IllustrationFAILED BRAKES DUE TO THE CORRODED BRAKE LINES- SAFETY ISSUE. *TR
2001 GMC Yukon
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2001 GMC Yukon do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 103.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Yukon 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
120–25K
2525–50K
2050–75K
1875–100K
22100–150K
11150K+
108 reports with mileage · 89 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, Hydraulic. Review the 57 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes. Review the 23 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Air Bags. Review the 18 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
23 crash reports0 fire reports11 injury reports
What owners actually said
197 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 GMC YUKON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL BECAME SEIZED CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO CRASH INTO AN EMBANKMENT. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED A CRUSHED PELVIS IN THREE AREAS, LEFT LEG AND ANKLE NERVE DAMAGE AND …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 GMC YUKON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE STEERING WHEEL BECAME SEIZED CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO CRASH INTO AN EMBANKMENT. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT SUSTAINED A CRUSHED PELVIS IN THREE AREAS, LEFT LEG AND ANKLE NERVE DAMAGE AND DISLOCATED RIGHT SHOULDER. THE FRONT PASSENGER SUSTAINED A BROKEN LEFT LEG AND ANKLE, BROKEN JAW AND FRONT AND SIDE TEETH WERE KNOCKED OUT WHICH REQUIRED MEDICAL ATTENTION. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 200,000.
IN AUG 2005, THE ABS LIGHT ON OUR 2001 GMC YUKON WITH 51K MILES CAME ON AND THERE WAS A GRINDING NOISE (THE PUMP) UNDERNEATH THE DRIVER'S SIDE WHICH REMAINS ON WHEN THE VEHICLE IS TURNED OFF. THE ABS FUSE MUST BE REMOVED TO SHUT OFF THE PUMP. OUR LOCAL GMC DEALERSHIP REPAIRED IT FOR $1100 ($870 FOR THE ABS MODULE). IN SEP 2009,…
Read full complaint
IN AUG 2005, THE ABS LIGHT ON OUR 2001 GMC YUKON WITH 51K MILES CAME ON AND THERE WAS A GRINDING NOISE (THE PUMP) UNDERNEATH THE DRIVER'S SIDE WHICH REMAINS ON WHEN THE VEHICLE IS TURNED OFF. THE ABS FUSE MUST BE REMOVED TO SHUT OFF THE PUMP. OUR LOCAL GMC DEALERSHIP REPAIRED IT FOR $1100 ($870 FOR THE ABS MODULE). IN SEP 2009, THE ABS FAILED AGAIN AT 91K MILES. OUR GMC DEALERSHIP HELPED COVER THE COST OF REPAIR BY COVERING THE COST OF THE MODULE. WE HAD TO WAIT 2 MONTHS (NOV 2009) BEFORE THE VEHICLE COULD BE REPAIRED BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD THAT THE MODULE WAS BEING REDESIGNED TO FIX THESE PROBLEMS. IN OCT 2014, THE ABS FAILED AGAIN AT 138K MILES. OUR GMC DEALERSHIP PUT US IN CONTACT WITH GMC CUSTOMER SERVICE WITH THE HOPE THAT GMC COULD ASSIST IN COVERING THE COST OF REPAIR. AFTER SEVERAL FRUSTRATING PHONE CALLS WITH SUPERVISORS, WE WERE TOLD THAT THE VEHICLE WAS TOO OLD AND THEREFORE GMC WOULD NOT ASSIST. DURING