2006 TOYOTA TACOMA Complaints

PREVIOUS OWNER REMOVED DRIVER AIRBAG AND SEAT BELT HARNESS (WEBBING ONLY) DUE TO RECALLS. THE PART THAT CAUSED THE RECALL FOR THE SEAT BELT IS STILL ATTACHED TO THE VEHICLE. LOCAL DEALERSHIP WILL NOT HONOR RECALL. CONTACTED TOYOTA (CASE #[XXX]) AND THEY TOO WILL NOT HONOR THE RECALL. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

WHEN INSPECTING THE LEAF SPRING REPLACEMENT FROM A RECALL, FOUND THE FRAME CORRODED TO THE POINT THAT IT WILL FAIL. (SEE PHOTO). TOYOTA HAD A RECALL ON THESE FRAMES AND THIS TRUCK FELL UNDER THE GUIDELINES.WHEN I CONTACTED TOYOTA THEY SAID THIS WAS AN EXTENDED WARRANTY AND HAD EXPIRED.SAID THEY SENT NOTIFICATION WHICH I NEVER RECEIVED. *TR

THIS VEHICLE IS COVERED IN THE TOYOTA RUSTY FRAME LAWSUIT. AS SUCH, IT HAS BEEN INSPECTED BY 2 DIFFERENT DEALERS AND DEEMED NOT TO NEED A FRAME REPLACEMENT BOTH TIMES. IT WAS TREATED WITH CRC. ITS LAST INSPECTION WAS IN NOVEMBER OF 2018. ON SUNDAY, MAY 17TH, 2020, THE FRAME BROKE AT THE FRONT CROSS-MEMBER CAUSING THE LEFT FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM TO SEPARATE AND STEERING THE VEHICLE/CONTROLLING THE VEHICLE BECAME NEAR IMPOSSIBLE. FORTUNATELY FOR ME, THIS HAPPENED IN A PARKING LOT BACKING OUT OF A PARKING SPACE AND TURNING LEFT (IN REVERSE AT LOW SPEED) AFTER A FULL 2 WEEKS OF DRIVING IN THE MOUNTAINS OF WEST VIRGINIA. I QUESTION ALL INSPECTIONS OF FRAMES BEING PERFORMED WITHIN THE TOYOTA DEALER NETWORK AND HOPE THAT NOBODY HAS THIS FAILURE WHILE THEY ARE DRIVING AT SPEED AS THE RESULTS WILL BE CATASTROPHIC. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2006 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENTIRE SUBFRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO TOYOTA SOUTH (961 FOUR MILE RD, RICHMOND, KY 40475, (859) 624-1313) AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED OF TOYOTA WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM ZH6 HOWEVER, THE WARRANTY PERIOD WAS EXPIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 262,000.

TOYOTA WAS FORCED TO GIVE A WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT FOR FRAMES ON A NUMBER OF TRUCKS BECAUSE OF RUST. THE WARRANTY HAS EXPIRED BUT I SILL HAVE THE OLD RUST PRONE FRAME. THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RECALL THAT DOES NOT EXPIRE, WHAT HAPPENS TO ME DOWN THE ROAD WHEN MY FRAME FAILS? SINCE THE PROBLEM WILL NOT GO AWAY HOW IS THE WARRANTY LIMITED? THIS IS NOT RIGHT, HOW CAN I RESELL A TRUCK THAT HAS A FAULTY FRAME? I AM UPSET THEY GOT AWAY WITH OUT A RECALL.

