2005 Toyota Tacoma Structure

THE FRAME IS ROTTING THROUGH ON THE DRIVERS SIDE INSIDE FRAME RAIL. THE PRESSED C CHANNEL FRAME IS ALSO ROTTING AND SEPARATING. I TAKE VERY GOOD CARE OF MY TRUCK. PEOPLE ARE CONSTANTLY TELLING ME. HOW GOOD IT LOOKS FOR THE YEAR. IT IS RIDICULOUS AND TOYOTA MOTOR COMPANY IS NOT DOING ANYTHING. THE DEALER HAS CONTACTED CORPORATE AND THEY DO NOT INTEND TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE 2005 AND UP TACOMA FRAME RUSTING/ROT PROBLEM. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A SLIGHT CRASH. THE CONTACT WAS NOT INJURED AND A POLICE REPORT WAS NOT FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS DEEMED AS DESTROYED BECAUSE THE FRAME WAS COMPLETELY RUSTED AND THE CONTACT WAS ADVISED THAT ALTHOUGH THE VEHICLE COULD BE REPAIRED, IT WOULD NOT PASS A STATE INSPECTION. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE MANUFACTURER BUT NO ASSISTANCE WAS PROVIDED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 54,000.

I HAVE A HOLE ON THE INSIDE OF BOX FRAME NEXT TO THE CAT. CONVERTER ON DRIVER SIDE. THIS WAS DISCOVERED BACK IN JANUARY OF 2013, AND WAS IMMEDIATELY REPORTED TO THE TOYOTA REP OVER THE DEALERSHIP. I'VE INQUIRED ABOUT THE SITUATION 3 TIMES SINCE THEN AND HAVE JUST GOTTEN THE ANSWER THAT ITS UNDER INVESTIGATION. THIS HOLE WHICH I CAN ALMOST STICK MY FIST THROUGH LOOKS TO BE LOCATED IN THE CRUMBLE ZONE, AND IS IN A HIGH STRESSED PART OF THE FRAME. I KNOW TOYOTA HAS RECALLED FIRST GENERATION TRUCKS FOR FRAME ROT, BUT WHY HAVEN'T THEY RECALLED ANY OF THE SECOND GENERATION TRUCKS FOR THE SAME ISSUES. YOU CAN SEARCH THE WEB AND FIND THAT I'M NOT ALONE WHEN IT COMES TO FRAME ROT ON THE SECOND GENERATION TACOMA TRUCKS. TOYOTA NEEDS TO BUCK UP AND FIX THESE ISSUES BEFORE SOMEONE GETS SEVERELY INJURED OR KILLED DUE TO THE DEFECTIVE FRAMES. PEOPLE SPEND THE EXTRA MONEY ON TOYOTA VEHICLES FOR QUALITY DURABILITY AND LONGEVITY. I WORK FOR A TOYOTA PRODUCTION PLANT AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THEY ARE AVOIDING SUCH A DANGEROUS ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED ASAP. I HOPE THAT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION LOOKS INTO THIS AND FORCES A RECALL BEFORE LIVES ARE LOST! *TR

WENT TO GET VEHICLE INSPECTION,DEALER SAID FRAME HAS ROTTED TO A UNSAFE DEGREE AND WILL NOT INSPECT. I CANT USE MY $30,000 TRUCK FOR WORK BECAUSE OF A KNOWN TOYOTA FRAME RUSTING ISSUE. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING INSPECTED, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE FRAME WAS PERFORATED DUE TO RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED ABOUT THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 138,000.

DURING A ROUTINE OIL CHANGE I NOTICED A LARGE RUST HOLE IN THE PASSANGER SIDE FRAME RAIL. THE HOLE IS ROUGHLY 10-12 INCHES LONG ON THE INSIDE OF THE RAIL ROUGHLY UNDER THE PASSANGER SIDE FLOOR BOARD. I HAVE NOTICED ALOT OF SURFACE RUST OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS AND HAVE TRIED TO SEAL THE AREA..PAINT OR UNDER COAT... NOTHING SEEMS TO STOP THE RUST. I TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE DEALER WHERE YES THEY DO AKNOWLAGE THE HOLE BUT SAID SINCE THE TRUCK WAS OUT OF WARRANTY THEY WERE NOT PREPARED TO DO ANY THING ABOUT IT,,,SEE YA HAVE A NICE DAY. I UNDERSTAND THIS HAS BEEN AND STILL IS A MOJOR PROBLEM FOR TOYOTA. I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND LOGGED IN A COMPLAINT AND HAVE YET TO HEAR BACK. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE PARKED, HE NOTICE A CORRODED HOLE IN THE FRAME. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 90,000. *TR

