1997 Toyota Tacoma Body & Structure Problems

While driving your 1997 Toyota Tacoma, you noticed the vehicle shaking and discovered that the subframe had fractured in half. You brought it to a Toyota dealer, but they said there was no recall and didn't inspect the vehicle. The problem occurred at approximately 172,000 miles. Repairing this will likely require subframe replacement or welding to restore structural integrity.

During a multi-point inspection at a dealership, mechanics discovered that your vehicle's frame has extensive rust damage and is considered unsafe to drive. You've stopped driving the vehicle as a result. A frame repair or replacement would be necessary to address this structural issue.

Your truck's subframe has developed severe rust, which the owner believes makes the vehicle unsafe to drive. The rust is significant enough that it may affect the structural integrity of your vehicle. Addressing this would likely require replacing or professionally repairing the rusted subframe components.

Your truck's driver's side frame has developed corrosion and holes, discovered during routine maintenance at 105,000 miles. Toyota previously applied a warranty frame undercoating repair in 2011 as part of a recall program for 1995–2005 Tacomas, but the corrosion has returned and the coating is now peeling. Repairing this will likely require professional frame repair or replacement of the corroded section, possibly including re-coating or welding.

Your 1997 Toyota Tacoma has developed rust on the frame that's preventing repairs—a mechanic said the truck couldn't be fixed due to the extent of the rust damage. Toyota's extended frame warranty expired in July 2014, so the manufacturer won't cover it. Addressing frame rust typically requires sandblasting, rust treatment, and repainting or protective coating of the affected frame areas.

Your truck's frame is experiencing rust and structural deterioration, requiring replacement of the rear portion and now repairs to the front end frame as well. This is a significant structural issue that can affect the vehicle's integrity and safety. Frame repair or replacement typically involves welding, cutting out rusted sections, and installing new frame components.

Your truck's frame has developed rust that makes it unsafe to drive. The rust appears to have developed around 160,000 miles. Fixing this will likely require professional inspection and either rust treatment, frame repair, or in severe cases, frame replacement.

Your truck's structural components are experiencing corrosion. This hasn't been diagnosed or repaired yet. You should have a mechanic inspect the affected areas to determine the extent of the rust and what repairs may be needed.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT DISCOVERED THAT THE FRAME OF THE VEHICLE WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 223,000. UPDATED 09/10/15*LJ MA 10/22/2015 UPDATED 10/31/2017*CN

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 157,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE REAR DRIVER AND PASSENGER SIDE FRAMES WERE CORRODED. AS A RESULT, THE FRAMES WERE RUSTING AND FALLING APART. THE DEALER WAS CONTACTED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 195,000.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT UPON INSPECTION, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE FRAME WAS RUSTED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE WAS CONFIRMED. THE DEALER APPLIED AN ANTI-RUST COATING BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 307,700.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE AT AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC SHE WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT THE FRAME WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 135,000.

MY TRUCK WAS BROUGHT IN FOR INSPECTION AFTER THE FRAME ROT RECALL AT PARKWAY TOYOTA AT 50 SYLVAN AVE ENGLEWOOD CLIFFS NJ IN JULY 2008. THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND TOLD US THE FRAME WAS SAFE THOUGH THERE WAS SOME SURFACE RUST. IT WAS DEEMED NO REPAIR NECESSARY. NOW IN APRIL OF 2013 MY TRUCK NEEDED A TUNE UP AND AFTER THAT WAS DONE WE WERE TOLD THEY SPOTTED POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS CORROSION OF THE FRAME. I TOOK THE TRUCK TO A BODY MECHANIC WHO ADVISED ME NOT TO DRIVE THIS CAR BECAUSE THE FRAME IS DANGEROUSLY ROTTED AND IS NOT REPAIRABLE. TOYOTA HAS TOLD US THEY WILL NOT REPAIR OR REPLACE THE TRUCK. I BELIEVE WHEN I ORIGINALLY BROUGHT MY TRUCK IN TO BE INSPECTED FOR RUST THEY MISSED THE EARLY STAGES OF FRAME ROT WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AT THAT TIME AND THEREFORE SHOULD HONOR THE FRAME WARRANTY EXTENSION ISSUED IN THE RECALL. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THERE WAS FAILURE WITH THE STEERING WHEEL AND THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION. THE DEALER FOUND CORROSION ON THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER'S SIDE OF THE FRAME AND THE SPRINGS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE WAS REPORTED TO THE MANUFACTURER, WHO REFUSED TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 88,518.

