Owners have filed 543 complaints
about the 2001 Toyota Tundra with NHTSA between 2001 and 2026.
The largest single group is the body & structure.
Across this model's run it ranks 9 of 27 worst.
The letter says how bad. This says what kind — whether this year drew
an unusual number of complaints, unusually dangerous
ones, or failures that arrived unusually early.
The dashed ring is 50 — the national norm. Further out is worse.
Complaint volume — 78
Against the median year of the Toyota Tundra. 50 means typical for this
model; 100 means roughly double.
Severity — 65
12.5% of these complaints
involved a crash, fire, injury or death, against a national rate of
9.7%.
Early failure — 18
11% of failures with a mileage on record happened under
36,000 miles, against a national rate of
29%.
NHTSA files every complaint against a named sub-assembly, not just a
system. This is the difference between knowing it was "the engine" and
knowing which part of it — the list to hand a mechanic.
Frame AND Members
8233.1%
Body
4819.4%
Rotor
3313.3%
Underbody Shields
2811.3%
Disc
176.9%
Lower Ball Joint
156.0%
Automatic Transmission
156.0%
Front
104.0%
When it fails
Odometer readings owners gave when they filed. About half of all
complaints include one.
Under 1,000 miles
82.1%
1,000 – 9,999 miles
51.3%
10,000 – 24,999 miles
143.6%
25,000 – 49,999 miles
4110.5%
50,000 – 74,999 miles
4411.3%
75,000 – 99,999 miles
8020.5%
100,000 – 149,999 miles
10326.4%
150,000+ miles
9524.4%
When owners complained
A spike years after the car went on sale usually means a part wearing
out on schedule across the whole fleet — the kind of pattern no single
owner can see from inside their own car.
Jan 2001peak 28Jul 2026
NHTSA investigations into the 2001 Toyota Tundra
An investigation is the step before a recall: the agency has seen enough
complaints to look into a pattern itself. An open one means it thinks
something may be wrong and nothing has been fixed yet.
PE09049Opened 6 Oct 2009Closed 26 Jan 2010FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:STORAGE:TANK ASSEMBLY:MOUNTING
FRAME CORROSION
THIS INVESTIGATION WAS OPENED BASED ON 20 REPORTS OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000 AND 2001 VEHICLES EXPERIENCING SEVERE CORROSION OF THE FRAME, RESULTING IN EITHER UNDER-BODY MOUNTED SPARE TIRE SEPARATION OR REAR BRAKE FAILURE.THE FAILURE REPORT COUNTS SHOWN ABOVE ARE FOR MY 2000 AND 2001 VEHICLES ONLY.BY LETTER OF NOVEMBER 16, 2009 TOYOTA HAS NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT WILL CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (09V-444) OF APPROXIMATELY 110,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000 THROUGH 2003 TUNDRA VEHICLES.THE AFFECTED RECALLED VEHICLES WERE SOLD OR ARE CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND THE STATES OF CT, D...
Recalls on the 2001 Toyota Tundra
A complaint is one owner's allegation. A recall is the point at which
the manufacturer or a regulator agreed the defect is real and dangerous
enough to fix for free — however old the car is.
United States — NHTSA
09V444000
STRUCTURE:FRAME AND MEMBERS:UNDERBODY SHIELDS
TOYOTA IS RECALLING MODEL YEAR 2000-2003 TUNDRA VEHICLES ORIGINALLY SOLD IN OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING STATES: CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, KENTUCKY, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, VIRGINIA, WEST VIRGINIA, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. EXCESSIVE CORROSION OF THE REAR CROSS MEMBER MAY CAUSE THE SEPARATION OF THE SPARE TIRE STOWED UNDER THE TRUCK BED WHICH WOULD PRESENT A ROAD HAZARD THAT COULD CAUSE A CRASH. ALSO, CORROSION OF THE REAR CROSS MEMBER COULD AFFECT THE REAR BRAKE LINES AND THE PROPORTIONING VALVE RESULTING IN DIMINISHED BRAKING CAPABILITY.
