2001 Toyota Tundra complaints

ACCELERATING ON AN ON-RAMP TO GO ON THE FREEWAY, A MASSIVE BUMP WAS FELT. I LOST CONTROL OF THE CAR USING MOMENTUM AND DIFFICULT STEERING TO GET ME TO THE SIDE OF THE FREEWAY. I DISCOVERED THE WHEEL WAS DISENGAGED AND WAS ONLY ATTACHED BY THE BRAKE LINE. MECHANIC INSPECTED THE DAMAGE AND SAID THE BALL JOINT BROKE OFF CAUSING THE WHEEL TO BE DISENGAGED. *TR

MY POWER STEERING BLEW OUT. IT BEGAN SQUEALING VERY LOUDLY AND LOSING FLUID RAPIDLY. I HAVE HAD THIS TRUCK 7-8 YEARS AND NEVER HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE STEERING. TODAY, A MECHANIC TELLS ME IT'S RUSTED OUT AND I NEED A NEW POWER STEERING RACK, PRESSURE LINE AND BUSHINGS. THIS PROBLEM IS VERY SIMILAR (IDENTICAL...) TO ISSUES I'VE READ BEFORE CONCERNING THE TUNDRA AND THE RECALL OF THE RUSTED FRAME. ON 1/4/2013 @ 158,495 MILES, I HAD ROHRICH TOYOTA ADDRESS THE RECALL FOR THE FRAME RUST CORROSION. THE CURRENT POWER STEERING ISSUE MAY VERY WELL BE RELATED TO THE RUST ISSUE THAT LEAD TO THE 2012 RECALL. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED AT AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR FACILITY, THE MECHANIC NOTICED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND DECLINED TO PROVIDE A REMEDY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 105,000.

TRUCK WAS PARKED IN THE DRIVE WHEN I NOTICED THAT A STRAP WAS DANGLING AND WHAT LOOKED TO BE THE TANK WAS HANGING A LITTLE LOW. AFTER CHECKING UNDER-NEATH THE TRUCK I FOUND THAT THE ONE OF THE STRAPS HAD BROKEN, RUSTED AT THE BOLT SITE AND WAS NO LONGER HOLDING THE TANK UP. *TR

WHILE TRAVELING VERY SLOWLY DOWN A SMOOTH, DRY DIRT ROAD MY DRIVER'S SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT SNAPPED. LUCKILY I WASN'T GOING FAST IN TRAFFIC. THE TRUCK IS AT A REPAIR SHOP RIGHT NOW. I CONTACTED TOYOTA'S CUSTOMER SERVICE, BUT HAVEN'T GOTTEN A REPLY. ON TOYOTA'S OFFICAL WEB SITE I ENTERED MY VIN TO SEARCH FOR OUTSTANING RECALLS AND GOT THIS ANSWER, " THERE ARE NO OPEN SAFETY RECALLS OR SPECIAL SERVICE CAMPAIGNS FOR YOUR VEHICLE." AFTER AN INTERNET SEARCH, I LEARNED VERY QUICKLY THAT THIS IS COMMON WITH FIRST GENERATION TUNDRAS. WHY ON EARTH HASN'T TOYOTA ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE. I'M VERY THANKFUL THAT I WAS GOING SLOW AND NOBODY WAS HURT OR KILLED. WITH THE NUMBER DRIVER'S SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT FAILURES BEING REPORTED, THERE ARE SURELY THAT MANY MORE THAT ARE NOT BEING REPORTED. HOW CAN TOYOTA LEGALLY NOT ADMIT THERE IS A FLAW AND MAKE THESE TRUCKS SAFE FOR IT'S CUSTOMERS TO DRIVE? *JS

2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE FRAME RUST RECALL. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS KNOWN FOR HAVING DEFECTIVE STEEL USED FOR THE FRAMES THAT WAS PRONE TO PREMATURE RUST. THE CONSUMER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER AND THEY KEPT THE VEHICLE FOR A WEEK, DURING WHICH THEY HAD A SECONDARY CONTRACTOR APPLY A RUST PROOFING MATERIAL TO THE FRAME. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS RETURNED TO THE CONSUMER, HE WAS INFORMED HE WOULD NEVER HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE FRAME RUSTING AGAIN. RECENTLY, HE HAD THE TIRE REPLACED AND WHILE ON THE HOIST, HE REALIZED THERE WAS RUST APPEARING IN SPOTS EVERYWHERE ON THE FRAME, INCLUDING WHERE THE METAL STRAPS WERE HOLDING THE GAS TANK TO THE FRAME. HE IMMEDIATELY TOOK THE VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALER, WHERE THEY INSPECTED IT AND TOOK MANY PHOTOS. THE SERVICE MANAGER INFORMED THE CONSUMER THE TRUCK FRAME DEFINITELY NEEDED TO RE-DONE, BUT IT WASN'T HIS DECISION. A TOYOTA REPRESENTATIVE INFORMED CONSUMER, THEY WERE NO LONGER PARTICIPATING IN THE RECALL, AS IT HAD ENDED. THE CONSUMER TRIED TO EXPLAIN, THE PREVIOUS REPAIR, MADE THE PROBLEM WORSE INSTEAD OF BETTER. *JB

TL* THE OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING DOWNHILL AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH ON A MOUNTAINOUS ROAD, THE BRAKES WERE DEPRESSED AND PULSATED ABNORMALLY AS THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO VIBRATE VIOLENTLY. THE FAILURE ONLY RECURRED WHEN THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING DOWNHILL IN COMBINATION TO THE BRAKE PEDAL BEING ENGAGED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THE ROTORS AND CALIPERS WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE DEFECT. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 60,000.