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER HAVING AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WELD A MUFFLER ONTO HIS VEHICLE, THEY INFORMED HIM THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY RUSTED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT IF YOU PULL ON THE FRAME, IT FELL APART. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND THEY ADVISED HIM THAT THE MANUFACTURER'S RECALL WAS EXPIRED AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE APPROXIMATELY 122,500. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BUMPER WAS RUSTED. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR A WINDSHIELD WIPER REPAIR AND THE DEALER RECOMMENDED THAT THE VEHICLE NO LONGER BE DRIVEN DUE TO THE SEVERITY OF THE RUST. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND STATED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 170,000. UPDATED 01/23/13*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED HE NOTICED PEALING WAFERS OF RUST FLAKING OFF THE FRAME, IN JANUARY 2011. PRIOR TO 2011, HE NOTICED RUST COMING THROUGH THE CHROME OF THE REAR BUMPER WHERE IT CONNECTED TO THE FRAME AND YEARS PRIOR TO THAT HE NOTICED INCREASED RUST TEXTURE ON THE FRAME WHEN HE LOOKED UNDER THE TRUCK BED AT THE REAR TIRES. UPDATED 01/31/13

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE HAVING HIS TIRES REPLACED, AS THE MECHANIC LIFTED THE VEHICLE THE FRAME BENT SEVERELY DUE TO RUST. THE MECHANIC REFUSED TO WORK ON IT AND ADVISED THE CONTACT NOT TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE AS IT APPEARED THE FRAME COULD SPLIT IN HALF. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND STATED THE VEHICLE WAS TOO OLD FOR THEM TO OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 212,000.

MY HUSBAND HAS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. HE BOUGHT IT USED FROM A DEALERSHIP IN 2004. RECENTLY HE SAW THAT THE FRAME UNDERNEATH WAS RUSTED AND ROTTING OUT. SOMEONE TOLD HIM THAT TOYOTA WAS TAKING CARE OF THIS PROBLEM AND THEIR CUSTOMERS BECAUSE IT TURNS OUT THAT THIS IS A MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT IN THIS YEAR, MAKE AND MODEL. WELL, THEY TOLD US TAT WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE THE VEHICLE IN BY FEBRUARY TO RECEIVE THE 15 YEAR EXTENDED WARRANTY. WE WERE NEVER CONTACTED BY TOYOTA, THEY DO NOT HAVE US AS THE CURRENT OWNER AND MY HUSBAND COULD HAVE HAD ANOTHER 5 OR SO YEARS WITH THIS VEHICLE. 15 YEARS SHOULD BE UP IN DECEMBER, BUT THEY SAY THAT THEY ARE GOING BY THE DATE IT WAS SOLD OR SOMETHING. THIS VEHICLE IS PRACTICALLY UNDRIVABLE AND TOYOTA BASICALLY SAID OH, WELL, YOU WERE TOO LATE. I FEEL THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB CONTACTING THEIR CUSTOMERS AND I HAVE FOUND EVIDENCE OF MANY OTHER DISSATISFIED CUSTOMERS ON THE INTERNET WHO ALSO WERE NOT NOTIFIED AND WHO ALSO MISSED THE DEADLINE. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS NOT RIGHT, AND IF IT IS A MANUFACTURER DEFECT IT SHOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF REGARDLESS OF WEATHER WE BROUGHT IT IN 9 MONTHS AGO OR TODAY. THE TOYOTA REPRESENTATIVE SAID THAT THERE WAS NO LEEWAY IN THIS AND THAT THERE WAS NO ELSE I COULD TAKE THIS ISSUE UP WITH. I AM ASKING FOR YOUR HELP IN THIS MATTER. *TR

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA. WHILE PARKED, THE CONTACT NOTICED SEVERE CORROSION ON THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE FRAME WAS SEVERELY CORRODED AND THERE WERE HOLES IN THE CROSS MEMBER. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE FRAME WOULD HAVE TO BE REBUILT. THERE WAS A VOLUNTARY RECALL ISSUED BY THE MANUFACTURER FOR THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND STATED THAT THE RECALL HAD EXPIRED TWO MONTHS PRIOR. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 212,000.