Risk: SEPARATION OF THE SPARE TIRE AND DIMINISHED BRAKE CAPACITY COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
09E025000
EXTERIOR LIGHTING:HEADLIGHTS
DOPE, INC. IS RECALLING 42,540 COMBINATION CORNER AND BUMPER LAMP ASSEMBLIES OF VARIOUS PART NUMBERS SOLD FOR USE AS AFTERMARKET EQUIPMENT FOR VARIOUS PASSENGER VEHICLES. THESE HEADLAMPS FAIL TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THESE LAMPS DO NOT CONTAIN THE REQUIRED AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS.
Risk: DECREASED LIGHTING VISIBILITY MAY RESULT IN A VEHICLE CRASH.
06E065000
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
CERTAIN AJ MOTORSPORT COMBINATION LAMPS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON THE ABOVE LISTED PASSENGER VEHICLES. COMBINATION LAMPS NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.
Risk: LACK OF AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS IN THE LAMPS WILL DECREASE LIGHTING VISIBILITY TO OTHER DRIVERS AND MAY POSSIBLY RESULT IN A VEHICLE CRASH.
06E026000
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
CERTAIN PRO-A MOTORS CORNER LAMPS, TURN SIGNALS, AND HEADLIGHTS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES LISTED ABOVE. SOME COMBINATION LAMPS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM TO FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.
Risk: WITHOUT THE AMBER REFLECTORS, THE VEHICLE WILL BE POORLY ILLUMINATED, POSSIBLY RESULTING IN A VEHICLE CRASH WITHOUT WARNING.
02V129000
WHEELS
ON CERTAIN 4X2 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH AN ALLOY WHEEL TIRE UPGRADE (OPTIONS WM4, WM8, ZL1-ZL4, DH4, OR DH5) INSTALLED BY THE PROCESSING CENTERS IN JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA OR COMMERCE, GEORGIA, A LABEL IDENTIFYING THE SPARE TIRE AS A TEMPORARY USE SPARE TIRE WAS NOT INSTALLED. THE UPGRADE INCLUDES 4 LARGER SIZE TIRES WITH ALLOY WHEELS. THE ORIGINAL SPARE TIRE/STEEL WHEEL IS NOT PART OF THE UPGRADE AND WAS NOT CHANGED.
Risk: DIFFERENT OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS CAN BE EXPERIENCED WHEN THE SPARE TIRE IS INSTALLED ON THE VEHICLE.
Canada — Transport Canada
Canada runs its own recall programme, and its campaigns do not
always mirror the American ones.
Recall 20093299,722 units in Canada
Structure
On certain vehicles operated in areas of heavy road salt usage, excessive corrosion of the rear cross member may cause separation of the spare tire stowed under the truck bed. Corrosion of the rear cross member may also affect the functionality of the rear brake line at the proportioning valve. A spare tire that separates during vehicle usage could impact nearby persons or objects resulting in personal injury and/or vehicle and property damage. Correction: Dealers will inspect the rear cross member and surrounding components and, depending on the amount of corrosion detected, either apply a corrosion-resistant compound or replace the cross member assembly.
Reports where the owner recorded a crash, a fire, an injury or a death.
Springfield, VA1 injured
WHEELS
Driving straight at 30mph and wheel came off causing near deadly collision. Upon inspection it is evident that the wheel separated from its ball joints. Further research strongly suggests that this is a known defect of this year/make/model, even though the recall was issued only for the subsequent years vehicle. This is a potentially deadly design flaw and not an isolated manufacturing defect as Toyota claims.
