Tl* the contact owns a 2001 toyota tundra. The contact stated that the secondary hood release-lever fractured due to corrosion, which made it difficult to open the hood. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The contact was advised that the part needed was discontinued. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was 102,000.
2001 Toyota Tundra body complaints
Page 3 of 7: complaints 41 to 70 of 171, newest first, as owners wrote them.
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 toyota tundra. The contact stated that the rear driver side subframe perforated due to excessive corrosion. In 2012, the vehicle was repaired under the federal safety agency campaign number: 09v444000 (suspension); however, the failure recurred. The remedy consisted of spraying a corrosion protector onto the entire frame, which failed to prevent the subframe corrosion. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 370,000.
On april 11 2013 I purchased a 2001 toyota tundra. Months later while checking the tire pressures at a gas station, I was shocked to notice that there was a hole in the frame about two inches across. I called my nearest toyota dealer, woburn foreign motors, and spoke with nicole who ran the VIN number and told me that jaffarian toyota in haverhill had inspected the truck on 20 april 2012. Therefore, they would not look at my truck. Next, I called jaffarian and explained that the frame looked to me as if it could snap in half, and that I could not see how that much rust could occur from when they inspected it. The service technician then said that if they had inspected and passed the truck then they would have applied a preservative undercoating to the frame. I pointed out there was no such paint or undercoating anywhere to be seen on the frame. He tried to get me back on the recall list, but found out that he could not. Being my only vehicle for use to make a living, I continued to drive the truck until 11 april 2015, when the frame snapped in half as I was entering my driveway. I had been on interstate 95 at 65 MPH only minutes earlier, when I expect the vehicle would have lost control and probably rolled over had the frame snapped then. If the vehicle was indeed inspected, then it seems evident that the inspector was negligent in his duties and passed the vehicle knowing that it had severe and dangerous corrosion to its chassis. Under these circumstances, I have contacted toyota motor corporation and have asked them to cover the cost of towing my truck to a dealer, and repairing it to a safe, roadworthy condition under the terms of their original recall and they have refused. Any help you can give to resolve this issue would be greatly appreciated.
I purchased the vehicle in october 2014 and was informed about a frame corrosion issue causing failures and failure to pass vt state inspections by a family friend in january. I contacted toyota and provided [xxx], the customer service representative with all VIN information. He looked up service records and informed me that the vehicle had a corrosion application applied in 2010 under the previous owner and there was nothing further required. Under the recall action that was all required based I my VIN number. I did ask if it had issues discovered what was I to do, [xxx] told me to contact toyota again if that occurred. I took the vehicle to be inspected on 27 march, 2015 at groton garage, in groton vt and the owner [xxx]. Contacted me to inform me that it could not be inspected due to multiple frame corrosion issues that are failures. He also knew of the recall issue for frame corrosion and failure and told me to contact toyota again. On 30 march I spoke with [xxx] who took the information update the data under case # 1503303884 and told me a specialist dealing with this high profile issue would contact me within 1 business day. I was contacted the next day by thorn who pulled up my information and informed me that toyota had completed the frame application in 2010 and that is all that is required by toyota to be completed by recall action b0d. I informed him that the vehicle could not be inspected after just purchasing due to the frame being corroded and he stated toyota recall action was not responsible for this issue with my vehicle. I disagree and currently own a 2013 rav and would never had purchased a tundra if I would have known about this frame issue. As a recent retired active duty member, I feel that customer service and taking care of known issue is the responsibility of toyota not those who purchased the vehicles unknowingly. Information redacted pursuant to the freedom of information act (foia), 5 u.s.c. 552(b)(6).
Tl*the contact owns a 2001 toyota tundra. The contact stated that the vehicle was serviced under the federal safety agency campaign number: 09v444000 (structure) and the dealer sprayed the cross member with a corrosion protection compound. The contact stated that while driving at 5 MPH, the spare tire detached from the vehicle. The vehicle was taken back to the dealer where they refused to repair the vehicle under the recall. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where it was repaired. The details of the repairs were unavailable. The failure mileage was 180,000.
Spare tire holder rusted & spare tire flew off into traffic. This is a safety issue.
You might be curious to know that the frame recall that toyota had and that ended in 2012 is recurring on the toyotas again. I had mine checked in 2012 and was told it was fine but they were going to under coat it in order to prevent it from happening in the future. I went to have it inspected last week for them to tell me that the frame is soft and rusted through with a hole, in the exact spot the recall was referring to. I brought it to the toyota dealership who did the under coating to begin with just for them to confirm that the hole was there, the rust was occurring but the recall had ended in 2012 and they can no longer help us. In turn they told us to contact toyota corporation, which we did, and they told us they can not help us either because the recall had ended. The representative on the phone agreed with us but said the corporation wouldn't allow him to do anything. So, end result is we are stuck with a truck that had a frame "fixed" but is now doing the same thing it did before but the toyota dealership won't honor it, nor will the corporation. I should add when I contacted the dealership in regards to this one of the first things the technician said to me was that I wasn't the first one to come back with a rusted frame. Very shady and unreliable. I would hope that toyota would honor their recalls that were previously fixed but apparently that's not the case.