THESE PHONE CALLS GMC STATED THAT THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THE VEHICLE IN "SALT-BELT" STATES BUT NOT CALIFORNIA. OBVIOUSLY THE ABS MODULE IS DEFECTIVE AS A RELATIVE WITH A SIMILAR VEHICLE (CHEVY TAHOE) HAD THE SAME ISSUE WITH THE ABS MODULE. IN SEARCHING THE INTERNET, WE FOUND A COMPANY THAT STATES THAT THEY CAN REPAIR THE MODULE FOR UNDER $100 AND GUARANTEES THE REPAIR FOR LIFE. IF THEY CAN DO THIS, WHY CAN'T GM MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGES TO THE ABS MODULE AND GIVE CUSTOMERS THE PEACE OF MIND THAT THE VEHICLE WILL BE SAFE. HOPEFULLY THE NHTSA WILL USE THIS AND SIMILAR COMPLAINTS AND FORCE GM TO ISSUE A RECALL ON THE ABS MODULE. *TR
BRAKES WERE WEAK, ALMOST TO FLOOR SO THE CAR WAS TOWED HOME. WHILE SLOWLY BACKING THE CAR INTO DRIVEWAY THE BRAKES FAILED COMPLETELY. STEPPED ON EMERGENCY BRAKE AND INTERMEDIATE CABLE BROKE. THE E-BRAKE CABLE FAILED BECAUSE OF RUST AND THE BRAKE LINES TO THE EBCM WHERE THEY GO OVER FRAME ALL FAILED. THE ONLY PART ON THIS CAR THA…
Read full complaint
BRAKES WERE WEAK, ALMOST TO FLOOR SO THE CAR WAS TOWED HOME. WHILE SLOWLY BACKING THE CAR INTO DRIVEWAY THE BRAKES FAILED COMPLETELY. STEPPED ON EMERGENCY BRAKE AND INTERMEDIATE CABLE BROKE. THE E-BRAKE CABLE FAILED BECAUSE OF RUST AND THE BRAKE LINES TO THE EBCM WHERE THEY GO OVER FRAME ALL FAILED. THE ONLY PART ON THIS CAR THAT HAS RUSTED BEYOND ANYTHING NORMAL ARE THE BRAKE LINES. UNBELIEVABLY RUSTED! WHEN THE BRAKES (E-BRAKE AND BOTH LINES) ALL FAILED THE CAR ROLLED OUT OF CONTROLLED INTO A TREE. THE REAR HATCH GLASS SHATTERED AND I HAD A SORE NECK FOR 5-DAYS. THIS IS APPARENTLY A COMMON PROBLEM TO THIS CAR WHERE SALT IS USED. THE BRAKES STARTED TO GO WEAK (1-LINE MUST HAVE FAILED) AS MY WIFE APPROACHED A TOLL BOOTH, ONLY LUCK PREVENTED A CATASTROPHIC EVENT FROM HAPPENING. I CAN'T BELIEVE WE WERE NOT NOTIFIED OR THE CAR WAS NOT RECALLED! GM AND THE NHTSA SHAME ON YOU. YOU KNEW OF A SAFETY PROBLEM AND HAVE DONE NOTHING. GM STATING THAT YOU WILL STILL HAVE BRAKES IF THE LINE FAILS IS A WEAK ARGUMENT, YOU HAVE TO PRESS MUCH HARDER AFTER THE FIRST LINE GOES AND THE OTHER LINE IS READY TO FAIL. GUESS WHAT HAPPENS, NO BRAKES. PLEASE HAVE A GM EXECUTIVE DRIVE ONE OF THESE DEATH TRAPS AND HIT THE BRAKES HARD. THE LAST THING THAT SHOULD RUST ARE THE BRAKE LINES. A LITTLE COMMON SENSE GOES A LONG WAY. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 GMC YUKON. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, THE ENGINE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO RESTART AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE CONTACT'S RESIDENCE AND WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 GMC YUKON. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 50 MPH, THE ENGINE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING AND THE VEHICLE FAILED TO RESTART AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE CONTACT'S RESIDENCE AND WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 173,000.