I TOOK MY CAR BACK TO TITUS WILL TOYOTA IN TACOMA, WA. THERE IS A RECALL FOR FRAME DAMAGE. THEY TOLD ME MY VEHICLE DID NOT HAVE THE PROBLEM. I THEN TOOK IT TO MY LOCAL MECHANIC A FEW WEEKS LATER FOR OTHER WORK. HE INFORMED ME THAT MY SKID PLATE WAS LOOSE AND COULD NOT BE RE-CONNECTED BECAUSE THE HOLES FOR THE SCREWS IN THE FRAME ARE RUSTED OUT. THIS IS WHAT THE RECALL IS ABOUT. SO THE DEALER TRIED TO NOT DO THE RECALL BECAUSE IT IS EXPENSIVE. MEANWHILE MY TRUCK NEEDS THE FRAME REPLACED AS THE RECALL SPECIFIED. MY TRUCK LIVED IN DULUTH MN, FOR 12 YEARS. *TR

THE VEHICLE WAS RECALLED FOR CORROSION ,FRAME .CROSS MEMBER AND GAS TANK STRAPS WERE REPLACED IN AUGUST 2012 03/16/2014 THE GAS TANK LEAKED APPROX. 15 GALLONS OF GAS IN MY ATTACHED GARAGE THE GAS TANK WAS PERFORATED IN THREE SPOT UNDERNEATH THE NEW TANK STRAPS THIS VEHICLE HAS 85000 MILES ON IT AND I BELIEVE THIS ISSUE COULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED WITHOUT ENDANGERING PEOPLE IN THIS MANNER. ALSO NOW THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING IS CORRODED SO BAD IT IS LEAKING GEAR OIL IN SEVERAL PLACES AND I AM AFRAID OF CATASTROPHIC FAILURE. *TR

WAS DRIVING HOME ON A 2-LANE RURAL HIGHWAY WHEN I HEARD A VERY LOUD BANG AND FOUND MY VEHICLE SCRAPING AND SKIDDING DOWN THE ROAD FOR APPROXIMATELY 100 FT. FORTUNATELY, NO ONE WAS COMING FROM THE OTHER DIRECTION AND NO ONE WAS BEHIND ME. WOUND UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. MANAGED TO FORCE THE TRUCK ONTO THE LEFT SHOULDER. AFTER GETTING OUT, FOUND THE LEFT FRONT WHEEL FLAT ON THE ROAD AND JAMMED UP INSIDE THE WHEEL WELL. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION FOUND THAT THE LEFT LOWER BALL JOINT HAD SNAPPED OFF AT THE BOLT HOLDING IT ONTO THE A-FRAME. OUT OF WARRANTY. TOYOTA SAYS THEY WON'T DO ANYTHING TO HELP. LOOKED ON INTERNET AND FOUND MANY, MANY SIMILAR EXPERIENCES WITH 2001 TUNDRAS. HAVE SCRUPULOUSLY MAINTAINED THIS VEHICLE SINCE I BOUGHT IT NEW IN 2001. THIS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN. I COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED AND I COULD HAVE KILLED OTHERS. THERE SHOULD BE A RECALL ISSUED RE. THIS PROBLEM AS HAS OCCURRED WITH LATER YEAR TUNDRAS AND TOYOTA SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE TO PAY FOR REPAIRING MY TRUCK. *TR

ORIGINALLY BROUGHT THE 2001 TUNDRA IN FOR FRAME RECALL, SUSPECTING IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED UNDER THE TOYOTA RECALL COVERAGE TO TOYOTA OF SCRANTON. THE DEALERSHIP SERVICE DEPARTMENT INSISTED THE FRAME HAD PASSED INSPECTION AND WAS SAFE, AND SPRAYED A CORROSIVE RESISTANT COMPOUND ON THE FRAME. I TOOK THEIR WORD THAT THE COMPOUND WOULD PREVENT/RESIST AGAINST FURTHER CORROSION AND THAT THE TRUCK WAS SAFE. A LITTLE OVER A YEAR (AND LESS THAN 3000 MILES) LATER I COULD SEE THE FRAME HAD ACTUALLY GOTTEN WORSE AND THAT THE SPARE TIRE WAS BEGINNING TO GET LOOSE ON THE CROSS MEMBER. WE TOOK THE TRUCK BACK TO TOYOTA OF SCRANTON WHERE THEY DID ANOTHER INSPECTION. THIS TIME, THEY DETERMINED THAT THE FRAME WAS PERFERATED AND THEREFORE FAILED THEIR FRAME INSPECTION. WE TOOK OUR TRUCK BACK AND THEY PUT IN THE ORDER FOR A NEW FRAME WHICH THEY WOULD INSTALL IN ABOUT TWO WEEKS, ONCE IT ARRIVED. THE FOLLOWING WEEK, WE GOT A CALL FROM THE DEALERSHIP, TELLING US THAT TOYOTA HAD DENIED THE DEALERSHIP'S CLAIM TO PROVIDE US A NEW FRAME, BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE TRUCK HAD ALREADY COME IN TO BE INSPECTED THE FIRST TIME, WHEN THEY SPRAYED THE COMPOUND. THIS LEADS ME TO ONE OF TWO CONCLUSIONS: EITHER A) THE SPRAY-ON COMPOUND IS COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE AND DID NOTHING TO PROTECT MY TRUCK'S DEFECTIVE FRAME AGAINST CORROSION, OR B) THE INITIAL INSPECTION ON MY TRUCK WHICH FOUND IT TO BE ACCEPTABLE WAS IN ERROR, MISSING THE PERFORATION SPOTS THAT WERE CAUGHT THE SECOND TIME AROUND. IN EITHER CASE, I AM CONC

