Motor mounts, can someone explain to me why Toyota doesn’t do anything about this?

You got it backwards. The frame rust service campaign (not recall, no DOT involvement) came from Toyota first. Then some leeching lawyers pushed a few truck owners to sue anyway. This is the actual settlement agreement: http://www.toyotaframesettlement.co...ent_with_Exhibits_Combined_Filed_11_15_16.pdf Go to page 28. Basically the plaintiff's lawyers pocket close to $10 million from Toyota. While the vehicle owners just get an expansion of the pre-existing Toyota service campaign on frame inspection, undercoating, or replacement.

Again, service campaign, not a recall. And the $25 million wasn't a court judgment, just a goodwill payment to appease Dana's 2nd largest customer that is Toyota. A court judgment wouldn't have worked, since Dana was in bankruptcy 2006-2008, and sold the frame business by 2009. And $25 million doesn't begin to cover Toyota's costs for the campaign.

 

Which i guess is why 2010 was the last model year affected? Goddamn Dana.

 

Toyota's campaign covered 2005-2008 model years. The class-action lawsuit settlement extended it to include 2009-2010 model years as well. Doesn't make much of a difference, because even today's frames are still made in the same factories, just under Metalsa ownership instead of Dana ownership.