On XXX in [XXX], my well-maintained 2003 Toyota Camry LE (69,019 miles) experienced Sudden Unintended Acceleration (SUA). After stopping with my foot on the brake, I shifted into reverse without touching the accelerator. The engine surged to full throttle, launching backward into a parked car (totaled) and then surging forward uncontrollably around my cul-de-sac while I slammed on the hard, ineffective brake pedal. No Check Engine light was on before or after, and two local mechanics found no stored Diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTCs). I filed Toyota Claim #XXX. On XXX, Toyota’s contractor, Engineering Analysis Associates (EAA), inspected the car and read the EDR at Peruzzi Toyota. On XXX, Toyota denied my claim, finding no mechanical defect and noting an aftermarket floor mat over the OEM mat. Toyota's denial ignores key facts: (1) The aftermarket mat has a heavy nibbed rubber backing, cannot slide, sits well clear of the pedals, and never trapped the accelerator. (2) As proven in Bookout v. Toyota, transient ETCS-i software freezes ("task death") hold the throttle open without setting fault codes and self-clear when turned off, while an open throttle depletes engine vacuum and starves the power brakes. (3) Toyota excluded 2002–2004 Camrys from its Brake Override System software updates. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
The worst 2003 Toyota Camry problems
Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.
Problems by type
Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.
- Acceleration260
- Engine164
- Brakes118
- Airbags73
- Steering53
- Transmission40
- Body29
- Suspension29
- Visibility22
- Electrical20
- Fuel system20
- Seat belts17
- Tires16
- Locks12
- Lights9
- Seats7
- Wheels6
- Driver assistance3
Specific symptoms reported on the 2003 Toyota Camry
Sudden acceleration 138No deployment 36Brake failure 31Engine failure 27Overheating 26Check engine light 22ABS 18Jerking 17Pulling 17Adaptive cruise 15Grinding brakes 15Stalling 14Door locks 12Hesitation 12Steering noise 11Seat belt 9Tire blowout 9Fire or smoke 8Headlights 7Spongy pedal 7Knocking 6Shudder 6
Recalls 1
Air bags: side/window
- What is wrong
- On certain vehicles equipped with curtain shield air bags (csa), one or both of the curtain air bags may be twisted near the inflator due to improper assembly.
- Risk
- If this occurs, the csa may not deploy rapidly enough when activated in a side impact collision. This may result in failure to provide the intended head protection, increasing the risk of injury.
- Remedy
- Dealers will inspect the csas and replace the air bag assembly if necessary. The recall began on august 6, 2004. Owners should contact toyota at 1‑800‑331‑4331.
Recall number 04V346000 · Recall details
See all 1 recalls for the 2003 Toyota Camry
Defect investigations
Engine surging
The petitioner owns a my 2006 toyota camry with a 4-cylinder engine that was purchased new in january 2006. The petitioner also previously owned a my 2005 camry. He alleges that both vehicles exhibited vehicle engine surging, which he described as a short duration (1 to 2 second) increase in engine speed occurring while the accelerator pedal is not depressed. In an initial interview, the petitioner estimated that 6 to 8 surge incidents, of varying severity, occurred in the my 2006 vehicle over the course of 10,000 miles and 7 months of ownership. The petitioner reports that the brake system is effective at overcoming the surge. However, he is concerned about reports filed with the federal safety agency alleging uncontrolledsurging in my 2002 to 2006 camry vehicles bringing those vehicles to a high rate of speed (in some cases, purportedly, with the brakes applied).after review and analysis of the available information, odi has not identified a vehicle-based defect that would have produced the alleged engine surge in the petitioner?s vehicle, nor was it able to witness such an event when road testing the petitioner?s vehicle.evaluation of a suspect throttle actuator removed from the petitioner?s vehicle did not reveal a component problem. Warranty and parts sales of the actuator are unremarkable.these data do not support the existence of a wide-spread defect or ongoing concern. The fault detection and reaction strategy described in toyota?s technical documents indicates that a loss of throttle control due to a component or system failure would be detected within a one second periodafter which engine power would be limited. The petitioner?s my 2006 vehicle brake system overcomes full engine power at easily achievable brake pedal forces. Based on the analysis conducted, it is unlikely that the federal safety agency would issue an order for the notification and remedy of a safety related defect at the conclusion of the investigation requested in the petition.consequently, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize the federal safety agency?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency?s safety mission, the petition is denied.please see the march 9, 2007 federal register notice for further details.
