2001 Toyota Tundra
The Verdict
The 2001 Toyota Tundra has 419 owner complaints filed with NHTSA. The most reported issues are body (240 complaints) and brakes (111 complaints). With a Klunk Score of 33/100, it earns a "Check Engine" rating. If you're shopping for a Toyota Tundra, consider the 2021 model year which has 94% fewer complaints.
Safe Bet
The 2021 has 94% fewer complaints
View the 2021 Toyota Tundra dashboard →
Klunk Score: Check Engine
More complaints than most vehicles. Known issues exist — budget for potential repairs.
How is this calculated?
The Klunk Score ranks this vehicle year against all others in our database based on total owner complaints filed with NHTSA. 100 = fewest complaints (top tier), 0 = most complained-about. Scores above 60 are better than average; below 40 means more problems than most.
Get notified if a recall hits this car.
We email you when NHTSA issues a new recall on the 2001 Toyota Tundra. No spam, no marketing.
Under the Hood
Each number is a complaint. Darker = bigger problem.
| Year | Body | Brakes | Electrical | Engine | Transmission |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 604 | 266 | 35 | 76 | 47 |
| 2001 | 240 | 111 | 15 | 25 | 28 |
| 2002 | 277 | 113 | 36 | 33 | 51 |
| 2003 | 210 | 37 | 89 | 36 | 38 |
| 2004 | 326 | 24 | 56 | 19 | 40 |
| 2005 | 176 | 37 | 95 | 34 | 32 |
| 2006 | 313 | 28 | 143 | 39 | 20 |
| 2007 | 183 | 27 | 27 | 85 | 65 |
| 2008 | 163 | 23 | 33 | 70 | 36 |
| 2009 | 14 | 1 | 6 | 9 | 8 |
| 2011 | 52 | 7 | 17 | 45 | 13 |
| 2012 | 40 | 7 | 20 | 78 | 9 |
| 2013 | 31 | 4 | 15 | 34 | 0 |
| 2014 | 45 | 5 | 24 | 13 | 5 |
| 2015 | 18 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 1 |
| 2016 | 40 | 32 | 33 | 9 | 4 |
| 2017 | 14 | 13 | 27 | 20 | 4 |
| 2018 | 29 | 22 | 19 | 28 | 1 |
| 2019 | 25 | 9 | 15 | 21 | 1 |
| 2020 | 22 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 1 |
| 2021 | 15 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 1 |
| 2022 | 79 | 26 | 17 | 234 | 45 |
| 2023 | 71 | 12 | 17 | 234 | 32 |
| 2024 | 53 | 13 | 22 | 173 | 44 |
| 2025 | 39 | 5 | 13 | 57 | 12 |
By Category
By Severity
Worst Problems
Compare Against
See how the 2001 Toyota Tundra stacks up against rivals.
Complaints
There is an unresolved body corrosion recall that has not been addressed in over a year, despite receiving an invoice from the dealership. I will attach the invoice that lists all the parts ordered for the remedy of this recall.
On September 4, 2025, I brought my 2001 Toyota Tundra to Midas at 5325 Olde Wadsworth Blvd, Arvada, CO 80002 for an oil change and inspection. Midas advertises a “Closer Look Vehicle Check,” which includes checking steering, suspension, and wheels. Their inspection report marked the steering system as “OK” and only noted mild shock wear. Less than a month later, while exiting the highway, the lower ball joint failed completely, causing the front suspension and wheel to detach. I immediately lost steering control. Fortunately, this occurred at low speed; had it happened moments earlier on the highway, it could have caused a major collision or fatalities. The failed component (lower ball joint and related suspension parts) is still available for inspection. An independent mechanic later confirmed that the joint was severely worn and the failure appeared to be due to long-term deterioration that should have been detected during Midas’s inspection. No warning lights or indicators appeared before the failure. The incident endangered my life, my passengers’ safety, and other drivers on the road. The business has refused to take responsibility or cover repair costs, which currently total over $2,400, despite their advertised inspection and guarantee. This raises serious concerns that Midas and potentially other service locations may be failing to properly inspect critical suspension components, which poses a major public safety hazard.
