IllustrationROTORS WARP PREMATURELY WHICH CAUSES THE BRAKE PADS TO CRACK. DEALER NOTIFIED.*AK
2000 Chevrolet S10
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most S10 years
Owner complaints for the 2000 Chevrolet S10 are substantially higher than the model-year median of 42.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all S10 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
250–25K
4825–50K
5350–75K
3175–100K
33100–150K
9150K+
199 reports with mileage · 272 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.
- Structure. Review the 93 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 92 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Seats. Review the 55 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
52 crash reports8 fire reports39 injury reports
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
92 reportsTHE REAR BRAKES WORE PREMATURELY. IT WAS LATER DISCOVERED THE THERE WAS NO LUBRICATION ON THE CALIPER PINS OF THE REAR BRAKES. THE PINS FROZE AND AS A RESULT, THE CALIPERS COULD NOT SLIDE. THIS CAUSED PREMATURE WEAR OF THE INSIDE BRAKE PADS AND ROTOR SURFACES. *AK *CB *NLM THE MANUFACTURER FAILED TO LUBRICATE THE PINS. …
Read full complaint
THE REAR BRAKES WORE PREMATURELY. IT WAS LATER DISCOVERED THE THERE WAS NO LUBRICATION ON THE CALIPER PINS OF THE REAR BRAKES. THE PINS FROZE AND AS A RESULT, THE CALIPERS COULD NOT SLIDE. THIS CAUSED PREMATURE WEAR OF THE INSIDE BRAKE PADS AND ROTOR SURFACES. *AK *CB *NLM THE MANUFACTURER FAILED TO LUBRICATE THE PINS. THE PINS WERE FROZEN INTO THE CALIPER BRACKETS AND COULD NOT BE LOOSENED AND REQUIRED REPLACEMENT. *SCC *JB
WHEN EVER VEHICLE IS BRAKING OVER BUMPS, RAILROAD CROSSINGS THE BREAK PEDDLE GIVES AWAY AND VEHICLE ANTI LOCK BREAK SYSTEM PREVENTS STOPPING. *NLM
THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED THE SAME DEFECT AS STATED IN RECALL 00 V 005 000, HOWEVER THE VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. *JB
I WAS PARKING MY TRUCK IN MY APT PARKING STRUCTURE AFTER WORK ON 9/14/02, UPON FINDING A PARKING SPACE I MADE A 3 POINT TURN TO GET INTO THE PARKING SPACE. I REVERSED THEN STOPPED AND PLACED THE TRUCK IN DRIVE AS I WAS ABOUT TO PULL FORWARD INTO THE PARKING SPACE. AT THAT POINT I BARELY TOUCH THE GAS EXPECTING TO COAST INTO TH…
Read full complaint
I WAS PARKING MY TRUCK IN MY APT PARKING STRUCTURE AFTER WORK ON 9/14/02, UPON FINDING A PARKING SPACE I MADE A 3 POINT TURN TO GET INTO THE PARKING SPACE. I REVERSED THEN STOPPED AND PLACED THE TRUCK IN DRIVE AS I WAS ABOUT TO PULL FORWARD INTO THE PARKING SPACE. AT THAT POINT I BARELY TOUCH THE GAS EXPECTING TO COAST INTO THE SPACE AND THEN SUDDELY THE MOTOR JUST STARTED REVVING UP. I DIDN'T THINK TWICE AND JUST JUMPED ON THE BRAKE WITH BOTH FEET BUT THE TRUCK WOULDN'T STOP. WE ENDED UP JUMPING THE CEMENT PARKING STOPPER ON THE GROUND, WHICH LIFTED THE FRONT END INTO THE AIR ABOUT 2-3 FEET, AND SENT US SMASHING INTO THE BLOCK WALL DIRECTLY INFRONT OF US. I NOW HAVE $2,200 WORTH OF FRONT END DAMAGE, AND AM REALLY WORRIED ABOUT DRIVING THAT TRUCK AGAIN.*AK
WHILE TRAVELING ON HIGHWAY IF ROLLED OVER A BUMP OR POTHOLE PEDAL WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR AND THERE WAS NO POWER. DEALERSHIP WAS AWARE OF PROBLEM.*AK
WHEN APPLYING BRAKES TO STOP AND HIT SHARP BUMP IN THE ROAD BRAKE PEDAL GOES TO THE FLOOR AND BRAKING IS SHARPLY DECREASED TO THE POINT WHERE I END UP ROLLING INTO THE INTERSECTION. THIS HAS HAPPENED AT LEAST TEN TIMES NOW AND ONLY THROUGH LUCK AND MY DRIVING SKILL HAVE I NOT BEEN INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT. BROUGHT BACK TO DEALE…
