2004 Toyota Tundra

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.

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE14-016 in June 2014 based on six inflator rupture incidents involving consumer owned vehicles produced by five vehicle manufacturers.All six vehicles were operated in Florida or Puerto Rico at the time of the rupture and for the majority of their service life, and were equipped with inflators produced by Takata, a tier-one supplier of automotive air bag systems.During the course of PE14-016, ODI determined that five additional vehicle manufacturers used inflators of a similar design and vintage also supplied by Takata. No evidence of field failures was found in vehicles produced by these five additional manufacturers.Nonetheless, at ODI's insistence, all 10 vehicle manufacturers initiated a regional recall within approximately two weeks of the opening of the investigation.The regions recalled initially included Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, areas with high absolute humidity and climatic conditions believed to be a significant factor in the inflator ruptures.As part of the recall actions, inflators removed from remedied vehicles are to be returned to Takata for testing.Takata's initial test results on passenger inflators from remedied vehicles indicated a much higher than anticipated rupture frequency for inflators returned from Florida.Accordingly ODI requested all 10 manufacturers expand the regional recalls for passenger inflators to include other geographic areas where high absolute humidity conditions exist, including the Gulf States and other coastal areas.Takata's testing of the passenger inflators to date continues to indicate this geographic area as having the highest risk, with no ruptures occurring from inflators returned from outside the expanded recall regions.During PE14-016 four additional passenger inflator field events occurred, all in vehicles from the same expanded geographic region.Also during PE14-016 four additional driver inflator field events occurred including two in vehicles from regions not known for high absolute humidity, specifically California and North Carolina.Accordingly, ODI requested all five of the affected vehicle manufacturers currently using the subject Takata driver inflators expand to nationwide recalls.Significantly, neither of the affected vehicle manufacturers or Takata provided any explanation to account for these two driver air bag inflator ruptures outside the area of high absolute humidity.Takata testing of returned driver inflators indicates a lower rupture frequency as compared to passenger inflator testing.All test ruptures reported by Takata to date have occurred on inflators returned from high absolute humidity areas.The investigation now includes all manufacturers and vehicles known to be affected at this time.ODI's investigation will focus on, among other things, root cause analysis, other potential defect consequences, identification of affected vehicles scope, and adequacy of the remedy.The five ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10537899, 10568848, 10585224, 10605877, 10651492

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE14-016 in June 2014 based on six inflator rupture incidents involving consumer owned vehicles produced by five vehicle manufacturers.All six vehicles were operated in Florida or Puerto Rico at the time of the rupture and for the majority of their service life, and were equipped with inflators produced by Takata, a tier-one supplier of automotive air bag systems.During the course of PE14-016, ODI determined that five additional vehicle manufacturers used inflators of a similar design and vintage also supplied by Takata. No evidence of field failures was found in vehicles produced by these five additional manufacturers.Nonetheless, at ODI's insistence, all 10 vehicle manufacturers initiated a regional recall within approximately two weeks of the opening of the investigation.The regions recalled initially included Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, areas with consistently high absolute humidity and climatic conditions believed to be a significant factor in the inflator ruptures.As part of the recall actions, inflators removed from remedied vehicles are to be returned to Takata for testing.Takata's initial test results on passenger inflators from remedied vehicles indicated a much higher than anticipated rupture frequency for inflators returned from Florida.Accordingly, ODI requested all 10 manufacturers expand the regional recalls for passenger inflators to include other geographic areas where high absolute humidity conditions exist, including the Gulf States and other coastal areas.Takata's testing of the passenger inflators to date continues to indicate this geographic area as having the highest risk, with no ruptures occurring from inflators returned from outside the expanded recall regions.During PE14-016, four additional passenger inflator field events occurred, all in vehicles from the same expanded geographic region.Also during PE14-016, four additional driver inflator field events occurred including two in vehicles from regions not known for high absolute humidity, specifically California and North Carolina.Accordingly, ODI requested all five of the affected vehicle manufacturers currently using the subject Takata driver inflators expand to nationwide recalls.Significantly, neither of the affected vehicle manufacturers or Takata provided any explanation to account for these two driver air bag inflator ruptures outside the area of high absolute humidity.Takata testing of returned driver inflators indicates a lower rupture frequency as compared to passenger inflator testing.All test ruptures reported by Takata to date have occurred on inflators returned from high absolute humidity areas.The PE is now closed/upgraded to an Engineering Evaluation (EA15-001) to include all manufacturersand vehicles known to be affected at this time.ODI's EA investigation will focus on, among other things, root cause analysis, other potential defect consequences, identification of affected vehicles scope, and adequacy of the remedy.The recalls related to this PE are: 14V343, 14V344, 14V348, 14V351, 14V353, 14V655, 14V700, 14V701, 14V752, 14V763, 14V770, 14V773, 14V787, 14V802 and 14V817.The number of vehicles affected are an estimate since some vehicles may have both the driver and passenger side inflators recalled. The five ODI reports cited above can be reviewed online at http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification numbers: 10537899, 10568848, 10585224, 10605877, 10651492