FOUND OUT I HAVE A WHOLE IN THE BODY FRAME. *TT

I AM THE OWNER OF A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA 4X4. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT TOYOTA HAS AN INSPECTION AND REPAIR PROGRAM FOR 1995 TO 2000 TACOMAS. I HAVE REQUESTED AN INSPECTION OF MY VEHICLE. THEY HAVE NOT GIVEN ME ANY ANSWER TO MY REQUEST. THEIR ATTITUDE IS THAT RUST IS NOT AN ISSUE IN CALIFORNIA. THEY THINK THAT RUST STOPS AT THE BORDER. ALL THAT I ASKED FOR WAS A SIMPLE INSPECTION SO THAT RUST THRU WARRANTY CAN BE APPLIED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP. *TR

THIS CONCERNS THE TOYOTA RUSTY FRAME PROBLEM IN TACOMAS. MY 1997 TACOMA IS BECOMING DANGEROUS BECAUSE OF THE FRAME BUT TOYOTA REFUSES ANY HELP BECAUSE OF A RECONSTRUCTED TITLE WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RUSTY FRAME PROBLEM. AS A TAXPAYER I WOULD LIKE TO SEE TOYOTA ADDRESS THIS AT THE CURRENT CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS. TOYOTA IS BASICALLY USING A LEGAL LOOPHOLE TO LEAVE DANGEROUS VEHICLES ON THE ROAD. *TR

FRAME RUST HOLES EXCESSIVE SWISS CHEESE LOOK. *TR

I OWN A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA THAT SHOULD FALL INTO THEIR RUSTY FRAME RECALL BUT WAS TOLD IT DIDN'T QUALIFY BECAUSE OF A REBUILT TITLE. THE TRUCK HAS BEEN ON THE ROAD FOR APPROXIMATELY 6 YEARS SINCE THE REBUILD. THE FRAME IS VERY RUSTY AND I'VE HAD TO HAVE IT WELDED. IT SEEMS TO ME THE FRAME RUST HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THE TRUCK WAS IN AN ACCIDENT AND THE RECALL SHOULD BE IN EFFECT, PROBABLY WITH A LOWER REIMBURSEMENT DUE TO THE SALVAGE TITLE. IF THE POINT IS TO GET UNSAFE VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD, A RUSTY FRAME IS A RUSTY FRAME WHETHER THE TRUCK HAS BEEN REBUILT OR NOT. IT'S ACTUALLY A VERY NICE TRUCK EXCEPT FOR THE FRAME. *TR

I HAVE A 97 TACOMA EXTENDED CAB. AT ABOUT 30K MILES, THE TRUCK'S BLACK PAINT STARTED TO CRACK UNDER THE CLEARCOAT. I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY A TOYOTA APPROVED BODYSHOP THAT IS WAS CALLED "CROW'S FEET". THE BODYSHOP SAID THAT IT WAS NOTHING THAT I COULD HAVE DONE, THAT IT WAS A DEFECT FROM THE FACTORY. I THEN TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE DEALER WHERE I GOT IT FROM, AND THEY PROLONGED DEALING WITH THE ISSUE UNTIL THE TRUCK RAN OUT OF WARRANTY. I HAVE ABOUT 134K NOW ON THE TRUCK, AND IT ALSO HAS A BAD VALVE TICK THAT FROM WHAT I READ ON THE INTERNET SEEMS NOT UNCOMMON FOR THIS ENGINE. I KNOW THAT SOME TIME HAS PAST, BUT I JUST FOUND THIS SITE. I THINK THAT SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT THE WAY THIS COMPANY TREATS THEIR CUSTOMERS. THIS TRUCK WAS NOT CHEAP, EVEN FOR THE WINTER OF 1998. *TR