Read full complaint
WHEN APPLYING BRAKES TO STOP AND HIT SHARP BUMP IN THE ROAD BRAKE PEDAL GOES TO THE FLOOR AND BRAKING IS SHARPLY DECREASED TO THE POINT WHERE I END UP ROLLING INTO THE INTERSECTION. THIS HAS HAPPENED AT LEAST TEN TIMES NOW AND ONLY THROUGH LUCK AND MY DRIVING SKILL HAVE I NOT BEEN INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT. BROUGHT BACK TO DEALER THREE TIMES, ONLY LAST TIME WAS SERVICE MANAGER ABLE TO DUPLICATE PROBLEM BUT EACH TIME DEALER HAS INFORMED ME THIS IS NORMAL ABS OPERATION. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS PROBLEM TO WHICH I HAVE SLOWED MY DRIVING DOWN CONSIDERABLY AND WILL NOT LET ANYONE ELSE DRIVE THE VEHICLE. STILL IT SCARES ME TO DEATH EVERYTIME IT HAPPENS.*AK
AUTOMOBILE STARTED PULLING TO THE RIGHT. AFTER LOOKING AT THE BRAKES, CONSUMER PULLED THEM, AND FOUND THAT THE PASSENGERS SIDE WERE WORN DOWN AND DRIVER SIDE WERE NOT. THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED AND THEY PULLED TO THE RIGHT, WHEN HE HEARD A DRAGGING NOISE.*AK *SCC
BRAKES ARE FAILING WHEN I STOP IT WON'T STOP SOMETIMES.*AK
BOTH REAR HYDRAULIC BRAKE LINES RUPTURED AT THE FLARE FITTING ENTERING EACH CALIPER WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF EACH OTHER. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO REPLACE THE FIRST ONE, RIGHT REAR, BECAUSE CHEVROLET INFORMED THEM THAT "THE PART DID NOT EXIST!" THE DEALER WAS FORCED TO REFLARE THE OLD LINE. WITHIN 1 WEEK, IT BROKE AGAIN IN THE SAME SPOT…
Read full complaint
BOTH REAR HYDRAULIC BRAKE LINES RUPTURED AT THE FLARE FITTING ENTERING EACH CALIPER WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF EACH OTHER. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO REPLACE THE FIRST ONE, RIGHT REAR, BECAUSE CHEVROLET INFORMED THEM THAT "THE PART DID NOT EXIST!" THE DEALER WAS FORCED TO REFLARE THE OLD LINE. WITHIN 1 WEEK, IT BROKE AGAIN IN THE SAME SPOT. I REPLACED THE LINE WITH AN AFTERMARKET ONE MYSELF. LESS THAN A WEEK LATER, THE OTHER REAR BRAKE LINE (LEFT REAR) RUPTURED AT THE FLARE IN THE SAME SPOT AS THE RIGHT REAR, ENTERING THE CALIPER. I REPLACED IT MYSELF AND TOOK THE OEM BROKEN LINE TO VIVA MOTORS TO INFORM THEM TO INFORM CHEVROLET THAT THERE WAS A POTENTIAL SERIOUS DEFECT IN CHEVROLET S-10 REAR BRAKE LINES. THE SERVICE MANAGER ADVISED ME TO CALL CHEVROLET MYSELF SINCE THEY (CHEVROLET) WOULDN'T LISTEN TO HIM. SINCE CHEVROLET'S SOUTHWEST AREA ZONE REPRESENTATIVE HAD PREVIOUSLY TOLD ME TO "GO POUND SAND" I FIGURED WHY BOTHER WITH HIM. I FEEL THE ODDS OF TWO OEM BRAKE LINES FAILING WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF EACH OTHER ARE ASTRONOMICAL AND SINCE CHEVROLET CHOSE TO IGNORE THE INCIDENTS, I'D BETTER CONTACT YOU TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER. HOPEFULLY, MINE WAS AN ISOLATED CASE BUT I DOUBT IT BECAUSE AS I SAID, THE ODDS ARE ASTRONOMICAL AND THE SW AREA ZONE REP CHOSE TO SAY THE PART DIDN'T EXIST RATHER THAN ADMIT HE HAD A SERIOUS LIFE THREATENING PROBLEM. IN REALITY, HOW CAN HE SAY THE TRUCK NEVER HAD BRAKE LINES? I SMELL A RAT AND WOULD LIKE YOUR ORGANIZATION TO CHECK INTO IT. IF FURTHER INVESTIGATION SAVES 1 LIFE, THIS IS WELL WORTH OUR EFFORTS. FORTUNATELY, I WAS ABLE TO STOP SAFELY BOTH TIMES MY HYDRAULIC SYSTEM SUFFERED MASSIVE FAILURES BUT I WILL SAY, I THINK THE FAILURES TOOK A FEW YEARS OFF MY LIFE AND ABSOLUTELY CAUSED SOME SOILED PANTS. I'M NOT A CHRONIC COMPLAINER BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION BUT I'M NOT STUPID EITHER AND CHEVROLET HAS PROBLEM WITH AT LEAST ONE OF ITS TRUCKS AND IS CHOOSING TO HIDE ITS HEAD IN THE SAND IT WANTS ME TO GO POUND. THANKS FOR YOUR EFFORTS, JOHN MULLEN. *AK
Official recalls
400V258001 · Equipment:other:labels
Sep 8, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: LIGHT DUTY PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. SOME OF THESE VEHICLES WERE BUILT WITH INCORRECT PAYLOAD INFORMATION ON THE VEHICLE CERTIFICATION LABEL. THE PAYLOAD SHOWN ON THE LABEL IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM VALIDATED PAYLOAD. IF THE VEHICLE WERE LOADED TO THE INCORRECTLY LABELED PAYLOAD, IT MAY NOT RIDE AND HANDLE IN THE MANNER THAT THE DRIVER EXPECTS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE OR AN INABILITY TO STOP THE VEHICLE WITHIN EXPECTED STOPPING DISTANCES.
Remedy: OWNERS WILL BE SENT A NEW LABEL FOR INSTALLATION ON THE DRIVER'S DOOR OF THE VEHICLE.
00V228003 · Seat Belts
Aug 7, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES, LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND MINI VANS EQUIPPED WITH TRW SEAT BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLIES. THE BUCKLE BASE OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES WERE NOT PROPERLY HEAT TREATED AND THEREFORE DO NOT PASS THE LOAD BEARING REQUIREMENT OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A VEHICLE CRASH, THE OCCUPANT MAY NOT BE PROPERLY RESTRAINED.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE VEHICLE'S SAFETY BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY DATE CODES AND, IF NECESSARY, WILL REPLACE ANY SAFETY BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY.
00V055000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip
Feb 28, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: LIGHT DUTY PICKUP TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH 4-WHEEL DISC BRAKES. SOME OF THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN ANTILOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) MOTOR CONTAINING AN OUT-OF-SPECIFICATION SPRING CLIP. THIS CLIP COULD ALLOW THE MOTOR BEARING TO BECOME MISALIGNED. IF MISALIGNMENT OCCURS, EVENTUALLY THE ABS WOULD BE NON-FUNCTIONAL.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE BASE BRAKES WOULD REMAIN FULLY FUNCTIONAL, BUT THE DYNAMIC REAR PROPORTIONING (DRP) SYSTEM, WHICH OPTIMIZES FRONT TO REAR BRAKE BALANCE, WOULD BECOME INOPERATIVE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE BRAKE PRESSURE MODULE VALVE ASSEMBLY.
99V220000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip
Aug 11, 1999
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: S -TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH 2 WHEEL DRIVE. THESE VEHICLES MAY HAVE HAD THE RIGHT-HAND ANTILOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) MODULE FEED PIPE AND/OR BRAKE CROSSOVER PIPE TUBE NUTS TIGHTENED WITHOUT SEATING THE PIPE-FLARED-ENDS ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND NORMAL ASSEMBLY AND VEHICLE INPUTS WITHOUT PARTIALLY UNSEATING. THIS DOES NOT COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 105, "HYDRAULIC SERVICE BRAKE NORMAL, EMERGENCY, AND PARK BRAKING PERFORMANCE."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THIS OCCURRED, THE SEATING SEAL COULD BE BROKEN DURING VEHICLE ASSEMBLY, OR FROM EARLY ROAD INPUTS OR BRAKE FLUID CYCLING, AND A LEAK COULD OCCUR INCREASING THE BRAKE STOPPING DISTANCE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE BRAKE PIPE UNION FOR SIGNS OF BRAKE FLUID, AND IF NECESSARY, INSTALL A NEW BRAKE PIPE UNION.