NHTSA complaint #11564251 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 148,000 milesMinford, OHCrash
SUSPENSION
MY BALL JOINTS ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE WHEEL CATASTROPHICALLY FAILED THIS MORNING WITHOUT WARNING (NO KNOCKING/RATTLING/VIBRATION/ETC.). LUCKILY I WAS ONLY GOING 15 MPH. I AM CONCERNED THAT TOYOTA IS AWARE OF AN ISSUE WITH THE BALL JOINTS THAT COULD CAUSE THIS FAILURE WITHOUT WARNING. I AM WORRIED FOR FUTURE INCIDENTS THAT WOULD NOT BE SO LUCKY AND HAPPEN ON A HIGHWAY GOING 70MPH OR MORE (WHICH I WAS DOING 10 MINUTES PRIOR TO THIS HAPPENING). I UNDERSTAND NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR BUT THIS IS A SUDDEN, CATASTROPHIC FAILURE THAT IS HIGHLY DANGEROUS AND LIKELY TO KILL PEOPLE. NORMAL BALL JOINT WEAR LOOSENS THE BALL JOINT AND MAKES A RATTLING NOISE, THIS ISSUE BINDS THE BALL JOINT WITH NO WARNING AND BREAKS IT OFF. I CALLED TOYOTA AND WAS DECLINED ANY INFORMATION RELATING TO TRENDING AND WAS TOLD THERE IS NOTHING THEY CAN DO ABOUT WEAR AND TEAR. THIS WAS IN SPITE OF KNOWLEDGE I HAVE OF OVER 533,000 RECALLS OF BALL JOINTS ON SIMILAR MODELS WITH SIMILAR SUSPENSIONS. THE TOYOTA PERSONNEL I SPOKE WITH WOULD NOT EVEN ADMIT TO ANY RECALLS OF SUCH LIKE INCIDENTS. TOYOTA SEEMED COMPLETELY UNCONCERNED AND EVEN WORRIED THAT IF THEY PROVIDED INFORMATION LIKE THIS TO OTHER TUNDRA OWNERS THAT THEY WOULD BE "LIABLE" AND EXPECTED TO PAY TO HAVE THEM FIXED. IT SEEMED TOYOTA WAS HAPPY TO SIT BY AND WATCH THE NEXT WHEEL GO FLYING OFF THEIR TUNDRAS/SEQUOIAS (AND POTENTIAL FATALITY) AT THE RISK OF HAVING TO COMMUNICATE AN ISSUE TO CUSTOMERS. I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO KNOW THERE COULD HAVE BEEN AN EXISTING BALL JOINT ISSUE, I WOULD HAVE PERFORMED A PM ON MINE!
NHTSA complaint #11256445 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 240,000 milesKlondike, TXCrash
SUSPENSION
THE LOWER BALL JOINTS ON THESE FIRST GENERATION TUNDRAS ARE ALL PRONE TO EARLY FAILURE WHEN USING ANY OTHER BRAND THAN OEM. I HAVE TALKED TO DOZENS OF FIRST GEN OWNERS AND ALL AGREE THE LOWER BALL JOINTS ON THE TRUCKS ARE A HUGE WEAK POINT. I HAD MY DRIVER'S SIDE FRONT WHEEL COME OFF OF MY TRUCK WHILE TURNING DOWN A STREET IN A BUSY INTERSECTION, CAUSING EXTENSIVE DAMAGE TO MY TUNDRA. THE WHEEL WENT ABOUT 50 FEET AND STOPPED BY COLLIDING WITH A PARKED CAR. THE SUSPENSION OF MY TRUCK ALSO CAUSED DAMAGE TO THE ROAD.
NHTSA complaint #11193099 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 200,000 milesWalkerton, INCrash1 injured
SUSPENSION
FRONT LOWER LEFT BALL JOINT BROKE AT 40 MPH WHILE CROSSING RR TRACKS.THE TIRE/HUB COMPLETELY TORE LOOSE TEARING OFF BRAKE LINE.AND JUST LUCKILY AVOIDED A DEADLY HEAD-ON COLLISION.THIS IS THE MOST DANGEROUS VEHICLE I HAVE EVER OWNED.THIS PROBLEM MUST BE ADDRESSED.MY PROBLEM IS L ALSO OWN A 2001 TOYOTA SEQUOIA WHICH HAS THE SAME FRONT BALL JOINTS.THIS IS TOTAL BULL. I WOULD HAD SENT A PICTURE,BUT THE TRUCK LEFT THE SCENE ON A FLAT BED TRAILER.
NHTSA complaint #11131849 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 200,000 milesRaleigh, NCCrash2 injured
AIR BAGS
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA. WHILE AT A COMPLETE STOP, THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS STRUCK BY ANOTHER VEHICLE TRAVELING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH. THE FRONTAL AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. BOTH DRIVERS WERE TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL BY AMBULANCE. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT HAD TO STAY IN THE HOSPITAL FOR THREE DAYS. THE CONTACT RECEIVED CARDIAC IMPACT WITH THE STEERING WHEEL BECAUSE THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 200,000. UPDATED 11/12/15*LJ UPDATED 1/4/2015
NHTSA complaint #10724780 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 132,000 milesMonroe Township, NJCrash2 injured
AIR BAGS
WAS HIT HEAD ON AND AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY.