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle started making a metallic cracking sound, and the steering wheel was pulling to the right. The dealer was contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 285,643.
Toyota Corporate is refusing to acknowledge my Tundra's eligibility for remedy under a safety recall and campaign. My Tundra is experiencing the failure mode outlined in the safety recall 90M and extended safety campaign Tundra BXD. The spare tire crossmember of the frame is almost entirely rotted through with rust and is barely connected at this point. My Tundra's VIN number falls within the VIN range table's indicated in the recall and campaign documentation, and meets the criteria of currently being registered in an eligible cold-climate state. By all accounts, it should be eligible to receive remedy under this campaign. However Toyota has on multiple occasions just told me that "Safety Recalls are Service Campaigns are VIN-specific" and that VIN does not report as eligible. I've provided photo evidence of the issue and the documentation, yet Toyota refuses to acknowledge my truck's eligibility for repair under this program. Safety recalls are to prevent safety incidents from occurring due to known design or manufacturing defects. My truck is experiencing a known and documented defect. Toyota has a process for fixing it. However they're refusing to fix mine because of a mis-match in the VIN database. Safety issues don't affect "VIN numbers", they affect vehicles, the people who drive them, and others out on the roads.
I feel vehicle's frame is not safe... starting making a metal cracking noise due excessive corrosion .. rear frame portion is been treated under recall but the front looks really bad we can't even change suspension parts due the possibility on getting a serious frame problems. I keeping my truck with low mileage and not planning on selling it, very clean inside. I understand frame replacement it is an option if the frame is really bad and mine is getting onto that stage...
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated while driving approximately 70 MPH, the steering wheel suddenly pulled to the right and front driver's side wheel detached from underneath the vehicle, causing the vehicle to skid across the highway before coming to a stop. The vehicle was later towed to the local dealer who diagnosed the vehicle and determined that the front driver's side ball joint had failed and needed to be replaced. The contact stated that there was damage to the subframe of the vehicle caused by the detached wheel. The vehicle was not yet repaired. The local dealer and manufacturer were notified of the failure, but no assistance was offered. The failure mileage was 233,500.
Driving straight at 30mph and wheel came off causing near deadly collision. Upon inspection it is evident that the wheel separated from its ball joints. Further research strongly suggests that this is a known defect of this year/make/model, even though the recall was issued only for the subsequent years vehicle. This is a potentially deadly design flaw and not an isolated manufacturing defect as Toyota claims.
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that the vehicle was taken to an inspection station where it was reported that the vehicle could not be lifted due to extensive rust located behind the cab on the sub frame. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 216,000.
I brought my 2001 Toyota Tundra into my dealer today, and he advised me that the frame of the Toyota is very rusted and cracking and close to completely breaking. He said Toyota issued a recall on this, but it is no longer in effect. I have learned this is a common issue with the 2000-2003 Toyota Tundras. Please advise!
Heavy rust on frame as well as rusting out under support. Causing the bed of the truck to rub on the Cab. Causing the frame to start to bend, I use his vehicle. To transport my special needs child. I’m wondering why, my vehicle? Isn’t covered under the recall ???
The car got a lot of rust all over the frame and notice is been a recall on this model and year
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that she noticed an unknown part hanging from the vehicle. The contact's son noticed that the cross member had fractured causing the fuel tank to detach. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer where it was diagnosed that the sub frame needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was contacted but no assistance was provided. The failure mileage was approximately 227,780. The contact stated repairs would cost $3800 and up but the contact can not afford the repairs. The contact is requesting further assistance on this matter as she was unable to find resolution.
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated while driving at various speeds on a bumpy road surface, the vehicle made abnormal sounds and the rear suspension shuddered and shifted to one side. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, where the front and rear shocks were replaced; however, the failure persisted. The vehicle was taken back to the independent mechanic, where it was diagnosed that the subframe was severely corroded and had holes. The vehicle was not repaired. The dealer was not notified of the failure. The manufacturer was notified of the failure, but no assistance was provided. The contact stated that the vehicle was previously repaired under NHTSA Campaign Number: 09V444000 (Structure) however, the dealer had only sprayed a corrosion protection compound on the subframe. The failure mileage was approximately 187,149.
