Disclaimer: Not affiliated with or endorsed by Toyota Motor Company. For informational purposes only. Full Disclaimer

Problems with 2003 Toyota 4Runner EQUIPMENT

On average, the 2003 Toyota 4Runner starts to “feel” problems with the EQUIPMENT and its various aspects after 0 miles.

Recently reported EQUIPMENT problems on 2003 Toyota 4Runner

2003 toyota 4runner has 3 faulty calipers 2 on front and one on the rear. the caliper uses a dual piston and the interior lower piston is the one that failed on both front calipers. this issue is know to thousands of toyota owners who inquire (its common knowledge among those who own them.) the fact that both failed at the same time was incredibly dangerous i live in the mountains and losing both front brakes simultaneously is cause for great concern my safety is at risk as well as the safety of my passengers and everyone else. i am not sure why it has taken soo much effort from us (the owners of said vehicles and therefore caliper) to get this looked into. the calipers are of a faulty design and will fail prematurely putting human lives at risk. what more do you need? a person to die before this becomes credited information? just check out t4r.org to find any number of identical claims. *tr

Tl* - the contact owns a 2003 toyota avalon xls. while attempting to change a flat tire the jack malfunctioned. the vehicle was released from the jack and injured the contact's hand, causing nerve damage. in addition, it damaged the driver side quarter panel. per the contact, the base of the jack had a narrow width of 1 3/4 inches and was inches in length. the jack was suppose to be able to lift larger toyota vehicles. the contact felt that the jack was too flimsy to secure the vehicle and was requesting an investigation to replace the current jack with one of appropriate size. the contact also spoke with customer relations of toyota. toyota investigators took pictures of the vehicle and the jack ,and promised a response within 90 days. the response from toyota stated that the jack was not faulty, and the inspection was addressed to evaluate whether the jack was faulty. the contact was concerned about the appropriateness of the jack size in relation to the vehicle. also, the letter stated this vehicle was not subject ...

Comments