2006 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.

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.

IN A LETTER DATED JANUARY 18, 2007, TOYOTA NOTIFIED NHTSA OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004 THROUGH 2006 TOYOTA TUNDRA AND MY 2004 THROUGH 2007 TOYOTA SEQUOIA VEHICLES PRODUCED BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 15, 2003 AND NOVEMBER 17, 2006 (NHTSA RECALL NO. 07V-013). ACCORDING TO TOYOTA, ?IN THE FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER BALL JOINT ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, DUE TO POSSIBLE IMPROPER FINISHING OF THE BALL JOINT, SUCH AS THE ASPECT OF THE BALL STUD SURFACE, SOME BALL JOINTS MAY EXPERIENCE AN INCIDENTAL DETERIORATION OF THE INTERNAL LUBRICATION. THIS MAY CAUSE THE BALL JOINT TO WEAR AND LOOSEN PREMATURELY, WHICH COULD RESULT IN INCREASED STEERING EFFORT, REDUCED VEHICLE SELF-CENTERING, AND NOISE IN THE FRONT SUSPENSION. IN EXTREME CASES, IF THE VEHICLE IS CONTINUOUSLY OPERATED IN THIS CONDITION, THE LOWER BALL JOINT MAY SEPARATE FROM THE KNUCKLE AND COULD CAUSE LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.?TOYOTA WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS TO RETURN THEIR VEHICLES TO ANY TOYOTA DEALER FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER BALL JOINTS. THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS HAS BEEN CLOSED, AS TOYOTA IS RECALLING THE AFFECTED VEHICLES.ODI WILL MONITOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE REMEDY AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED.

The vehicle was at the independent mechanic. For a repair and discovered that the bottom frame was rusted. The vehicle was not repaired. The dealer was also notified of the failure; however the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the issue. The approximate failure mileage was 330,000.

NHTSA ID

11740080

Incident

May 21, 2026

Mileage

330,000 mi

My frame is rotting, with literal holes in it. I spoke with a dealership and they stated the recall had been fixed in 2015, prior to me owning it. I was told to contact the manufacturer and they said it would be an out of pocket expense. When I research the recall, the affected area of the frame is the same, with no apparent fixes.

NHTSA ID

11718303

Incident

Feb 16, 2026

The frame has rusted so badly that the sway bar mount disengaged from the frame. Brought it to a Toyota dealership and confirmed that frame recalls were performed on earlier models with the same issue . However my year did not qualify.

NHTSA ID

11714854

Incident

Dec 20, 2025

The contact’s father owns a 2006 Toyota Tundra equipped with Cooper Tires, Tire Line: Discoverer Rugged Trek, Tire Size: 265/70/R16, DOT Number: (N/A). While the contact’s father was driving at an undisclosed speed, the driver lost control of the vehicle. The contact’s father was able to regain control of the vehicle by releasing the accelerator pedal and allowing the vehicle to decelerate. The driver was able to pull over to the side of the road to inspect the vehicle. The driver became aware that the tread on the driver's side tire had separated, causing a portion of the tire near the seam to detach around the entire tire. The tire was a replacement tire. The driver replaced the tire with the spare. The contact sent an email to American Tire Depot where the tire was purchased. The manufacturer was informed of the failure. The vehicle failure mileage was approximately 194,040, and the tire failure mileage was approximately 17,339.

NHTSA ID

11694530

Incident

Oct 18, 2025

Mileage

194,040 mi

Frame rust is so extreme that rear suspension mounts are completely disconnected from frame

NHTSA ID

11691861

Incident

Oct 6, 2025

I own a 2006 Toyota Tundra with severe frame corrosion and rot. The rust has eaten through major portions of the frame, especially around the rear crossmember and leaf spring mounts. It has compromised the vehicle’s safety and structural integrity. Toyota previously offered frame replacements and extended corrosion coverage for similar models (Tacoma, Sequoia, and certain Tundras), but my VIN was denied even though the issue is identical. The corrosion is so severe that it poses a risk of the frame snapping or suspension components detaching while driving. This is a serious safety defect, not just cosmetic rust. The frame can fail without warning, which could lead to loss of control or an accident. Toyota should be required to inspect and address this defect for all affected vehicles. Location of problem: Frame rails, rear crossmember, spare tire area, and control arm mounts. Date problem occurred: 07/09/2025 I’m requesting that NHTSA investigate and require Toyota to include my vehicle in their frame corrosion program or issue a new recall covering affected first-generation Tundras.

NHTSA ID

11691772

Incident

Jul 9, 2025

The contact owns a 2006 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that while driving 25 MPH, the brake pedal was depressed to prevent a crash with another vehicle that had pulled in front of the vehicle, but the vehicle failed to respond. The contact was able to veer into another lane safely, and the crash was avoided. The brake warning light was illuminated after the failure. The contact continued driving and was able to slow down by shifting the transmission into a lower gear. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed with brake line failure which lead to the brake master cylinder and brake fluid reservoir becoming empty. The brake line was replaced, and the vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 277,000.

NHTSA ID

11689706

Incident

Jul 25, 2025

Mileage

277,000 mi

The contact owns a 2006 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that upon further inspection, it was noticed that the frame was rusted. In addition, the contact related the failure to an unknown NHTSA Campaign that was performed in the past; however, the failure reoccurred. The local dealer that performed the recall repair was contacted; however, the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 200,000.

NHTSA ID

11686234

Incident

Jan 15, 2025

Mileage

200,000 mi

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.