MY BRAKES LINE RUSTED OFF. I GOT IT REPLACED. IF I DIDN'T NOTICE IT I COULD HAVE GOTTEN INTO A MAJOR ACCIDENT WITH NO BRAKES. MY FRAME ON THE PICKUP IS RUSTING AND I AM CONCERNED THAT IT WILL BECOME ANOTHER SAFETY ISSUE. I HAVE OWNED TOYOTAS ALL MY LIFE AND NOW WORRIED TO DRIVE THEM DUE TO RUSTY FRAMES. *TR

ON 3/15/10 MY VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY TOYOTA AS PART OF THE RECALL ADDRESSING THE FRAME RUSTING. THE DEALERSHIP SAID NOTHING NEEDED TO BE DONE. ON MAY 4, 2012 THE DEALERSHIP STATED THE FRAME NEEDED A COATING APPLIED TO INHIBIT THE FRAME FROM RUSTING. THE DEALERSHIP APPLIED THE FRAME COATING. ON DECEMBER 23, 2013 MY INSPECTION MECHANIC INFORMED ME THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTING. I RETURNED THE VEHICLE TO THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND THEY CONFIRMED THE FRAME WAS RUSTING BUT NOTHING COULD BE DONE SINCE THE RECALL HAD EXPIRED. MY ISSUE IS THEY SHOULD STILL BE OBLIGATED TO FIX THE FRAME SINCE IT WAS NEVER ADDRESSED PROPERLY IN 2012. THEY SHOULD HAVE REPLACED THE FRAME AS WAS THE PROTOCOL IN MOST CASES. IN MY CASE THEY ELECTED TO APPLY A COATING OVER THE RUST WHICH PREVENTED NOTHING. THE DEALERSHIP AND TOYOTA CLAIM SINCE THE RECALL HAS ENDED THERE IS NOTHING THEY CAN DO FOR ME. AGAIN MY ISSUE IS THE RECALL WAS NEVER ADDRESSED THE FIRST TIME BY TEAM TOYOTA OF GLEN MILLS. *TR

THIS IS A FOLLOW-UP WITH REGARDS TO REFERENCE NUMBER 10479431. I INSPECTED THE FRAME OF MY VEHICLE ON AUG. 15 AND DISCOVERED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THE CORROSION RESISTANT COMPOUND (CRC) HAD BEEN REMOVED, I SPOKE TO TOYOTA CORPORATE ON AUGUST 19 AND THEY INFORMED ME THEY WILL NOT DO ANYTHING TO REMEDY THE FAILURE OF THE PRODUCT AND ITS APPLICATION AND THAT I SHOULD EXPECT THE CRC TO FALL OFF THE FRAME. HOWEVER, THE WARRANTY FOR THE WORK THAT WAS PERFORMED WOULD BE APPLICABLE FOR 12 MONTHS. IN ADDITION, I RAISED MY CONCERNS IN OCT. 2012 REGARDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROPOSED SOLUTION TO THE FRAME RUST AND I WAS ASSURED THE CRC APPLICATION WOULD RESOLVE THE ISSUES WITH FRAME RUST. UNFORTUNATELY THE CRC HAS FAILED SIGNIFICANTLY AFTER TWO APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL ULTIMATELY LEAD TO FRAME FAILURE WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF REMEDIATION. TO CLARIFY, WHEN I ORIGINALLY RAISED MY CONCERNS WITH THE PROPOSED SOLUTION OF THE CRC APPLICATION TOYOTA ASSURED ME THE SOLUTION WOULD BE AN EFFECTIVE PROCESS. HOWEVER, TOYOTA HAS NOW STATED THE APPLICATION WILL FALL OFF THE FRAME AND THEY WILL NOT WARRANTY THE WORK PERFORMED EVEN THOUGH I HAVE WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION STATING OTHERWISE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE FRONT PASSENGER'S SIDE TIRE DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO SAFELY PULL OVER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSIS WHERE IT WAS STATED THAT THE BALL JOINTS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED AND THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 141,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 09V444000 (STRUCTURE) AND TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR RECALL SERVICE. MONTHS LATER, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO EXHIBIT SIGNS OF RUSTING. THE CONTACT HAD NOT ENCOUNTERED ANY ISSUES PRIOR TO HAVING THE RECALL SERVICE PERFORMED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 180,968.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS SERVICED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 09V444000 (STRUCTURE) HOWEVER, SINCE THE REPAIR THE CONTACT HAD NOTICED PARTS OF THE FRAME LAYING IN HIS DRIVEWAY. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO ADVISED THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH RUST AND THE RECALL REPAIR HAD NOT BEEN PERFORMED CORRECTLY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT FURTHER REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 130,470. *TR UDPATED 05/01/14

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO BRAKE, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED ABNORMALLY AND CRASHED INTO THE READ OF ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE CONTACT DID NOT SUSTAIN ANY INJURIES. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DRIVER OF THE SECOND VEHICLE WAS INJURED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. *TR

VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO 80MPH HAD TO PULL OFF ROADWAY AND SHUTDOWN IGNITION. *TR

TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL DEALER FOR A FRONT END INSPECTION DUE TO A STEERING PROBLEM. THE VEHICLE WAS VERY STIFF DURING TURNING AND WOULD NOT RETURN TO CENTER. ASKED FOR A THOROUGH FRONT END INSPECTION OF POWER STEERING SYSTEM AND ASSOCIATED STEERING LINKAGES, ETC. DEALER ADVISED THAT ALL WAS OK BUT THAT FRONT END WOULD NEED TO BE ALIGNED. PAID FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND A FRONT END ALIGNMENT. THE PROBLEM WAS STILL THERE UPON RECEIPT OF THE VEHICLE. DROVE ANOTHER 600 + MILES AND WHILE DRIVING TO A LOCAL BUSINESS AT APPROXIMATELY 10 MPH, THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE SEPARATED FROM THE FRAME AND WEDGED UNDER THE RIGHT FRONT WHEEL HOUSING. IT TURNS OUT THAT THE RIGHT FRONT LOWER BALL JOINT ASSEMBLY HAD FAILED AND THE WHEEL WAS COMPLETELY DISCONNECTED FROM THE FRAME. HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO A LOCAL SHOP FOR REPAIR. AM REPORTING THIS PROBLEM TO TOYOTA CORPORATE AS A COMPLAINT THAT THE DEALER DID NOT DISCOVER THE PROBLEM WHEN IT WAS IN THEIR CARE FOR A STEERING/FRONT END DISCREPANCY. UPON FURTHER RESEARCH TODAY, DISCOVERED THAT THIS IS A KNOWN ENGINEERING DEFECT AND PROBLEM WITH THE 2000 - 2004 TUNDRA FRONT END. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE SPARE TIRE BECAME DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING. THE TECHNICIAN ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 09V444000 (STRUCTURE) AND THE RECALL REPAIR WAS PERFORMED HOWEVER, THE DEALER WOULD NOT COVER THE REPLACEMENT OF THE CROSS MEMBER THAT HELD THE SPARE TIRE IN PLACE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 217,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE VEHICLE SLIPPED ON BLACK ICE, CRASHING ON THE CENTER MEDIUM AND THEN PROCEEDED TO ROLL OVER. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOYED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DRIVER AND A PASSENGER SUSTAINED A CONTUSION AND BRUISING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC BUT WAS NOT INSPECTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THEY WOULD CONTACT HIM AT A LATER DATE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 185,000.

THE 1ST GENERATION TOYOTA TUNDRA'S ARE RUST BUCKETS. I OWN A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA W/ APPROX 101,000 MILES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE LOCAL AUTHORIZED DEALER FOR REPAIRS UNDER RECALL: 09V444000 (STRUCTURE: FRAME AND MEMBERS:UNDERBODY SHIELDS). THE VEHICLE IS BEING REPAIRED (FRAME IS BEING REPLACED). BUT THE DEALER ALSO INFORMED ME THAT THE STEERING RACK AND HOSE CONNECTIONS ARE ROTTED OUT AND IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT -> $1300. ADDITIONALLY, THE DEALER INFORMED ME THAT THE REAR E-BRAKE PIVOTS ARE RUSTED/FROZEN AND WILL ALSO NEED REPLACING ->> $450. IN A NUTSHELL, THE FRAME, THE STEERING AND THE BRAKES ARE ALL RUSTED OUT - IT APPEARS THAT SAFETY WAS AN AFTERTHOUGHT. I FEEL THAT TOYOTA CORPORATION IS NEGLIGENT AND THAT CONSUMERS ARE LEFT HOLDING THE BAG FOR POORLY ENGINEERED PRODUCTS THAT ARE PRONE TO EARLY RUST-OUT. ON-LINE FORUMS ARE FILLED WITH THREADS FROM OTHER OWNERS EXPERIENCING SIMILAR ISSUES. *TR

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I AM WRITING THIS LETTER IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE TOYOTA MOTORS CORPORATION RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEFECTIVE BRAKING SYSTEM ON TOYOTA TUNDRAS 2001 ,AND PROBABLY OTHER YEARS,SPECIFICALLY THE FRONT BRAKE CALIPERS . FROM WHAT THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIPS TELL ME THESE TRUCKS CAME WITH FRONT CALIPERS THAT ARE TOO SMALL FOR THE VEHICLE AND THEY GET TOO HOT AND AS A RESULT THEY WARP THE DISCS AND THIS CREATES A MODERATE TO VIOLENT SHAKING OF THE FRONT END OF THE VEHICLE EVERY TIME THE BRAKES ARE APPLIED . TOYOTA MOTORS REPAIRED THE ISSUE, BY INSTALLING BIGGER CALIPERS WITH MORE SURFACE AREA, AS LONG AS THE CAR WAS WITHIN THE WARRANTY 3 YEARS OR 36,000 MILES . IT IS MY OPINION THAT THIS ISSUE SHOULD BE EXAMINED AND BE CONSIDERED A GOVERNMENT RECALL BECAUSE IT IS NOT THAT A PART BROKE OR GOT WORN OUT BEFORE THE WARRANTY EXPIRED . IT IS MORE THAT THE CAR CAME WITH BRAKES NOT CAPABLE OF WITHSTANDING THE HEAT GENERATED BY THE FRICTION B/W THE PADS AND THE DISC DUE TO THE DESIGN OF THE CALIPER AND AS A RESULT IT WARPS THE DISCS CAUSING OWNERS TO RESURFACE OR REPLACE DISCS FREQUENTLY WITHOUT SOLVING THE PROBLEM OR SOLVING IT FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AND NEEDLESS TO SAY THIS ,TO ME, IS A BIG SAFETY ISSUE NOT ONLY BECAUSE THE BRAKES DO NOT WORK PROPERLY BUT ALSO BECAUSE ALL THAT SHAKING AND VIBRATION CAN LOOSEN UP OTHER COMPONENTS IN THE SUSPENSION OR BRAKING SYSTEM COMPROMISING THE SAFETY OF THE VEHICLE AND AS A RESULT THIS MAY CAUSE AN ACCIDENT . MANY DISAPPOINTED TUNDRA OWNE