THIS COMPLAINT IS REGARDING PROBLEMS I HAVE HAD WITH MY 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA AND WITH TOYOTA HEADQUARTERS LIVING UP TO THEIR RECALL OF 1995-2000 TACOMA'S WITH FRAME RUST/FAILURE. ON APRIL 25, 2008 I PURCHASED A USED 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA FROM A USED CAR DEALER FOR $3200. ON OR ABOUT OCTOBER 15TH, 2008 I EXPERIENCED A TOTAL FAILURE OF THE PASSENGERS SIDE BALL JOINT CAUSING ME TO LOSE CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND RUNNING OFF ONTO THE MEDIAN. WHEN GETTING THE VEHICLE REPAIRED, THE SERVICE MAN TOLD THAT MY FRAME LOOKED BAD AND THAT I SHOULD TAKE IT TO A TOYOTA DEALER TO GET IT CHECKED FOR FRAME RUST. HE TOLD ME THAT TOYOTA WAS EITHER FIXING OR BUYING BACK THE TRUCKS WITH BAD FRAMES. ON OR ABOUT OCTOBER 22, 2008 I TOOK MY 1997 TACOMA TO BRAD HUGHES TOYOTA IN PRESTONSBURG KY FOR AN EVALUATION OF THE FRAME. THE DEALER CONFIRMED THAT MY TRUCK DID INDEED HAVE A BAD FRAME AND THAT TOYOTA WOULD CONTACT ME. THEY SAID THAT I COULD EXPECT TO RECEIVE 150% OF KELLEY BLUE BOOK VALUE AND THAT I WOULD BE CONTACTED WITHIN 2 WEEKS WITH AN OFFER ON MY TRUCK. ON NOVEMBER 20, 2008 I RECEIVED A CALL FROM CHARLES ZACHARY OF TOYOTA HEADQUARTERS, PHONE NUMBER 1-800-331-4331. MR ZACHARY OFFERED ME $1500 (KBB BLUE BOOK TRADE IN VALUE), NOT 150% AS PROMISED IN THE LETTER THAT TOYOTA PROMISED IN THE RECALL LETTER. ALTHOUGH I AM WORRIED ABOUT THE BAD FRAME, I HAD TO DECLINE THE OFFER. I CAN'T AFFORD TO LOSE $2700 ON A TRUCK I PURCHASED EARLIER THIS YEAR. MR ZACHARY'S REASON FOR OFFERING SO LITTLE WAS THAT I BOUGHT THE TRUCK AFTER MARCH, WHEN THE LETTERS WENT OUT. AND THAT THE DEALER THAT I BOUGHT THE TRUCK WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SELLING ME A TRUCK WITH A BAD FRAME. TOYOTA IS PUTTING LIVES IN DANGER BY REFUSING TO LIVE UP TO THEIR PROMISE OF BUYING BACK THE VEHICLES THAT HAVE BAD FRAMES. THE SERVICE DEPT AT THE TOYOTA DEALER WHERE I TOOK MY TRUCK FOR INSPECTION SAID THAT I WAS GETTING A RAW DEAL FROM TOYOTA. THEY SAID THAT THEY HAD NEVER HEARD OF THIS HAPPENING BEFORE. I AM AFRAID TO DRIVE IT. *TR

I PURCHASED MY 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA IN 2003. ALTHOUGH THIS TRUCK WAS IN AN ACCIDENT IT WAS COMPLETELY RESTORED, INSPECTED AND ISSUED A PENNSYLVANIA RECONSTRUCTED TITLE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE FRAME WAS NOT DAMAGED IN THE ACCIDENT. IN LATE, MARCH OF 2008 I HEARD ABOUT THE FRAME PROBLEM AND TOOK THIS TRUCK TO ALLEGHENY TOYOTA, THE LOCAL DEALER, FOR AN INSPECTION OF THE FRAME. THE FRAME WAS CHECKED FOR CORROSION AND I WAS NOT PERMITTED TO TAKE IT OFF THE LOT AS IT WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. ON APRIL 9TH, I RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE TOYOTA COMPANY TELLING ME THAT THE CAR DIDN'T QUALIFY FOR THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM BECAUSE OF THE RECONSTRUCTED TITLE. KNOWING THE FRAME WAS UNSAFE I WAS TOLD TO PICK UP THE TRUCK AND UNTIL THE FRAME IS REPAIRED IT IS NOT ROAD WORTHY. MY COMPLAINT IS THAT TOYOTA HAS FULL KNOWLEDGE THAT THE FRAME IS FAULTY DUE TO EXCESSIVE RUST CORROSION BUT REFUSES TO COVER THE VEHICLE SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE RECONSTRUCTED TITLE. IF IT WEREN'T FOR THE RUSTED FRAME THIS TRUCK WOULD STILL BE IN SERVICE. AT THIS POINT I'M AFRAID TO DRIVE IT AND DON'T BELIEVE I SHOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR A REPAIR TO A PROBLEM THAT TOYOTA ADMITS TO KNOWING BUT ARE SELECTIVELY TRYING TO AVOID FOR THIS VEHICLE. THE RECONSTRUCTED TITLE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EXCESSIVE RUST CORROSION OF THE FRAME AND I WOULD EXPECT THEM TO COVER THIS VEHICLE UNDER THE CUSTOMER SUPPORT PROGRAM. *TR

