IllustrationI WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE AT 45 MPH AND THE BRAKES WENT OUT WITHOUT WARNING OR A WARNING LIGHT. IT MADE ME ALMOST HIT ANOTHER VEHICLE IN FRONT OF ME. MY PREGNANT WIFE AND I WERE IN THE VEHICLE AT THE TIME. IT SEEMS MANY OTHER PEOPLE HAVE HAD THIS PROBLEM, IT SHOULD BE FIXED ASAP. *TR
2003 Chevrolet Avalanche
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Avalanche years
Owner complaints for the 2003 Chevrolet Avalanche are substantially higher than the model-year median of 82.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Avalanche years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
280–25K
3025–50K
2850–75K
2375–100K
35100–150K
17150K+
161 reports with mileage · 43 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Service Brakes. Review the 51 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 42 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 27 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
10 crash reports2 fire reports5 injury reports
Service Brakes complaints
51 reportsI WAS ABOUT TO SLOW DOWN TO MAKE A TURN ON TO A SIDE STREET AND MY BRAKES WENT TO THE FLOOR. I HAD TO TAKE BACK ROADS AND PLAN MY STOPS WHILE DRIVING IN LOW GEAR TO SAFELY MAKE IT TO THE SHOP. A BRAKE LINE BURST. I WAS TOLD THAT THE LINES ARE RUSTED AND ROTTED. ALL THE LINES HAD TO BE REPLACED. IT COST ME ABOUT $1800.00. *TR
WENT TO APPLY BRAKES AND BRAKE PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR. A COMPLETE FAILURE OF THE BRAKING SYSTEM. IMMEDIATELY SHIFTED THE TRUCK INTO NEUTRAL AND APPLIED THE EMERGENCY BRAKE TO COME TO A STOP. NO PRIOR WARNING ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND BRAKES FAILED COMPLETELY, FRONT AND BACK. *TR
REPLACED REAR BRAKE LINE TWO WEEKS PRIOR. WENT TO LEAVE FOR WORK AND FRONT BRAKE LINES BLEW OUT. *TR
A VERY GOOD FRIEND NOTIFIED ME YESTERDAY THAT HIS SAME YEAR AVALANCHE EXPERIENCED A BURST BRAKE LINE AND CAUSED HIM TO HAVE TO CRASH HIS VEHICLE TO STOP IT. HE TOLD ME WHERE THE LINE HAD BURST AND STATED THAT CHEVROLET USES STEEL BRAKE LINE INSTEAD OF STAINLESS STEEL. I INSPECTED MY 2003 AVALANCHE AND NOTICED THAT MY BRAKE LINES…
Read full complaint
A VERY GOOD FRIEND NOTIFIED ME YESTERDAY THAT HIS SAME YEAR AVALANCHE EXPERIENCED A BURST BRAKE LINE AND CAUSED HIM TO HAVE TO CRASH HIS VEHICLE TO STOP IT. HE TOLD ME WHERE THE LINE HAD BURST AND STATED THAT CHEVROLET USES STEEL BRAKE LINE INSTEAD OF STAINLESS STEEL. I INSPECTED MY 2003 AVALANCHE AND NOTICED THAT MY BRAKE LINES ARE SHOWING SEVERE SIGNS OF CORROSION. LMC TRUCK PARTS SELLS A REPLACEMENT BRAKE LINE KIT FOR THIS VEHICLE FOR A REASONABLE PRICE OF 379.00. IT IS THAT HARD TO FORCE VEHICLE MANUFACTURES TO USE STAINLESS STEEL INSTEAD OF REGULAR STEEL IN THEIR BRAKING SYSTEMS. YOU FORCED SEAT BELTS, ANTI-LOCK BRAKES, TRACTION CONTROL, STABILITY CONTROL, DAYTIME DRIVING LIGHTS, ETC... WHY NOT THIS! *TR
I WAS IN ANSONIA CT ON 6TH OCTOBER 2012 AT APPROXIMATELY 09:47. HAD PULLED OFF THE HIGHWAY TO REFUEL. NO ISSUES AS I TRAVELED IN THE MORNING. AFTER LEAVING THE SERVICE STATION TO HEAD BACK TO THE HIGHWAY I WENT TO PLACE ON THE BRAKES WHILE GOING DOWNHILL APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION AT APPROXIMATELY 35MPH. BRAKE PEDAL WENT S…
Read full complaint