STEERING BECAME VERY STIFF WHILE DRIVING IN TOWN YESTERDAY. UPON MAKING A RIGHT TURN AT A FAMILIAR INTERSECTION, IT BECAME DIFFICULT TO MAKE THE TURN DUE TO VERY STIFF STEERING. THE FRONT END OF MY TRUCK CAME VERY CLOSE TO A VEHICLE COMING INTO THE INTERSECTION FROM THE STREET I WAS TURNING INTO, AND THEN THE USUAL RETURN OF MY WHEELS TO STRAIGHT AHEAD DID NOT OCCUR AS EXPECTED, AND I HAD TO QUICKLY FORCE THE STEERING WHEEL BACK BEFORE I RAN UP OVER THE CURB ON MY RIGHT. LUCKILY THE CAR COMING INTO THE INTERSECTION HAD BEEN FAR ENOUGH BACK FROM THE INTERSECTION THAT WE DID NOT COLLIDE, AND IF I HAD NOT FORCED THE STEERING WHEEL BACK AT THE END OF THE TURN I MAY HAVE HIT PEDESTRIANS ON THE SIDEWALK. UPON INVESTIGATING THIS PROBLEM WITH A MECHANIC IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE INCIDENT (YESTERDAY AFTERNOON) AND AT ONLINE FORUMS, THE MOST LIKELY CAUSE SEEMED TO BE THE U-JOINT ON THE LOWER INTERMEDIATE SHAFT OF THE STEERING COLUMN DOWN JUST BEFORE THE STEERING GEAR, JUST INSIDE THE LEFT FRONT WHEEL. PER SOME ONLINE FORUM ADVICE, I USED PENETRATING OIL ON THAT U-JOINT TO LOOSEN IT, WITH GOOD RESULTS (STIFFNESS IS NOW GONE). BUT THIS SEEMS MOST LIKELY TO BE A TEMPORARY FIX. I DOUBT THAT LOOSENING THE U-JOINT TODAY WILL KEEP IT FROM A REPEAT PERFORMANCE AT SOME UNKNOWN AND UNPREDICTABLE TIME. CLEARLY THIS COULD CAUSE ACCIDENTS, AND PER ONLINE FORUMS, IT HAS APPARENTLY BEEN A KNOWN ISSUE FOR A WHILE. THERE ARE NO GREASE FITTINGS ON THE U-JOINT, SO THERE IS NO WAY TO PUT A MORE PERMANENT LUBRICANT (GREASE) INTO THE BEARINGS OF THE U-JOINT. ALSO, THE U-JOINT IN QUESTION IS NOT PROTECTED BY A RUBBER BOOT, AND IS COMPLETELY EXPOSED TO ALL THE WATER, DIRT, AND SALT THAT SPLASHES UP WHILE DRIVING. OTHERS HAVE NOTED THAT SPRAYING WITH PENETRATING OIL OR THE LIKE IS ONLY A TEMPORARY FIX, AND THE STIFF STEERING PROBLEM RETURNS AFTER A TIME, MAKING AN ACCIDENT MUCH MORE LIKELY.

THE SUBJECT VEHICLES' REAR SUSPENSION SYSTEM CONTAINS LEAF SPRINGS THAT ARE CONSTRUCTED OF EITHER THREE OR FOUR LEAVES. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT A LEAF COULD FRACTURE DUE TO STRESS AND CORROSION. IF THIS OCCURS AND THE VEHICLE CONTINUES TO BE OPERATED, THE BROKEN LEAF COULD MOVE OUT OF POSITION AND CONTACT SURROUNDING COMPONENTS, INCLUDING THE FUEL TANK. SAFETY RISK: IF THE BROKEN LEAF CONTACTS THE FUEL TANK REPEATEDLY, IT COULD PUNCTURE THE TANK AND CAUSE A FUEL LEAK. IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, THIS COULD RESULT IN A FIRE. REMEDY: TOYOTA WILL REPLACE THE LEAF SPRINGS WITH NEWLY DESIGNED ONES. IT HAS BEEN REPAIRED I NEED TO HAVE IT SHIPPED OFF ISLAND ASAP

