2001 Toyota Tundra problems

“The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 09V444000 (Structure); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The contact stated that upon further inspection, the underbody frame appeared to be rusted. The vehicle was taken to a local independent mechanic where it was confirmed that the underbody frame was rusted. The local dealer was contacted; however, the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired because the parts were no longer manufactured. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 200,000.”

“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…”

“There is an unresolved body corrosion recall that has not been addressed in over a year, despite receiving an invoice from the dealership. I will attach the invoice that lists all the parts ordered for the remedy of this recall.”

“I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE NEW IN 2000 AND HAD THE ENTIRE UNIT UNDERCOATED FOR RUST PROTECTION AND SOUND PROOFING. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN GARAGED SINCE NEW AND SINCE I TRAVEL FOR BUSINESS HAS LOW MILEAGE. THIS IS MY PERSONAL VEHICLE NOT A WORK TRUCK. AS TIME WENT ON I BEGAN NOTICING THE RUST UNDER THE CHASSIS AND THEN I RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR THE SPARE TIRE BRACKET. I FOUND OUT LATER THAT TOYOTA USED THE SPARE TIRE RECALL TO UNDERSTAND THE MAGNITUDE OF THE CHASSIS RUST PROBLEM. A SHORT TIME LATER I RECEIVED THE RECALL FOR THE CHASSIS EXCHANGE. WHEN I PICKED UP THE TRUCK THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE STEERING, THE WHEEL DID NOT RETURN TO STRAIGHT AFTER A TURN. I COMPLAINED THAT NIGHT AND WAS TOLD IT WAS NORMAL. AFTER A FEW HINDERED MILES THE LINKAGE WAS WORN AND HAD TO BE REPLACED. MY MECHANIC TOLD ME THE CAB WAS NOT ALIGNED TO THE RACK WHEN THEY CHANGED THE CHASSIS. MY COMPLAINT IS WITH THE ROT ISSUE. THE REAR AXLE IS NOW ROTTED TO A POINT WHERE IT IS LEAKING THOUGH THE CASING, NOT THROUGH A SEAL OR FITTING BUT THROUGH THE ROTTED METAL. I DO NOT VIEW A REAR AXLE AS A WEAR/REPLACEMENT PART UNLESS IT IS ABUSED THROUGH THE WORKING OF THE TRUCK. I AM 62 YEARS…”

“On September 4, 2025, I brought my 2001 Toyota Tundra to Midas at 5325 Olde Wadsworth Blvd, Arvada, CO 80002 for an oil change and inspection. Midas advertises a “Closer Look Vehicle Check,” which includes checking steering, suspension, and wheels. Their inspection report marked the steering system as “OK” and only noted mild shock wear. Less than a month later, while exiting the highway, the lower ball joint failed completely, causing the front suspension and wheel to detach. I immediately lost steering control. Fortunately, this occurred at low speed; had it happened moments earlier on the highway, it could have caused a major collision or fatalities. The failed component (lower ball joint and related suspension parts) is still available for inspection. An independent mechanic later confirmed that the joint was severely worn and the failure appeared to be due to long-term deterioration that should have been detected during Midas’s inspection. No warning lights or indicators appeared before the failure. The incident endangered my life, my passengers’ safety, and other drivers on the road. The business has refused to take responsibility or cover repair costs,…”

“THE TOYOTA SAFETY RECALL WORK DONE IN 2012 TO TREATED MY VEHICLES FRAME TO PREVENT RUST PERFORATION HAS FAILED. DURING NH STATE INSPECTION AREAS WHERE THE FRAME HAD RUSTED THROUGH WERE IDENTIFIED. THESE AREAS HAD BEEN TREATED UNDER TOYOTA'S GUIDANCE AND AT THEIR EXPENSE. DUE TO FRAME RUST PERFORATION, AND RUST ISSUES IDENTIFIED BELOW MY VEHICLE WOULD NOT PASS INSPECTION. TOYOTA OF PORTSMOUTH, WHERE THE INITIAL RECALL WORK WAS INITIATED, AND TOYOTA MOTOR SALES HAVE BOTH DENIED TO REMEDY THIS SITUATION. MANY OTHER 2001 TOYOTA TUNDRA OWNERS WERE PROVIDED COMPLETE FRAME REPLACEMENTS. I WAS PROVIDED WITH A RUST TREATMENT THAT HAS FAILED TO CORRECT THIS SAFETY ISSUE. THE STATE INSPECTION WAS REQUESTED BY ME PRIOR TO SPENDING $2,776 (AND UP TO $5,000 OR MORE IF INTERNAL PARTS WERE DAMAGED) TO REPLACE A RUSTED THROUGH AND LEAKING REAR DIFFERENTIAL CASE THAT COULD HAVE SEIZED UP AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS IF I HAD NOT NOTICED THE LEAK. THIS INSPECTION ALSO IDENTIFIED FOR THE SECOND TIME A RUSTED THROUGH AND LEAKING EXHAUST MANIFOLDS (THE LEFT MANIFOLD WAS "STARTING" TO LEAK ON 09/16/2014 WHEN THE TRUCK LAST PASSED INSPECTION. I HEARD THE TICKING SOUND, CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS…”