On 11//18/0/01irc'd a recall for excessive corrosion of the rear cross member. In 10/2012,I was informed that the truck frame passed inspection and was good.they did replace two gas tank straps and told me the undercoating that should be sprayed on it as part of the recall was not available.I never received any addition correspondence regarding the undercoating.on 12/23,14 I took my truck to tj toyota for a trailer light whip repair. At that time, the mechanic had me look at the frame rail.it is rusted so bad I could see right through the rail.the connection of this rail to the frame has excessive scaling.the truck was due for an inspection at the end of the month, and I was told they would not do an inspection.the mechanic continued to tell me he felt the truck was "junk" unsuitable for towing anything.I called 1‑800‑331‑4331 at toyota and spoke with [xxx], [xxx] and [xxx]. [xxx] processed a conference call with herself, [xxx] at tj toyota and me. [xxx] told me to take the truck back to tj toyota to redo the frame inspection and if it failed, toyota would replace the frame. However, [xxx], from tj toyota stated it is not corroded on the frame but it is on the rail connecting to the frame. I asked what they would for me and he stated, spray it with undercoating. I asked what that would do for the truck and [xxx] stated nothing?. Nnyroads are salted heavily.if this vehicle was never undercoated or protected for rust, the fact that the rails are rusted is due to not being prepared for driving in nnywinter.I find it difficult to believe that in 2012 my truck frame and under carriage was in as good a condition as the inspection dictated.if in two years a toyota truck frame goes from good to junk, there is a problem some place. I believe not undercoating the vehicle LED to the rust problems and the result of the inspection in 2012 was incorrect. Information redacted pursuant to the freedom of information act (foia), 5 u.s.c. 552(b)(6).
I purchased a 2001 toyota tundra extended cab pick up truck new in feb. 2001. The vehicle was serviced at a toyota dealership for years. On dec. 11, 2011 I received a recall notice from toyota (ssc 90m) regarding severe corrosion of the rear cross-member. On feb. 18, 2012 the truck was serviced at koons toyota in westminster, md. At that time an inspection was completed and the paper work I was given indicated the following; "inspect, remove rust & clean frame, no rust ex spec, apply crc. The truck was back at the same dealership in 2013 for a routine oil change and no mention of rust was made by the service department. In oct. 2014 the vehicle was serviced at a certified automobile repair station. At this time I was informed the mechanic that my frame was badly rusted. I have contacted toyota and they will only say the "campaign" on my vehicle is over. Although I realize recall ssc 90m ended in 2012 I believe that my frame was rusted in feb. 2012 when the vehicle was at a toyota dealership and should have been fixed at that time. I base this on the opinion of 2 certified auto mechanics and 1 certified auto body repairman. All 3 inspected my vehicle and our of the opinion that the amount of rust on the frame could not have occurred from 2012 to 2014. They advise the frame would have had to have been rusting in feb. 2012, before the recall ended.
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 toyota tundra. The contact stated that in january 2012 the vehicle was taken to the dealer to be inspected for frame corrosion. After inspecting the vehicle the mechanic determined that the frame did not need to be repaired or replaced and sprayed the frame with an anti corrosion substance crc. In october 2014 the vehicle failed an inspection due to a perforated sub frame caused by corrosion. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The VIN number was not available. The failure mileage was 187,000.
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 toyota tundra. The contact stated that the frame was corroded and caused the protective coating to chip off. The contact mentioned that the vehicle was repaired under the federal safety agency campaign number: 09v444000 (structure). However, the failure recurred. The vehicle was not taken to the dealer. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 122,000. Updated 01/07/14*lj the consumer stted the vehicle was taken to a mechanic hwo advised the failure was due to rust jacking. The machanic suggested the vehicle be taken to the dealer. The dealer stated there were no rust holes. Updated 6/8/2015
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 concerned about my truck's safety and that it has passed through toyota's inspection without correction to the known safety issue, due to a technicality based on a faulty policy.
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.
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.
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.
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 toyota tundra. The contact received notification of the federal safety agency 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 the federal safety agency 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 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 the federal safety agency 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.
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.
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 toyota tundra. The contact stated that the vehicle was taken to the dealer for repairs under the federal safety agency 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
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 the federal safety agency 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.
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 resolution in our favor, we will see. My concern is, how many of these toyota dealers are not thoroughly inspecting these trucks, spraying over the problems and putting these vehicles back on the roads. How safe is that?
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.
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.
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 toyota tundra. The contact made an appointment to have the vehicle repaired under the federal safety agency 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.
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2001 Toyota Tundra?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history