2006 Toyota PRIUS NHTSA Investigations
Defect Investigations
The following investigations on the Toyota PRIUS have been announced by the ODI. Interested in how this information is collected? Read more about investigations by the NHTSA.
Recent 2006 PRIUS Investigations
-
UNINTENDED ACCELERATION Defect Investigation for the 2006 PRIUS
Vehicle Component: Electrical System*
Summary: On September 26, 2007, Toyota filed a defect information report and notified NHTSA that some of its model year (MY) 2007 and 2008 Lexus E350 and Toyota Camry vehicles could experience unintended and uncontrolled acceleration due to interference between the optional all weather floor mat offered on those vehicles and the vehicles' accelerator pedal. This decision was influenced by an Office Of Defects Investigation (ODI) engineering analysis. This recall was designated 07E082. Two years later, on October 5, 2009, Toyota filed a defect information report and notified NHTSA that a number of its MY 2004-2009 Lexus and Toyota vehicles may also experience unintended and uncontrolled acceleration due to interference between the accelerator pedal and the driver's floor mat. This recall was designated 09V388. Several months later, on January 27, 2010, Toyota filed an amended, or supplemental, defect information report and expanded the population of vehicles to include additional MY 2008-2010 Toyota and Lexus vehicles. Since this expansiontook place in a different calendar year, this recall was designated 10V023. Separately on January 21, 2010, Toyota filed a defect information report and notified NHTSA that certain Toyota vehicles and certain Pontiac vibe vehicles contained a safety defect in the accelerator pedal assembly that may cause the accelerator pedal to become harder to depress, slower to return, or in the worse case, mechanically stuck in a partially depressed position. NHTSA designated this recall 10V017. In total, the four recalls cover over 7.6 million Toyota and Lexus vehicles as well as the Pontiac vibe product made by new united motor manufacturing, Inc., a Venture of Toyota and General Motors corporation. NHTSA requires additional information from Toyota to more fully understand and evaluate, among other things, whether the scope of the recalls identified above (makes, models and model years) is sufficiently broad. The Agency is seeking to determine whether Toyota viewed the underlying defects too narrowly as interference between the accelerator pedal and the driver¿S side floor mat, or as a lever design (including materials) or performance problem giving rise to a sticking accelerator pedal, without fully considering the broader issue of unintended acceleration and any associated safety-related defects that warrant recalls. For purposes of this investigation, "unintended acceleration" refers to unintended, unrequested, uncontrollable, and/or unexplained acceleration of a subject vehicle, and to the failure of a vehicle's engine to return to idle when the driver takes his or her foot off of the accelerator pedal or raises his or her foot to a position where the engine ordinarily would return to idle, regardless of the alleged or determined cause of the acceleration or failure to decelerate or return to idle and regardless of the speed at which the event allegedly took place. Unintended acceleration thus is broader than interference between the accelerator pedal and driver¿S side floor mat and sticking accelerator pedals with levers made of a particular plastic(s). NHTSA is seeking information about how Toyota viewed complaints and other reports to Toyota and how Toyota assessed potential electromagnetic interference. The Agency also requires information from Toyota on why some models of vehicles with electronic throttle control were not included in the recalls. This investigation does not duplicate TQ10-001 or TQ10-002.
More Details: For detailed information & supporting documents, see the official NHTSA page concerning investigation #RQ10003 »
Status of Investigation: and there is a possible recall.
* This defect investigation is filed under 4 related vehicle components.
-
HEADLIGHT FAILURE Defect Investigation for the 2006 PRIUS
Vehicle Component: Exterior Lighting:Headlights*
Summary: ODI opened this investigation after receiving reports that both headlights would go out, or extinguish while driving. The subject vehicles are equipped with high intensity discharge (hid) headlamps that operate on independent lamps and ECU's (electronic control units) for each headlight, meaning that each headlight runs independently of the other, and a failure in one lamp or ECU does not necessarily result in a failure of the other. During the investigation, a random sample of forty consumers was contacted by ODI in a telephone survey to verify their experiences. The consumers stated in complaints to Toyota that both headlights failed at the same time. ODI discovered through talking with these complainants that in fact one headlight would begin to flicker and then cut off. The other headlight would still be operational. In a few cases where no action was taken, some complainants stated that after a few months both headlamps would begin to fail resulting in no headlights; however none reported that both lamps failed simultaneously. Complainants also stated that they could toggle the headlamp switch on and off to temporarily restore lighting when this condition occurred, even in cases were both headlamps were extinguished. The results of this survey are largely consistent with ODI's assessment of the reports and warranty data. Toyota submitted in response to ODI's information request letter that, generally speaking, only one lamp failed at a time, and that toggling the switch restored the lamp. Toyota requested a meeting with ODI and on August 6, 2009, presented their assessment of headlamp failure. Toyota confirmed that a headlamp could extinguish while driving due to a bulb failure, and that it could be temporarily restored by turning the headlight switch on and off, and that simultaneous failure of both headlamps was rare and unlikely. Toyota also briefly discussed their intention to conduct a customer service campaign to address consumer dissatisfaction with hid bulb failures. Since there is still one headlight operating when the other one cuts off, there is still lighting available to get the vehicle to a repair facility. Thus, a safety defect trend has not been identified at this time and further use of Agency resources does not appear to be warranted. Accordingly this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency will take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
More Details: For detailed information & supporting documents, see the official NHTSA page concerning investigation #PE09019 »
Status of Investigation: This investigation was closed on August 27 2009 and no recall was issued.
* This defect investigation is filed under 2 related vehicle components.