AIR BAGS:FRONTAL:DRIVER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE; AIR BAGS:FRONTAL:PASSENGER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE
2013 Toyota 4Runner
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 36 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2013 Toyota 4Runner, most frequently naming the airbags, brakes and fuel system categories. 6 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; 1 NHTSA investigation names it; and 345 manufacturer communications are on file.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Complaint activity over time
When owners filed reports about this model year
View as table
| Month | Complaints filed | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 2016 | 1 | 1 |
| Oct 2016 | 1 | 2 |
| Feb 2017 | 1 | 3 |
| Aug 2017 | 2 | 5 |
| Oct 2017 | 2 | 7 |
| Dec 2017 | 1 | 8 |
| Jan 2018 | 1 | 9 |
| Feb 2018 | 2 | 11 |
| Apr 2018 | 1 | 12 |
| Jul 2018 | 1 | 13 |
| Oct 2018 | 1 | 14 |
| Dec 2018 | 1 | 15 |
| Jan 2019 | 1 | 16 |
| Feb 2019 | 1 | 17 |
| Mar 2019 | 3 | 20 |
| May 2019 | 1 | 21 |
| Jan 2020 | 1 | 22 |
| Mar 2020 | 2 | 24 |
| May 2020 | 1 | 25 |
| Sep 2020 | 1 | 26 |
| Nov 2020 | 1 | 27 |
| Apr 2021 | 1 | 28 |
| Sep 2021 | 1 | 29 |
| Oct 2022 | 1 | 30 |
| Feb 2023 | 1 | 31 |
| Nov 2023 | 1 | 32 |
| Aug 2024 | 1 | 33 |
| Apr 2025 | 1 | 34 |
| Nov 2025 | 1 | 35 |
| Jun 2026 | 1 | 36 |
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Airbags925.7%
- Brakes514.3%
- Fuel system411.4%
- Electrical411.4%
- Engine38.6%
- Body & structure25.7%
- Other / unspecified25.7%
- Driver assistance25.7%
Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.
Safety recalls
6 campaigns cover this model year
Recalls apply to specific vehicles, not to every vehicle of a model year. Check your VIN with NHTSA or your manufacturer's dealer to confirm whether a recall affects your vehicle.
Check a VIN on NHTSA.govAIR BAGS:FRONTAL:PASSENGER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE
AIR BAGS:FRONTAL:PASSENGER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
Recalls I have not done myself and have had the vehicle since March 2020
- NHTSA ID
- 11742866
- Incident
- Mar 25, 2026
TOYOTA 4RUNNER 2013 VIN# [XXX] LP# XXX The gas needle will be above the half (middle line), and the fuel range on top of the dash would read anywhere from 160-213 miles, going 45 mph up a hill or 70 mph on the freeway, all of a sudden starts to stall and completely shut off while still driving. I would then only have a few seconds to try to pull over due to losing all power, and not being able to shift into neutral because it's a push/start button. The car will only turn back on after putting some gas into it, so I make sure to never let the gas needle go below the middle line or have the gas range reading go below anything around 160-200 miles since the vehicle has shut down at a different amount each time, and there's been multiple times. Also, the fuel level needle never matches with how many miles is shown on the range, displaying inaccurate readings. It has poor acceleration, poor mileage, and now making a loud whining noise that is heard from outside the vehicle near gas tank. I have tried looking up the VIN and it does not show that it falls under the recall, despite it having all the symptoms of a faulty fuel pump/sending unit. I love my 4Runner but I am in fear for my life whenever I drive it and not showing accurate fuel levels. I pray that nobody runs into me if the vehicle stalls out in the roadway, while going 30-80 mph (it has done it on regular roads and on the highway). There are no warning lights or check engine light. It's at about 208,000 miles, with the issue slowly getting worse over time. I am requesting for it to be inspected free of charge, as well as getting the necessary repairs that the recall is for free of charge. [XXX] [XXX] [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
- NHTSA ID
- 11700686
- Incident
- Jul 3, 2024
I was traveling on [XXX] returning home and felt the steering wheel pulling strongly to the right so I immediately pulled off to the side of the road and noted the right front passenger tire was deflated. This tire is a 245/60 R20 107HSL BSW Procontrol Cooper tire. The tire at the top portion was bulging out in several areas. Within a couple minutes a truck with 3 men stopped to help and they removed the flat tire and put on the spare. I drove back to Lubbock and took the tire to Discount tire where we had bought them July of 2024. We were told the tire was defective and that they were able to inflate the tire and there was no damage to the tire such as nails etc. They replaced the tire. No warning lights were on. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
- NHTSA ID
- 11655165
- Incident
- Apr 10, 2024