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that upon taking the vehicle to an independent mechanic for servicing, he was informed that the chassis was severely corroded. The independent mechanic diagnosed that the undercarriage needed to be replaced and referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact stated that the failure was related to an unknown recall. The dealer and the manufacturer were not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 148,000.
Lower ball joints(right and left hand sides) very serious safety concern. this is my family vehicle and has been with the family since 2005-06. members from the tundra forums are concerned about this issue with toyota tundras. yes toyota has a recall for their 02-06 tundras and tacomas and sequioas of the same year. my car doesn't qualify for the recall. this recall is not covered for the 2000-2001 tundras,tacomas, and sequioas. dont understand why. they all have the same part numbers. i have seen and witnessed the aftermath of this failed ball joint. some are fatal and some leave you stranded. we need to have this deadly issue resolved with toyota. help me and help all other toyota tundra owners who are in this same situation as I am. thank you
My frame is broke . Right at the passenger front tire
The contact owns a 2001 Toyota Tundra. The contact stated that the sub frame of the vehicle was severely corroded. The dealer was notified of the failure and advised the contact that they could not repair the vehicle. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and did not provide any assistance. The vehicle was not diagnosed nor repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 115,000.
2001 Tundra (4.7 Engine); frame badly rusted in rear. Told on Aug. 3, 2021 that it would fail the next inspection. I put my VIRIN into the NHTSA site but couldn't find any recalls.
RECENTLY MY MECHANIC BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION FRAME DAMAGE. I WENT FOR AN INSPECTION FROM A LOCAL FRAME SPECIALIST, WHO TOLD ME MY FRAME WAS COMPLETED RUSTED THROUGH. COST FOR REPLACEMENT MATERIALS AND LABOR TOTAL COST 9227.30. TOYOTA EARLY ON IDENTIFIED KNOWN RUST ISSUES WITH THE TUNDRA WITH A RECALL MANY YEARS AGO. AFTER WAITING OVER A YEAR AFTER THE RECALL MY TRUCK WAS UNDERCOATED WITH A BIG ONE YEAR WARRANTY. APPARENTLY WAS UNAFFECTIVE.
LOW MILEAGE, TWO YEAR OLD FRONT TIRES BEGINNING TO SEPARATE AT INNER SIDEWALLS, MAKING VIBRATIONS ABOVE 50+ MPH AND SHAKING VEHICLE SO BAD ALMOST UNDRIVEABLE AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. ALIGNMENT SHOP SAID GET THEM CHECKED. RE-BALANCING TIRES HAD NO EFFECT, MOVED FRONT TIRES TO REAR THEN BED OF TRUCK WOULD VIBRATE AT SPEED. REPLACE THE 2 TIRES IN QUESTION AND PROBLEM RESOLVED. HAD TIRE SHOP LOOK AT THE TIRES AND THEY FOUND TREAD SEPARATION AT INNER SIDEWALLS OF BOTH SUSPECT TIRES. CALLED MANUFACTURED FOR WARRANTY REPLACEMENT OR REFUND AND THEY NEEDED A RMA FORM FILLED OUT BY AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHO SELLS THIS BRAND OF TIRE BEFORE A RETURN COULD BE ACCEPTED. ORIGINAL PURCHASE WAS ONLINE FROM WALMART FOR PICKUP AT LOCAL STORE. WALMART HAD NO RECORD OF THE TIRE SELLER WHO SUPPLIED ONLINE WALMART SALES. MANUFACTURER REFERRED ME TO A 'DISCOUNT TIRE' STORE LOCALLY THAT MANUFACTURER HAD PREVIOUS CONTACT WITH AND DEALT IN THIS BRAND OF TIRE. CONTACTED THE SUGGESTED STORE AND SALESMAN NEEDED TO CONTACT MANUFACTURER FIRST TO KNOW HOW TO PROCEED. AFTER A CALLBACK FROM STORE, SALESMAN TRIED TO DIAGNOSIS THE TIRE PROBLEM OVER THE PHONE WITHOUT ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE TIRES AND SAID TIRES WERE PROBABLY OUT OF ROUND. I HAVE THE TWO TIRES AND STILL PONDERING FOR A SOLUTION.
419 total