I read through a big chunk of this thread and decided to do some checking so that you guys have some more statistics.
My vehicle is an '07 FJ and has about 41K on it, has lots of mods, and has seen a lot of offroad use. No jumping at all, and no heavy hits. I drive like a grandpa offroad. I do not have any of the aforementioned bulges or rips. Having said that, I can't say that I'm not very concerned about it. At the very least it shows that the crumple zone in that particular area was made too weak. And that is "at the very least". Clearly there is likely an underlying cause since it appears that some have had it replaced 2 or 3 times.
According to the poll on this thread there are 325 vehicles with the body rip/fender bulge issue. Today (5/10/09) I searched the entire NHTSA database, for all year models of the Toyota FJ Cruiser, under Structure, Structure Frame and Members - Underbody Shields, Structure Body, and Structure Frame and Members. According to the NHTSA search there are:
53, 2007 FJ's reporting these problems OR concerned about these problems
and
10, 2008 FJ's reporting these problems OR concerned about these problems
Total: 63
In addition to the above, the NHTSA Office of Defects Investigations does not show a single FJ Cruiser investigation having ever been opened. They do show these for some other Toyota vehicles, but not the FJ Cruiser.
That's 63 FJ's that have been reported with the problem or concerned about the problem with the NHTSA.
According to the poll on this thread there are 262 FJ's that have the problem (not counting the one's that are concerned about the problem, such as myself), which have not reported the problem to the NHTSA.
I've picked and chosen my battles when it comes to activism, but the one thing that everyone who is either concerned about this problem, or is the recipient of a body rip or fender bulge, has to understand, is that if you don't say anything or aren't willing to file a complaint, nothing is going to change.
As for myself, I am:
1) Concerned that the vehicle that was built and marketed on the coattails of the heavy duty Landcruiser name, was not manufactured to withstand offroading like it's predecessors,
2) That Toyota has clearly chosen to shove this problem under the rug and force those FJ owners who may have had a warranty into arbitration (which also does not appear to be working many times),
3) That in the coming days, months or years, my vehicle will likely encounter the bulges or rips noted in this thread. Only to have to go through the same horror of arbitration and frustration.
That Toyota, and the NHTSA, have also ignored this issue is even more concerning. Perhaps they are waiting for one of us to get into a major traffic collision and sustain significant front-end damage, so that they can test the crumple zone defect, on a recessionary budget.
If that's the case, and it turns out that this defect is to blame, lets just hope that someone doesn't lose their life or lives. It doesn't appear that this has happened yet, but what if it did. Put this into perspective, this is something that should concern all FJ Cruiser owners. This problem is out there, and you or I could be next.
The questions you have to ask yourself are these:
Do you want to put your head in the sand and pretend as though this is not happening?
Or do you want to wait until it happens to you before you do something about it?
If you're concerned about this and you want to have your FJ for years to come, ACT!! Do something before you become a victim.
Now...what can I do to help those of you with this problem? I am one person and may not be able to do much, but maybe there will be more volunteers...
Have you tried to take this to any local news stations or newspaper outlets to have them follow your story? Has anyone spoken with anyone over the phone with the NHTSA to see why they have not opened up an investigation on this (their website does state, "We do not have to receive a specific number of complaints before we look into a problem. We gather all available information on a problem. Your complaint is important to us.")? Has anyone tried to contact a consumer advocate to get some media attention?
I feel your generally on target. I am one of those 53 who filed a formal complaint.
I think a catastrophic failure could be possible, but after 100-k + miles...
Still, I was hoping this would be my 'retirement farm use vehicle'
Duke, the moment my FJ shows a sign of bulge or buckle, trust me, I'll raise hell...
In the meanwhile - here's a little sketch to help everybody understand where I'm coming from as far as the REAL problem that needs to be demanded to be fixed....
if the inner fender is EVER fixed to where it doesnt buckle any more, then trust me, your crumple zone is no longer functional.
As it stands right now, it is doing exactly what it was designed to do!! There is a force applied, it is designed to give way. The problem is the force is supposed to happen under accident impact, not normal driving!!
If people are pacified with (partial) inner fender replacements.... rest assured the real problem is still lurking to rear its ugly head.
The motor mount and inner fender failures are all the result of one problem - a weak frame once it comes out past the rigid cab unibody!
Since there are some who have the rip/bulge problem and others dont, I'm beginning to wonder if there is a batch variation in the frame or frame steel? Are the frames tagged with any date of manufacture identifying info?
I know with QS9000 anything and everything is tracked!
Since there are some who have the rip/bulge problem and others dont, I'm beginning to wonder if there is a batch variation in the frame or frame steel? Are the frames tagged with any date of manufacture identifying info?