THE ENTIRE FRAME OF THIS GARAGE KEPT TRUCK IS COMPLETELY RUSTED THOUGH. THIS TRUCK AS ONLY 61,000 MILES ON IT & IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE REAR LEAF SPRING MOUNTS ARE BROKEN & HAVE PUNCTURED THE GAS TANK. THE ELECTRICAL WIRING TO DO WITH THE SAFETY NEUTRAL SWITCH, WHICH IS TIED INTO THE ENTIRE FROM WIRING HARNESS HAS CAUGHT FIRE TWICE. TOYOTA HAS BEEN NOTIFIED ABOUT ALL OF THIS, IN DETAIL, & THEY COULD CARE LESS ABOUT MY OWN OR ANYONE ELSE'S SAFETY. THERE ISN'T A SCRATCH ON THIS TRUCK & HAS REALLY LOW MILES YET IS SO UNSAFE TO USE BECAUSE OF POOR CONSTRUCTION ON TOYOTA'S PART.

MY 2006 TOYOTA TACOMA WAS RECALLED DUE TO TOYOTA'S FRAME RUST AND CORROSION ISSUE. AFTER NOTIFICATION, JULY 2015, I BROUGHT MY CAR TO TOYOTA OF WALLINGFORD (DEALER) AS INSTRUCTED IN THE RECALL NOTICE FOR A FRAME INSPECTION. THE DEALER INSPECTED THE TRUCK FRAME AND SAID IT WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR A NEW FRAME AS THE FRAME PASSED THEIR INSPECTION. I DISPUTED THIS BECAUSE I WAS ABLE TO PUSH MY FINGER THROUGH PARTS OF THE FRAME. THEY INSISTED THAT THE INTEGRITY WAS SOUND. THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS TO SPRAY THE CAR WITH A CORROSION RESISTANT COVERING (CRC). AFTER SOME DEBATE I TOOK THEIR RECOMMENDATION AND AUTHORIZED THE WORK. THE CRC WAS A THICK BLACK GEL THAT COVERED THE FRAME, SO RUST, ROT AND DETERIORATION WAS COMPLETELY HIDDEN. IN RETROSPECT, I BELIEVE THEY INTENTIONALLY COVERED THE RUST SO ISSUES COULD NOT BE DETECTED AND RE-INSPECTION DID NOT OCCUR. RECENTLY I HAD TO REPLACE THE TIRES ON THE TRUCK. WHEN THE TIRE DEALER PUT THE TRUCK ON THE LIFT HE NOTICED THE FRAME WAS BOWING AND LARGE PIECES OF THE FRAME WERE MISSING. THE CRC WAS STILL COVERING THE RUST BUT LARGE HOLES IN THE FRAME WERE DETECTED. THE TIRE SPECIALIST WOULD NOT WORK ON THE TRUCK DUE TO THE UNSTABLE FRAME, SO I QUICKLY CALLED THE TOYOTA DEALER TO RE-INSPECT THE FRAME. THEY CONCLUDED THAT THE FRAME WAS ROTTED AND NEED TO BE REPLACED, BUT INFORMED ME THAT THE DEADLINE UNDER THE RECALL HAD JUST PASSED ON 1/31/19. THEY WOULD NOT COVER ANY REPAIRS ALTHOUGH I FOLLOWED EVERY STEP AND ENDURED EVERY INCONVENIENCE FOR A ROT ISSUE THAT THEY WERE ALWAYS RESPONSIBLE FOR. UNSATISFIED WITH THE DEALER'S RESPONSE, I CONTACTED TOYOTA DIRECTLY AND THEY REAFFIRMED THAT THEY WOULD NOT COVER THE FRAME. TOYOTA DID NOT RESOLVE ALL ISSUES RELATED TO THEIR FAULTY FRAMES. THEY BRILLIANTLY CAME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT HID THE RUST AND ROT AND SAVED THE COMPANY MILLIONS BY MASKING THE ISSUE AND NOT REPLACING THE BAD FRAMES.

BODY FRAME PERFORATION CAUSED BY RUST AFTER REMEDIATION BY TOYOTA PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT.