TAKATA RECALL . MY CAR JUST DIED OUT OFF NOWHERE WHILE I WAS JUST PARKED AND WHEN IT FINALLY GOT JUMPED THE 'SERVICE AIRBAG' LIGHT CAME. I'VE DONE SOME RESEARCH AND THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING TO EVERYBODY AND THE REPAIRS IS UP TO $1000
2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Limited comparison data
There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Malibu Eco 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
82 reports with mileage · 5 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.
- Electrical System. Review the 49 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine. Review the 22 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 16 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Air Bags complaints
10 reportsBATTERY SYSTEM CHARGING FAILURE...CAR STALLS WILL NOT START. EVEN WITH A JUMP...DOORS ALL LOCK...AIRBAG FAILURE LIGHT COMES ON
I STARTED MY CAR, AND THE SERVICE AIRBAG POPPED UP ON MY SCREEN.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 CHEVROLET MALIBU ECO. UPON STARTING THE VEHICLE, THE AIR BAG WARNING INDICATOR ILLUMINATED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC OR DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING AND REPAIR. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE ISSUE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 35,000.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 CHEVROLET MALIBU ECO. WHILE OPERATING THE VEHICLE, THE CHECK BATTERY SENSOR, THE AIR BAG INDICATOR, AND THE SERVICE POWER STEERING INDICATOR SUDDENLY ILLUMINATED AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY SHUT OFF. THE BATTERY WAS RECHARGED, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO CASTLE CHEVROLET IN ILLINOI…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 CHEVROLET MALIBU ECO. WHILE OPERATING THE VEHICLE, THE CHECK BATTERY SENSOR, THE AIR BAG INDICATOR, AND THE SERVICE POWER STEERING INDICATOR SUDDENLY ILLUMINATED AND THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY SHUT OFF. THE BATTERY WAS RECHARGED, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO CASTLE CHEVROLET IN ILLINOIS WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE AIR BAG MODULE WAS FAULTY. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE, BUT NO ASSISTANCE WAS OFFERED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 20,000.
WHILE DRIVING HOME MY INSTRUMENT PANEL LITE UP AND RADIO STARTED PLAYING FOR ABOUT 10 MINUTES THEN CLEARED AND THE SERVICE AIR BAG CAME ON.... HAVE AN APPOINTMENT WITH CHEVROLET DEALERSHIP FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING
VEHICLE MAKE, MODEL, AND YEAR: 2013 CHEVROLET MALIBU ECO VEHICLE VIN NO.: [XXX] INCIDENT DATE: 06/21/2015 INCIDENT TIME: 10:40:00 AM INCIDENT LOCATION: [XXX] APPROXIMATE MONETARY VALUE: 100000 ARE YOU WILLING TO TESTIFY IN COURT REGARDING THIS COMPLAINT? (X)…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE MAKE, MODEL, AND YEAR: 2013 CHEVROLET MALIBU ECO VEHICLE VIN NO.: [XXX] INCIDENT DATE: 06/21/2015 INCIDENT TIME: 10:40:00 AM INCIDENT LOCATION: [XXX] APPROXIMATE MONETARY VALUE: 100000 ARE YOU WILLING TO TESTIFY IN COURT REGARDING THIS COMPLAINT? (X)YES( )NO DID YOU COMPLAIN DIRECTLY TO THE BUSINESS? (X)YES( )NO IF SO, WHO? CHEVY CUSTOMER ACCURANCE WHAT WAS THE RESPONSE FROM THE BUSINESS? CASE #[XXX] NOTHING ON 9/7/2015 I BOUGHT THIS BRAND NEW CHEVY MALIBU ECO WITH A STICKER PRICE OF OVER $28.000 DOLLARS THERE WHERE MANY ISSUES AND RECALLS BACK IN NOV 2014 I GOT A LETTER FROM CHEVY REGARDING A SAFETY ISSUE WITH THE STEERING IN THIS CAR GM DID NOT DO A RECALL AS YOU KNOW IT WOULD HAVE COST THEM MILLONS OF DOLLARS TO DO A RECALL INSTEAD THEY SENT THIS LETTER OUT I TOOK THE LETTER TO THE CHEVY DEALER 2 TIMES THEY DID NOTHING ON 6/21/15 I WAS COMING FROM SEEING MY DYING MOTHER WHO WAS IN A LONG TERM CARE FOR 14 MONTHS SHE DID DIE LAST WEEK BUT ON THIS DATE I WAS DRIVING HOME ON THIS ROAD I DROVE 2 TIMES A DAY FOR 14 MONTHS THE GM CHEVY DEFECT CAUSED ME TO HAVE A CAR ACCIDENT WITH INJURY'S ME BEING INJURED THE STEERING WHEELS STAYED STRAIGHT AND CAUSED THE ACCIDENT I DID GET BLAMED FOR THE ACCIDENT LOST MY 2013 CHEVY MALIBU ECO WENT TO THE HOSPITAL WITH TRAMA FOR 6 TO 8 WEEKS PAID A FINE OF $439.00 THEN ON JULY 11 2015 I BOUGHT ANOTHER NEW CHEVY THE DEALER ACTION CHEVY SCAMMED ME I WAS TO PAY $21.200 FOR THE CAR MINUS THE $1500 REBATE THE CAR DEALER CHANGED IT TO I PAY $21.200 MINUS THE $1500 REBATE ACTION CHEVY ALSO SCREWED ME ON BUYING A 3RD CHEVY IN 12 YEARS I LOST MAYBE $100.000 PLUS MY CAR INS WENT UP BECAUSE OF THIS CHEVY GM DEFECT CHEVY /GM NEED TO DO A RECALL ATTORNEY NEEDS TO DO A CLASS ACTION LAW SUITE AGAINST CHEVY/GM INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
NOV 2014 I GOT A SAFETY STEERING ISSUE WITH IS CALL TOOK IT TO THE DEAL ACTION CHEVY 2 TIMES THEY DID NOTHING ABOUT LETTER # 14232 ON 6/21/2015 I HAD AN ACCIDENT BECAUSE OF THIS STEERING SAFET ISSUE THAT GM/CHEVY DID NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THEY DID NOT DO A RECALL BECAUSE IT WOULD COST MILLONS OF DOLLARS I GOT BLAMED FOR TH…
Read full complaint
NOV 2014 I GOT A SAFETY STEERING ISSUE WITH IS CALL TOOK IT TO THE DEAL ACTION CHEVY 2 TIMES THEY DID NOTHING ABOUT LETTER # 14232 ON 6/21/2015 I HAD AN ACCIDENT BECAUSE OF THIS STEERING SAFET ISSUE THAT GM/CHEVY DID NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THEY DID NOT DO A RECALL BECAUSE IT WOULD COST MILLONS OF DOLLARS I GOT BLAMED FOR THE ACCIDENT THAT WAS BECAUSE OF GM/CHEVY ALL GM/CHEVY DID WAS OPEN A CASE # 8-1613872160 ON 10/9/15 AND GM/CHEVY DID NOTHING
I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE ON FEBRUARY 7, 2013. BEFORE DRIVING OFF OF THE DEALER LOT, WE ASKED WHY AN AIRBAG LIGHT WAS FLASHING. THE DEALERSHIP ASSURED US IT WAS FINE AND DID NOT LOOK INTO IT. THEY LET US DRIVE THE CAR HOME. AFTER ABOUT A WEEK OF THE LIGHT CONTINUING TO FLASH AND THE CAR NOT RECOGNIZING THAT MY HUSBAND WAS IN THE …
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE ON FEBRUARY 7, 2013. BEFORE DRIVING OFF OF THE DEALER LOT, WE ASKED WHY AN AIRBAG LIGHT WAS FLASHING. THE DEALERSHIP ASSURED US IT WAS FINE AND DID NOT LOOK INTO IT. THEY LET US DRIVE THE CAR HOME. AFTER ABOUT A WEEK OF THE LIGHT CONTINUING TO FLASH AND THE CAR NOT RECOGNIZING THAT MY HUSBAND WAS IN THE PASSENGER SEAT AND TURNING THE PASSENGER AIRBAG ON, WE DECIDED TO TAKE IT INTO THE LOCAL DEALERSHIP TO GET IT CHECKED OUT. UPON TAKING IT THERE, WE LEARNED THAT THERE HAD BEEN AN ACTIVE RECALL ON MY CAR WITH THE AIRBAG POTENTIALLY BEING ABLE TO DEPLOY IF THE CAR BRAKED TOO HARD. SO WE FOUND OUT WE WERE SOLD THE CAR WITH AN ACTIVE RECALL AND IT WAS NOT FIXED BEFORE PURCHASE. AFTER THIS FIRST INCIDENT ON THE DAY I BOUGHT IT, THERE HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT PROBLEMS. THE GCM RECALLED, THE WIRING HARNESS RECALLED, BOTH WHICH COULD START A FIRE, I HAVE STEADILY LOST GAS MILEAGE AND NOW AVERAGE ONLY 26 MPG, IF I'M LUCKY, NOT THE 37-40 ADVERSTISED, THERE IS A BUZZING NOISE WHEN TRYING TO GO IN AND OUT OF ECO MODE, WHICH THE DEALERSHIP ASSURED US WAS "PROBABLY NORMAL", AND NOW THERE IS SOME KIND OF SMOKE COMING OUT OF THE VENTS AND MOISTURE ALL OVER THE DRIVER SIDE FLOOR MAT. WE HAVE ALSO RECENTLY FOUND OUT THAT THIS MODEL WAS DISCONTINUED AFTER ONLY ONE YEAR. IN SPITE OF THIS, CHEVY WILL NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT, BUT OFFER TO HELP US TRADE IT IN, AND EVEN THEN THEY WOULD NOT GIVE US WHAT THE CAR IS "WORTH". IN MY OPINION, IF CHEVY KNOWS THEY DID SOMETHING WRONG, THEY NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR CUSTOMERS WHO BOUGHT THE WORTHLESS CARS TO BEGIN WITH. I AM A COMPLETELY DISSATISFIED CUSTOMER, YET THEY DON'T SEEM TO CARE, SO THEY HAVE NOW LOST NOT JUST ME AND MY HUSBAND AS CUSTOMERS, BUT ALSO FAMILY AND FRIENDS THAT HAVE HEARD OF OUR TERRIBLE AND UNSAFE EXPERIENCE. *JS
I HIT A DEER GOING 55 MPH AND THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. I GOT A STATEMENT ON THE SCREEN RIGHT WHEN IT HAPPENED SAYING AIRBAG SERVICE. I WOULD THINK HITTING SOMETHING GOING THAT FIRST WOULD DEPLOY AN AIRBAG. *TR
Official recalls
113V173000 · Electrical System
May 6, 2013
General Motors (GM) is recalling certain model year 2012 and 2013 Buick LaCrosse and Regal, and model year 2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco vehicles equipped with eAssist. These vehicles may have a condition in which the Generator Control Module (GCM) may not function properly. This could cause a gradual loss of battery charge and the illumination of the malfunction indicator light.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the vehicle is continued to be driven, the engine may stall and/or the vehicle may not start. In addition, there may be a burning or melting odor, smoke, and possibly a fire in the trunk.
Remedy: GM will notify owners and dealers will test the GCM and replace it, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began on June 11, 2013. Owners may contact GM at 1-800-521-7300. GM's recall campaign number is 13136.