NHTSA complaint #10653793 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
The most recent complaints
In the owners' own words, exactly as filed with NHTSA.
at 200,000 milesSterling, VA
STRUCTURE
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 09V444000 (Structure); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The contact stated that upon further inspection, the underbody frame appeared to be rusted. The vehicle was taken to a local independent mechanic where it was confirmed that the underbody frame was rusted. The local dealer was contacted; however, the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired because the parts were no longer manufactured. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 200,000.
NHTSA complaint #11752462 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Sheffield Village, OH
WHEELS
There is an unresolved body corrosion recall that has not been addressed in over a year, despite receiving an invoice from the dealership. I will attach the invoice that lists all the parts ordered for the remedy of this recall.
NHTSA complaint #11721644 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Sheffield Village, OH
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
There is an unresolved body corrosion recall that has not been addressed in over a year, despite receiving an invoice from the dealership. I will attach the invoice that lists all the parts ordered for the remedy of this recall.
NHTSA complaint #11721644 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Sheffield Village, OH
SUSPENSION
There is an unresolved body corrosion recall that has not been addressed in over a year, despite receiving an invoice from the dealership. I will attach the invoice that lists all the parts ordered for the remedy of this recall.
NHTSA complaint #11721644 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Arvada, CO
WHEELS
On September 4, 2025, I brought my 2001 Toyota Tundra to Midas at 5325 Olde Wadsworth Blvd, Arvada, CO 80002 for an oil change and inspection. Midas advertises a “Closer Look Vehicle Check,” which includes checking steering, suspension, and wheels. Their inspection report marked the steering system as “OK” and only noted mild shock wear. Less than a month later, while exiting the highway, the lower ball joint failed completely, causing the front suspension and wheel to detach. I immediately lost steering control. Fortunately, this occurred at low speed; had it happened moments earlier on the highway, it could have caused a major collision or fatalities. The failed component (lower ball joint and related suspension parts) is still available for inspection. An independent mechanic later confirmed that the joint was severely worn and the failure appeared to be due to long-term deterioration that should have been detected during Midas’s inspection. No warning lights or indicators appeared before the failure. The incident endangered my life, my passengers’ safety, and other drivers on the road. The business has refused to take responsibility or cover repair costs, which currently total over $2,400, despite their advertised inspection and guarantee. This raises serious concerns that Midas and potentially other service locations may be failing to properly inspect critical suspension components, which poses a major public safety hazard.
NHTSA complaint #11691486 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Arvada, CO
STEERING
On September 4, 2025, I brought my 2001 Toyota Tundra to Midas at 5325 Olde Wadsworth Blvd, Arvada, CO 80002 for an oil change and inspection. Midas advertises a “Closer Look Vehicle Check,” which includes checking steering, suspension, and wheels. Their inspection report marked the steering system as “OK” and only noted mild shock wear. Less than a month later, while exiting the highway, the lower ball joint failed completely, causing the front suspension and wheel to detach. I immediately lost steering control. Fortunately, this occurred at low speed; had it happened moments earlier on the highway, it could have caused a major collision or fatalities. The failed component (lower ball joint and related suspension parts) is still available for inspection. An independent mechanic later confirmed that the joint was severely worn and the failure appeared to be due to long-term deterioration that should have been detected during Midas’s inspection. No warning lights or indicators appeared before the failure. The incident endangered my life, my passengers’ safety, and other drivers on the road. The business has refused to take responsibility or cover repair costs, which currently total over $2,400, despite their advertised inspection and guarantee. This raises serious concerns that Midas and potentially other service locations may be failing to properly inspect critical suspension components, which poses a major public safety hazard.
NHTSA complaint #11691486 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Arvada, CO
SUSPENSION
On September 4, 2025, I brought my 2001 Toyota Tundra to Midas at 5325 Olde Wadsworth Blvd, Arvada, CO 80002 for an oil change and inspection. Midas advertises a “Closer Look Vehicle Check,” which includes checking steering, suspension, and wheels. Their inspection report marked the steering system as “OK” and only noted mild shock wear. Less than a month later, while exiting the highway, the lower ball joint failed completely, causing the front suspension and wheel to detach. I immediately lost steering control. Fortunately, this occurred at low speed; had it happened moments earlier on the highway, it could have caused a major collision or fatalities. The failed component (lower ball joint and related suspension parts) is still available for inspection. An independent mechanic later confirmed that the joint was severely worn and the failure appeared to be due to long-term deterioration that should have been detected during Midas’s inspection. No warning lights or indicators appeared before the failure. The incident endangered my life, my passengers’ safety, and other drivers on the road. The business has refused to take responsibility or cover repair costs, which currently total over $2,400, despite their advertised inspection and guarantee. This raises serious concerns that Midas and potentially other service locations may be failing to properly inspect critical suspension components, which poses a major public safety hazard.