Make: Toyota Model: 4Runner Year: 2013 Mileage: 76,200 Description of Incident While driving on [XXX] at night, the vehicle experienced a sudden and catastrophic engine failure, leaving it immobilized in the middle of the highway. This presented an immediate and severe safety risk to both the vehicle occupants and other motorists. The failure was later determined to be caused by a malfunction in the Variable Valve Timing (VVT) oil control system, specifically an Exhaust Cam Gear failure. This led to a broken timing chain and subsequent engine failure. Inspection and Diagnosis The vehicle was inspected by an authorized Toyota Dealer in Florence, SC. They confirmed the failure of the oil control system and recommended a complete engine replacement, estimating costs over $5,000. Broader Implications and Potential Safety Hazard Further investigation, including consultations with multiple Toyota technicians, review of technical discussions on various platforms, and examination of online 4Runner forums, suggests that this issue is not isolated. Failures of the exhaust cam gear and problems with the VVT Oil Control System appear to be common in the Toyota 1GR-FE Engine and other engines equipped with this system. It's noteworthy that Toyota issued a voluntary recall in 2014 (Safety Recall 13V-395, TM-TC-14021) for Lexus vehicles with similar issues. However, this recall does not appear to cover the 2013 1GR-FE 4Runner engine, despite the apparent similarity in potential failure modes. Safety Concerns This issue presents a significant safety hazard: Sudden engine failure at highway speeds can lead to loss of vehicle control. Unexpected vehicle immobilization, especially at night or in high-traffic areas, poses a severe collision risk. The apparent widespread nature of this issue suggests that many vehicles may be at risk of similar failures. Urgency for Action Given the severity of the potential outcomes and the ap INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
- NHTSA ID
- 11605962
- Incident
- Jun 12, 2020
The component that failed is the air back clock spring. It’s preventing the horn form functioning properly. In turn can result in an accident from lack of warning other drivers and/or air bag might not go off. It seems to be a known problem on the 13 model year of the 4Runners. It has not been inspected as I’m not knowledgeable on what to do in that situation and the dealer says that I’d have to pay for it anyway. No warnings just one day the horn didn’t want to work anymore and seems to be a problem that’s pretty consistent. People have reported that it has gone bad with as little as a 100k miles which the clock spring shouldn’t be a maintenance item to begin with.
- NHTSA ID
- 11554026
- Incident
- Jul 12, 2023
1) The failed component is the door locks. Or more precisely, the motor for the electrical operation of the door locks. When failed, the door remains locked even when pulling on the interior handle to open the door or when trying to unlock the door using the interior latch. You are essentially locked inside your car. I believe the door should always unlock when the handle is pulled, and the interior lock lever should always unlock the door as well. Both of these function "normally" when the actuator is not failed. The failure first appeared in late 2018/early 2019. I noticed that when I locked the vehicle using the key fob, I was not hearing the audible "beep." And when the car was shifted out of PARK, I was not hearing all the doors lock. I then realized the drivers front door was not locking. I lived with this for a while, long enough for the drivers side rear door to fail, and then the right rear door failed as well. The front right and rear door have never failed. I purchased a Toyota lock assembly for the drivers side front and it functioned perfectly after replacement until this past week. It appears to have failed again. And I was essentially trapped in the drivers seat. I had to give it and electrical command to unlock while pushing on the manual lever in order for the door to unlock. Pulling the open handle did not open the door, and pushing on the manual lock lever did not open the lock. The failed component appears to be a small motor in the lock assy. I replaced this motor in the left and right rear door lock assembly's and that corrected the problem. I am going to replace the motor in the lock assy I removed in 2019 and reinstall it in hopes of correcting the problem. I can send you the Toyota lock assy I will remove, and one of the motors I removed from one of the rear door lock assembly's. 2)The failed door locks trap occupants inside the vehicle. 3)Did not visit a dealer or repair center. 4)No inspections have been performed. 5)No
- NHTSA ID
- 11507971
- Incident
- Feb 1, 2023
The problem is the reproduction of a vehicle illegally by a dealer. My federal information & later my vehicle & home were obtained after my phone was cloned. Vehicle has airbag recalls from takata. Vin- [XXX]. (It’s and emergency vehicle) INFORMATION Redacted PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).