I WAS IN ANSONIA CT ON 6TH OCTOBER 2012 AT APPROXIMATELY 09:47. HAD PULLED OFF THE HIGHWAY TO REFUEL. NO ISSUES AS I TRAVELED IN THE MORNING. AFTER LEAVING THE SERVICE STATION TO HEAD BACK TO THE HIGHWAY I WENT TO PLACE ON THE BRAKES WHILE GOING DOWNHILL APPROACHING AN INTERSECTION AT APPROXIMATELY 35MPH. BRAKE PEDAL WENT STRAIGHT TO THE FLOOR. WITHIN 2 SECONDS DASH WARNING OF " CHECK BRAKE SYSTEM " FLASHED ON INFORMATION DISPLAY. HAD NO BRAKES, NON AT ALL. PULLED INTO LOWEST GEAR AND RAN THRU THE RED LIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION. I PROCEEDED TO PULL A SHARP RIGHT TURN INTO A COMMUTER LOT USING THE CURB TO STOP THE VEHICLE. EMERGENCY BRAKE INEFFECTIVE AT REDUCING SPEED. CALLED AAA AND DISCOVERED RUPTURED BRAKE LINES ALONG THE FRAME RAIL BELOW DRIVERS SIDE FOOTWELL AREA. *TR
I HAD JUST LEFT A STORE AND STOPPED AT A SIGNAL LIGHT WITH NO PROBLEMS BUT WHEN I PROCESSED TO THE NEXT LIGHT I PUT MY FOOT ONTO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND MY TRUCK STARTED TO SLOW DOWN AND THEN ALL THE SUDDEN THE BRAKE PIDDLE WENT TO THE FLOOR AND I WENT THROUGH A RED LIGHT, LUCKILY THE OTHER DRIVER ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE SIGNAL …
Read full complaint
I HAD JUST LEFT A STORE AND STOPPED AT A SIGNAL LIGHT WITH NO PROBLEMS BUT WHEN I PROCESSED TO THE NEXT LIGHT I PUT MY FOOT ONTO THE BRAKE PEDAL AND MY TRUCK STARTED TO SLOW DOWN AND THEN ALL THE SUDDEN THE BRAKE PIDDLE WENT TO THE FLOOR AND I WENT THROUGH A RED LIGHT, LUCKILY THE OTHER DRIVER ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE SIGNAL LIGHT DID NOT LEAVE TO GO THROUGH THE LIGHT RIGHT AWAY AND THAT GAVE ME TIME TO GO THROUGH WITHOUT INCIDENT BUT NEVERTHELESS IT WAS VERY SCARY AND COULD OF BEEN REAL BAD, AND NOW IT IS COSTING ME $1400.00 TO REPLACE ALL OF MY BRAKE LINES DUE TO THIS INCIDENT AND CAUSE GM DOES NOT MAKE THE PRE-BENT BRAKE LINES FOR MY TRUCK ANYMORE (WHICH IS STUPID). AS MUCH AS THESE VEHICLES COST I WOULD OF THOUGHT THAT THESE BRAKE LINES WOULD BE MADE OF STAINLESS STEEL AND NOT (PROBABLY) CHINA METAL. *TR
I WAS TAKING MY 3 BOYS TO SCHOOL WHEN THE VEHICLE LOST ALL PRESSURE IN THE BRAKES. ONCE AGAIN ONE OF THE BRAKE LINES ON THE TRUCK HAS RUSTED THROUGH AND IS NOW LEAKING. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME I HAVE HAD AN ISSUE WITH A RUSTY BRAKE LINE IN THE PAST TWO YEARS. THERE IS NO REASON THAT THESE LINES SHOULD BE RUSTING OUT SO PREMAT…
Read full complaint
I WAS TAKING MY 3 BOYS TO SCHOOL WHEN THE VEHICLE LOST ALL PRESSURE IN THE BRAKES. ONCE AGAIN ONE OF THE BRAKE LINES ON THE TRUCK HAS RUSTED THROUGH AND IS NOW LEAKING. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME I HAVE HAD AN ISSUE WITH A RUSTY BRAKE LINE IN THE PAST TWO YEARS. THERE IS NO REASON THAT THESE LINES SHOULD BE RUSTING OUT SO PREMATURELY. I HAVE LIVED IN THE SAME AREA MY ENTIRE LIFE AND HAVE NEVER HAD THIS PROBLEM WITH ANY OF MY OTHER VEHICLES. I OWNED A 1988 CHEVROLET S-10 BLAZER FOR NEARLY 20 YEARS AND HAPPILY PUT OVER 228,000 MILES ON IT AND NEVER ONCE HAD A BRAKE LINE RUST THROUGH. I AM REPLACING THE DEFECTIVE PART WITH AN IMPROVED TEFLON COATED BRAKE LINE. I DO NOT WANT THE SAME INFERIOR ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT PUT BACK IN PLACE OF THE CURRENT RUSTED LINE. THE LINES HAVE RUSTED OUT BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT MANUFACTURED TO PROPER STANDARDS. THE WORST PART IS NOW WONDERING WHICH BRAKE LINE WILL BE NEXT. ALL GM VEHICLES AFFECTED BY THIS ISSUE SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECALLED. YOU CAN FIND THOUSANDS OF STORIES JUST LIKE MINE ALL OVER THE INTERNET. YESTERDAY I SPOKE TO A GM EMPLOYEE WHERE I BOUGHT MY TRUCK AND HE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM WITH HIS 2002 TAHOE. GM AGREED TO REPLACE EVERY BRAKE LINE ON HIS TRUCK FOR A FLAT FEE OF $250 BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THE BRAKE LINES ARE DEFECTIVE. THIS ISSUE NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED NOW BECAUSE FOUR LIVES WERE AT STAKE ON 8/29/2012 WHEN I LOST ALL THE BRAKES ON MY TRUCK. I WAS LUCKY TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE SITUATION BUT NO ONE SHOULD DIE OVER AN ISSUE SUCH AS THIS WHICH HAS BEEN DOCUMENTED MANY TIMES ALREADY. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 CHEVROLET AVALANCHE 1500. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 5 MPH WHEN THE BRAKES WERE DEPRESSED TO THE FLOORBOARD AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP PROPERLY. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE HE NOTICED THAT THERE WAS BRAKE FLUID LEAKING FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEA…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 CHEVROLET AVALANCHE 1500. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING 5 MPH WHEN THE BRAKES WERE DEPRESSED TO THE FLOORBOARD AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO STOP PROPERLY. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT AFTER INSPECTING THE VEHICLE HE NOTICED THAT THERE WAS BRAKE FLUID LEAKING FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE DEALER. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 190,000.
ON APPROACHING A STOP SIGN THE REAR BRAKES FAILED. THE LINE HAD RUSTED THRU ABOVE THE LEFT REAR SPRING. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME A LINE HAS RUSTED THRU. THE FIRST TIME I LOST BOTH BRAKES. I HAD IT REPAIRED BY A CHEVROLET DEALERSHIP. AS YOU CAN SEE THEY DID NOT REPLACE ALL THE PROBLEM LINES. I HAD IT DONE BY OAKWOOD SERVICE CENTER…
Read full complaint
ON APPROACHING A STOP SIGN THE REAR BRAKES FAILED. THE LINE HAD RUSTED THRU ABOVE THE LEFT REAR SPRING. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME A LINE HAS RUSTED THRU. THE FIRST TIME I LOST BOTH BRAKES. I HAD IT REPAIRED BY A CHEVROLET DEALERSHIP. AS YOU CAN SEE THEY DID NOT REPLACE ALL THE PROBLEM LINES. I HAD IT DONE BY OAKWOOD SERVICE CENTER IN AUBURN, NY. AT LEAST NOW I BELIEVE I AM SAFE. *TR
Official recalls
405V163000 · Seat Belts:rear/other
Apr 22, 2005
ON CERTAIN CREW CAB PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE 2ND ROW CENTER OCCUPANT SEAT BELT ROUTING MAY MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO POSITION THE LAP PORTION OF THE SAFETY BELT LOW AROUND THE HIPS OF OCCUPANTS, ESPECIALLY SMALLER OCCUPANTS, SEATED IN THIS POSITION. APPROPRIATE USE OF A CHILD SEAT OR BOOSTER SEAT, AS RECOMMENDED FOR SMALL CHILDREN, DOES IMPROVE THE FIT CONDITION FOR THIS USER GROUP. IN ADDITION TO INSTRUCTIONS ON PROPER INFANT AND YOUNG CHILD RESTRAINT (WITH CHILD SEATS OR BOOSTERS), SPECIAL VERBIAGE FOR RESTRAINING OLDER CHILD IS INCLUDED IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL. ALSO, THE SUGGESTED SEAT BELT FIT/ROUTING FOR ADULTS, IRRESPECTIVE OF SEATING POSITION, IS DESCRIBED IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL TEXT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A LAP PORTION OF THE SEAT BELT ROUTING THAT IS NOT LOW AND SNUG ON THE HIPS CAN ALLOW THE LAP BELT TO RIDE UP ON AN OCCUPANT'S ABDOMEN INSTEAD OF FITTING LOW AROUND THEIR HIPBONES, AND THEREFORE, CAN EXPOSE THEM TO MORE RISK OF ABDOMINAL AND INTERNAL ORGAN INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL CUT OPEN THE GUIDE LOOP, REMOVE A PORTION OF THE LOOP, AND THEN THE REMAINING TWO SIDES SHOULD BE FOLDED OVER AND SECURED WITH A RETAINER FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 21, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CADILLAC AT 1-866-982-2339, CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, GMC AT 1-866-996-9463, OR HUMMER AT 1-800-732-5493.