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR REPAIRS UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 09V444000 (STRUCTURE: FRAME AND MEMBERS: UNDER BODY SHIELDS). THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD HAVE A COMPOUND PLACED ON THE VEHICLE INSTEAD OF REPLACING THE FRAME. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE FRAME SHOULD BE REPLACED BUT THE MANUFACTURER DETERMINED THAT THE FRAME WOULD ONLY BE REPLACED IF THERE WERE HOLES IN THE FRAME, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS VISIBLE STRUCTURAL DAMAGE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DEALER REMOVED THE CAB AND SPRAYED A COMPOUND SOLUTION ON THE POINTS OF THE FRAME THAT THEY COULD REACH. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE COMPOUND WAS WASHED AWAY ONCE IT RAINED. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 57,000. ..UPDATED 11/14/12 *BF UPDATED 11/16/2012*JS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS CORROSION AND RUST ON THE FRAME, REAR AXLE AND BRAKE SYSTEM. THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER 09V444000 (STRUCTURE: FRAME AND MEMBERS: UNDERBODY SHIELDS). THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO DEALER WHERE THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT THE RECALL REPAIRS COULD NOT BE PERFOMRED DUE TO THE STATE IN WHICH THE VHEICLE WAS HOUSED. THE DEALER THEN ADVISED THAT THERE WERE NO HOLES IN THE FRAME THAT WOULD REQUIRE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. THE BUMPER, GRILL, HOOD AND FENDER WERE REPLACED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 60 MPH, THE FRONT UPPER BALL JOINT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE FAILED AND CAUSED THE WHEEL TO SEPARATE FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALER FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST. THE FAILURE OCCURRED DUE TO STRESS ON THE BALL JOINT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER'S SIDE BALL JOINT WAS REPLACED AT 276,343 MILES. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND A COMPLIANT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 286,911.

DUE TO PREMATURE CORROSION (VEHICLE 4 YEARS OLD) PARKING BRAKE FAILED TO FUNCTION, FAILED NYS INSPECTION, WAS REPAIRED (03/14/2005). DUE TO PREMATURE CORROSION, SPRING BROKE, WAS REPAIRED (01/02/2008). POWER STEERING RACK ROTTED, HAD TO BE REPLACED. APPROX MILEAGE 150,000. FRONT SUSPENSION LINKS ROTTED OUT. CALLED TOYOTA (04/15/2009) VOICED OUR CONCERN FOR ROTTING FRAME, NO RECALL AT THAT TIME. THEY ISSUED A COMPLAINT #.TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALER FOR INSPECTION FOR THREE RECALLS, A0F, B0D, 90M ON 05/02/2012. INSPECTION NOT PROPERLY DONE, CHUNKS OF RUST STILL CAN BE FLAKED OFF, POSSIBLE HOLES BEHIND, BUT THEY SPRAYED CRC OVER TOP OF THE LOOSE SCALING, COVERING OVER THE PROBLEMS. WE HAD NO CHOICE IN WHAT THEY WERE DOING WITH OUR PROPERTY. WE TOOK IT IN FOR AN INSPECTION. AFTER SAID INSPECTION, IF IT WOULD NOT GET A NEW FRAME, WE WOULD HAVE OPTED TO TAKE IT HOME, REMOVED ALL LOOSE SCALING PRIOR TO THE CRC BEING APPLIED. WE WERE NOT GIVEN ANY OPTIONS, OUR VEHICLE WAS ALREADY ON THE WAY TO THEIR COLLISION SHOP FOR THE WORK. THIS WOULD HAVE ACCOMPLISHED TWO THINGS; THE DEALERSHIP WOULD KNOW WITHOUT A DOUBT THAT THERE WERE NO HOLES AND THE CRC WOULD STICK DIRECTLY TO THE FRAME MINIMIZING FUTURE CORROSION (THAT IS THE OBJECTIVE OF THE RECALL AFTERALL) I CALLED TOYOTA CORPORATE AND VOICED MY CONCERN WITH A SPRAY COVERING OVER THE PROBLEM, AND THE TRUCK NOT BEING SAFE. MY CASE IS STILL PENDING, BUT BASED ON THE INITIAL CALL BACK FROM THE CASE MANAGER, IT IS NOT LOOKING LIKE THERE WILL BE A