WHEN EXITING MY DRIVEWAY I WENT DOWN THE STREET TO THE STOP SIGN , WHEN I APPLIED THE BRAKE THE PEDDLE WENT TO THE FLOOR AND THE TRUCK DID NOT STOP. IT WAS GOOD THAT I WASN'T GOING FASTER. WHEN I TOOK MY TRUCK ( YOUKON ) TO THE REPAIR SHOP I EXPLAINED THE ISSUE TO THE REPAIR MAN. I GOT HOME AND HE CALLED ME BACK AND ASKED ME TO …
Read full complaint
WHEN EXITING MY DRIVEWAY I WENT DOWN THE STREET TO THE STOP SIGN , WHEN I APPLIED THE BRAKE THE PEDDLE WENT TO THE FLOOR AND THE TRUCK DID NOT STOP. IT WAS GOOD THAT I WASN'T GOING FASTER. WHEN I TOOK MY TRUCK ( YOUKON ) TO THE REPAIR SHOP I EXPLAINED THE ISSUE TO THE REPAIR MAN. I GOT HOME AND HE CALLED ME BACK AND ASKED ME TO RETURN TO THE SHOP TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE TRUCKS PROBLEMS. WHEN RETURNING TO THE SHOP THE TRUCK WAS LIFTED UP AND HE SHOWED ME THE BRAKE LINES AND THE GAS LINES THAT WERE CORRODED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE . HE ALSO EXPLAINED THE TIME AND LABOR INVOLVED. I WAS SURPRISED OF HOW MUCH LABOR AND TIME WAS INVOLVED TO REPAIR THESE ISSUES . HE SAID THE COST INCLUDING PARTS AND LABOR WILL BE ABOUT 2,500. TO 3,000. DOLLARS, THAT IS IF HE DIDN'T COME ACROSS ANY OTHER PROBLEMS. *TR
I WAS DRIVING LOCALLY,WHEN I USED MY BRAKES TO SLOW DOWN AS I WAS APPROACHING A RED LIGHT I DID NOT HAVE PROPERLY FUNCTIONING BRAKES,PEDAL WENT TO FLOOR,I USED EMERGENCY BRAKE THIS PREVENTED ME FROM HITTING CAR IN FRONT OF ME. THIS OCCURRED IN AUGUST,2012.BRAKE LINES WERE DETERMINED TO HAVE RUSTED OUT,BRAKES FAILED ,A $444 REPA…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING LOCALLY,WHEN I USED MY BRAKES TO SLOW DOWN AS I WAS APPROACHING A RED LIGHT I DID NOT HAVE PROPERLY FUNCTIONING BRAKES,PEDAL WENT TO FLOOR,I USED EMERGENCY BRAKE THIS PREVENTED ME FROM HITTING CAR IN FRONT OF ME. THIS OCCURRED IN AUGUST,2012.BRAKE LINES WERE DETERMINED TO HAVE RUSTED OUT,BRAKES FAILED ,A $444 REPAIR WAS NEEDED. IN NOVEMBER 2013 A SIMILAR INCIDENT OCCURRED WITH MY SON DRIVING. THIS RESULTED IN A $ 1111 DOLLAR REPAIR BILL. AND TODAY JULY 8 2014 WHILE BACKING OUT ONTO STREET ANOTHER BRAKE FAILURE OCCURRED BILL TO BE DETERMINED ? *TR UPDATED 3/18/2015 *JS
I WAS TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH WHEN THE CAR IN FRONT BRAKED SUDDENLY. I PRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL QUICKLY AND FIRMLY TO SLOW THE VEHICLE, AND THE BRAKES WORKED NORMALLY. A HALF MILE OR SO LATER, AT AN INTERSECTION, WHEN I APPLIED THE BRAKES GRADUALLY, THE PEDAL WAS SOFT AND WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR, ONLY BARELY STO…
Read full complaint
I WAS TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY 35 MPH WHEN THE CAR IN FRONT BRAKED SUDDENLY. I PRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL QUICKLY AND FIRMLY TO SLOW THE VEHICLE, AND THE BRAKES WORKED NORMALLY. A HALF MILE OR SO LATER, AT AN INTERSECTION, WHEN I APPLIED THE BRAKES GRADUALLY, THE PEDAL WAS SOFT AND WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR, ONLY BARELY STOPPING THE VEHICLE BEFORE IT ENTERED THE INTERSECTION. I DROVE THE VEHICLE HOME (ABOUT A MILE) SLOWLY AND CAUTIOUSLY AND INSPECTED THE BRAKES AND FOUND BRAKE FLUID COATING THE UNDERSIDE OF THE VEHICLE AND WHAT APPEARED TO BE RUST OR CORROSION ON THE BRAKE LINES WHERE THEY CROSSED THE FRAME NEAR THE DRIVER'S SIDE WHEEL AXLE. *TR
PARKING BRAKE WILL APPLY ITSELF AND WILL STAY ENGAGED UNTIL IT DECIDES TO RELEASE, OR UNTIL THE PADS AND METAL SHOE IS WORN OUT OR CATCHES FIRE FROM THE EXTREME HEAT , IF YOU APPLY IT , IT MAY STAY ENGAGED AND YOU WON'T KNOW IT , UNTIL IT IS TO LATE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT, ,THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF COMPLAINTS ONLINE THAT HAS BE…
Read full complaint