- NHTSA ID
- 11488130
- Incident
- Jul 19, 2016
Rust appeared on the hatch of my 4Runner approximately 2 years after I purchased it new. My complaints to 2 different dealerships were ignored and left undocumented. I was told this wasn't covered under warranty. In 2019, the rust was finally documented by Toyota and I was told that this would have been covered under warranty, but now it's too late. At that point the rust was just an eyesore. Sometime in August 2021, while driving on a bumpy dirt road, my "open door" indicator illuminated and a warning chime went off. When I checked my doors, I discovered that the hatch wasn't fully secure. Upon closer inspection, I discovered that rust had eaten away the metal that secures the latch which keeps the hatch closed. The rust I had on the hatch, had eaten away at the metal from the inside, out. There is now only a small piece of rusted metal holding the locking mechanism in place that keeps the rear hatch secure. Since my earlier complaints to the service departments of Toyota went ignored, I contacted Toyota USA directly. I had explained that a cosmetic issue had now become a safety issue. Due to an apparent design flaw or lack of corrosion control, the supporting structure of the hatch lock had almost completely corroded away. This may be an isolated incident, however, other 4Runner owners may also be at risk and this needs to be addressed. No matter how old a vehicle is, the integrity of a vehicle interior should never be compromised by a locking mechanism rusting off, to the point a door, or hatch, can eventually open.Toyota USA dismissed my complaint. I stated that this is a potential vehicle safety issue, where occupants and vehicle contents are left unsecured and could be at risk. I was advised that this is just a matter of corrosion and that my warranty was expired, therefore, Toyota would not fix the problem.
- NHTSA ID
- 11432699
- Incident
- Aug 17, 2021
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
Some 2005 – 2026 Toyota vehicles that have undergone water intrusion may exhibit a condition in which a musty odor is present. Follow the procedures in this bulletin to remediate the odor and address this condition. The purpose of this Service Bulletin is to provide general guidelines and procedures for odor remediation. This Service Bulletin provides a guide on how to prepare and treat the interior of the vehicle for odor remediation. Refer to the applicable model and model year Repair Manual and the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) website for the most up-to-date safety and precautionary guidelines.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
The air conditioning dye injection tool kit has been developed to aid in identifying the location of air conditioning refrigerant leaks. The procedures outlined in this Service Bulletin aid in locating, inspecting, and repairing refrigerant leaks.
STRUCTURE:BODY
Acid rain results from rainwater or other airborne moisture that become acidic due to industrial chemical impurities in the atmosphere. If these acidic compounds settle on an exposed vehicle, especially the horizontal areas such as the hood, roof, and decklid, significant damage to the painted surfaces can occur. Acid rain damage can typically be identified on vehicles by the presence of stains on the paint surface that resemble hard water spots. Unlike water spots however, acid rain damage cannot be removed by regular washing procedures. Also, because acid rain can etch and soften the paint, normal buffing or polishing repair procedures should not be attempted. This can cause further damage and result in visible depressions in the paint surface. The following are the three major categories of acid rain damage: •Minor damage: requires only buffing to repair. •Moderate damage: usually requires neutralizing, color sanding, and buffing. •Severe damage: extending beyond 1/2 mil of clearcoat on a pearl, metallic, or solid color, requires neutralization, sanding, and repainting. In cases where acid rain damage is minor, neutralization and buffing with a liquid-type paint finessing product may provide an adequate repair. Only specially formulated products outlined in this bulletin should be used for that purpose. Unfortunately, other than minor damage, there is no simple method of determining the actual extent (depth) of acid penetration other than color sanding a representative affected area until there is no visible etching or depressions, followed by measuring the amount of paint removed with either a magnetic or digital-type film thickness gauge. The procedures in this bulletin are intended for use by qualified body/paint technicians and should not be attempted by inexperienced personnel. It is the dealer’s responsibility to protect and maintain the quality of the vehicle’s paint finish after receipt at the dealership prior to the first sale. Perform frequent vehicle washing, as often as daily, during high heat and humidity periods to minimize the potential for paint damage due to acid rain exposure. This is especially important in geographical areas known for high frequency and concentration of acid rain and industrial fallout.
