1998 Toyota Tacoma Structure

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT DURING A ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE BRACKET TO THE FRAME HAD RUSTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THIS FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 299,000. UPDATED 8/27/14*CN THE CONSUMER STATED THE DEALER ADVISED THERE HAD BEEN A RECALL ISSUED 3 YEARS PRIOR THAT THE CONSUMER WAS NEVER MADE AWARE OF. UPDATED 08/29/2014 *JS

1998 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH SIGNIFICANT FRAME RUST. VEHICLE FALLS WITHIN THE "FRAME RUST CORROSION PERFORATION WARRANTY EXTENSION" PROGRAM OFFERED BY TOYOTA. THE PROGRAM OFFERS TO BUY BACK TOYOTA TACOMAS THAT FAIL THEIR "INSPECTION" DEALER ACTUALLY DENTED THE FRAME DURING INSPECTION DUE TO WEAK FRAME SECONDARY TO RUST. THEY DID NOT PUT A HOLE IN IT THEREFORE RETURNING IT TO ME, SAYING THE VEHICLE IS SAFE. CONTACTED CORPORATE TOYOTA AND BASICALLY GOT BLOWN OFF AS THEY STATED THE DEALER DID NOT PUT A HOLE IN IT DURING INSPECTION. PERSONALLY, ANY VEHICLE WHICH YOU CAN DENT THE FRAME IN CRITICAL AREAS WITH A 12 OZ HAMMER WITH "LIGHT TO MODERATE" SWINGS IS UNSAFE. AT THIS POINT I CAN ONLY HOPE I DO NOT GET INTO A CRASH WITH THIS VEHICLE. I AM FILING THIS COMPLAINT AS I BELIEVE THEY ARE OVERLOOKING A POTENTIALLY SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THIS VEHICLE. *JS

THIS TRUCK BELONGS TO MY SON WHO IS IN THE NAVY. HE WAS ON DEPLOYMENT AND I TOOK THE TRUCK TO GET IT INSPECTED AND IT FAILED DUE TO A RUSTED FRAME. NEITHER MYSELF NOR MY SON WERE AWARE OF THE FRAME RECALL DONE BY TOYOTA. I CALLED TOYOTA AND THEY ARE REFUSING TO HELP US WITH THIS VEHICLE SINCE THE RECALL HAS EXPIRED. WE HAVE OWNED 3 TOYOTA TACOMA'S AND NEVER HAVE HAD AN EXPERIENCE SUCH AS THIS. THEY TOLD ME TO FILE A COMPLAINT WITH YOUR COMPANY IF I WASN'T HAPPY WITH THE END RESULT AND I OF COURSE AM VERY DISAPPOINTED. MY SON SERVES THIS COUNTRY AND NOW HE IS OUT A VEHICLE AND CAN'T AFFORD TO REPLACE IT. PLEASE ADVISE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP. [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

FRAME HAS RUSTED OUT AT AN UNUSUALLY YOUNG AGE AND MILEAGE FOR THIS VEHICLE. HOLES ARE NOW VISIBLE THROUGH THE VEHICLE'S FRAME AND STATE INSPECTION REJECTED. *TR

1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO VEHICLE RUSTED FRAME RECALL NOTICE. *SMD THE CONSUMER STATED HE WAS NEVER NOTIFIED OF A RECALL. WHEN HE CALLED TOYOTA, TO INQUIRE ABOUT GETTING HIS VEHICLE FIXED, HE WAS INFORMED, HE WAS A MONTH TOO LATE.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SEAT INSIDE THE VEHICLE WOULD BOUNCE UP AND DOWN WHEN THE VEHICLE STARTED TO SLOW DOWN. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE HE NOTICED THAT THE FRAME HAD RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER OR MECHANIC FOR INSPECTION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED BUT PROVIDED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 130,000.

LETTER FROM SENATOR CASEY ON BEHALF OF CONSTITUENT RE HIS 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED PRIOR TO PURCHASING THE VEHICLE, IT WAS DAMAGED ON THE RIGHT SIDE AND HAS A RECONSTRUCTED TITLE. TOYOTA RECALLED THE VEHICLE DUE TO A MANUFACTURERS DEFECT FOR FRAME RUST. TOYOTA DENIED THE RECOMMENDATION OF INCLUDING THE VEHICLE IN THE BUY BACK PROGRAM, DUE TO THE RECONSTRUCTED TITLE, EVEN THOUGH THE FRAME WAS CAUSED BY TOYOTA THREE YEARS PRIOR DURING THE MANUFACTURING OF THE VEHICLE. *JB