04V129000 · Structure:body:tailgate:hinge And Attachments
Mar 17, 2004
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE GALVANIZED STEEL TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES THAT RETAIN THE TAILGATE IN THE FULL OPEN (HORIZONTAL) POSITION MAY CORRODE, WEAKEN, AND EVENTUALLY FRACTURE. IF BOTH CABLES FRACTURED, THE TAILGATE WOULD SUDDENLY DROP AND STRIKE THE TOP SURFACE OF THE REAR BUMPER.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: ANYONE SITTING OR STANDING ON THE HORIZONTAL SURFACE OF THE TAILGATE WHEN BOTH CABLES FRACTURED COULD BE INJURED BY FALLING FROM THE TAILGATE. ON VEHICLES THAT HAVE HAD THE BUMPER REMOVED, THE TAILGATE MAY DROP EVEN LOWER. ADDITIONALLY, IF THERE IS CARGO ON THE TAILGATE THE CARGO MAY FALL OFF IF THE SUPPORT CABLES FRACTURE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE CABLES. INTERIM OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON APRIL 7, 20004. THE RECALL BEGAN ON SEPTEMBER 24, 2004, WHEN REPLACEMENT PARTS WERE AVAILABLE, AND WILL CONTINUE THROUGH OCTOBER 29, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT CADILLAC AT 1-866-982-2339, CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438 OR GMC AT 1-866-996-9463, OR VISIT WWW.MYGMLINK.COM, AND ENTER YOUR VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER.
04V045000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic
Feb 4, 2004
CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, PICKUP TRUCKS, AND PASSENGER VANS FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 135, ?PASSENGER CAR BRAKE SYSTEMS.? SOME OF THESE VEHICLES WERE PRODUCED WITH AN OUT-OF-SPECIFICATION BRAKE HYDRO-BOOST HOUSING RELIEF VALVE BORE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: CONSEQUENTLY, THE VALVE O-RING SEAL MAY FRACTURE. STEERING EFFORTS MAY BE SLIGHTLY INCREASED WHILE BRAKING OR PARKING. UNDER CERTAIN DRIVING CONDITIONS, A FRACTURED SEAL MAY REQUIRE A SLIGHT INCREASE IN THE APPLIED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORT TO ACHIEVE THE SAME VEHICLE DECELERATION RATE AS PRIOR TO THE SEAT FRACTURE.
Remedy: DEALERS ARE TO REPLACE THE HYDRO-BOOST RELIEF VALVE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JUNE 18, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT CADILLAC AT 1-866-982-2339; CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438; GMC AT 1-866-996-9463; OR HUMMER AT 1-866-486-6376.