DUE TO PREMATURE CORROSION (VEHICLE 4 YEARS OLD) PARKING BRAKE FAILED TO FUNCTION, FAILED NYS INSPECTION, WAS REPAIRED (03/14/2005). DUE TO PREMATURE CORROSION, SPRING BROKE, WAS REPAIRED (01/02/2008). POWER STEERING RACK ROTTED, HAD TO BE REPLACED. APPROX MILEAGE 150,000. FRONT SUSPENSION LINKS ROTTED OUT. CALLED TOYOTA (04/15/2009) VOICED OUR CONCERN FOR ROTTING FRAME, NO RECALL AT THAT TIME. THEY ISSUED A COMPLAINT #.TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALER FOR INSPECTION FOR THREE RECALLS, A0F, B0D, 90M ON 05/02/2012. INSPECTION NOT PROPERLY DONE, CHUNKS OF RUST STILL CAN BE FLAKED OFF, POSSIBLE HOLES BEHIND, BUT THEY SPRAYED CRC OVER TOP OF THE LOOSE SCALING, COVERING OVER THE PROBLEMS. WE HAD NO CHOICE IN WHAT THEY WERE DOING WITH OUR PROPERTY. WE TOOK IT IN FOR AN INSPECTION. AFTER SAID INSPECTION, IF IT WOULD NOT GET A NEW FRAME, WE WOULD HAVE OPTED TO TAKE IT HOME, REMOVED ALL LOOSE SCALING PRIOR TO THE CRC BEING APPLIED. WE WERE NOT GIVEN ANY OPTIONS, OUR VEHICLE WAS ALREADY ON THE WAY TO THEIR COLLISION SHOP FOR THE WORK. THIS WOULD HAVE ACCOMPLISHED TWO THINGS; THE DEALERSHIP WOULD KNOW WITHOUT A DOUBT THAT THERE WERE NO HOLES AND THE CRC WOULD STICK DIRECTLY TO THE FRAME MINIMIZING FUTURE CORROSION (THAT IS THE OBJECTIVE OF THE RECALL AFTERALL) I CALLED TOYOTA CORPORATE AND VOICED MY CONCERN WITH A SPRAY COVERING OVER THE PROBLEM, AND THE TRUCK NOT BEING SAFE. MY CASE IS STILL PENDING, BUT BASED ON THE INITIAL CALL BACK FROM THE CASE MANAGER, IT IS NOT LOOKING LIKE THERE WILL BE A

I SENT IN MY TOYOTA TUNDRA FOR A SAFETY RECALL THE SSC 90-M RECALL AND THE DEALERSHIP DID NOTHING BUT SPRAY CRC OVER THE RUST WHEN I BROUGHT IT TO THERE ATTENTION THAT THE FUEL STRAPS WERE NOT CHANGED OR THE SPARE TIRE THAT HAS PREVIOUSLY DISLODGED FROM THE VEHICLE WAS STILL IN THE BED OF THE TRUCK THEY SAID IT IS NOT OUR PROBLEM . WHAT ACTION CAN I TAKE ON THIS? *JS

VEHICLE WAS BEING DRIVEN APPROX. 35 MPH WHEN BALL JOINT FAILURE OCCURRED. LOWER PASSENGER SIDE BALL JOINT WAS AT FAULT. BALL UNDER SOCKET SEPARATED ALLOWING TIRE TO SWING 90 DEGREES AND JAM UNDER FRAME. CV AXLE WAS TORN FROM FRONT DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING UPON FAILURE. DIFFERENTIAL OIL LOSS OCCURRED. TIE ROD, UPPER BALL JOINT AND BRAKE LINE REMAINED INTACT. BODY DAMAGE RESULTED ON FRONT PASSENGER FENDER. *TR

2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. CONSUMER STATES CRC APPLICATION HAS PROVEN TO BE A COMPLETELY INADEQUATE SOLUTION TO THE LONG-STANDING FRAME AND CROSS MEMBER RUST PROBLEM *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED ONLY ONE OF THE GAS TANK STRAPS WERE REPLACED, CONTRARY TO THE PROMISED REPLACEMENT OF BOTH IN THE RECALL NOTICE. THE COMPOUND WAS APPLIED OVER THE EXISTING RUSTY SURFACE, ALTHOUGH HE WAS ASSURED THAT THE AREAS TO BE TREATED WOULD BE CLEANED OF RUST BEFORE APPLYING THE COMPOUND. A TOYOTA REP ALSO TOLD THE CONSUMER THE SPARE TIRE CARRIER ASSEMBLY WOULD BE REPLACED, BUT NOT ONLY WASN'T IT REPLACED, BUT WHAT WAS LEFT OF THE ASSEMBLY, WAS A SMALL RUSTED, BROKEN FRAGMENT AND NO SPARE TIRE. THE MECHANIC INFORMED THE CONSUMER, THE FRAME WAS UNSOUND AND ADVISED AGAINST USING THE HITCH FOR ANY KIND OF TOWING. *JB

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT MADE AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE VEHICLE REPAIRED UNDER THE NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 09V444000 (STRUCTURE: FRAME AND MEMBERS:UNDER BODY SHIELDS) RECALL. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A VOICE MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE DEALER STATING THAT THE APPOINTMENT WAS CANCELLED AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO ASSIST HIM AT THIS TIME, WITHOUT GIVING AN EXPLANATION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND A COMPLAINT WAS FILED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 160,000.