1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. CONSUMER WRITES REGARDING FRAME RUST *TGW THE MECHANIC FROM THE INSPECTION STATION NOTICED LARGE AMOUNTS OF RUST AND SCALE ON THE RIGHT AND LEFT FRAME RAILS BETWEEN THE CAB AND BED. UPON CLOSER INSPECTION, THE RIGHT AND LEFT FRAME RAILS WERE ALMOST RUSTED THROUGH. *JB

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MAIN FRAME AND REAR BUMPER EXHIBITED SEVERE RUST. IN ADDITION, THE FRONT AND REAR SHOCKS WERE REPLACED DUE TO EXCESSIVE RUST AND WITHIN A ONE YEAR PERIOD, BOTH NEW SHOCKS REQUIRED A SECOND REPLACEMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT EXAMINED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 182,000. UPDATED 02/07/11 *BF UPDATED 04/21/11

1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. LETTER SENT REGARDING COMPLAINT AGAINST LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP *TGW TOYOTA DID NOT COVER THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE BECAUSE THE TRUCK HAD A SALVAGED TITLE. *JB

I OWN A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA THAT SHOULD FALL INTO THEIR RUSTY FRAME BUYBACK BUT WAS TOLD IT DIDN'T QUALIFY BECAUSE OF A MASSACHUSETTS RECONSTRUCTED TITLE. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN ON THE ROAD FOR APPROXIMATELY 3 YEARS SINCE THE REBUILD. THE FRAME IS RUSTED THROUGH IN SOME PLACES AND THE PASSENGER SIDE BODY MOUNT HAS RUSTED AWAY FROM THE FRAME . IT SEEMS TO ME THE FRAME RUST HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THE TRUCK WAS IN AN ACCIDENT AND THE RECALL SHOULD BE IN EFFECT, PROBABLY WITH A LOWER REIMBURSEMENT DUE TO THE SALVAGE TITLE. IF THE POINT IS TO GET UNSAFE VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD, A RUSTY FRAME IS A RUSTY FRAME WHETHER THE TRUCK HAS BEEN REBUILT OR NOT. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT TOOK HIS VEHICLE IN TO BE SERVICED AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRAME WAS ROTTING UNDER THE VEHICLE. HE DID NOT HAVE THE VEHICLE REPAIRED AT THE SERVICE CENTER. HE IS WAITING TO CALL THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER REGARDING THE REPAIR WORK. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 135,000.

I WENT TO GET MY TRUCK INSPECTED AND THEY REFUSED TO DO SO, BECAUSE THE FRAME ON MY TRUCK HAS CRACKED. THEY STATED THAT THEY THOUGHT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THESE VEHICLES AND TO CHECK INTO IT. MY DEALER STATED THEY COULD NOT DO ANYTHING BECAUSE THE TRUCK IS SO OLD. I STILL OWE MONEY ON IT. WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO NOW. *TR

1998 TOYOTA TACOMA WITH SIGNIFICANT FRAME RUST. VEHICLE FALLS WITHIN THE "FRAME RUST CORROSION PERFORATION WARRANTY EXTENSION" PROGRAM OFFERED BY TOYOTA. THE PROGRAM OFFERS TO BUY BACK TOYOTA TACOMAS THAT FAIL THEIR "INSPECTION" DEALER ACTUALLY DENTED THE FRAME DURING INSPECTION DUE TO WEAK FRAME SECONDARY TO RUST. THEY DID NOT PUT A HOLE IN IT THEREFORE RETURNING IT TO ME, SAYING THE VEHICLE IS SAFE. CONTACTED CORPORATE TOYOTA AND BASICALLY GOT BLOWN OFF AS THEY STATED THE DEALER DID NOT PUT A HOLE IN IT DURING INSPECTION. PERSONALLY, ANY VEHICLE WHICH YOU CAN DENT THE FRAME IN CRITICAL AREAS WITH A 12 OZ HAMMER WITH "LIGHT TO MODERATE" SWINGS IS UNSAFE. AT THIS POINT I CAN ONLY HOPE I DO NOT GET INTO A CRASH WITH THIS VEHICLE. I AM FILING THIS COMPLAINT AS I BELIEVE THEY ARE OVERLOOKING A POTENTIALLY SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THIS VEHICLE. *TR