NHTSA complaint #11691486 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 285,643 milesSanta Maria, CA
SUSPENSION
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle started making a metallic cracking sound, and the steering wheel was pulling to the right. The dealer was contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 285,643.
NHTSA complaint #11656735 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Mounds View, MN
SUSPENSION
Toyota Corporate is refusing to acknowledge my Tundra's eligibility for remedy under a safety recall and campaign. My Tundra is experiencing the failure mode outlined in the safety recall 90M and extended safety campaign Tundra BXD. The spare tire crossmember of the frame is almost entirely rotted through with rust and is barely connected at this point. My Tundra's VIN number falls within the VIN range table's indicated in the recall and campaign documentation, and meets the criteria of currently being registered in an eligible cold-climate state. By all accounts, it should be eligible to receive remedy under this campaign. However Toyota has on multiple occasions just told me that "Safety Recalls are Service Campaigns are VIN-specific" and that VIN does not report as eligible. I've provided photo evidence of the issue and the documentation, yet Toyota refuses to acknowledge my truck's eligibility for repair under this program. Safety recalls are to prevent safety incidents from occurring due to known design or manufacturing defects. My truck is experiencing a known and documented defect. Toyota has a process for fixing it. However they're refusing to fix mine because of a mis-match in the VIN database. Safety issues don't affect "VIN numbers", they affect vehicles, the people who drive them, and others out on the roads.
NHTSA complaint #11650826 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Winchester, VA
SUSPENSION
I feel vehicle's frame is not safe... starting making a metal cracking noise due excessive corrosion .. rear frame portion is been treated under recall but the front looks really bad we can't even change suspension parts due the possibility on getting a serious frame problems. I keeping my truck with low mileage and not planning on selling it, very clean inside. I understand frame replacement it is an option if the frame is really bad and mine is getting onto that stage...
NHTSA complaint #11604997 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 233,500 milesEl Segundo, CA
SUSPENSION:FRONT:CONTROL ARM:LOWER BALL JOINT
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated while driving approximately 70 MPH, the steering wheel suddenly pulled to the right and front driver's side wheel detached from underneath the vehicle, causing the vehicle to skid across the highway before coming to a stop. The vehicle was later towed to the local dealer who diagnosed the vehicle and determined that the front driver's side ball joint had failed and needed to be replaced. The contact stated that there was damage to the subframe of the vehicle caused by the detached wheel. The vehicle was not yet repaired. The local dealer and manufacturer were notified of the failure, but no assistance was offered. The failure mileage was 233,500.
NHTSA complaint #11581721 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Springfield, VA1 injured
WHEELS
Driving straight at 30mph and wheel came off causing near deadly collision. Upon inspection it is evident that the wheel separated from its ball joints. Further research strongly suggests that this is a known defect of this year/make/model, even though the recall was issued only for the subsequent years vehicle. This is a potentially deadly design flaw and not an isolated manufacturing defect as Toyota claims.
NHTSA complaint #11564251 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 216,000 milesPoca, WV
STRUCTURE:FRAME AND MEMBERS
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that the vehicle was taken to an inspection station where it was reported that the vehicle could not be lifted due to extensive rust located behind the cab on the sub frame. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 216,000.
NHTSA complaint #11554298 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Desoto, MO
STRUCTURE:BODY
I brought my 2001 Toyota Tundra into my dealer today, and he advised me that the frame of the Toyota is very rusted and cracking and close to completely breaking. He said Toyota issued a recall on this, but it is no longer in effect. I have learned this is a common issue with the 2000-2003 Toyota Tundras. Please advise!
NHTSA complaint #11543163 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Roxana, IL
STRUCTURE:BODY
Heavy rust on frame as well as rusting out under support. Causing the bed of the truck to rub on the Cab. Causing the frame to start to bend, I use his vehicle. To transport my special needs child. I’m wondering why, my vehicle? Isn’t covered under the recall ???