03V019000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly
Jan 27, 2003
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, VEHICLES, DURING A 30 DEGREE LEFT ANGLE FRONTAL IMPACT OF SUFFICIENT SEVERITY, A TEAR COULD DEVELOP IN THE MID-FRAME CROSS MEMBER AT ITS ATTACHMENT TO THE LEFT FRAME RAIL. IF THE MID-FRAME CROSS MEMBER TEARS DURING FRONTAL IMPACT AND PRODUCES A SHARP EDGE, CONTACT OF THE SHARP EDGE WITH THE FUEL TANK COULD RESULT IN A PUNCTURE OF THE FUEL TANK AND POSSIBLE FUEL LEAKAGE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE, IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUEL TANK SHIELD. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN FEBRUARY 20, 2003. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-222-1020 OR GMC AT 1-800-462-8782.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
4PE10010 · Brake Line Corrosion Failure
Opened Mar 30, 2010 · Closed Jan 5, 2011
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:hydraulic:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received Defect Petition DP10-003 on March 2, 2010, requesting the investigation of model year (MY) 2003 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD 4WD pickup trucks for corrosion failures of the vehicle brake lines.DP10-003 was granted and on March 30, 2010, Preliminary Evaluation PE10-010 was opened on more than six million model year 1999 through 2003 light trucks and sport utility vehicles manufactured and sold by General Motors Corporation (GM).On July 2, 2010, ODI received GM's response to an information request, which included GM's assessment of the frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect. GM stated that:(1) the brake system of the subject vehicles is split front/rear and should a brake pipe suddenly fail for any reason, the affected vehicle would be capable of stopping with the pressure supplied by the remaining circuit; (2) the subject vehicles were designed to meet the hydraulic circuit partial failure requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 105 and 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems; and (3) should a brake fluid leak occur for any reason, the brake system malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) would illuminate and warn the driver before the brake fluid level was low enough to cause a loss of line pressure.ODI's and GM's analysis indicates that 85 percent of the complaints occurred on vehicles used primarily in States that use salt on the roads during Winter months (Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin).Overall the complaint rates per 100,000 vehicles for Salt Belt States is 43.0 and Non-Salt Belt is 3.0.In approximately 25 percent of the complaints the brake pipe failure occurred suddenly, with no warning (i.e., no MIL, Brake Fluid Loss Warning), and resulted in extended stopping distances.In 30 of these the increase in stopping distance that resulted was a factor in the crash and in 10 others the vehicle was intentionally steered off the road or into another lane of travel in order to avoid a crash.This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA11-001) for subject vehicles sold or currently registered in Salt Belt States to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with sudden failures of corroded brake pipes that can result in decreased brake effectiveness. ODI will continue to gather information on subject vehicles outside the Salt Belt as well.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received Defect Petition DP10-003 on March 2, 2010, requesting the investigation of model year (MY) 2003 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD 4WD pickup trucks for corrosion failures of the vehicle brake lines.DP10-003 was granted and on March 30, 2010, Preliminary Evaluation PE10-010 was opened on more than six million model year 1999 through 2003 light trucks and sport utility vehicles manufactured and sold by General Motors Corporation (GM).On July 2, 2010, ODI received GM's response to an information request, which included GM's assessment of the frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect. GM stated that:(1) the brake system of the subject vehicles is split front/rear and should a brake pipe suddenly fail for any reason, the affected vehicle would be capable of stopping with the pressure supplied by the remaining circuit; (2) the subject vehicles were designed to meet the hydraulic circuit partial failure requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 105 and 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems; and (3) should a brake fluid leak occur for any reason, the brake system malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) would illuminate and warn the driver before the brake fluid level was low enough to cause a loss of line pressure.ODI's and GM's analysis indicates that 85 percent of the complaints occurred on vehicles used primarily in States that use salt on the roads during Winter months (Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin).Overall the complaint rates per 100,000 vehicles for Salt Belt States is 43.0 and Non-Salt Belt is 3.0.In approximately 25 percent of the complaints the brake pipe failure occurred suddenly, with no warning (i.e., no MIL, Brake Fluid Loss Warning), and resulted in extended stopping distances.In 30 of these the increase in stopping distance that resulted was a factor in the crash and in 10 others the vehicle was intentionally steered off the road or into another lane of travel in order to avoid a crash.This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA11-001) for subject vehicles sold or currently registered in Salt Belt States to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with sudden failures of corroded brake pipes that can result in decreased brake effectiveness. ODI will continue to gather information on subject vehicles outside the Salt Belt as well.