SEVERELY CORRODED FRAME RAILS ON A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA 4X4. PURCHASED USED FROM A MAINE USED CAR DEALER WITH 121K MILES IN AUG 2007. WHILE REPLACING THE MUFFLER AND TAIL PIPE IN DECEMBER 2007 I NOTICED SEVERE RUST AND CORROSION OF THE FRAME RAILS AND CROSS MEMBERS ON THE FRAME OF THIS TRUCK. UPON CLOSER INSPECTION OF THE FRAME, I NOTICED SEVERAL AREAS WHERE THE PREVIOUS OWNER OR DEALER HAD REPAIR PATCHES WELDED TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE FRAME TO SHORE UP THE WEAKER AREAS. BOTH DRIVERS AND PASSENGER SIDE FRAME RAILS HAVE HUGE HOLES OR CRACKS WHERE THE FRAME HAS ROTTED AWAY. THE PATCH JOBS THAT WERE DONE RANGE FROM A COUPLE INCHES TO 14 INCHES. RUST PROOFING WAS USED TO HIDE/PROTECT WHAT WAS LEFT OF THE FRAME. RUST PROOFING NOW NOT ABLE TO HIDE THE CORROSION OR THE LARGE PIECES THAT ARE FLAKING OFF THE FRAME SHOWING NEW HOLES. VEHICLE UNSAFE TO HAUL ANYTHING OR EVEN TO DRIVE. UNSAFE CONDITION COULD RESULT IN SERIOUS PERSONAL INJURY OR DEATH. *TR

SEVERELY CORRODED FRAME RAILS ON A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA 4X4. PURCHASED USED FROM A MAINE USED CAR DEALER WITH 121K MILES IN AUG 2007. WHILE REPLACING THE MUFFLER AND TAIL PIPE IN DECEMBER 2007 I NOTICED SEVERE RUST AND CORROSION OF THE FRAME RAILS AND CROSS MEMBERS ON THE FRAME OF THIS TRUCK. UPON CLOSER INSPECTION OF THE FRAME, I NOTICED SEVERAL AREAS WHERE THE PREVIOUS OWNER OR DEALER HAD REPAIR PATCHES WELDED TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE FRAME TO SHORE UP THE WEAKER AREAS.BOTH DRIVERS AND PASSENGER SIDE FRAME RAILS HAVE HUGE HOLES OR CRACKS WHERE THE FRAME HAS ROTTED AWAY. THE PATCH JOBS THAT WERE DONE RANGE FROM A COUPLE INCHES TO 14 INCHES. RUST PROOFING WAS USED TO HIDE/PROTECT WHAT WAS LEFT OF THE FRAME. RUST PROOFING NOW NOT ABLE TO HIDE THE CORROSION OR THE LARGE PIECES THAT ARE FLAKING OFF THE FRAME SHOWING NEW HOLES. VEHICLE UNSAFE TO HAUL ANYTHING OR EVEN TO DRIVE. UNSAFE CONDITION COULD RESULT IN SERIOUS PERSONAL INJURY OR DEATH. *TR

I BOUGHT A BRAND NEW 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA 4X4 REG CAB 4 CYL. STANDARD TRANSMISSION AND MY MECHANIC TOLD ME MY FRAME WAS BREAKING APART.. HE DID THE BEST HE COULD TO WELD THE FRAME BUT TOLD ME IT PROBABLE ONLY HAD A YEAR LEFT.. THIS DISAPPOINTS ME TERRIBLE.. I ALWAYS TRUSTED TOYOTA VEHICLES AND RECOMMEND THEM TO EVERYONE, BUT I AFRAID THAN I NO LONGER CAN DO SO.. I TOOK VERY GOOD CARE OF MY VEHICLE AND TOYOTA LET ME DOWN.. MY NEXT VEHICLE WILL BE A FORD F 150 WITH A C CHANNEL FRAME NOT BOXED LIKE THE TACOMA... I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU GET A HANDLE ON THIS PROBLEM OR YOU WILL LOSE MAJOR SALES...IT PAINS ME TO WRITE THIS... I ALWAYS LOVED TOYOTA. ALSO THE EXHAUST MANIFOLD HAD TO BE REPLACED 3 TIME IN THIS 10YEAR PERIOD... WAKE UP... *TR

PUT TRUCK ON LIFT. TRUCK FRAME LITERALLY BROKE IN HALF WHEN TRUCK WAS ELEVATED. EXTENSIVE CORROSION OF TRUCK FRAME. VIRTUALLY ZERO CORROSION ON THE REST OF THE TRUCK. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME ON THE VEHICLE WAS RUSTING, WHICH HE OBSERVED WHILE PERFORMING MAINTENANCE. SOME OF THE RUSTY METAL AND PIECES OF THE FRAME FELL OFF THE VEHICLE. HE CONSULTED THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER NUMEROUS TIMES, BUT THEY WERE "NONCHALANT AND UNCONCERNED". INITIALLY, THEY OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. MOST RECENTLY, THE CONTACT WAS SENT A LETTER REQUESTING THAT HE TAKE THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION. AFTER THE INSPECTION, HE WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRAME FAILED INSPECTION AND THE RECOURSE WAS STILL BEING NEGOTIATED AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 145,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 100,000.

FRAME RUSTY/ROT PROBLEM. *TR

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE AND TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION. THE DEALER STATED THAT THE VEHICLE'S FRAME WAS DAMAGED TOO SEVERELY TO BE REPAIRED; HOWEVER, THEY OFFERED HER APPROXIMATELY $7,000 TOWARDS A TRADE-IN. THE RECALL NUMBER WAS UNKNOWN. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 53,000.