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
3EA05008 · Tailgate Support Cables
Opened Apr 14, 2005 · Closed May 19, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Latches/locks/linkages:tailgate:latch
GENERAL MOTORS IS CONDUCTING A SPECIAL POLICY PROGRAM FOR 903,464 OWNERS OF 2000 - 2003 MODEL S/T VEHICLES THROUGH WHICH OWNERS MAY, AT THEIR OPTION, EITHER (1) PERIODICALLY INSPECT THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES INSTALLED IN THEIR VEHICLE AND HAVE THE CABLES REPLACED IF THE CABLE COATING EXHIBITS ANY INDICATIONS OF DAMAGE OR DETERIORATION OR (2) REQUEST THAT THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES BE REPLACED FREE OF CHARGE. GM WILL HONOR ALL REQUESTS BY OWNERS WHO OPT FOR REPLACEMENT WITHOUT QUESTION REGARDLESS OF THE CONDITION OR APPEARANCE OF THE CABLES. GM HAS AGREED TO MAIL REMINDER NOTIFICATIONS TO OWNERS EVERY TWO YEARS UNTIL THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES HAVE BEEN REPLACED OR UNTIL THE VEHICLE IS 12 YEARS OLD.ODI'S INVESTIGATION INDICATES THAT A SIGNIFICANT MAJORITY OF THE REPORTED COMPLAINTS (87%) AND INJURIES (94%) HAVE OCCURRED IN MY 2000 - 2003 S/T VEHICLES.
RQ04012 · Tailgate Support Cable(s) Break
Opened Nov 22, 2004 · Closed Apr 14, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut
ODI IS UPGRADING RQ04-012 AND OPENING AN EA TO INVESTIGATE THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES INSTALLED IN 1998 - 2004 MODEL YEAR SONOMA AND S10 MODEL VEHICLES.GENERAL MOTORS IS CONDUCTING RECALL CAMPAIGN 04V-129 TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES ORIGINALLY INSTALLED IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 SIERRAS AND SILVERADOS AND CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2002-2004 AVALANCHES AND ESCALADE EXTS (C/K MODELS).GENERAL MOTORS HAS ADVISED ODITHAT THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES INSTALLED IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE FABRICATED USING IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR SHEATHING MATERIAL AS THE RECALLED VEHICLES.HOWEVER,GENERAL MOTORS HAS ADVISED ODI THAT SONOMA AND S-10 VEHICLES DIFFER FROM C/K MODELS IN SEVERAL WAYS: THE VEHICLE HEIGHT IS LOWER; THE TAILGATE DISPLACEMENT (DROP) WHEN NOT SUPPORTED BY THE CABLES IS SMALLER AND THE TAILGATE COMES TO REST AT A LESS SEVERE TIP ANGLE WHEN NOT SUPPORTED BY THE CABLES; THE TAILGATE MASS IS SMALLER; AND THE SIZE, PAYLOAD, AND USAGE CHARACTERISTCIS ARE LESS DEMANDING THAN C/K MODEL VEHICLES.GM ALSO STATED THAT SONOMA AND S-10 WARRANTY CLAIM INFORMATION INDICATES A LOWER CLAIM COUNT AND A LOWER CLAIM RATE THAN RECALLED C/K MODELS.NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE INFORMATION, ODI HAS RECEIVED AN ADDITIONAL 73 NON-INJURY COMPLAINTS AND 10 INJURY COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES DURING RQ04-012 (SINCE NOVEMBER 2004 TO DATE), WHICH JUSTIFIES OPENING AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE THIS ISSUE.
PE02066 · Engine Stall Due To Fuel Starvation
Opened Sep 6, 2002 · Closed Nov 3, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline; Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump; Fuel System, Other; Fuel System, Other:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Gasoline
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Other:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Other
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.