PARKING BRAKE WILL APPLY ITSELF AND WILL STAY ENGAGED UNTIL IT DECIDES TO RELEASE, OR UNTIL THE PADS AND METAL SHOE IS WORN OUT OR CATCHES FIRE FROM THE EXTREME HEAT , IF YOU APPLY IT , IT MAY STAY ENGAGED AND YOU WON'T KNOW IT , UNTIL IT IS TO LATE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT, ,THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF COMPLAINTS ONLINE THAT HAS BEEN REPORTED TO DEALERSHIPS , AND TO GM BUT THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING. *TR
LETTER FROM SENATOR SCOTT ON BEHALF OF CONSTITUENT RE GMC YUKON. *SMD THE CONSUMERS HUSBAND WAS KILLED IN AN ACCIDENT, AND THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. *JB
Official recalls
607V521000 · Engine And Engine Cooling
Nov 7, 2007
ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH AN 8.1L V8 ENGINE, THE CRANKSHAFT POSITION CAN OPERATE INTERMITTENTLY OR FAIL COMPLETELY. IF THE SENSOR OPERATES INTERMITTENTLY, THE SES LIGHT MAY ILLUMINATE AND THE VEHICLE MAY RUN ROUGH. THE ENGINE MAY STALL, AND IF SO, MAY RE-START IMMEDIATELY OR AFTER A COOL DOWN PERIOD.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE SENSOR BECOMES COMPLETELY INOPERATIVE, THE ENGINE WILL QUIT RUNNING AND WILL NOT RE-START. EITHER OF THESE FAILURES CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE CRANKSHAFT POSITION SENSOR FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON DECEMBER 18, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438 AND GMC AT 1-866-996-9463.
05V379000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip
Aug 29, 2005
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES MAY EXPERIENCE UNWANTED ANTILOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) ACTIVATION. THIS CONDITION IS MORE LIKELY TO OCCUR IN ENVIRONMENTALLY CORROSIVE AREAS. THIS RECALL WILL BE LAUNCHED IN THE "SALT BELT" STATES OF CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ONLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS CAN CAUSE INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES DURING LOW-SPEED BRAKE APPLICATIONS, WHICH COULD RESULT IN A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS ARE TO REMOVE THE WHEEL SPEED SENSOR AND THOROUGHLY CLEAN THE WHEEL SPEED SENSOR MOUNTING SURFACE ON THE BEARING, APPLY RUST INHIBITOR TO THE CLEANED SURFACE, GREASE THE MOUNTING SURFACE, REINSTALL THE WHEEL SPEED SENSOR, AND CHECK THE PEAK-TO-PEAK OUTPUT VOLTAGE TO ENSURE THE WHEEL SPEED SIGNAL IS WITHIN SPECIFICATIONS. THE RECALL BEGAN SEPTEMBER 22, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438 OR GMC AT 1-866-996-9463.
03V094000 · Structure
Mar 7, 2003
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCK, VAN, AND MINI VAN CONVERSIONS EQUIPPED WITH SOUTHERN COMFORT BUILT RUNNING BOARDS THAT CONTAIN CERTAIN COURTESY LIGHTS MANUFACTURED BY AMERICAN TECHNOLOGY COMPONENTS, INC. THESE UNITS CONTAIN A COURTESY LIGHT OR LIGHTS THAT MIGHT OVERHEAT WHEN THE WIRE HARNESS IS EXPOSED TO EXCESSIVE MOISTURE AND ROAD SALT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS OVERHEATING CONDITION CAN CAUSE THE RUNNING BOARD TO MELT OR CAUSE A FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE WIRING HARNESS ON THESE RUNNING BOARDS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN MARCH 7, 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 SOUTHERN COMFORT AT 1-800-745-6096.
02V253000 · Seats:front Assembly:head Restraint
Sep 17, 2002
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH REARWARD FOLDING HEAD RESTRAINTS ON THE SECOND ROW SEATS, TWO POTENTIAL PINCH POINTS EXIST ON EACH OF THE FOLDING HEAD RESTRAINTS WHEN THE RESTRAINTS ARE FOLDED REARWARD AS THE SEATBACK IS FOLDED DOWN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF A PERSON WERE TO INSERT THEIR FINGER(S) INTO THE PINCH POINT WHEN THE HEAD RESTRAINT FOLDS, IT COULD TRAP AND PINCH THE FINGER(S) CAUSING INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL PROTECTIVE COVERS OVER THE PINCH POINTS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN NOVEMBER 8, 2002. 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, GMC AT 1-800-462-8782, OR CADILLAC AT 1-800-458-8006.