STRUCTURE:BODY
To prevent brake rotor rust from forming during transportation and storage, wheel film will be used instead of a cardboard type of anti-rust cover. The purpose of the wheel film is to shield the disc brake rotor from weather elements and initial rust before the vehicle is delivered to the customer. Consequently, the film should remain on the wheel for as long as possible.
STRUCTURE:BODY
The condition known as acid rain is caused by airborne chemicals or particles in the atmosphere, which mix with rainwater, nighttime dew, or high humidity to form acidic compounds. If these contaminants settle and remain on a painted vehicle surface, especially the horizonal areas of the hood, roof, and decklid, significant damage can occur. This damage is the result of actual etching of the paint and appears as pitting or water spots. As acid rain droplets on the vehicle surface evaporate, the concentration strength of the acid increases, causing deeper and more rapid damage. This evaporation and corrosive action also occur more rapidly on dark colored cars as direct sun heat increases. It is the dealer’s responsibility to protect and maintain the quality of the vehicle’s paint finish after receipt at the dealership prior to the first sale. In areas known for high frequency and/or concentration of acid rain, frequent vehicle washing during high heat or humidity periods will minimize the potential for paint damage caused by acid rain. It is further recommended that either reverse osmosis or deionized water be used to prevent water spotting.
STRUCTURE:BODY
Toyota vehicles are currently protected with RapgardTM protective film designed to protect the horizontal painted surfaces. This material protects from acid rain, environmental fallout, and rail contamination. Follow the Removal Procedure in this bulletin to remove the RapgardTM protective film within 90 days from initial application.
Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.
Compare model years
Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model
| Year | Complaints | Recalls | Investigations | Issue Index |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 7 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2025 | 54 | 1 | 0 | 49.7 |
| 2024 | 8 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2023 | 30 | 1 | 0 | 51.7 |
| 2022 | 39 | 3 | 0 | 58.8 |
| 2021 | 34 | 1 | 0 | 51.1 |
| 2020 | 31 | 1 | 0 | 44.0 |
| 2019 | 64 | 4 | 0 | 58.1 |
| 2018 | 58 | 5 | 0 | 56.9 |
| 2017 | 36 | 5 | 1 | 63.7 |
| 2016 | 78 | 8 | 1 | 65.4 |
| 2015 | 86 | 9 | 1 | 59.1 |
| 2014 | 77 | 7 | 1 | 59.4 |
| 2013Viewing | 36 | 6 | 1 | 57.3 |
| 2012 | 96 | 8 | 1 | 58.8 |
| 2011 | 163 | 10 | 1 | 57.4 |
| 2010 | 145 | 12 | 1 | 56.6 |
| 2009 | 22 | 6 | 1 | 60.0 |
| 2008 | 96 | 5 | 1 | 58.6 |
| 2007 | 154 | 5 | 1 | 53.2 |
| 2006 | 380 | 5 | 2 | 60.0 |
| 2005 | 424 | 5 | 2 | 56.6 |
| 2004 | 678 | 2 | 2 | 53.0 |
| 2003 | 695 | 3 | 2 | 53.5 |
| 2002 | 224 | 3 | 1 | 55.7 |
| 2001 | 185 | 3 | 0 | 49.9 |
| 2000 | 483 | 2 | 0 | 49.0 |
| 1999 | 330 | 2 | 0 | 51.2 |
| 1998 | 250 | 4 | 0 | 52.1 |
| 1997 | 261 | 4 | 0 | 55.1 |
| 1996 | 161 | 5 | 0 | 54.3 |
| 1995 | 172 | 4 | 1 | 59.2 |
| 1994 | 64 | 4 | 2 | 63.2 |
| 1993 | 51 | 3 | 2 | 59.9 |
| 1992 | 53 | 3 | 2 | 60.1 |
| 1991 | 43 | 2 | 4 | 55.7 |
| 1990 | 78 | 2 | 4 | 65.1 |
| 1989 | 6 | 1 | 1 | — |
| 1988 | 9 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1987 | 5 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1986 | 8 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1985 | 2 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1984 | 2 | 0 | 0 | — |
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.