TL*- THE CONTACT HAS ASKED FOR THE EXACT VERBIAGE OF HIS EMAIL ENTERED AS HIS COMPLAINT: TOYOTA HAS INSTITUTED A WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FOR 1995-2000 TOYOTA TACOMAS FOR FRAME RUST. TOYOTA IS BUYING BACK THE TRUCKS BECAUSE OF SAFETY PROBLEMS. THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS ACCIDENTS RESULTING FROM COLLAPSING FRAMES THAT HAVE RUSTED OUT. THEY ARE DOING THIS TO AVOID A NHTSA RECALL. MY TRUCK HAS A TITLE THAT LISTS PRIOR DAMAGE, AND THEY WILL NOT TAKE MY TRUCK BACK. THEY CLAIM THAT THE TRUCK HAS BEEN ALTERED. THE TRUCK WAS REPAIRED USING TOYOTA TACOMA FACTORY PARTS, AND NOT AFTERMARKET PARTS. THE TRUCK WAS REPAIRED IN YEAR 2002, BUT THE INSURANCE COMPANY CHOSE NOT TO SPEND THE MONEY ON REPAIRS. IF MY TRUCK WAS NEWER, THE INSURANCE COMPANY WOULD HAVE SPENT THE MONEY ON REPAIRS, THE REPAIR WOULD NOT APPEAR ON THE TITLE, AND TOYOTA WOULD QUALIFY THIS TRUCK FOR BUY BACK. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MY TRUCK AND A NEWER TRUCK RECEIVING THE SAME REPAIR IS THAT ONE IS OLDER THAN THE OTHER, AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY CHOSE TO REPAIR THE NEWER VEHICLE. MY 1998 TACOMA WAS PROFESSIONALLY REPAIRED AND INSPECTED BY THE MASSACHUSETTS POLICE. THE TRUCK LOOKS BRAND NEW EXCEPT FOR THE FRAME RUST. I BELIEVE THAT TOYOTA IS TRYING TO AVOID A NHTSA RECALL BY THIS WARRANTY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM. STILL, THERE ARE MANY VEHICLES LIKE MINE ON THE ROADS WITH FRAME RUST WAITING FOR AN ACCIDENT THAT TOYOTA CHOOSES TO IGNORE. UPDATED 07/15/08 *BF UPDATED 07/15/08

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRAME DETERIORATED ON HIS VEHICLE. HE WAS ABLE TO PICK OFF CHUNKS OF THE FRAME AND IT EVENTUALLY CRACKED AND SPLIT IN HALF. HE CONSULTED TOYOTA FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO AND A HALF YEARS, BUT WAS NOT OFFERED ANY RECOURSE; THEREFORE, HE SOLD THE VEHICLE. MOST RECENTLY, THE CONTACT WAS NOTIFIED ABOUT A BUYBACK OF 813,000 TOYOTA TACOMAS, MODEL YEARS 1995-2000 FOR THE FRAME. HE WAS OFFERED $675 FOR HIS VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 86000. UPDATED 5/20/08 *CN UPDATED 05/20/08

I OWNED A 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA. RECENTLY TOYOTA DIDN'T PERFORM A RECALL BUT A GOOD FAITH SERVICE FOR RUSTING AND BREAKING FRAMES. MY FRAME HAD RECENTLY BROKE CAUSING ME TO BUY A NEW VEHICLE, TOYOTA AND I HAVE WENT BACK AND FORTH ON THIS SINCE MAY OF 2005. IN FEBRUARY OF 2008 THEY HAVE CAME OUT AND SAID THAT THEIR 1995-2000(170,000 TOTAL) TOYOTA TACOMA'S DID NOT HAVE THE PROPER RUST PROTECTOR AND IT WAS CAUSING MASS DETERIORATION AND POSSIBLE FRAME BREAKING. *TR

THE FRAME ON MY 1998 TOYOTA TACOMA REGULAR CAB 4X4 PICKUP TRUCK IS SEVERELY RUSTED. IN SOME PLACES, THE METAL IS EXTREMELY THIN BECAUSE OF THIS. THE REST OF THE TRUCK, OTHER THAN THE FRAME, IS IN GOOD SHAPE. THE AMOUNT OF FRAME DETERIORATION, ESPECIALLY IN THE REAR PORTION OF THE FRAME, SEEMS EXCESSIVE GIVEN THE AGE OF THE VEHICLE AND THE CARE I HAVE GIVEN IT. FORTUNATELY, THERE ARE NO HOLES IN MY FRAME YET, BUT OTHERS HAVE NOT BEEN AS LUCKY. *TR