DP06003
Vehicle speed control
In a letter dated july 8, 2005, and after experiencing two incidents (and one crash) where he alleges his model year (my) 2002 camry accelerated without driver input, mr. Jordan ziprin petitioned the federal safety agency?s (the federal safety agency) office of defects investigation (odi) to commence a proceeding to determine the existence of a defect within the etc system in my 2002 to 2005 toyota and lexus vehicles, or to reopen a prior investigation preliminary evaluation (pe) 04-021.in a letter dated august 18, 2005, mr. Ziprin amended his petition to include allegations of interrelated brake and acceleration problems that allegedly result in inappropriate and uncontrollable vehicle accelerations.the 1172 vehicle owner questionnaire reports cited by the petitioner involve 4 lexus and 15 toyota models defining a population of 7 million vehicles.the reports typically alleged a defect in the brake system, the throttle control system, or a combination of both systems.in its review of the reports, odi a) failed to find evidence to support the existence of a brake related defect in the cited models, and b) determined that many cited products were not equipped with etc.accordingly, odi restricted its analysis to the 432 petitioner reports involving my 2002 to 2005 camry, solara, and es models (all equipped with etc) that alleged an abnormal throttle control event (see the january 3, 2006 federal register notice for further details).about 40% of the 432 reports involve a driveability concern where the operator intentionally applies the throttle pedal, in expectation that the vehicle will accelerate, and then experiences a delay or hesitation in vehicle response.these reports involve vehicle response to intentional driver commands which odi considers unrelated to the allegations raised by the petitioner.therefore, the reports do not provide support for the investigation requested.about 20% of the reports involve incidents where operators allege vehicle acceleration without driver input and an inability of the brake system to control the vehicle when applied.neither the reports, nor the interviews conducted by odi, identified any vehicle-based cause to explain the incidents or disclosed evidence to support that a failure of the brake or throttle control system had occurred.because these reports do not indicate a distinct safety defect for investigation, the reports do not provide support for the investigation requested by the petitionerthe remaining reports (~ 40%, similar to the petitioner?s and those of pe04-021) typically describe incidents where a vehicle is being maneuvered at slow speed in a close quarter situation at which point the operator alleges that the vehicle accelerates without driver input and crashes.in the aftermath, operators are unsure of whether the brakes were applied or not, sometimes stating there was insufficient time to use the brake; a crash occurred and the operator believes an uncommanded acceleration caused it.in spite of the effort expended during pe04-021 and during this analysis, odi has not identified any vehicle-based cause to explain the reports, or uncovered any evidence to indicate that a throttle control system failure occurred.therefore, the reports have ambiguous significance and do not constitute a basis on which any further investigative action is warranted.based on the analysis conducted, it is unlikely that the federal safety agency would issue an order for the notification and remedy of a safety related defect at the conclusion of the investigation requested in the petition.consequently, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize the federal safety agency?s limited resources t
DP05002
Throttle control system
The lexus models were the subject of defect petition (dp) 04-003.twelve odi complaints are duplicative to toyota reports, including the two minor crashes.the v6 equipped solara models have been excluded because they do not contain the subject throttle control system.toyota introduced electronic throttle control (etc) on the subject vehicles beginning in model year (my) 2002.odi opened the investigation to determine if the system could be the cause of complaints alleging the engine speed increased, or failed to decrease, (for a short duration) when the accelerator pedal was not depressed (the alleged defect).during the course of the investigation, odi analyzed agency data and reviewed vehicle owner questionnaire (voq) reports, conducted interviews involving 113 voq and 36 toyota reports, inspected two complainant vehicles, reviewed relevant toyota service and new car feature documentation, reviewed and analyzed toyota?s responses to odi?s information request letter, conducted a limited control pedal assessment, and attended a toyota technical presentation that included the assessment of two demonstration vehicles.through interviews, odi identified 14 voq and 6 toyota reports (20 unique vehicles) where complainants report multiple occurrences of the alleged defect.in some cases the condition was experienced by different vehicle operators or was witnessed by other occupants.odi was unable to make a determination as to the cause of 9 toyota and an additional 37 voq reports (which describe 28 unique incidents) due to insufficient information.the remaining complainants interviewed (62 voq, 21 toyota) described conditions not caused by a failure of the throttle control system and were thus considered unrelated to the investigation.none of the complainants interviewed reported a component failure (or other indicator of a system failure) as the potential cause of incidents relevant to this investigation.in many cases, the complaint vehicles were subsequently inspected by dealership or manufacturer representatives who also failed to identify a fault within the vehicle.toyota identified 43 related warranty claims, 24 of which were for diagnostic purposes only (no repairs performed).odi found nothing abnormal in the control pedal configuration of the subject vehicles.a 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 the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist.the agency will take further action if warranted by the circumstances.see the attached summary for further detail.
PE04021
Technical service bulletins for the 2003 Toyota Camry 157
Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.
- Acid rain results from rainwater or other airborne moisture that become acidic due to industrial chemical...
- To prevent brake rotor rust from forming during transportation and storage, wheel film will be used...
