What's the real scoop about Toyota frame rust?

[jeremyc74]

So then I would assume you should agree that the concentration of the fault is a design flaw? Why else would it so commonly fail there, and not anywhere else on the frame? The fact that Toyota knows about this internally could help. Yes I understand that it is 'my fault' for purchasing a bad vehicle, but I am not too sure many have the ability to look inside the frame for perforation. The reason this was not included in the original lawsuit with Dana is because it wasn't found. We now see it. Yes 15 years is past Toyota's design limitations (at that time) so you are correct in that fact, but when a part fails and endangers a consumer that is another thing. Not all of our 3rd Gens are 15 years old yet.

These frames weren't even made by Dana, not even on the same continent. 4Runners were built in Japan. The recalled vehicles had frames from Mexico and were assembled in the US. They weren't covered under the recall because they're not the same.

So how long is Toyota responsible for keeping consumers safe?

The youngest 3rd gen was built 13 years ago.

 

[Riceye]

The reason this was not included in the original lawsuit with Dana is because it wasn't found.

This is not true. The 3rd gen 4Runners were final assembled in Japan. The Dana Corp had nothing to do with the production.

Now, you may surmise that because the frame treatment was done by Toyota, and that another company could not be blamed, they may be a little more reluctant to offer this campaign. And, again, the Tacoma program was a customer satisfaction campaign, not a recall.

Let's keep the facts straight.

I live a little south of Milwaukee, as I have for most of my 50 - something years. Rust never sleeps. I wash my vehicles frequently, especially in winter. And, I treat the known weak areas annually. My Tacoma corroded and failed at a completely different rate than any other vehicle I have ever owned, with the exception of my '65 Mustang.

 

[OOPSIES]

These frames weren't even made by Dana, not even on the same continent. 4Runners were built in Japan. The recalled vehicles had frames from Mexico and were assembled in the US. They weren't covered under the recall because they're not the same.

So how long is Toyota responsible for keeping consumers safe?

The youngest 3rd gen was built 13 years ago.

Again, I just stated at the time that 15 years was the limitation. What about the 4Runners that aren't 15 years old?

Just because they were built in Japan does not mean they weren't designed by the same contractor. I forgot to mention it gets even more convoluted when you involve Hino as well since they are legally separate from Toyota.

Although I am glad that your 4Runner is ok, and luckily I am in the financial situation where I am not bankrupted by this. You should have some sort of compassion for the hundreds of thousands of other 4Runner owners that don't have a 15 year old truck and are now out of a vehicle, possibly being put into financial jeopardy. This is not only about me.

 

[adkins]

Wow just wow. I feel like im back in the euro scene.

 

[OOPSIES]

I would like to make it clear that I will survive regardless of compensation, but there are many that are in my spot that bankrupted themselves, injured themselves, or have a separated arm without any surface rust present. I was merely asking who else felt the same way, and if you don't care to help that's fine. Again, I was mistaken in thinking this the same problem as the Tacomas so I apologize. I realize that a Hino designed vehicle may need to be litigated differently. Also, Toyota internally knows about this. That speaks something to its effect? What's the problem with trying? You all can laugh when it does fail that is fine by me, but some people are on a lifeline because of this.

 

[Riceye]

OOPSIES, how long have you lived in Lansing, MI? Have you visited salvage yards in your area and seen first hand the corrosion carnage that abounds? Ten year old domestic vehicles fill the yards, destroyed by road salt.

This is not an issue.

 

[SkidPalace]

Watching people take advantage of the courts make me angry. You cost us ALL money.

And you are speaking to an engineer with about 15 years in corrosive environments. I did salt water desalinization for several years, then designed products for the marine industry for 7, and spent the last 7 in automotive, so I honestly don't care who I'm speaking to.

Until manufacturers switch to aluminum for frames, trucks driven on salted roads WILL RUST if not taken care of.

So just let me ask...in your expert opinion, what would be the acceptable life of the frame? How long should Toyota be responsible for it? Obviously 15 years at least, but would 20 be enough? Maybe even 50?

They're legally responsible through the warranty period, and that's it. Anything beyond that is good will on the part of the company, and that's the cold hard reality of the matter.

And also, are you the original owner of your vehicle?

If Toyota admitted to making truck frames that last as long as the warranty period, or even if they admitted they will last only 15 years max, they would be out of business in no time. Toyotas reputation would be in the toilet. Toyota has built a reputation on reliability and even advertise their vehicles that way. Inside out corrosion due to NORMAL usage in some of the most populated areas of this country is NOT considered reliable in my opinion. It is also my opinion that washing your vehicle, including the inside of the frame is NOT considered normal. These are the only Toyota trucks left off the recall list yet they all exhibit the same failure mode.
The Japanese should be ashamed that their frames are as inferior as the ones made in Mexico for the NAFTA market.

 

[OOPSIES]

OOPSIES, how long have you lived in Lansing, MI? Have you visited salvage yards in your area and seen first hand the corrosion carnage that abounds? Ten year old domestic vehicles fill the yards, destroyed by road salt.

This is not an issue.

Again can we please reference how this is an isolated issue. It is a specific member of the chassis that continually rusts and seperates. This also happens on 4Runners that corrode from the inside without ANY visual signs. Clean chassis 4Runners have had this problem. I do expect my Toyota to last as long as other vehicles, and as previously stated, it should last until its respective design limitation.