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:hydraulic:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received Defect Petition DP10-003 on March 2, 2010, requesting the investigation of model year (MY) 2003 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD 4WD pickup trucks for corrosion failures of the vehicle brake lines.DP10-003 was granted and on March 30, 2010, Preliminary Evaluation PE10-010 was opened on more than six million model year 1999 through 2003 light trucks and sport utility vehicles manufactured and sold by General Motors Corporation (GM).On July 2, 2010, ODI received GM's response to an information request, which included GM's assessment of the frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect. GM stated that:(1) the brake system of the subject vehicles is split front/rear and should a brake pipe suddenly fail for any reason, the affected vehicle would be capable of stopping with the pressure supplied by the remaining circuit; (2) the subject vehicles were designed to meet the hydraulic circuit partial failure requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 105 and 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems; and (3) should a brake fluid leak occur for any reason, the brake system malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) would illuminate and warn the driver before the brake fluid level was low enough to cause a loss of line pressure.ODI's and GM's analysis indicates that 85 percent of the complaints occurred on vehicles used primarily in States that use salt on the roads during Winter months (Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin).Overall the complaint rates per 100,000 vehicles for Salt Belt States is 43.0 and Non-Salt Belt is 3.0.In approximately 25 percent of the complaints the brake pipe failure occurred suddenly, with no warning (i.e., no MIL, Brake Fluid Loss Warning), and resulted in extended stopping distances.In 30 of these the increase in stopping distance that resulted was a factor in the crash and in 10 others the vehicle was intentionally steered off the road or into another lane of travel in order to avoid a crash.This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA11-001) for subject vehicles sold or currently registered in Salt Belt States to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with sudden failures of corroded brake pipes that can result in decreased brake effectiveness. ODI will continue to gather information on subject vehicles outside the Salt Belt as well.
DP05009 · Parking Brake Failure
Opened Dec 20, 2005 · Closed May 31, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Parking Brake; Parking Brake:conventional; Parking Brake:conventional:mechanical
ODI'S REVIEW OF COMPLAINT DATA RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF EA04-011 REVEALED NO INDICATION THAT THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.MORE DETAILS CAN BE FOUND IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ENCLOSED IN THE DP05-009 PUBLIC FILE.ODI RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION IN THE FUTURE SHOULD CONDITIONS WARRANT.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Parking Brake:conventional
ODI'S REVIEW OF COMPLAINT DATA RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF EA04-011 REVEALED NO INDICATION THAT THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.MORE DETAILS CAN BE FOUND IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ENCLOSED IN THE DP05-009 PUBLIC FILE.ODI RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION IN THE FUTURE SHOULD CONDITIONS WARRANT.
Parking Brake:conventional:mechanical
ODI'S REVIEW OF COMPLAINT DATA RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF EA04-011 REVEALED NO INDICATION THAT THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.MORE DETAILS CAN BE FOUND IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ENCLOSED IN THE DP05-009 PUBLIC FILE.ODI RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION IN THE FUTURE SHOULD CONDITIONS WARRANT.
Parking Brake
ODI'S REVIEW OF COMPLAINT DATA RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF EA04-011 REVEALED NO INDICATION THAT THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.MORE DETAILS CAN BE FOUND IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ENCLOSED IN THE DP05-009 PUBLIC FILE.ODI RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION IN THE FUTURE SHOULD CONDITIONS WARRANT.
EA04012 · Hydraulic Pump Failres
Opened Apr 30, 2004 · Closed Feb 28, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist; Steering:hydraulic Power Assist System
GM IS CONDUCTING A RECALL ON ALL SUBJECT VEHICLES BUILD BETWEEN MAY 1999 AND OCTOBER 14, 1999.SIGNIFICANT CHANGES WERE INCORPORATED INTO PRODUCTION IN EARLY OCTOBER 1999, AND VEHICLES BUILT AFTER THAT DATE HAVE LOWER WARRANTY FAILURE RATES.THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA APPEAR TO SUPPORT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THESE CHANGES. GM MADE ADDITIONAL CHANGES IN NOVEMBER 1999, FEBRUARY 2000, MAY 2001, AND FEBRUARY 2004.ODI WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THIS PROBLEM AND WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION, IF WARRANTED, IN THE FUTURE.FOR FURTHER TECHNICAL DETAILS SEE THE ATTACHED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS REPORT.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist
GM IS CONDUCTING A RECALL ON ALL SUBJECT VEHICLES BUILD BETWEEN MAY 1999 AND OCTOBER 14, 1999.SIGNIFICANT CHANGES WERE INCORPORATED INTO PRODUCTION IN EARLY OCTOBER 1999, AND VEHICLES BUILT AFTER THAT DATE HAVE LOWER WARRANTY FAILURE RATES.THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA APPEAR TO SUPPORT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THESE CHANGES. GM MADE ADDITIONAL CHANGES IN NOVEMBER 1999, FEBRUARY 2000, MAY 2001, AND FEBRUARY 2004.ODI WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THIS PROBLEM AND WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION, IF WARRANTED, IN THE FUTURE.FOR FURTHER TECHNICAL DETAILS SEE THE ATTACHED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS REPORT.