NHTSA complaint #11542335 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Gaithersburg, MD
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
The car got a lot of rust all over the frame and notice is been a recall on this model and year
NHTSA complaint #11536696 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 227,780 milesCurtice, OH
STRUCTURE:BODY
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that she noticed an unknown part hanging from the vehicle. The contact's son noticed that the cross member had fractured causing the fuel tank to detach. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer where it was diagnosed that the sub frame needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was contacted but no assistance was provided. The failure mileage was approximately 227,780. The contact stated repairs would cost $3800 and up but the contact can not afford the repairs. The contact is requesting further assistance on this matter as she was unable to find resolution.
NHTSA complaint #11530610 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 187,149 milesDetroit, MI
SUSPENSION
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated while driving at various speeds on a bumpy road surface, the vehicle made abnormal sounds and the rear suspension shuddered and shifted to one side. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, where the front and rear shocks were replaced; however, the failure persisted. The vehicle was taken back to the independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed that the subframe was severely corroded and had holes. The vehicle was not repaired. The dealer was not notified of the failure. The manufacturer was notified of the failure, but no assistance was provided. The contact stated that the vehicle was previously repaired under NHTSA Campaign Number: 09V444000 (Structure) however, the dealer had only sprayed a corrosion protection compound on the subframe. The failure mileage was approximately 187,149.
NHTSA complaint #11527964 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 187,149 milesDetroit, MI
STRUCTURE
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated while driving at various speeds on a bumpy road surface, the vehicle made abnormal sounds and the rear suspension shuddered and shifted to one side. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, where the front and rear shocks were replaced; however, the failure persisted. The vehicle was taken back to the independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed that the subframe was severely corroded and had holes. The vehicle was not repaired. The dealer was not notified of the failure. The manufacturer was notified of the failure, but no assistance was provided. The contact stated that the vehicle was previously repaired under NHTSA Campaign Number: 09V444000 (Structure) however, the dealer had only sprayed a corrosion protection compound on the subframe. The failure mileage was approximately 187,149.
NHTSA complaint #11527964 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 148,000 milesOzone Park, NY
STRUCTURE:FRAME AND MEMBERS
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that upon taking the vehicle to an independent mechanic for servicing, he was informed that the chassis was severely corroded. The independent mechanic diagnosed that the undercarriage needed to be replaced and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact stated that the failure was related to an unknown recall. The dealer and the manufacturer were not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 148,000.
NHTSA complaint #11494408 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 148,000 milesOzone Park, NY
STRUCTURE:FRAME AND MEMBERS:UNDERBODY SHIELDS
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that upon taking the vehicle to an independent mechanic for servicing, he was informed that the chassis was severely corroded. The independent mechanic diagnosed that the undercarriage needed to be replaced and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact stated that the failure was related to an unknown recall. The dealer and the manufacturer were not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 148,000.
NHTSA complaint #11494408 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Whittier, CA
SUSPENSION
Lower ball joints(right and left hand sides) very serious safety concern. this is my family vehicle and has been with the family since 2005-06. members from the tundra forums are concerned about this issue with toyota tundras. yes toyota has a recall for their 02-06 tundras and tacomas and sequioas of the same year. my car doesn't qualify for the recall. this recall is not covered for the 2000-2001 tundras,tacomas, and sequioas. dont understand why. they all have the same part numbers. i have seen and witnessed the aftermath of this failed ball joint. some are fatal and some leave you stranded. we need to have this deadly issue resolved with toyota. help me and help all other toyota tundra owners who are in this same situation as I am. thank you
NHTSA complaint #11466530 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Nevada, MO
SUSPENSION
My frame is broke . Right at the passenger front tire
NHTSA complaint #11440577 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 115,000 milesCedar Falls, IA
STRUCTURE:BODY
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that the sub frame of the vehicle was severely corroded. The dealer was notified of the failure and advised the contact that they could not repair the vehicle. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and did not provide any assistance. The vehicle was not diagnosed nor repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 115,000.
NHTSA complaint #11439729 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Bristow, VA
SUSPENSION
2001 Tundra (4.7 Engine); frame badly rusted in rear. Told on Aug. 3, 2021 that it would fail the next inspection. I put my VIRIN into the NHTSA site but couldn't find any recalls.
NHTSA complaint #11427742 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.