2005 TACOMA WITH SEVERE RUST PERFORATIONS TO FRAME. NOTIFED VEHICLE UNSAFE TO DRIVE. DEALER WILL NOT WARRANTY OR ASSIST. 8 YR OLD VEHICLE UNDRIVABLE. I TOOK MY 2005 TACOMA IN TO SEVRCO AUTO WINDWARD IN KANEOHE, HI ON 25 APRIL 2013 TO HAVE THE VEHICLE INSPECTED FOR SEVERE RUST PERFORATIONS ON THE FRAME. WHEN I DROPPED THE VEHICLE OFF THE ATTENDANT NOTIFIED ME THAT TOYOTA HAD SEEN A NUMBER OF THESE FRAME ISSUES AND THAT THEY HAD WARRANTIED 2 FRAMES THAT HE KNEW OFF--AT A COST OF APPROXIMATELY $12,000.00 PER FRAME. ON APRIL 29TH, I WAS TOLD THAT MY VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND THAT I WOULD NEED TO SIGN A WAIVER TO RETRIEVE MY VEHICLE. DEALER HAD INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND SENT PHOTOS TO TOYOTA TO SEE IF WARRANTY WORK WOULD BE COVERED. ON MAY 10TH, I WAS CONTACTED BY DEALER AND THEY NOTIFIED ME THAT MY VEHICLE WAS NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY AND THAT THEY WOULD DO NOTHING FOR ME. I SPENT OVER $30,000.00 ON A TOYOTA BECAUSE THEY HAD A REPUTATION FOR RELIABILITY AND CUSTOMER SERVICE. NOW 8 YEARS LATER, I HAVE A TRUCK THAT IS UNSAFE TO DRIVE, AND NO RECOURSE FROM THE DEALER. *TR

THERE IS A HOLE IN THE FRAME BELOW THE DRIVERS DOOR DUE TO RUST. VEHICLE MAY BE UNSAFE DUE TO A FAULTY FRAME. PRIOR YEARS HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE FRAME. MY HUSBAND DRIVES THE TRUCK 500 MILES A WEEK TO WORK. TOYOTA CLAIMS NOTHING IS WRONG AND WILL NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE CONTACT ALSO MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A HOLE IN THE METAL FRAME WHERE IT BEGAN TO SEPARATE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER, WHO STATED THAT THE FRONT PORTION OF THE FRAME NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 98,000. ..UPDATED 12-30-13 *BF THE CONSUMER STATED THE REAR FRAME WAS BEGINNING TO CORRODE. UPDATED 1/22/2014 *JS

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE AT THE DEALER FOR UNRELATED REPAIRS, THE TECHNICIAN NOTICED RUST THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE FRAME. THE CONTACT WAS UNAWARE OF THE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO CORRECT THE FAILURE. THERE WAS A MANUFACTURER'S RECALL FOR CORROSION OF THE FRAME HOWEVER, THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT THE VIN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL CAMPAIGN. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 89,960. UPDATED 4/1/13 *CN THE CONSUMER STATED HE HAS SINCE TRADED THE VEHICLE.