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
2AQ14001 · Sands Chevrolet/hybrid System Fire/stall
Opened May 2, 2014 · Closed May 22, 2016
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System
NHTSA opened AQ14-001 to determine whether Sands Chevrolet of Surprise, Arizona complied with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 (Safety Act) and its implementing regulations. The Safety Act requires, among other things, that a manufacturer notify its dealers of defects related to motor vehicle safety and non-compliances with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and, in turn, that a dealer not sell and deliver a new vehicle subject to a recall unless the recall remedy has been performed (49 U.S.C. ?? 30112(a), 30120(i)).NHTSA issued an information request (IR) letter to Sands Chevrolet on May 5, 2014.Sands Chevrolet responded to this request on May 22, 2014.To ensure NHTSA?s information request encompassed all possible reference codes for General Motors recall 13V-173, NHTSA issued another IR letter to Sands Chevrolet on June 8, 2015.Again, a response letter was received on June 9, 2015.NHTSA?s investigation indicated that Sands Chevrolet did sell and deliver recalled vehicles that did not have the recall remedy completed at the time the vehicles were delivered to the customers.NHTSA therefore concluded that Sands Chevrolet was liable for civil penalties for violations of the Safety Act, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. ? 30165.Under a Settlement Agreement dated March 24, 2016, Sands Chevrolet represented that it improved its processes to verify that it checks every vehicle for recalls prior to delivery to the purchaser and that it has not sold and delivered any unremedied new motor vehicles since June 9, 2015.Sands Chevrolet also represented that it now also checks for open recalls on every customer vehicle brought in for service, and that it checks for open recalls on every used trade-in vehicle, regardless of make or model, and takes steps to have all used trade-in vehicles repaired prior to retail sale. Sands Chevrolet admitted to violating the law and must pay civil penalties in the amount of $40,000.This Audit Query is closed.
RQ13003 · Generator Control Module Fires
Opened Jul 5, 2013 · Closed Jul 22, 2014
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System:traction Battery
On July 5, 2013 the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Recall Query RQ13-003 to investigate whether the service procedures utilized in recall bulletins 13136 and 13142 for safety recall 13V-173 were sufficient to identify the safety defect in the subject vehicles.These safety recalls were issue on May 3, 2013 to address the improper function of the Generator Control Module (GCM) in certain model year (MY) 2012-13 Buick LaCrosse and Regal and MY 2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco equipped with eAssist.This condition may result in a loss of battery charge, engine stall and/or inability for the vehicle to start.In severe cases it may also lead to odor, smoke and possibly a fire in the trunk.During discussions with General Motors (GM), ODI was informed that the subject vehicles could be separated into 4 distinct build populations, or groups. Group A contained vehicles built from the start of production through 3/19/2012.Group B involved vehicles built from 3/20/2012 to 8/20/2012, group C from 8/21/2012 to 12/31/12, and group D from 1/1/2013 onwards.Bulletin 13136 instructed dealers to inspect and, if necessary, replace the GCM for vehicles in groups A or C.Bulletin 13142 instructed dealers to replace the GCM of any vehicle in group B.Group D vehicles were not recalled.All eAssist vehicles have a Powerpack which contains a BAS (belt alternator-starter) Power Inverter Module (BPIM)/Accessory Power Module (APM) and a 115-V Lithium-Ion battery.The Powerpack is known by GM's Part Description System as the GCM and Battery Module. The BPIM/APM contains 3 multi-layered printed circuit boards (PCBs) comprised of conductive layers separated by isolating layers.Vehicles built within the time periods of groups A and B had PCBs using single isolation layers.Vehicles build in group C had dual isolation layers on 1 of the 3 PCBs, and group D had all 3 PCBs built with dual insulation.Adding dual insulation to a PCB makes it more robust to material and manufacturing variations, and ultimately less susceptible to an electrical short circuit and subsequent failure.Through initial analysis of the GCM failures, GM identified that vehicles within group B contained PCBs that were contaminated during production due to increased production volumes that resulted in inadequate quality control.GM also noted that GCM failures occurred early in the life of the vehicle (typically <1000 miles).Therefore a service procedure was developed to replicate early life failures by subjecting the GCM to high current loads which would cause the identified failure mechanism (copper migration) to occur quickly and reveal any underlying PCB defect.Although groups A and C were built with PCBs containing single layer PCBs, they were built using better quality control, and as the data supports, experienced significantly lower failures.GM advised that for these reasons the two different service procedures were used in the Recall 13V-173 population.In response to ODI's Information Request (IR) GM submitted 234 unique reports related to the alleged problem. It was noted that 197 (84%) of the received reports fell into the group B population.The 2 fire incidents noted were events in which flames were evident and/or damage was experienced outside of the GCM. Both of these incidents involved group B vehicles. One hundred four warranty claims were also submitted in response to the IR, with 96 claims (92%) from group B.It was also noted that none of the claims from groups A or C occurred after the service procedure was conducted, and that the majority of the A or C incidents occurred during the service procedure.Given the data, ODI believes the ser
Illustration