2001 Toyota Tundra. Consumer writes in regards to broken cross member. The consumer stated the spare tire mount fell off, the rear shock top failed and the crossmember failure caused the brake line to fail. Updated 11/08/2017

- Des Moines, IA, USA

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 old and have been driving sine 16 and have never ever had to replace a rear axle for rot. The fact that Toyota acknowledged ownership for the chassis rust tells me that they should own the axle rot as well. I have called Toyota corporate with no success and am looking for some relief on this repair. Toyota quoted me approximately $5000 for a new axle (parts and labor). Last month I sent $1500 at the dealership to rebuild my emergency brakes in order to pass our state safety inspection. Emergency brake linkage is not a wear/replacement part. Your thoughts? [xxx] information redacted pursuant to the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).

- North Smithfield, RI, USA

On 11//18/0/01irc'd a recall for excessive corrosion of the rear cross member. In 10/2012, I was informed that the truck frame passed inspection and was good.they did replace two gas tank straps and told me the undercoating that should be sprayed on it as part of the recall was not available.I never received any addition correspondence regarding the undercoating.on 12/23,14 I took my truck to tj Toyota for a trailer light whip repair. At that time, the mechanic had me look at the frame rail.it is rusted so bad I could see right through the rail.the connection of this rail to the frame has excessive scaling.the truck was due for an inspection at the end of the month, and I was told they would not do an inspection.the mechanic continued to tell me he felt the truck was "junk" unsuitable for towing anything.I called 1-800-331-4331 at Toyota and spoke with [xxx], [xxx] and [xxx]. [xxx] processed a conference call with herself, [xxx] at tj Toyota and me. [xxx] told me to take the truck back to tj Toyota to redo the frame inspection and if it failed, Toyota would replace the frame. However, [xxx], from tj Toyota stated it is not corroded on the frame but it is on the rail connecting to the frame. I asked what they would for me and he stated, spray it with undercoating. I asked what that would do for the truck and [xxx] stated nothing?. nnyroads are salted heavily.if this vehicle was never undercoated or protected for rust, the fact that the rails are rusted is due to not being prepared for driving in nnywinter.I find it difficult to believe that in 2012 my truck frame and under carriage was in as good a condition as the inspection dictated.if in two years a Toyota truck frame goes from good to junk, there is a problem some place. I believe not undercoating the vehicle led to the rust problems and the result of the inspection in 2012 was incorrect. Information redacted pursuant to the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).

- Norwood, NY, USA

The owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that while driving downhill at approximately 30 mph on a mountainous road, the brakes were depressed and pulsated abnormally as the front end of the vehicle began to vibrate violently. The failure only recurred when the contact was driving downhill in combination to the brake pedal being engaged. The vehicle was taken to an authorized dealer, who stated that the rotors and calipers would need to be replaced. The vehicle had not been repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the defect. The approximate failure mileage was 60,000.

- Fresno, CA, USA

My brakes line rusted off. I got it replaced. If I didn't notice it I could have gotten into a major accident with no brakes. My frame on the pickup is rusting and I am concerned that it will become another safety issue. I have owned Toyota all my life and now worried to drive them due to rusty frames.

- Carrington, ND, USA

The 1st generation Toyota Tundra's are rust buckets. I own a 2001 Toyota Tundra w/ approx 101,000 miles. The vehicle was taken to the local authorized dealer for repairs under recall: 09V444000 (structure: Frame and members:underbody shields). The vehicle is being repaired (frame is being replaced). But the dealer also informed me that the steering rack and hose connections are rotted out and in need of replacement -> $1300. Additionally, the dealer informed me that the rear E-brake pivots are rusted/frozen and will also need replacing ->> $450. In a nutshell, the frame, the steering and the brakes are all rusted out - it appears that safety was an afterthought. I feel that Toyota corporation is negligent and that consumers are left holding the bag for poorly engineered products that are prone to early rust-out. On-line forums are filled with threads from other owners experiencing similar issues.

- Westford, MA, USA

To whom it may concern: I am writing this letter in an effort to make Toyota motors corporation responsible for the defective braking system on Toyota Tundra 2001, and probably other years, specifically the front brake calipers. From what the Toyota dealerships tell me these trucks came with front calipers that are too small for the vehicle and they get too hot and as a result they warp the discs and this creates a moderate to violent shaking of the front end of the vehicle every time the brakes are applied. Toyota motors repaired the issue, by installing bigger calipers with more surface area, as long as the car was within the warranty 3 years or 36,000 miles. It is my opinion that this issue should be examined and be considered a government recall because it is not that a part broke or got worn out before the warranty expired. It is more that the car came with brakes not capable of withstanding the heat generated by the friction B/w the pads and the disc due to the design of the caliper and as a result it warps the discs causing owners to resurface or replace discs frequently without solving the problem or solving it for a short period of time and needless to say this, to me, is a big safety issue not only because the brakes do not work properly but also because all that shaking and vibration can loosen up other components in the suspension or braking system compromising the safety of the vehicle and as a result this may cause an accident. Many disappointed Tundra owners express their frustration about this issue on different forums one of them is Toyota Tundra forums and another is Tundra solutions forum. I respectfully request revision of this problem because a lot of us can't afford or think that it is not fair to pay B/w $2,200- $3,200 that the dealerships and brake shops charge to solve this problem. Thank you for your attention.

- Northridge, CA, USA