2001 Toyota Tundra

2001 Toyota Tundra Extended Cab

Overall

Not Rated

Front Crash

Not Rated

Side Crash

Not Rated

Rollover

★★★☆☆

EXTERIOR LIGHTING:HEADLIGHTS

DOPE, INC. IS RECALLING 42,540 COMBINATION CORNER AND BUMPER LAMP ASSEMBLIES OF VARIOUS PART NUMBERS SOLD FOR USE AS AFTERMARKET EQUIPMENT FOR VARIOUS PASSENGER VEHICLES. THESE HEADLAMPS FAIL TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THESE LAMPS DO NOT CONTAIN THE REQUIRED AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS.

Campaign: 09E025000

STRUCTURE:FRAME AND MEMBERS:UNDERBODY SHIELDS

TOYOTA IS RECALLING MODEL YEAR 2000-2003 TUNDRA VEHICLES ORIGINALLY SOLD IN OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING STATES: CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, KENTUCKY, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, VIRGINIA, WEST VIRGINIA, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. EXCESSIVE CORROSION OF THE REAR CROSS MEMBER MAY CAUSE THE SEPARATION OF THE SPARE TIRE STOWED UNDER THE TRUCK BED WHICH WOULD PRESENT A ROAD HAZARD THAT COULD CAUSE A CRASH. ALSO, CORROSION OF THE REAR CROSS MEMBER COULD AFFECT THE REAR BRAKE LINES AND THE PROPORTIONING VALVE RESULTING IN DIMINISHED BRAKING CAPABILITY.

Campaign: 09V444000

EXTERIOR LIGHTING

CERTAIN AJ MOTORSPORT COMBINATION LAMPS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON THE ABOVE LISTED PASSENGER VEHICLES. COMBINATION LAMPS NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.

Campaign: 06E065000

EXTERIOR LIGHTING

CERTAIN PRO-A MOTORS CORNER LAMPS, TURN SIGNALS, AND HEADLIGHTS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES LISTED ABOVE. SOME COMBINATION LAMPS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM TO FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.

Campaign: 06E026000

WHEELS

ON CERTAIN 4X2 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH AN ALLOY WHEEL TIRE UPGRADE (OPTIONS WM4, WM8, ZL1-ZL4, DH4, OR DH5) INSTALLED BY THE PROCESSING CENTERS IN JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA OR COMMERCE, GEORGIA, A LABEL IDENTIFYING THE SPARE TIRE AS A TEMPORARY USE SPARE TIRE WAS NOT INSTALLED. THE UPGRADE INCLUDES 4 LARGER SIZE TIRES WITH ALLOY WHEELS. THE ORIGINAL SPARE TIRE/STEEL WHEEL IS NOT PART OF THE UPGRADE AND WAS NOT CHANGED.

Campaign: 02V129000

STRUCTURE

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.

SUSPENSION,WHEELS,UNKNOWN OR OTHER

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.

STEERING,SUSPENSION,WHEELS

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, which currently total over $2,400, despite their advertised inspection and guarantee. This raises serious concerns that Midas and potentially other service locations may be failing to properly inspect critical suspension components, which poses a major public safety hazard.

SUSPENSION

The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle started making a metallic cracking sound, and the steering wheel was pulling to the right. The dealer was contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 285,643.

SUSPENSION

Toyota Corporate is refusing to acknowledge my Tundra's eligibility for remedy under a safety recall and campaign. My Tundra is experiencing the failure mode outlined in the safety recall 90M and extended safety campaign Tundra BXD. The spare tire crossmember of the frame is almost entirely rotted through with rust and is barely connected at this point. My Tundra's VIN number falls within the VIN range table's indicated in the recall and campaign documentation, and meets the criteria of currently being registered in an eligible cold-climate state. By all accounts, it should be eligible to receive remedy under this campaign. However Toyota has on multiple occasions just told me that "Safety Recalls are Service Campaigns are VIN-specific" and that VIN does not report as eligible. I've provided photo evidence of the issue and the documentation, yet Toyota refuses to acknowledge my truck's eligibility for repair under this program. Safety recalls are to prevent safety incidents from occurring due to known design or manufacturing defects. My truck is experiencing a known and documented defect. Toyota has a process for fixing it. However they're refusing to fix mine because of a mis-match in the VIN database. Safety issues don't affect "VIN numbers", they affect vehicles, the people who drive them, and others out on the roads.

SUSPENSION

I feel vehicle's frame is not safe... starting making a metal cracking noise due excessive corrosion .. rear frame portion is been treated under recall but the front looks really bad we can't even change suspension parts due the possibility on getting a serious frame problems. I keeping my truck with low mileage and not planning on selling it, very clean inside. I understand frame replacement it is an option if the frame is really bad and mine is getting onto that stage...

SUSPENSION

The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated while driving approximately 70 MPH, the steering wheel suddenly pulled to the right and front driver's side wheel detached from underneath the vehicle, causing the vehicle to skid across the highway before coming to a stop. The vehicle was later towed to the local dealer who diagnosed the vehicle and determined that the front driver's side ball joint had failed and needed to be replaced. The contact stated that there was damage to the subframe of the vehicle caused by the detached wheel. The vehicle was not yet repaired. The local dealer and manufacturer were notified of the failure, but no assistance was offered. The failure mileage was 233,500.

WHEELS

Driving straight at 30mph and wheel came off causing near deadly collision. Upon inspection it is evident that the wheel separated from its ball joints. Further research strongly suggests that this is a known defect of this year/make/model, even though the recall was issued only for the subsequent years vehicle. This is a potentially deadly design flaw and not an isolated manufacturing defect as Toyota claims.

STRUCTURE

The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that the vehicle was taken to an inspection station where it was reported that the vehicle could not be lifted due to extensive rust located behind the cab on the sub frame. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 216,000.

STRUCTURE

I brought my 2001 Toyota Tundra into my dealer today, and he advised me that the frame of the Toyota is very rusted and cracking and close to completely breaking. He said Toyota issued a recall on this, but it is no longer in effect. I have learned this is a common issue with the 2000-2003 Toyota Tundras. Please advise!