Steering:hydraulic Power Assist System
GM IS CONDUCTING A RECALL ON ALL SUBJECT VEHICLES BUILD BETWEEN MAY 1999 AND OCTOBER 14, 1999.SIGNIFICANT CHANGES WERE INCORPORATED INTO PRODUCTION IN EARLY OCTOBER 1999, AND VEHICLES BUILT AFTER THAT DATE HAVE LOWER WARRANTY FAILURE RATES.THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA APPEAR TO SUPPORT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THESE CHANGES. GM MADE ADDITIONAL CHANGES IN NOVEMBER 1999, FEBRUARY 2000, MAY 2001, AND FEBRUARY 2004.ODI WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THIS PROBLEM AND WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION, IF WARRANTED, IN THE FUTURE.FOR FURTHER TECHNICAL DETAILS SEE THE ATTACHED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS REPORT.
EA04005 · Tailgate Cable Breakage
Opened Feb 19, 2004 · Closed Sep 28, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Latches/locks/linkages:tailgate:latch; Structure:body:tailgate ; Structure:body:tailgate:hinge And Attachments
GENERAL MOTORS FILED A DEFECT NOTICE 04V-129 ON MARCH 17, 2004, WHICH OUTLINES A PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE CABLES INSTALLED IN AFFECTED MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES.REFER TO ODI'S CLOSING REPORT FOR EA04-005 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.ODI IS AWARE OF REPORTS OF TAILGATE CABLE BREAKAGE OCCURRING IN MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES.THESE VEHICLES WERE EQUIPPED WITH SIMILAR TAILGATE CABLES AS ADDRESSED BY 04V-129, BUT ARE NOT BEING ADDRESSED BY CAMPAIGN O4V-129.ODI IS INITIATING A SEPARATE INVESTIGATION TO ADDRESS THESE VEHICLES.THE COMPLAINT-INJURY-FATALITY STATISTICS SUMMARIZED ABOVE PERTAIN TO MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES. THE COMPLAINT-INJURY STATISTICS FOR MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE OPENING RESUME FOR THAT INVESTIGATION.
Additional source detail variants (6)
Latches/locks/linkages:tailgate:latch
GENERAL MOTORS FILED A DEFECT NOTICE 04V-129 ON MARCH 17, 2004, WHICH OUTLINES A PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE CABLES INSTALLED IN AFFECTED MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES.REFER TO ODI'S CLOSING REPORT FOR EA04-005 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.ODI IS AWARE OF REPORTS OF TAILGATE CABLE BREAKAGE OCCURRING IN MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES.THESE VEHICLES WERE EQUIPPED WITH SIMILAR TAILGATE CABLES AS ADDRESSED BY 04V-129, BUT ARE NOT BEING ADDRESSED BY CAMPAIGN O4V-129.ODI IS INITIATING A SEPARATE INVESTIGATION TO ADDRESS THESE VEHICLES.THE COMPLAINT-INJURY-FATALITY STATISTICS SUMMARIZED ABOVE PERTAIN TO MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES. THE COMPLAINT-INJURY STATISTICS FOR MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE OPENING RESUME FOR THAT INVESTIGATION.
Latches/locks/linkages:tailgate:latch
GENERAL MOTORS FILED A DEFECT NOTICE 04V-129 ON MARCH 17, 2004, WHICH OUTLINES A PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE CABLES INSTALLED IN AFFECTED MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES.REFER TO ODI'S CLOSING REPORT FOR EA04-005 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.ODI IS AWARE OF REPORTS OF TAILGATE CABLE BREAKAGE OCCURRING IN MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES.THESE VEHICLES WERE EQUIPPED WITH SIMILAR TAILGATE CABLES AS ADDRESSED BY 04V-129, BUT ARE NOT BEING ADDRESSED BY CAMPAIGN O4V-129.ODI IS INITIATING A SEPARATE INVESTIGATION TO ADDRESS THESE VEHICLES.THE COMPLAINT-INJURY-FATALITY STATISTICS SUMMARIZED ABOVE PERTAIN TO MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES. THE COMPLAINT-INJURY STATISTICS FOR MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE OPENING RESUME FOR THAT INVESTIGATION.
