Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
What exactly is the Borla and where did you get it? Is it working for you? And where are you finding low sulfer grade fuel.
I love this truck, but the stink is killing me.
Any other recommendations or advice from anyone else with a 2004 V8?
I have purchased gas in 3 states, including at Hess dealerships, so it may just be a matter of time before your vehicle starts have the problem regardless. Mostly, mine was always worse in a lot of stop and go driving. I definitely recommend that you go ahead and ask Toyota to make the fix anyhow. The more people that do this, the more likely that the TSB will become an overall recall and all consumers can benefit without jumping through a thousand hoops.
The smell is from a reaction to material in the catalytic converter.
I beleive that TOYOTA MOTOR COMPANY should pay attention regarding this Sulfor Dioxide Complain. They need to issue a recall for those affected cars.
The sulfur smell is carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide is odorless, the sulfur smell is a detection warning of carbon monoxide inside the vehicle, not outside, where it belongs. I have had the vehicle back to the dealer three more times to fix this problem, to no avail. Following the lemon law procedure, my first arbitration was denied, based soley on a road test. I had used their recommended fuel and it had helped, but not solved, the problem. During arbitration Toyota recommends only BP Amoco gasoline to help with the sulfer smell. They acknowledge that it's a fuel problem. They are asking me to mask the detection smell that warns me of the presence of carbon monoxide inside the vehicle. At the end of arbitration Toyota told me that other manufacturers are experiencing the same problem. The arbitration company's is NCDS (National Center for Dispute Settlement), which is hired by Toyota. Now the office of the Attorney General takes over for a new arbitration hearing. This is a very serious health hazard.......I will keep you posted.
How have you determined that you have CO in your car's interior?
The reason I ask is because that's a pretty startling claim and should therefore have startling evidence.
In summary, today's engines burn so clean that the old carbon monoxide problem (due to incomplete combustion) doesn't usually exist. It's a stink nuisance and would probably be improved if Toyota went back to the side-firing exhaust they used to use. Stink is probably coming from the rear cabin exhausts, so you can often avoid the stink by simply leaving the system on fresh (rather than recirculate) and having the fan on at least the low setting.
If the stink is a problem, get the TSB(s) and keep leaning on your dealer and, by all means, complain to Toyota too. This kind of thing shouldn't be happening, but it's not unique to the 4Runner or to Toyota.
So I am suggesting you drop that one and stick to the obnoxious odor as being very annoying rather than life-threatening.
If you can't tell, I'm NOT a "sky is falling, let's sue everybody" advocate. We have become a country of victims and plaintiffs instead of men, women, and consumers.
How can Toyota blame this problem on gasoline? I have driven 5 different vehicles at work in the last year, and not one of those vehicles has a bad smell problem. Toyota says other manufactures are having the same issues. I would like to know who. Every friend and relative hate to get in our car. They don't have this problem.
What can I use to HELP my situation? Am I just fighting a losing battle?
Someone pointed out that the cabin vent is under the right side of the rear bumper, next to the exhaust. (true. I checked it out). That is why the smell is so intense. A co-worker of mine has a '03 Accord that smells of sulfur whenever he guns it with the windows open. The emission is common in many cars. Volvos from the '80s were plagued this smell. The problem is that the 4runner has a bad vent location.
Also, in driving without the fix for about 18 months, I found that recirculate kept the smell down. I was never one for driving with open windows, so it never bothered me.
The Toyota manual has a warning against running the engine in idle for more than 20 minutes (as in slow traffic). I hope that is not because they are aware of the risk of exhaust coming in through the cabin vent. CO is still produced even with the best CAT. I could see it building up to lethal levels in a cabin. But that is still possible if one has recirculate off while sitting in traffic behind any car.
Lastly, I have been checking to see if my fuel inefficiency has changed. (by calculating at fill ups) It appears to remain the same.
Secondly, although it's a nuisance, the condition DOES NOT meet with any lemon law statutes in ANY state - it is not a "significant impairment of use, safety, or value".
Don't get your hopes up with this arbitration - if it falls in your favor, great.
Your mileage may vary.
The success of the TSB procedure in some cases in encouraging.
If I were a referee and we could drive the car in question and it was actually exhibited a truly sickening odor during the test drive, with me driving, I'd rule in the owner's favor. If it was a case of "Smell that?" "Smell what?" "THAT" "WHAT?",....then maybe not.
Value? OK, let's say 10%. Still not a "significant" impairment - those are strong words and standards to comply with. And mostly, use and safety aren't affected at all, unless the safety issue is pushed by great-acting, overly dramatic Academy Award nominees.