I know with QS9000 anything and everything is tracked!
I appreciate that..... but i hope you arent serious?
In another thread there was a discussion about a drive train component failure and the component in question has an individual tag with a date of manufacture.
Frames are made totally independent from the vehicle, very possibly even at an altogether different plant - there has to be tracking information prior to being united with the unibody.... It would be a nightmare if the VIN number was specific to a frame prior to that assembly phase.
If you ever worked with automotive or QS-9000 you would really understand the full traceability I'm referring to.....
I appreciate that..... but i hope you arent serious?
In another thread there was a discussion about a drive train component failure and the component in question has an individual tag with a date of manufacture.
Frames are made totally independent from the vehicle, very possibly even at an altogether different plant - there has to be tracking information prior to being united with the unibody.... It would be a nightmare if the VIN number was specific to a frame prior to that assembly phase.
If you ever worked with automotive or QS-9000 you would really understand the full traceability I'm referring to.....
I am dead serious. Yes, automatic tranny may have its own tag. But, on frames, the only "serialized" number that i can see is the VIN#. This applies to all frames from all manufacturers. Maybe i am wrong....
The rear axle has its own tag also....
All I am saying is that SOMEWHERE there has to be full traceability... If in the production log the origin/tracking number of the frame is logged and tied with the VIN, I can believe that.
But to put it in perspective - if a frame fails for any other reason than an accident - there has to be a record tracing its origins all the way to the steel mill. Thats the foundation of QS, if it isnt present, you don't get certified!
When we produced the electronic cam/crank position sensors for Ford & Chrysler we had to log each coil of plated material in the production log. Each coil had its lot number from the plater and the mill. Each strip of 250 sensor components had a tag, as we changed coils the starting and ending strip number that came from that coil was logged stating the starting and ending press stroke of that coil, each box with 3000 pcs had a ID tag including the running inspection results..... and we were running 600 strokes/min!
I am just skimming the surface here - the point being that IF a cam sensor failed in a vehicle, the manufacturer could literally trace it back to within 250 hits of the punch press.... out of MILLIONS of vehicles made. That means traceability within fractions of a second of real time production.
The Japanese Automotive industry initiated all the inspection/traceability/quality control programs that are used around the world... I cannot believe they can't trace a frame on an FJ!
I noticed a slight bulge on the driver side at 22,000 miles. I reported it to both of the dealers who have serviced my truck. The bulge stayed that way until just recently, Now I am at 59,000 miles and a hairline crack has appeared. I showed it to one of the Dealer's service guys and he said he'd "send it up the line". He was told that since it is past 36K my extended warranty does not cover body work. He suggested that he could have his body guys run a weld down the crack and "fix it" that way.
I haven't made an issue yet. I guess my next step is NHTSA....
I wonder if I have a leg to stand on since I reported it ( I made sure it was logged in the computer) while it was still under 36K ?
My rig is pretty modified, Lift, Big Tires, Front and Rear bumpers... but only moderate wheeling and definitely no jumps.
__________________
BLACK PEARL
TRD SE, OME 3" LIFT, TOYOTA DVD, ARB FRONT BUMPERW/ WARN 8K WINCH, DEMELLO REAR BUMPER, MAN-A-FRE SKID PLATES, OMF BEADLOCKS
The rear axle has its own tag also....
All I am saying is that SOMEWHERE there has to be full traceability... If in the production log the origin/tracking number of the frame is logged and tied with the VIN, I can believe that.
But to put it in perspective - if a frame fails for any other reason than an accident - there has to be a record tracing its origins all the way to the steel mill. Thats the foundation of QS, if it isnt present, you don't get certified!
When we produced the electronic cam/crank position sensors for Ford & Chrysler we had to log each coil of plated material in the production log. Each coil had its lot number from the plater and the mill. Each strip of 250 sensor components had a tag, as we changed coils the starting and ending strip number that came from that coil was logged stating the starting and ending press stroke of that coil, each box with 3000 pcs had a ID tag including the running inspection results..... and we were running 600 strokes/min!
I am just skimming the surface here - the point being that IF a cam sensor failed in a vehicle, the manufacturer could literally trace it back to within 250 hits of the punch press.... out of MILLIONS of vehicles made. That means traceability within fractions of a second of real time production.
The Japanese Automotive industry initiated all the inspection/traceability/quality control programs that are used around the world... I cannot believe they can't trace a frame on an FJ!
You know what you are talking about 100%, and I agree, Toy CAN look that info up in seconds, and you know it. They gave us this level of quality control (for cars), and it does work well.
Linear Mode