LAST MONTH I LOOKED UNDERNEATH MY TRUCK AND DISCOVERED SIGNIFICANT FRAME RUST. THE MOST SIGNIFICANT AREAS ARE BETWEEN STEEL FRAME COMPONENTS THAT ARE RIVETED TOGETHER. RUST HAS FORMED BETWEEN THESE PLATES AND IS PUSHING THEM APART. THERE IS UP TO 3/8" DEFORMATION BETWEEN PLATES. THE PLATES WERE ORIGINALLY IN CONTACT WITH EACH OTHER. THE PLATES ARE STILL IN CONTACT WITH EACH OTHER AT RIVET POINTS. THE CONDITIONS OF THE CONCEALED PORTIONS OF THE RIVETS ARE UNKNOWN. THE RUST IS LOCATED PRIMARILY UNDER THE TRUCK BED, BUT THERE IS SOME UNDER THE PASSENGER CAB. AN INTERNET SEARCH INDICATES THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN MISTREATED AND HAS FOLLOWED ALL MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE. I AM ALSO AWARE OF THE 2001-2004 TACOMA FRAME RECALL. I WILL BE CONTACTING TOYOTA IN THE NEAR FUTURE WITH THE HOPE THEY WILL PROPERLY ADDRESS THIS SITUATION. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE NOTICED A HOLE IN THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE DUE TO RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A DEALER, WHO CONFIRMED THERE WAS A HOLE IN THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN ANY RECALLS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 98,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SPARE TIRE FELL AND DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE SPARE TIRE WAS LOCATED UNDER THE VEHICLE AND THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE ENTIRE CROSS MEMBER ON THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE BECAME RUSTED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HALF OF THE REAR CROSS MEMBER ALSO FRACTURED AND DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT ALSO STATED THAT THE CROSS MEMBER THAT WAS LOCATED IN THE CENTER OF THE VEHICLE WAS ALSO COMPLETELY RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 145,000.

RUST HAS DEVELOPED ON FRAME OF MY 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. DESPITE PRIOR RUST ISSUES WITH THIS MODEL TOYOTA HAS NO PROGRAM IN EFFECT TO LOOK AT THE TRUCK. *TR

I HAVE A 2005 TACOMA REGULAR CAB. IT HAS ROUGHLY 58K ON THE ODO AND THE FRAME IS RUSTED FROM THE FRONT TO THE BACK INSIDE AND OUT. IN SOME PLACES, SUCH AS THE REAR LEAF SPRING ATTACHMENT POINTS IT IS TO THE POINT WHERE SCALE FLAKING OFF AND ROT APPEARS TO BE TAKING PLACE. THIS IS UNSAFE AND UNACCEPTABLE FOR A VEHICLE PRODUCED IN TODAY'S DAY AND AGE! WHY ISN'T ANYTHING BEING DONE AS WAS THE CASE FOR THE PRE 2004 TRUCKS? AFTER TALKING WITH SEVERAL OTHER 2005+ TACOMA OWNERS, IT APPEARS AS THOUGH THE PROBLEM WAS NEVER SOLVED AND THE NEW 2ND GENERATION TRUCKS HAVE IT JUST AS BAD AS THE EARLY TACOMAS. AGAIN, THIS IS UNSAFE AND I TRULY HOPE TOYOTA IS WILLING TO STAND BEHIND THEIR TRUCKS AS THEY DID WITH THE EARLIER TACOMAS. *TR

LAST YEAR DURING VEHICLE INSPECTION I WAS TOLD MY FRAME HAD RUST. I CHECKED WITH TOYOTA AND THEY HAD A RECALL FOR MODEL YEARS UP TO 2004 FOR FRAME RUST ISSUES. THIS YEAR WHILE MY TRUCK WAS ON THE LIFT FOR MECHANICAL WORK, THE MECHANIC INFORMED ME THAT THE RUST ON MY FRAME WAS GETTING SERIOUS AND THERE WERE SOME POSSIBLE WEAK AREA'S. AGAIN I CONTACTED TOYOTA AND THEY SAID THEY HAVE HAD NO ISSUES NOR SEEN ANY RUST ON THE TRUCK FRAME. I ASKED IF THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY OF A SPLIT YEAR AND THE DEALERSHIP TOLD ME THAT 2005'S HAD A NEW DESIGN AND FRAME MANUFACTURER. I FILED A CASE WITH TOYOTA CASE #[XXX] JUST SO I WOULD BE ON RECORD. I HAVE ALSO SEEN MANY COMPLAINTS ON THE INTERNET WHEN I DID A SEARCH FOR FRAME RUST 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. TOYOTA WILL DO NOTHING TO HELP. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE ENTIRE FRAME WAS CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTICS. THE TECHNICIANS STATED THE CORROSION WAS SUPERFICIAL AND WOULD NOT CAUSE A FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000. UPDATED 08/07/12*LJ