Structure:body:tailgate
GENERAL MOTORS FILED A DEFECT NOTICE 04V-129 ON MARCH 17, 2004, WHICH OUTLINES A PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE CABLES INSTALLED IN AFFECTED MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES.REFER TO ODI'S CLOSING REPORT FOR EA04-005 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.ODI IS AWARE OF REPORTS OF TAILGATE CABLE BREAKAGE OCCURRING IN MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES.THESE VEHICLES WERE EQUIPPED WITH SIMILAR TAILGATE CABLES AS ADDRESSED BY 04V-129, BUT ARE NOT BEING ADDRESSED BY CAMPAIGN O4V-129.ODI IS INITIATING A SEPARATE INVESTIGATION TO ADDRESS THESE VEHICLES.THE COMPLAINT-INJURY-FATALITY STATISTICS SUMMARIZED ABOVE PERTAIN TO MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES. THE COMPLAINT-INJURY STATISTICS FOR MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE OPENING RESUME FOR THAT INVESTIGATION.
Structure:body:tailgate
GENERAL MOTORS FILED A DEFECT NOTICE 04V-129 ON MARCH 17, 2004, WHICH OUTLINES A PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE CABLES INSTALLED IN AFFECTED MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES.REFER TO ODI'S CLOSING REPORT FOR EA04-005 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.ODI IS AWARE OF REPORTS OF TAILGATE CABLE BREAKAGE OCCURRING IN MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES.THESE VEHICLES WERE EQUIPPED WITH SIMILAR TAILGATE CABLES AS ADDRESSED BY 04V-129, BUT ARE NOT BEING ADDRESSED BY CAMPAIGN O4V-129.ODI IS INITIATING A SEPARATE INVESTIGATION TO ADDRESS THESE VEHICLES.THE COMPLAINT-INJURY-FATALITY STATISTICS SUMMARIZED ABOVE PERTAIN TO MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES. THE COMPLAINT-INJURY STATISTICS FOR MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE OPENING RESUME FOR THAT INVESTIGATION.
Structure:body:tailgate:hinge And Attachments
GENERAL MOTORS FILED A DEFECT NOTICE 04V-129 ON MARCH 17, 2004, WHICH OUTLINES A PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE CABLES INSTALLED IN AFFECTED MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES.REFER TO ODI'S CLOSING REPORT FOR EA04-005 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.ODI IS AWARE OF REPORTS OF TAILGATE CABLE BREAKAGE OCCURRING IN MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES.THESE VEHICLES WERE EQUIPPED WITH SIMILAR TAILGATE CABLES AS ADDRESSED BY 04V-129, BUT ARE NOT BEING ADDRESSED BY CAMPAIGN O4V-129.ODI IS INITIATING A SEPARATE INVESTIGATION TO ADDRESS THESE VEHICLES.THE COMPLAINT-INJURY-FATALITY STATISTICS SUMMARIZED ABOVE PERTAIN TO MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES. THE COMPLAINT-INJURY STATISTICS FOR MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE OPENING RESUME FOR THAT INVESTIGATION.
Structure:body:tailgate:hinge And Attachments
GENERAL MOTORS FILED A DEFECT NOTICE 04V-129 ON MARCH 17, 2004, WHICH OUTLINES A PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE CABLES INSTALLED IN AFFECTED MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES.REFER TO ODI'S CLOSING REPORT FOR EA04-005 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.ODI IS AWARE OF REPORTS OF TAILGATE CABLE BREAKAGE OCCURRING IN MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES.THESE VEHICLES WERE EQUIPPED WITH SIMILAR TAILGATE CABLES AS ADDRESSED BY 04V-129, BUT ARE NOT BEING ADDRESSED BY CAMPAIGN O4V-129.ODI IS INITIATING A SEPARATE INVESTIGATION TO ADDRESS THESE VEHICLES.THE COMPLAINT-INJURY-FATALITY STATISTICS SUMMARIZED ABOVE PERTAIN TO MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 VEHICLES. THE COMPLAINT-INJURY STATISTICS FOR MODEL YEAR 1999 AND EARLIER VEHICLES ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE OPENING RESUME FOR THAT INVESTIGATION.