NOTICED OIL IN DRIVE WAY LOOKED UNDER TRUCK AND NOTICE MY STEERING RACK WAS LEAKING AND STABILIZER LINKS WERE RUSTED OFF. TOOK TO MECHANIC FOR REPAIRS AND HE INFORMED ME MY WHOLE EXHAUST WAS RUSTED AS WELL AS THE BODY. TOOK TO A TOYOTA DEALERSHIP BACK IN 2009 FOR BODY RUST RECALL AND WAS TOLD IT WAS OK. I NOW NO THAT WAS NOT TRUE. *TR

THIS IS NOT A COMPLAINT, HOWEVER, I WAS WONDERING IF THERE WAS/IS A RECALL ON LOWER BALL JOINTS FOR 4BY2, 4.7 LITRE TOYOTA TUNDRAS, MODEL YEAR 2001. *TR

BRAKES PULSATE AND GO ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR; YOU MUST QUICKLY RELEASE AND RE-APPLY TO STOP VEHICLE THEN YOU GET A BAD VIBRATION AND HORRIBLE NOISES BEFORE VEHICLE FINALLY STOPS. MY SERVICE MECHANIC CANNOT GET TOYOTA TO FAX HIM THE DIAGRAMS HE NEEDS TO DIAGNOSE AND REPAIR ISSUE. I HAVE READ OVER 300 COMPLAINTS ONLINE ABOUT THIS SAME ISSUE FROM OTHER 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA OWNERS. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AND THERE HAVE BEEN NEAR MISS ACCIDENTS BECAUSE OF THIS ISSUE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWN A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL BEGAN TO VIBRATE VIGOROUSLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSTIC. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE ROTORS WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. THE FAILURE CONTINUED AFTER THE ROTORS WERE REPLACED. THE MECHANIC THEN STATED THAT THE FAILURE MAY BE OCCURRING BECAUSE THE VEHICLE'S WEIGHT WAS TOO EXCESSIVE FOR THE BRAKING SYSTEM. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 18,000.

2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA COMPLAINT: WHILE I WAS DRIVING IN THE CITY ALL OF A SUDDEN I LOST 90% OF MY BRAKING ABILITY. AFTER PULLING OVER TO THE SIDE AND INSPECTING MY FRONT BRAKES I NOTICE MY LEFT DRIVER'S SIDE HAD FLUID ON THE ROAD AND TIRE. LIMPING IT HOME AND ON FARTHER INSPECTION THE BRACKET THAT SUPPORTS THE FLEX LINE FROM THE FRAME TO BRACKET AND THE RIDGED LINE FROM THE BRACKET TO THE BRAKE CALIPER WAS RUSTED OFF, THIS CAUSED THE RIDGED LINE TO FRACTURE. AFTER PURCHASING A NEW BRACKET I THAN NEEDED TO LOOK AT THE PASSENGER SIDE TO SEE EXACTLY HOW TO MOUNT THE NEW BRACKET, TO MY SURPRISE THE PASSENGER SIDE BRACKET WAS ALSO RUSTED OFF. I AM SURE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE I LOSS MY BRAKES AGAIN HAD I NOT INSPECTED THE PASSENGER SIDE. WHEN NOTIFYING THE DEALER ABOUT IT I WAS PRETTY MUCH BLOWN OFF AS THE ONLY PERSON WITH THIS PROBLEM THERE FOR I PROBABLY JUST IMAGINED IT. SO I GUESS MY COMPLAINT IS RECALLING THESE TRUCKS FOR AN INSPECTION OF SINGULAR RUST PROBLEM SUCH AS THE SPIRE TIRE BRACKET IS A JOKE. THESE TRUCKS ARE JUST SIMPLY ROAD HAZARDS AND ARE GOING TO GET A LOT OF PEOPLE KILLED IF ACTION IS NOT TAKEN TO GET THESE RUST BUCKETS OFF THE ROAD. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE HEARD A BANGING FROM THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT PIECES OF METAL HAD DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH. THE CONTACT STOPPED THE VEHICLE AND NOTICED THAT THE LEAF SPRINGS WERE FRACTURED DUE TO CORROSION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO HAVE THE FAILURE DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE, BUT OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 105,000.

WHILE DRIVING MY 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA A LEAK DEVELOPED FROM THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL SPRAYING GEAR OIL ONTO THE ROAD AND VEHICLE BEHIND ME .I HAD MY VEHICLE TOWED TO MY MECHANIC FOR REPAIR .I BELIEVED THAT IT WOULD PROBABLY BE A 2 YRS 3 HUNDRED DOLLAR REPAIR FOR A SEAL OR GASKET BUT WAS INFORMED THAT THE REAR HOUSING COVER HAD RUSTED THRU AND THAT BECAUSE OF THE DESIGN THE ONLY WAY TO REPAIR IT IS TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE REAR AXLE HOUSING AT A COST OF A LITTLE OVER $ 2,000 . THE VEHICLE IS IN VERY GOOD CONDITION AND THERE IS NOT EVEN RUST ON ANY OF THE FENDERS . I CONTACTED THE TOYOTA CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE HOTLINE AND EXPLAINED THE PROBLEM TO BOTH THE FIRST PERSON I SPOKE WITH AND THEN THE FOLLOW UP WITH A CASE MANAGER . THEY INFORMED ME THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THEY CAN DO AND THE ONLY RUST ISSUES THEY WOULD DEAL WITH ARE WITH THE REAR FRAME .MY EXPERIENCE WITH OLDER VEHICLES THAT HAD COMPLETELY RUSTED BODIES AND FRAMES NEVER HAD DIFFERENTIALS RUST THRU . I AM BEING FORCED TO GET RID OF A VEHICLE THAT I PURCHASED NEW IN 2001 DUE TO A POORLY DESIGNED PART .NOT ONLY IS THIS A DESIGN FLAW WITH AN UNSERVICABLE PART BUT ALSO A SAFETY ISSUE WITH FLUID SPEWING FROM THE REAR END ONTO THE ROADWAY AND VEHICLES TRAVELING FROM BEHIND. ALSO AFTER RESEARCHING THIS PROBLEM ON THE INTERNET I DISCOVERED THAT IT IS A WIDESPREAD PROBLEM WITH THE FIRST GENERATION TUNDRAS THAT TOYOTA REFUSES TO ADDRESS . *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE UNDERSIDE OF THE VEHICLE WAS COMPLETELY CORRODED. THE CONTACT ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE FUEL TANK WAS CORRODED AND AS A RESULT, THERE WAS A FUEL LEAK. IN ADDITION, THE REAR DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING WAS ALSO AFFECTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO REPLACED THE DIFFERENTIAL HOUSING AND THE FUEL TANK IN ORDER TO REMEDY THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE PERSISTED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 98,000.