- The condition known as acid rain is caused by airborne chemicals or particles in the atmosphere, which mix...
- Toyota vehicles are currently protected with RapgardTM protective film designed to protect the horizontal...
- Vehicles may occasionally be subjected to contamination by airborne iron particles shed from railroad...
- Toyota vehicles are currently protected with RapgardTM protective film designed to protect the horizontal...
- This is to advise of various price adjustments that will affect Toyota Genuine Motor Oil and Long Life...
- Obsolete notice
- Replacement certification labels (the vinyl label installed on the driver door or door post) and VIN...
- The Immobilizer and Smart Key Reset is a feature that allows the registration of new keys when all master...
2003 Toyota Camry fuel economy
Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.
| Engine | Drive | City | Highway | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.4L 4‑cyl | FWD | 20-21 | 28-30 | 23-24 |
| 3.0L 6‑cyl | FWD | 17-18 | 24-26 | 19-21 |
What 2003 Toyota Camry owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
Sudden Unintended Acceleration: I had been out doing errands in the morning. I returned home, pulling up in front of my townhouse which is on a cul de sac. After gently coming to a stop, I planned to back up just a bit to park my car along the curb. (I did not have my foot on the accelerator, as the car normally goes gently backwards when you put it in reverse.) When I put it in R, the car accelerated backwards and crashed into a car that was parked along the curb about 15-20 ft behind me. I instinctively put the car in D to stop going uncontrollably backwards. The car shot forward; the brakes did not work. The car was out of control, making very loud revving sounds and loud screeching sounds from slamming on the brakes. Somehow, it did finally come to a stop by itself ¾ of the way around the cul de sac. Wanting to get out of the middle of the street, I instinctively turned the car back on and drove it slowly to my driveway. The car functioned normally. I could have badly injured or killed someone; in my cul de sac, there is often a lot of activity involving people of all ages, including children and babies. A police report exists. The car I hit was totaled. I had the car towed to my mechanic. He said the car didn’t throw any codes. He inspected it, but did not find anything wrong with it. The local Toyota dealership refuses to touch it because it’s been in an accident. I called Toyota (Plano TX) on 10/5: filed a claim with them on 10/7. A 3rd third-party inspector from Engineering Analysis Associates inspected the car and did a Bosch download from the black box on 10/14. There were no warning lamps, messages or other symptoms of the problem prior to the failure. I don’t absolutely know which component or system failed or malfunctioned. I am wondering if it’s a "ghost" software glitch (see Bookout vs Toyota litigation). Something similar happened to my husband in April 2025 when he was parking in a parking lot. The car is available for inspection upon request.
I am reporting a serious nighttime visibility and roadway-safety concern involving excessive glare from modern LED headlights while driving my 2003 Toyota Camry. When vehicles equipped with extremely bright LED headlights approach from the opposite direction or follow behind me, the glare can temporarily impair my vision and make it difficult to see the roadway, lane markings, pedestrians, hazards, and other vehicles. The effect is especially severe when the headlights are very high intensity, have a high color temperature, or are mounted on taller vehicles such as SUVs and trucks. This is not simply a complaint about brightness or personal preference. The glare creates periods of significantly reduced visibility while I am actively operating the vehicle. At nighttime driving speeds, even a brief loss of clear forward vision presents a meaningful safety risk.My 2003 Toyota Camry was designed in an era when vehicle lighting was substantially different from today's increasingly common high-output LED systems. I am concerned that current federal lighting standards and testing procedures do not adequately account for the real-world glare experienced by drivers of older, lower vehicles. I ask the federal safety agency to investigate whether current headlamp standards adequately control glare from modern LED lighting, including headlamp intensity, color temperature, aiming, mounting height, and the effects on drivers of lower/older vehicles. I also ask whether existing testing accurately reflects real-world nighttime conditions. The purpose of this complaint is to bring attention to a growing safety issue: lighting intended to improve one driver's visibility can, when excessively glaring to others, reduce another driver's ability to see the road safely.
The contact owns a 2003 Toyota Camry. The contact stated that the vehicle would suddenly accelerate or lunge forward and had done so several times, both while idle, pressing the brakes, and while driving at various speeds. Suddenly accelerated downhill, and when approaching the inner section, the contact immediately turned the vehicle to avoid hitting another vehicle and ended up crashing into a nearby residence's garage, causing the vehicle to stop. The air bags did not deploy. The garage door was damaged, and the contact's vehicle's front-end was damaged. A police report was filed. The contact had stated they had experienced sleep issues and a fear of driving the vehicle since the incident. The vehicle was able to be driven to the contact's residence. The vehicle had not been driven since. The contact spoke with a certified mechanic who informed them it was a known issue and of the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 09V388000 (Vehicle Speed Control), which related to their experienced failure. The mechanic did not repair the vehicle. The dealer was contacted, and it was confirmed that the VIN was not included in the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 09V388000 (Vehicle Speed Control). The manufacturer was informed of the failure, and they too confirmed that the VIN was not included. The manufacturer referred the contact to the federal safety agency Hotline to file a complaint. The failure mileage was approximately 75,000.