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, DE, IL, IN, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, VA, VT, WI, WV.TOYOTA ALLEGES HIGH AMOUNTS OF ROAD SALTS ARE USED IN THESE AREAS AND EXCESSIVE CORROSION OF THE REAR CROSS-MEMBER (TO WHICH THE SPARE TIRE IS MOUNTED) CAN OCCUR AND CAUSE THE SPARE TIRE TO SEPARATE FROM THE VEHICLE AND CAN ALSO LEAD TO REAR BRAKE FAILURE.TOYOTA STATED: TOYOTA HAS TENTATIVELY CONCLUDED THAT THE ROOT CAUSE IS A COMBINATION OF FACTORS, INCLUDING USAGE IN AREAS WHERE ROAD SALT IS APPLIED, INADEQUATE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE (I.E., NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL), THE DESIGN OF THE REAR CROSS-MEMBER, AND MANUFACTURING ISSUES.THE DESIGN OF THE REAR CROSS-MEMBER IS SUCH THAT IT IS OPEN ON THE TOP SIDE AND SUSCEPTIBLE TO ACCUMULATION OF DIRT, WATER AND ROAD SALT.MANUFACTURING ISSUES OF THE REAR CROSS-MEMBER RELATED TO THE COATING PROCESS ALSO AFFECT ITS CORROSION RESISTANCE.TOYOTA ALSO STATES THAT OWNERS OF MY 2000 THROUGH 2003 VEHICLES IN STATES NOT COVERED BY THE RECALL WILL BE NOTIFIED ON HOW TO OBTAIN THE SAME INSPECTION AND REPAIR AS THE RECALLED VEHICLES, FREE OF CHARGE.FURTHER TOYOTA STATES: PLEASE NOTE THAT WHILE TOYOTA HAS NOT DETERMINED A DEFECT EXISTS IN 2004 THROUGH 2006 MY TUNDRA VEHICLES, TOYOTA PLANS ON INITIATING A FIELD ACTION IN THE NEAR FUTURE TO PREVENT FUTURE CORROSION ON THOSE VEHICLES ORIGINALLY SOLD OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE AFFECTED REGION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.BY LETTER OF JANUARY 8, 2010 TOYOTA HAS NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT AMENDED ITS DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT FOR SAFETY RECALL 09V-444 TO INCLUDE THE FUEL TANK MOUNTING SYSTEM (I.E., FUEL TANK SUPPORT STRAPS AND FUEL TANK MOUNTING CROSS-MEMBERS) IN THE SAFETY RECALL.TOYOTA STATES: TOYOTA HAS NOT DECIDED THAT THE FUEL TANK MOUNTING SYSTEM IN THOSE VEHICLES CONTAINS A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT WITHIN THE MEANING OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY LAW.RATHER, TOYOTA IS TAKING THIS ACTION AT ODI'S REQUEST AND TO AVOID FUTURE DISAGREEMENT WITH ODI WITH RESPECT TO THIS ISSUE.MY 2007 AND NEWER TUNDRA VEHICLES ARE NOT INCLUDED IN ANY OF TOYOTA'S ACTIONS AS THE REAR CROSS-MEMBER IN THOSE VEHICLES HAVE BEEN REDESIGNED SO THAT IT IS OPEN ON THE BOTTOM.THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY TOYOTA ARE SUFFICIENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THIS INVESTIGATION.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

1) The newly installed rack & pinion rack locks up and tried to turn right when on a continuous or left turn followed closely by another left turn. 2) My safety and the other drivers near me were all in danger when the loss of steering control occurs. The problem makes the vehicle want to turn hard to the right and the hydraulics are too strong to control the steering. 3) The problem has not been confirmed by a dealer or independent service center, but the problem still exist and is repeatable for any needed inspection. 4) The vehicle has not been inspected by any outside entity, but is available for inspection. The problem still exist and can be confirmed. 5) There are no warning lights or symptoms. When it happens, all of the sudden the truck wants to make a hard right and there is nothing you can do to stop it, other than stop and let go the the steering wheel.

