2002 Toyota Tundra problems
Owners have filed 648 complaints with NHTSA about the 2002 Toyota Tundra. Body & structure is the most reported problem area, at 25% of complaints. Next are brakes (22%) and suspension (15%).
At a glance
- Complaints
- 648 filed with NHTSA
- Most reported
- Body & structure 25% of complaints
- Crashes and fires
- 39 and 2
- Injuries and deaths
- 27 and 5
- Typical mileage
- 87,000 miles 502 complaints with mileage
Source: NHTSA owner complaints
Where the complaints are
Share of this model year's complaints by the part of the car involved. One complaint can name more than one part, so the shares can add up to more than 100%.
When problems show up
View the numbers
| Mileage | Complaints |
|---|---|
| 0k to 20k miles | 68 |
| 20k to 40k miles | 55 |
| 40k to 60k miles | 42 |
| 60k to 80k miles | 52 |
| 80k to 100k miles | 73 |
| 100k to 120k miles | 50 |
| 120k to 140k miles | 46 |
| 140k to 160k miles | 37 |
| 160k to 180k miles | 23 |
| 180k to 200k miles | 20 |
| 200k+ miles | 36 |
What the data shows
Of the 502 complaints that include odometer readings, half describe a problem before roughly 87,000 miles. For body & structure specifically, the median reported mileage is about 120,000 miles (133 complaints with mileage).
Safety-related details: 39 complaints mention a crash; 2 complaints mention a fire; 27 injuries reported; 5 deaths reported.
Looking only at complaints filed within five years of the model year (so older and newer years are comparable), the 2002 ranks 8th most-complained-about out of 27 model years of the Toyota Tundra with enough data (219 complaints in that window). It is also covered by 3 safety recall campaigns.
What owners wrote
A few complaints as filed, shortened and with personal details removed. The first ones are among the most serious reports for this model year; the rest are typical.
Dt: the consumer states that she and her husband were traveling on the interstate between 70-75 MPH and vehicle was not operating correctly. This was the first time that consumer noticed that the steering was not correct. The owners changed seating arrangements, and the wife took over driving after one hour and a half. The other driver noticed that the truck was pulling her into an 18 wheeler that was traveling besides her. The interstate was flat that they were traveling on.
Cab separated from chassis. Cab is attached to chassis at 4 flanges welded to frame. 2 each 10 mm bolts connect cab to each flange. A 71 mm hole exists in flange between the 2 each 13 mm holes for the 10 mm bolts. Only 6 mm of flange steel exists between 13 mm holes and 71 mm hole. Cab separated by tearing 10 mm bolt nuts through the 13 mm holes at the 6 mm dimension.
The Toyota Tundra 2002 truck did NOT deploy driver's side and passenger's side airbags in a collision consisting of frontal and left-sided collision with immobile objects, with frontal/top profound impact from standing tree. The car was up to date on its inspections and maintenance. The breaks, though appropriately checked and tested, would take longer than normal to break the vehicle. The seatbelt, if pulled hard enough, would easily dislodge from buckle, coming undone.
The plastic link member of the rear side window latching pivot failed/broke/fractured when the window was latched closed. This occurred on both the driver and passenger side windows within about 2 months of each other at the end of 2005. It is apparent to me that this is a design defect as it occurred in both latches on a vehicle that is only 4 years old. The pin pressed into the mechanism, through the hole in the plastic link, is a split spring pin with a zig-zag 'tooth" pattern along the slit in the pin.
I was pulling out of my driveway and experienced a sudden and complete loss of power steering and was unable to complete the turn, stopping in the middle of the road. One of the connections on the power steering rack had completely separated due to rust and the power steering fluid was pouring out. If I had been going at higher speeds (such as driving on a highway or taking an off ramp) it would have been extremely dangerous as it would have been hard to impossible to maintain control.