2005 TOYOTA TACOMA TAILGATE IS DANGEROUSLY WEAK, AND IS UNABLE TO SUPPORT WHAT MOST CONSIDER NORMAL WEIGHT FOR A TRUCK TAILGATE. ALTHOUGH SUBSTANDARD DESIGN MAY BE CONSIDERED "BUYER BEWARE", TRUCK BUYERS EXPECT A TAILGATE TO SUPPORT THE WEIGHT OF NORMAL TRUCK USE ACTIVITIES. TOYOTA PROVIDES NO WARNING OR CAUTION ANYWHERE THAT THE TAILGATE IS OF INSUFFICIENT STRENGTH TO PERFORM NORMAL 1/2-TON TRUCK DUTIES, AND TYPICALLY (PER INTERNET FORUM THREADS) TELLS THEIR CUSTOMERS THAT IT IS THEIR PROBLEM AND THAT THEY SHOULD NOT EXPECT TO BE ABLE TO SAFELY USE THE TAILGATE FOR ANYTHING MORE THAN HIDING THE INSIDE OF THE BED. SINCE TOYOTA HAS PRODUCED A SUBSTANDARD DESIGNED PART, THEY SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED A VISUAL WARNING ON THE PART TO ALERT CUSTOMERS TO THE DANGER THEIR PRODUCT IMPOSES IF USED IN A TRADITIONAL MANNER. SINCE THEY DID NOT DO SO, THEY SHOULD BE HELD LIABLE TO PROVIDE A REDESIGNED PART TO THEIR CUSTOMERS OR FULL RESTITUTION FOR THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE VEHICLES. A GOOGLE OR SIMILAR INTERNET SEARCH ON "TACOMA TAILGATE FORUM" WILL SUBSTANTIATE MY STATEMENTS BEYOND MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH THE TAILGATE BENDING. *TR

MOTOR SUPPORT ON FRAME TORE OFF WHILE RUNNING AT 30MPH. TOYOTA DEALER IN P R EXAMINED THE AREA AND DETERMINED THAT THE FRAME WAS FRACTURED DUE TO HEAVY CORROSION. THEY DIAGNOSED THAT THE TRUCK SHALL NOT BE DRIVEN FOR SAFETY REASONS. TOYOTA DENIED TO REPAIR THE TRUCK . THAT IS NOT FAIR. I COULD HAVE INJURED MYSELF OR SOMEBODY ELSE'S. WHAT YOU GUYS ARE WAITING FOR TO TAKE CARE OF SO MANY COMPLAINTS, FATALITIES GOOD DECISION. HOPE IS NOT SOME OF YOUR LOVE ONES. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, HE WOULD HEAR A LOUD DRAGGING NOISE FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC AND THEY ADVISED HIM THAT THE FRAME WAS FRACTURED AND REFERRED HIM TO THE DEALER. THE DEALER ADVISED THAT THEY WOULD REPAIR THE FRAME AT THEIR EXPENSE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 114,000. UPDATED 07/20/11*LJ THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THE FRAME WAS CRACKED AT THE MOTOR MOUNT. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED TOYOTA WAS OFFERING A GOODWILL ASSIST WITH A NEW FRAME, BUT THE CONSUMER WOULD HAVE TO PAY LABOR FOR TRANSFERRING ALL PARTS AND INCIDENTALS WHICH WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $3,000-$4,000. THEY ALSO OFFERED TO HAVE IT WELDED AND IT WOULD COST $400.00-$500.00. THE CONSUMER REFUSED BOTH OFFERED. THE CONSUMER STATED THE FRAME IS THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE VEHICLE AND SHOULD NEVER BREAK OR CRACK UNDER NORMAL USE. IT WAS ALSO UNREASONABLE TO PAY $3,000-$4,000 FOR A DEFECT THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE EXISTED IF PROPERLY ENGINEERED IN THE BEGINNING. UPDATED 08/17/11