Odometer Fraud. The contact purchased a 2003 Toyota Camry. The contact stated that while attempting to register the vehicle, it was discovered that there was a mileage discrepancy. The vehicle was a private sale. At the time of purchase, the vehicle mileage was 127,888, and at the time of registration, it was discovered that the mileage was 165,064.
No incident. But it's a problem with the ABS. Dealership says it's nothing wrong with the brakes. But it is. Had a diagnostics done at Auto Zone, and it came back showing a code for the ABS system. But showed the service dept the code that it showed something is wrong with ABs. They still say nothing is wrong.
The contact owns a 2003 Toyota Camry. The contact stated that the vehicle was taken to the dealer for service and the mechanic informed her that the subframe, muffler, the brakes, and the gas tank were extremely corroded. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 206,000.
48 degrees outside, sitting in my car waiting a few minutes for it to warm up, after about one minute of sitting in it, the rear driver side window just cracked everywhere and shattered. Glass all over. Not happy, no reason why this should have happened. No cars were around, nothing hit it, it just shattered with no warning or no reason. I always loved Toyotas but this is really discouraging.
The contact owns a 2003 Toyota Camry. The contact stated that oil was leaking from the vehicle onto her driveway. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic to be diagnosed. The contact was informed that the engine bolts had sheared off. The contact stated that the bolts were replaced and torqued to specs however, the failure recurred. The manufacturer was contacted and notified of the failure however, no assistance was provided. The approximate failure mileage was 215,000.
Having purchased w 2003 Toyota Camry 2.4l, (with good paint, no rust, great interior, and new clear headlights) 3 days prior, the previous owner reported no current issues. The check engine light come on the 3 rd day as I drove away from the DMV having just titled it. AC was blowing cold, no other dash lights were on and I couldn't feel any apparent issues driving, so I proceed to my place of employment, where a friend whom is an independent mechanic had the machine to read check engine codes. I never made it. Had driven approximately 25 miles and came to a full stop for a red light. Upon turning green and beginning to accelerate, my Camry's engine died and would not start. When the key was turned it made no noise at all. Towed to a mechanic shop, I was asked if it had overheated, it had not. Without investing further and me acquiring a diagnostics charge, he said one apparent issue was the fact that there was absolutely no coolant in the engine. Dumfounded I had ittowed home where another Mechanic friend (licensed) was going to see about reapiring it. One of the code//errors read, was that the was no combustion, the radiator was full, but there was no traces of coolant in the engine, when took of the engine mainfold right away he noticed 3 cool packs that were damaged, as well as what appeared to be a used head gasket poorly installed, and worse if all the timing chain had jumped and made a mad mesh nightmare to the engine...so previous owners obviously sold me their night mare, I now am stuck with either replacing the engine (not) or bring carless once again.✔️✔️ Note: Contacted the acclaimed christian, God fearing sellers, whom I paid $4000 and they kindly refunded me $1000, as they stated it was no fault of theirs ..
Compare the 2003 Toyota Camry
Camry vs Honda AccordCamry vs Ford FusionCamry vs Chevrolet MalibuCamry vs Hyundai SonataCamry vs Nissan AltimaCamry vs Volkswagen PassatCamry vs Kia OptimaCamry vs Subaru Legacy
Other model years
19901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024
Questions about the 2003 Toyota Camry
Is the 2003 Toyota Camry reliable?
Owners have filed 783 complaints about the 2003 Toyota Camry, 1.7 times a typical Camry model year.
What is the 2003 Toyota Camry year score?
The 2003 Toyota Camry scores 53 out of 100 (below average). The score compares it with the other model years of the Toyota Camry: 75 is a typical year, 50 means twice the usual complaints, and serious complaints and recalls lower it.
What is the most common problem with the 2003 Toyota Camry?
Acceleration and speed control, with 260 complaints, typically around 37,335 miles. Next is engine (164).
How many recalls does the 2003 Toyota Camry have?
1 recall, covering air bags.
What year does the Toyota Camry have the most acceleration problems?
The Toyota Camry model years with the most acceleration complaints are 2007 (511 complaints), 2002 (281 complaints) and 2005 (272 complaints).
What gas mileage does the 2003 Toyota Camry get?
Official estimates for the 2003 Toyota Camry range from 19 to 24 mpg combined. The most efficient version (2.4L 4-cyl, FWD) gets 20-21 city and 28-30 highway.
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2003 Toyota Camry?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history