 

[OOPSIES]

If Toyota admitted to making truck frames that last as long as the warranty period, or even if they admitted they will last only 15 years max, they would be out of business in no time. Toyotas reputation would be in the toilet. Toyota has built a reputation on reliability and even advertise their vehicles that way. Inside out corrosion due to NORMAL usage in some of the most populated areas of this country is NOT considered reliable in my opinion. It is also my opinion that washing your vehicle, including the inside of the frame is NOT considered normal. These are the only Toyota trucks left off the recall list yet they all exhibit the same failure mode.
The Japanese should be ashamed that their frames are as inferior as the ones made in Mexico for the NAFTA market.

Skid,

This is a Hino designed and manufactured vehicle with a Toyota badge. This may be the sole reason it got left out. I'm sure there are still possibilities left open to fix this. Some people have been successful in small claims court.

 

[Riceye]

It is a specific member of the chassis that continually rusts and seperates.

Every chain has a weakest link. To strengthen the weakest link only shifts the weakness to another location.

The difference between a customer satisfaction campaign and a recall is that the company would be required to make a recall. The customer satisfaction campaign is voluntary. Toyota was not obligated to offer the buyback of the Tacoma trucks.

 

[SkidPalace]

Complaint filed with the NHTSA. Not sure why I didn't do this earlier.
I encourage everyone with rotten frames to do the same.
https://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/

 

[OOPSIES]

Every chain has a weakest link. To strengthen the weakest link only shifts the weakness to another location.

The difference between a customer satisfaction campaign and a recall is that the company would be required to make a recall. The customer satisfaction campaign is voluntary. Toyota was not obligated to offer the buyback of the Tacoma trucks.

I fully understand your point. Failure tests are part of engineering a vehicle. To knowingly have a failure that endangers the driver is negligent. You are entitled to your opinion but I will hold my grounds on the opinions of Toyota's corrosion experts. If anything, small claims would be able to help out those in need. Especially those that have yet to reach the end of the design life limitation.

 

[Riceye]

Sincerely, OOPSIES, good luck with your quest.

 

[OOPSIES]

Sincerely, OOPSIES, good luck with your quest.

I will update all on the progress of this if I decide to move forward. It is very reasonable since it has been done before. I will take that comment as void of sarcasm as I hope it was intended.

 

[jeremyc74]

If Toyota admitted to making truck frames that last as long as the warranty period, or even if they admitted they will last only 15 years max, they would be out of business in no time. Toyotas reputation would be in the toilet. Toyota has built a reputation on reliability and even advertise their vehicles that way. Inside out corrosion due to NORMAL usage in some of the most populated areas of this country is NOT considered reliable in my opinion. It is also my opinion that washing your vehicle, including the inside of the frame is NOT considered normal. These are the only Toyota trucks left off the recall list yet they all exhibit the same failure mode.
The Japanese should be ashamed that their frames are as inferior as the ones made in Mexico for the NAFTA market.

Toyota's sales are pretty strong, so obviously your opinion isn't shared by a significant number of its customers.

Rust in salt states is an issue for all manufacturers, not just Toyota. Hell go take a look under a 10 year old Jeep in MI! Most people realize this and accept it for what it is.

As a consumer you're well within your rights to vote with your feet and buy something else, and you won't hear a word from me for doing that, but you have absolutely zero legal grounds to sue.

 

[OOPSIES]

Toyota's sales are pretty strong, so obviously your opinion isn't shared by a significant number of its customers.

Rust in salt states is an issue for all manufacturers, not just Toyota. Hell go take a look under a 10 year old Jeep in MI! Most people realize this and accept it for what it is.

As a consumer you're well within your rights to vote with your feet and buy something else, and you won't hear a word from me for doing that, but you have absolutely zero legal grounds to sue.

Are you a legal expert? As stated there have been people that have been successful with this. If my particular case has no legal grounds, I would implore you to provide your legal expert advice on why not. I will admit I am not a lawyer.

 

[jeremyc74]

I would like to make it clear that I will survive regardless of compensation, but there are many that are in my spot that bankrupted themselves, injured themselves, or have a separated arm without any surface rust present.

Can you show us some examples of these?

 

[OOPSIES]

Can you show us some examples of these?

I could link you to the NHTSA's website, but a previous post did that. I would hope you can peruse through the complaints. Not all people can handle a vehicle losing control, most people would just panic. Luckily I was able to save myself and nobody was near enough on the highway.

 

[Riceye]

I will take that comment as void of sarcasm as I hope it was intended.

Indeed. No sarcasm. Good luck.

 

[02SE]

Just joined this forum after doing a google search and it seems my control arm has just done the exact same thing last Friday. Advice was given to me to sue through small claims court. I just bought this truck not even a year ago and it looked just fine in that area before. Since this is known and/or becoming very common, maybe we all can do something about it.

So you didn't do your due diligence, and are now looking for someone else to blame.

This is a design flaw.

You still seem to forget that this is a design flaw, rather than usual neglect.

So then I would assume you should agree that the concentration of the fault is a design flaw? Why else would it so commonly fail there, and not anywhere else on the frame?

You are a broken record for passing-the-buck.

Here's the reality:
Your vehicle was neglected by the previous owner(s).
You bought the vehicle without doing your due diligence.
You are now looking for someone to blame for a rust issue on a vehicle that is YEARS OUT OF WARRANTY.

A "design flaw" which you keep harping on, would show failure during the warranty period.