NHTSA ID

11738850

Incident

Jan 15, 2026

The contact owns a 2004 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that the vehicle was Emissions tested, and rust was discovered on the driver’s and passenger’s side subframes. The dealer was notified of the issue, but the vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The contact related the failure to NHTSA Action Number: PE09049 (Service Brakes, Hydraulic, Tires, Fuel System, Gasoline, Structure). The failure mileage was 72,000.

NHTSA ID

11731089

Incident

Apr 7, 2026

Mileage

72,000 mi

The contact owns a 2004 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that while driving approximately 40 MPH, there was an abnormal screeching sound coming from the vehicle. The contact then saw sparks coming from the rear driver’s side of the vehicle, and the driver’s side rear wheel was turned sideways. The vehicle was pulled over to the shoulder and was later towed back to the residence. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, and the contact was informed that the ball joint, control arms, front suspension, and several other unknown parts needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired; however, the failure persisted. The independent mechanic made the contact aware of an unknown NHTSA Campaign Number; however, the VIN was not under recall. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 200,000.

NHTSA ID

11718541

Incident

Aug 17, 2025

Mileage

200,000 mi

The contact owns a 2004 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that after purchasing tires for replacement, the tire technician stated that the subframe was damaged from corrosion to the front frame, the side members, and the rear subframe. The contact was informed that the most severe corrosion was located on the driver's side front subframe behind the wheel well. The subframe was almost fully rusted through. The contact was referred to a welder by the tire shop. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was informed of the failure and issued a customer complaint report. The failure mileage was approximately 114,000.

NHTSA ID

11709590

Incident

Dec 29, 2025

Mileage

114,000 mi

Frame rot on the original frame with a recall

NHTSA ID

11688676

Incident

Sep 12, 2025

The contact owns a 2004 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that on several occasions, while driving at undisclosed speeds and then parking the vehicle, the contact observed oil leaking from the vehicle. The contact stated that on another occasion, while driving at an undisclosed speed, the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was inspected, and the contact observed corrosion and holes on the frame of the vehicle, and the motor mounts were rusted, causing the engine to run abnormally low. The vehicle was towed to an independent mechanic to be diagnosed, and it was determined that the vehicle was flexing due to the holes throughout the frame of the vehicle. The mechanic was unable to lift the vehicle due to the excessive corrosion. The vehicle was deemed unsafe to drive. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 150,000.

NHTSA ID

11681547

Incident

Jul 29, 2025

Mileage

150,000 mi

2004 Toyota Tundra. Left rear upper shock mount rotted away and the shock absorber is no longer connected. (rust) Auto Service report 12/30/2024. October 21, 2021 Toyota Dealership report: Recommends replace spare tire cross member. (rust perforation damage) Recall issued for rust and dealership performed a very limited service repair to this vehicle years ago. The recall repair consisted of rust proof paint applied to a very small limited area, not to frame, not to cross member, not to any shock mount) Concerned about rust currently causing the shock mount to fail and the cross member rust damage along with frame rust on the passenger side. 2 different dealerships told me this concern it is not under a recall. This Toyota Tundra truck is well maintained with regular scheduled auto service checks and appointments. It is never used for towing or off road use. I am the original owner, central New Jersey use only. The truck runs and looks good. The high amount of rust under the truck should not have occurred to the level of a shock mount rusting out and a cross member rusting out and frame rust.

NHTSA ID

11633351

Incident

Dec 31, 2024

The contact owns a 2004 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that while the vehicle was parked, the contact became aware that the sub frame underneath the vehicle was rusted. The contact was concerned that the sub frame could collapse. The vehicle was taking to the dealer to be inspected. The contact was informed that the sub frame needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and a case was opened. The failure mileage was 157,000.

NHTSA ID

11615451

Incident

Sep 18, 2024

Mileage

157,000 mi

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.

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.

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.

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.

Vehicles may occasionally be subjected to contamination by airborne iron particles shed from railroad tracks, train wheels, exposure to heavy machinery facilities, grinding, welding, etc. This type of contamination can be identified by the presence of small, red or brown particles on the paint surface. These particles are often difficult to see on dark color paints but can be easily felt when brushing a hand across horizontal body surfaces such as the hood, roof, or deck lid. Follow the Repair Procedure in this bulletin to clean vehicles that may have been subjected to contamination by airborne iron particles such as rail dust during rail transportation or extended storage near industrial areas.

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.