SAFETY HAZARD AND NOT INFORM THE OWNERS. HAD I NOT PERFORMED ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, I WOULD STILL BE COMMUTING 130 MILES A DAY AT 65 MILES AND PLACE OTHERS AT RISK. MY DEALER STATED THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE 2001 TACOMAS IN OUR SMALL TOWN THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN FOUND TO BE UNSAFE OTHER THAN NHTSA, WHAT AUTHORITY EXISTS IN THE UNITED STATES THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO PUBLICLY ANNOUNCE THIS SAFETY ISSUES AND FORCE TOYOTA TO RECALL THESE VEHICLES. *TR

MY SON WAS IN AN ACCIDENT WITH MY 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA. IT IS A TOTAL LOSS. IT ROLLED OVER AND HIS PASSENGER WAS INJURED. HE HAS TOLD ME THE PASSENGER SEAT BELT FAILED AND THE PASSENGER SEAT BROKE. MY QUESTION IS THERE ANY WAY SOME ONE COULD CHECK THIS OUT FOR US? I DO HAVE PICTURES OF THE BROKEN SEAT. *TR

2001 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH FAILING FRAME DUE TO RUST ISSUES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT TOYOTA IS NOW OFFERING TO REPLACE FAILING FRAMES ON 2001 AND NEWER MODELS AS OPPOSED TO THEIR BUYBACK OF 95-200 MODELS. UNACCEPTABLE DUE TO THE OBVIOUS DECREASED RETAIL VALUE CAUSED BY THIS MAJOR ISSUE, NOT TO MENTION THAT MANY CERTIFIED MECHANICS STATE THAT THE FRAME REPLACEMENT IS A TERRIBLE IDEA DUE TO THE ELECTRICAL, ALIGNMENT, AND STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT ARE COMMON WHEN THIS IS DONE. NEVER A GOOD IDEA AND TOYOTA KNOWS IT. I AM IN LIMBO, WANTED TO TRADE IN MY TRUCK, BUT AM NOT BEING OFFERED THE SAME PLAN THAT 95-2000 OWNERS WERE. *TR

I HAVE A 2001 TOYOTA TACOMA AND HAD IT INSPECTED BY TOYOTA REP. AND IT FAILED THE ROT TEST AT FIRST THEY OFFERED ME 100% BUYBACK BUT I REFUSED BECAUSE OLDER TRUCKS 95-2000 WERE GETTING 150% BUYBACK AND THAT ABSOLUTELY DID NOT SEEM FAIR WITH ME HAVING A NEWER TRUCK SO I REFUSED. AND THEY ARE ONLY OFFERING FRAME REPLACEMENT TO THE 2001-2005 WHICH SCARES ME TO DEATH JUST THINKING ABOUT IT!!! SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS FRAME ISSUE BEFORE SOME INNOCENT PERSON IS KILLED!!! *TR