Not to be mean - I wish all these folks the best of luck, and sincerely hope the manufacturer ponies up some money. It's just that it's not happening (monetary or buyback resolution) with other manufacturers, and you'll never get me to testify in an arb or trial that it meets any lemon law criteria.
So I think there is an argument that can be heard regarding the Lemon Law. It really depends on whether the owner can convince anyone that this is persistent, obnoxious and incurable.
And I don't know the answer to that, never having experienced the problem.
Hey, people win lawsuits and claim arbitrations all the time - more power to 'em.
Just don't ask me to testify. I'll step out of this topic, I suppose, since I don't agree with the layman definition of a "defect", a "lemon" and "resolution".
Unfortunately, I deal with the real world and practically-applied meanings of those words, not what a consumer wants them to be.
California has an interesting wrinkle on the Lemon Law:
"Any defect or condition that substantially impairs the use, value or safety of your vehicle under warranty, and that you have tried to have repaired by an authorized dealer, entitles you to seek a refund or replacement under the Lemon Law, even if the manufacturer continues to say it cannot find a problem"
Caifornia also has a "presumtive" clause that throws a bit of extra weight to the consumer, in the same way people are "presumed" innocent until proven guilty by the courts. You the consumer may presume your car is a lemon if you can solidly prove that attempts have been made to fix it and have failed.
Of course, laws vary state to state, I'm not a lawyer and don't want to be, blah blah blah.....
The irony is that the US manufacturers ASSISTED in writing every state's lemon law, as well as the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Improvement Act.
What folks don't understand is that what you, I, or your neighbor considers to be a condition that "substantially impairs the use, value or safety" and what the courts believe to be a condition that "substantially impairs the use, value or safety" are usually two different things.
Consumers try to take this fight on with little or no research or knowledge, or they stop reading when they've read what they wanted to read...not what they needed to read.
Just like people hearing only what they want to hear, same concept.
I recommend counseling and advice from a professional, especially when it doesn't cost anything - most lemon law lawyers (that I've dealt with) work on a contingency basis instead of demanding a retainer.
As for manufacturers assisting in writing regulations, this is the age old problem with solely using regulations to force a change. The lobbyists adhere very closely to the legislative process (often providing much of the information necessary) and end up being partial creators of the regulations. Happens all the time in EPA regs, labor regs, etc.
They sure pulled one on us!
I asked if they had any proof from Shell, Exxon or Mobil to name a few. She expressed that she had spoke with a service tech at the manufacturer and that this was the information he was given.
This is pretty said for a major corporation like Toyota.
I will be receiving an answer next week. I will keep you posted.
By the way, I did take the arbitrator on a test drive and the car smelled bad. I hope he smelled the smell. He was about 80 years old.
I keep preying. BGS
There is a technical service bulletin #EG020-04 issued on June 14, 2004 to address this problem on the model year 2003-04 4Runner with the 2UZ-FE engine. I believe this is just for the V8 engine. I have a copy which I had downloaded after getting an address I think from this forum. Do a search on the "Problems and Solutions" section using keywords " TSB or Technical Service Bulletin and/or sulfer dioxide to see if this web address is mentioned. This TSB is also for sale on the Toyota web site by subscription I believe.
I do however have to pay a mileage offset. I still lose about $5000.00 in the end, but I will get most of my money baack. Toyota must pay all taxes and registration back as well.
Arbitration in my case was worth the wait. Now I can go and buy a vehicle that doesn't stink.
The only ground that Toyota would stand on was that due to the lack of poor quality crude in our world market, there is more sulphur in our gas, thus your vehicle smells.
Good thing that you used the value argument and the analogy of two identical cars, one smelling and one not. That was a smart way to argue. The "health" argument doesn't cut it IMO.
It appears is affects the v6 (1GR-FE) models. Check the VIN number's to see if you are affected.
hope this helps
It appears is affects the v6 (1GR-FE) models. Check the VIN number's to see if you are affected.
hope this helps
I read your message and went to the provided link concerning the 2003-2004 "Excessive Sulfur Dioxide" issue. I recently bought a 2005 SR5 V6 and really like the vehicle. A week or two later after I got it, while the vehicle was under load on the highway going up a hill, I noticed a similar sulfur dioxide smell coming from my 4Runner. I took it into the dealer and they checked it out. I also made them aware that I knew of this problem with the 2003 and 2004 models. They were polite and checked the computer/fuel settings, but said that there was no service bulletin on the 2005 yet. They said that they couldn't replace the catalytic converter at that time. It sounds like this issue is carrying over to the 2005 model, but I have no recourse at this time to correct it. Do you have any comment/suggestion? It's not a big deal, but I would like it not to happen. Thanks.