THERE WAS NO WARNING OF AN IMPENDING FAILURE. WHILE TRAVELING ON A STRAIGHT LEVEL INTERSTATE HIGHWAY AT 70 MPH THE FRONT DRIVER-SIDE WHEEL COLLAPSED UNDER THE VEHICLE. CONTROL WAS REGAINED AND THE VEHICLE WAS NEGOTIATED TO THE SHOULDER. SINCE THE FRONT SUSPENSION WAS RECENTLY SERVICED, I SUSPECTED AN INSTALLATION ERROR. I LATER DISCOVERED THAT THE LOWER BALL JOINT HAD SEPARATED. HAVING NOT BEEN INFORMED OF A MULTI-YEAR RECALL, I WAS UNAWARE OF THE POTENTIAL DANGER THAT COULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED FOR UNDER $300 DURING THE LAST SERVICING. CURRENT REPAIRS ARE BEING MADE AT A COST OF OVER $3000. *TR

2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA BROUGHT TO LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP FOR CONCERNS WITH ROT HOLES THROUGH CROSS MEMBERS THAT SUPPORT GAS TANK. RECEIVED TOYOTA RECALL NOTICE REGARDING CROSS MEMBER AT REAR OF VEHICLE SUPPORTING SPARE TIRE. DEALER STATES THAT RECALL DOES NOT COVER FAILING CROSS MEMBERS OTHER THAN ONE SUPPORTING SPARE TIRE. DEALER RECOMMENDS CONTACTING TOYOTA DIRECTLY AND FILING COMPLAINT. CONTACTED TOYOTA DIRECT AND WAS TOLD THEY WOULD ONLY REPLACE FAILING COMPONENT IF NTSB FORCED THEM TO EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE THE SAME PART, INSTALLED AT THE SAME FACTORY AT THE SAME TIME AND HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE!! THIS FAILING CROSS MEMBER IS JUST AS IMPORTANT IF NOT MORE THAN THE ONE TOYOTA IS RECALLING. ISN'T A FALLING FUEL TANK MORE OF A SAFETY CONCERN THAN A FALLING SPARE TIRE?? *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, HE APPLIED THE BRAKES AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT SLOW DOWN UNTIL THE CONTACT ENGAGED THE BRAKES AGGRESSIVELY BEFORE THE VEHICLE CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND TOLD HIM TO CONTACT THE DEALER. THE DEALER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNAVAILABLE THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 140,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WHEN THE TECHNICIAN NOTICED A PART OF THE FRAME WAS CORRODED AND THE STEEL WAS CHIPPING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS INCLUDED IN NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 09V444000 (STRUCTURE: FRAME AND MEMBERS:UNDERBODY SHIELDS) AND WAS REPAIRED PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIANS STATED THE FRAME WAS IN GOOD CONDITION AND WAS NOT IN NEED OF REPAIRS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000. UPDATED 6/8/11 *CN

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA LIMITED. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 5 MPH, THE DRIVER SIDE BALL JOINT FRACTURED AND CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO COME TO IMMEDIATE HALT. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TILTED AND AS HE EXITED THE VEHICLE, NOTICED DAMAGE TO THE TIRE, FENDER AND THE DRIVER SIDE DOOR. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL MECHANIC WHERE HE WAS ADVISED THAT ALL THE FRONT BALL JOINTS WOULD NEED REPLACING. THE BALL JOINTS WERE ALL REPAIRED AND THE CONTACT WAS AWAITING THE ARRIVAL OF PARTS TO HAVE THE BODY DAMAGE REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 154,000.

IM ON THE THIRD SET OF FRONT BRAKES FOR MY TRUCK WHICH JUST TURNED 60000 MILES AND IT IS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. THIS IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE FOR A VEHICLE OF THIS MILEAGE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 2 MPH, THE VEHICLE WAS CRASHED INTO FROM BEHIND. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED HEAD INJURIES DUE TO THE DESIGN OF THE DRIVERS SIDE HEAD REST. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO HAVE THE FAILURE DIAGNOSED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 110,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 113,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.

TAILLIGHT BULBS FALL OUT OF THE SOCKET. WE RETURNED THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER A COUPLE OF TIMES AND THEY PUT THE BULBS BACK IN BUT DIDN'T FIX THE PROBLEM THAT THE SOCKETS DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SPRING TENSION TO SECURE THEM IN PLACE. I'VE SINCE BLOCKED THEM IN PLACE WITH TOOTHPICKS TO INCREASE THE TENSION OF THE SOCKETS. CHEAP FIX BUT THEY SHOULD REPLACE THE SOCKETS. *TR

RUSTY FRAME ON A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. *TR