1997 TOYOTA TACOMA PICK UP TRUCK WAS ON A LIFT FOR SERVICE. THE FRAME RAILS WERE ROTTED DUE TO RUST PROBLEMS ACKNOWLEDGED BY TOYOTA. THE FRAME BROKE IN HALF AND THE BED OF THE TRUCK REACHED THE FLOOR WHILE THE TRUCK WAS SUSPENDED ON THE LIFT. THE TRUCK WAS UNSAFE AND HAD TO BE TAKEN OUT OF SERVICE AT THAT TIME. I HAVE CONTACTED TOYOTA AND AM AWAITING THEIR RESPONSE. I NEED TO KNOW WHAT RECOURSE I HAVE AS I WOULD STILL HAVE THE TRUCK ON THE ROAD IF IT WAS NOT FOR THE RUST PROBLEM. *TR

1997 TOYOTA TACOMA EXTENDED CAB V6 4WD I HAD MY TRUCK IN MY LOCAL TOYOTA DEALERSHIP FOR NEW PLUGS AND WIRES AND A FAULTY INJECTOR. THE SERVICE MANAGER CALLED AND SAID THAT WHEN THEY HOISTED THE TRUCK UP ON THE LIFT THEY DISCOVERED SEVERE RUSTING ON THE FRAME. THE WORST WAS JUST FORWARD OF THE REAR LEAF SPRINGS. THEY SAID IT WAS SO BAD THAT THEY WONDERED IF I WANTED TO PROCEED WITH THE SERVICING. I COULDN'T BELIEVE IT! I THOUGHT, THE TRUCK IS ONLY 10YEARS OLD, HOW BAD CAN IT BE. I WENT UP AND TOOK A LOOK AND THE RUST HAD ACTUALLY EATEN THROUGH THE STEEL. I COULD PUSH MY FINGER THROUGH IT. UNBELIEVABLE! THE BODY OF THE TRUCK IS IN GREAT CONDITION AND UP UNTIL NOW IT HAS BEEN VERY GOOD MECHANICALLY. IT IS VERY UNNERVING. I'M AFRAID IT WILL NOT PASS INSPECTION AND I'LL HAVE TO CLAIM A TOTAL LOSS. WHAT RECOURSE DO I HAVE? THANKS. *TR

THE FRAME OF MY 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA PICK UP IS ROTTED THROUGH IN SEVERAL PLACES MAKING IT POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS TO DRIVE. *TR

RECENTLY NOTICED A KNOCKING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF MY TRUCK. UPON INSPECTION, I NOTICED THAT THE FRAME, JUST BEFORE THE LEAF SPRINGS, HAS COMPLETELY RUSTED AND CRACKED. I HAVE YET TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CORRECT THE FAILURE. I FEAR THE TRUCK IS NOW UNSAFE TO DRIVE. *TR

I HAVE A 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA, I DISCOVERED FRAME ROT IN FRONT OF THE REAR SPRING SHACKLES. THERE WAS STILL UNDERBODY PAINT ON THE FRAME IN THAT AREA WHICH WHEN REMOVED REVEALED THE SERIOUS CORROSION OF THE FRAME RAIL. AFTER FURTHER INSPECTION I FOUND SEVERE CORROSION THROUGHOUT THE FRAME. THE BUMPER BRACKETS ARE BARELY HOLDING UP THE BUMPER. *TR