I OWN A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA, 4X4, 4-CYLINDER, 5-SPEED MANUAL, PURCHASED NEW. IT HAS 92,000 MILES ON IT AND I HAVE FILED TWO COMPLAINTS, GOING BACK THREE YEARS, WITH MY DEALER AND WITH TOYOTA HEADQUARTERS REGARDING EXCESSIVE RUST ON THE FRAME OF MY VEHICLE. BOTH HAVE TOLD ME IT IS ACCEPTABLE FOR THE FRAME TO BE RUSTING. I DISAGREE. A VEHICLE THAT SHOULD EASILY LAST OVER 200,000 MILES SHOULD BE BUILT ON QUALITY FRAMES. AT SOME POINT IT WILL CAUSE ISSUES AND COULD BE A DANGER IF JOINTS START RUSTING. I HAVE SEARCHED ONLINE AND SEEN OTHER SIMILAR TRUCKS AND ALL OWNERS COMPLAIN OF THIS ISSUE. THE FRAME AND BRACKETS ARE ALL RUSTING EXCESSIVELY, MUCH MORE EXCESSIVELY THAN ANY OTHER CAR I HAVE EVER OWNED. THIS STARTED OCCURRING SHORTLY AFTER OWNING THE CAR AND IT HAS GOTTEN TREMENDOUSLY WORSE. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN FRAME DAMAGE TO THE TRUCK AND THE TRUCK IS IN EXCEPTIONAL CONDITION, HAS BEEN WASHED WITH REGULARITY AND EVEN GARAGED. I AM SUBMITTING THIS COMPLAIN WITH THE HOPE OTHERS ARE ALSO COMPLAINING. I KNOW TOYOTA DID A RECALL OF THEIR PREVIOUS MODELS DUE TO THIS ISSUE AND NOTHING IN THEIR PRODUCTION HAS IMPROVED THE WAY THESE FRAMES ARE MADE AND I BELIEVE A RECALL SHOULD BE CONSIDERED TO REMEDY THESE MODEL YEAR ISSUES TOO. *TR

I HAVE A 2005 TOYOTA, TACOMA WITH 30,000 MILES. THE FRAME HAS EXCESSIVE RUSTING, NO HOLES YET BUT CERTAINLY VERY SOON. ROTORS ON ALL 4 WHEELS BAD. (THIS WAS TOLD TO US TODAY BY TOYOTA MECHANIC) ALL THEIR BAD FRAMES AND THEY WILL NOT HELP US ON THIS AS IT IS A 2005 (THE RECALL WAS ON EARLIER ONES TO 2004) THE THING IS DANGEROUS. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MOTOR MOUNTS COLLAPSED INTO THE FRAME WHILE HE WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH AND THE ENGINE WAS DROPPED INTO THE RADIATOR SHROUD. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL REPAIR FACILITY WHERE HE WAS INFORMED OF THE FAILURE. THE MECHANIC ADVISED THAT THE FRAMED WAS WHAT CAUSED THE FAILURE AND THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT ASSIST. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 170,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 180,000.

I HAVE A 2005 TOYOTA TACOMA 4X4 WITH EXTENDED CAB. I'VE BOUGHT IT BRAND NEW FROM BALISE TOYOTA IN W.SPFLD, MA AND HAVE HAD EVERY BIT OF SERVICE PERFORMED THERE (WITH EXCEPTION OF 1 OIL CHANGE AND A NEW SET OF TIRES). LAST YEAR I PUT A CLAIM IN WITH TOYOTA ABOUT THE FRAME RUSTING. TWICE I HAVE HAD THE VEHICLE INSPECTED FOR THIS DURING OTHER MAINTENANCE. BOTH TIMES I WAS FED THE STORY OF 'SURFACE RUST' WITH NO OFFER FROM TOYOTA TO REMEDY. MY FATHER OWNS A 2006 TOYOTA TACOMA 4X4 WITH THE EXTENDED CAB. SAME TRUCK BUT JUST A YEAR NEWER. HE WAS THE ONE WHO ALERTED ME TO LOOK UNDER THE TRUCK TO SEE IF IT WAS RUSTING BECAUSE HIS WAS. HE TOO HAS A CLAIM. FROM WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD, TOYOTA HAD A RECALL OF FRAMES DUE TO RUSTING BUT THAT WAS UP TO THE 2004 MODELS. THEIR REMEDY FOR 2004 AND PRIOR MODELS WAS A CHANGE IN FRAME DESIGN STARTING IN 2005. APPARENTLY THERE WAS A BAD BATCH OF METAL ON THOSE PRIOR YEARS (IF WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD IS CORRECT). NONE OF THESE TRUCKS HAVE ANY FORM OF RUST PREVENTION UNDER THEM. NOR WAS THAT FACT DIVULGED DURING THE PURCHASE OF THIS VEHICLE. I LOVE DRIVING THE TRUCK BUT HAVE BECOME VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE BRAND. I WILL NOT BE PURCHASING ANY VEHICLES FROM TOYOTA EVER AGAIN DUE TO THEIR NONRESPONSIVENESS TO THIS ISSUE. *TR