HI, I HAVE A 1997 TACOMA. WITHIN THE PAST YEAR THE FRAME HAS RUSTED TO THE POINT THAT I CAN PUT A SCREWDRIVER THRU IT AND IT CANT BE REPAIRED. I FEAR I'LL HAVE TO JUNK THE VEHICLE. WHAT TYPE OF METAL DID THEY USE? TOYOTA OR CONSUMER AFFAIRS SHOULD LOOK INTO THIS. THE REST OF THE TRUCK IS FINE. IF ANYONE KNOW WHO CAN HELP PLEASE LET ME KNOW. BUMMED! *TR

BOTH FRAME RAILS ROTTED OUT, MAKING TRUCK UNSAFE TO DRIVE. *TR

I NOTICED BUBBLING OF THE COATING APPLIED TO THE FRAME BY THE MANUFACTURER AND WHEN I POKED AT IT THE METAL UNDERNEATH FELL AWAY. I DID A GOOGLE SEARCH ON CORRODED TACOMA FRAMES AND DISCOVERED I WAS NOT ALONE AND IF OTHER OWNERS HAVE COMPLAINED I WANTED TO ADD MINE. THE FRAME IS CORRODED IN NUMEROUS LOCATIONS AND WITHOUT REPAIR COULD FAIL IN THE EVENT OF A COLLISION. I AM GOING TO HAVE THE FRAME REPAIRED BY HAVING NEW METAL WELDED IN. I REALIZE THE VEHICLE IS TEN YEARS OLD AND MOST OF THE COMPLAINTS I FOUND ONLINE REFERENCED THE NINETY-NINE MODEL YEAR. I SHOULD ADD UNTIL TWO YEARS AGO I HAD A 1967 DATSUN 1300 PICKUP AND ITS FRAME WAS INTACT. THIS IS NOT NORMAL CORROSION! *TR

THE CHASSIS (FRAME) ROTTED AND CRACKED JUST BEHIND BOTH THE DRIVER'S DOOR AND THE PASSENGER'S DOOR. THE TRUCK IS NOW UNSAFE TO USE BECAUSE IT MIGHT BREAK ( IN TWO. THE FRAME IS THE MAIN SUPPORTING STRUCTURE OF THE VEHICLE. I BELIEVE THIS IS AN ENGINEERING DEFECT.*AK

NO INCIDENT -- VEHICLE WOULD NOT PASS PA INSPECTION -- NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. REAR FRAME IS COMPLETELY ROTTED OUT WITH RUST. *TR

I PURCHASED A USED 1997 TOYOTA TACOMA ON 3/15/07 WITH A ROTTED FRAME. FORTUNATELY I HAD ANOTHER GARAGE CHECK OUT THE TRUCK WITHIN 30 DAYS OF PURCHASE WHILE WARRANTY FROM DEALER WAS STILL IN EFFECT. I WANT TO REPORT THIS SO THAT THIS VEHICLE WILL NOT BE PURCHASED BY ANYONE. IT WAS NOT NY STATE ROAD WORTHY, PER STATE INSPECTION CRITERIA. THE VEHICLE WAS GREEN, 4WD, EXTEND CAB. PURCHASED IN ROCHESTER, NY. I WAS ABLE TO RETURN IT FOR A FULL REFUND, BUT WANT TO BE SURE THE CROOKED DEALER WAS NOT RESELLING THE VEHICLE. HE ALSO HAD ANOTHER BLACK TACOMA, 1998 WITH THE SAME PROBLEM, BOUGHT BOTH OF THEM AT AUCTION. *JB

SUNVISORS THAT ARWE ON DRIVER SIDE AND PASSENGER SIDE WILL NOT COME DOWN. CONSUMER'S NOT ABLE TO PROTECT VISION IN PRESENT OF A HIGH BEAM OF LIGHT. VISORS ARE STIFF, AND FABRIC ONE OF THEM IS TORN.*AK

WHILE DRIVING BOLTS BROKE OFF THE DRIVESHAFT SEPARATING REAR AXLE AND HITTING THE GAS TANK. *AK ONE OF THE TWO BOLTS HOLDING THE DRIVE SHAFT FELL OUT CAUSING THE DRIVE SHAFT TO FALL AND RESULTING IN REAR AXLE SEPARATION AND RIPING A HOLE IN THE GAS TANK. *YH