01V159000 · Seat Belts:front:retractor
May 17, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PICKUP AND UTILITY TRUCKS. SOME OF THESE VEHICLES HAVE AN INTERNAL COMPONENT IN THE OUTBOARD SEAT BELT RETRACTORS FOR THE 2ND AND 3RD ROW OF SEATS THAT COULD BE CRACKED. WITH REPEATED ACTUATION OF THE LOCKING MECHANISM, THE CRACK COULD SPREAD TO THE POINT SUCH THAT THE SEAT BELT WOULD NO LONGER LOCK.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN A CRASH, INCREASED OCCUPANT INJURY COULD RESULT FROM THE NO-LOCK CONDITION.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE OUTBOARD SEAT BELTS FOR SPECIFIC LOT NUMBERS AND REPLACE THE BELTS IF NECESSARY. GM IS ENCLOSING AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE FOR THE OWNERS TO USE OR THEY CAN HAVE THEIR DEALERS DO THE INSPECTIONS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN JULY 2, 2001. 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.
00V343000 · Structure:body
Oct 25, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: LIGHT DUTY PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. SOME OF THESE VEHICLES HAVE LOOSE OR MISSING REAR WHEELHOUSE PLUGS. UNDER CERTAIN VEHICLE OPERATING CONDITIONS, EXHAUST GASES CAN FLOW FORWARD AND ACCUMULATE IN THE REAR WHEELHOUSE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THESE GASES COULD FLOW INTO THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT IF THE PLUG IS MISSING OR LOOSE AND COULD CAUSE POSSIBLE ILLNESS, UNCONSCIOUSNESS, OR DEATH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE VEHICLE FOR LOOSE OR MISSING WHEELHOUSE PLUGS AND INSTALL NEW PLUGS IF NECESSARY.
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
5PE10010 · 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.
PE05020 · Unwanted LOW-SPEED Abs Activation
Opened Apr 28, 2005 · Closed Sep 13, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module
IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 29, 2005, GM NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WAS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1999 THROUGH 2002 C/K PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) WHEEL SPEED SENSOR CORROSION THAT MAY RESULT IN UNWANTED ABS ACTIVATION AND EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCES DURING LOW-SPEED BRAKING (RECALL 05V-379).GM'S RECALL COVERS APPROXIMATELY 804,000 VEHICLES CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING 14 SALT-BELT STATES:CONNECTICUT, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE, MICHIGAN, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, AND WEST VIRGINIA.THE RECALL PROCEDURE WILL INVOLVE REMOVING THE SENSOR, CLEANING THE MOUNTING SURFACE, APPLYING A RUST INHIBITOR (ZINC-X) TO THE SURFACE, AND REINSTALLING THE SENSOR.IF NECESSARY, THE SENSOR WILL BE REPLACED. THE POPULATION AND FAILURE REPORT DATA GIVEN IN THIS RESUME ARE FOR THE FULL REGION THAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY ODI AS THE SALT-BELT.THAT INCLUDES DELAWARE, IOWA, MARYLAND, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN ADDITION TO THE 14 STATES INCLUDED IN 05V-379.THE STATES COVERED BY GM'S RECALL HAVE THE HIGHEST INCIDENT RATES FOR THE SUBJECT CONDITION, ACCOUNTING FOR 91% OF THE INCIDENTS, BUT ONLY 24% OF SUBJECT VEHICLE SALES IN THE UNITED STATES.ODI'S ANALYSIS DETERMINED THAT 840 OF THE COMPLAINTS, 244 OF THE CRASHES, AND 16 OF THE INJURIES IDENTIFIED IN THIS INVESTIGATION OCCURRED IN THOSE STATES.THE RESULTING INCIDENT AND CRASH RATES ARE 96.2 AND 28.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES RESPECTIVELY (NOTE:RATES ARE BASED ON VEHICLE SALES, NOT REGISTERED VEHICLES). THE CORRESPONDING NUMBERS IN THE EXCLUDED PORTIONS OF THE SALT-BELT ARE 399,000 VEHICLES, 81 INCIDENTS (20.3 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 3 CRASHES, AND NO INJURIES.THE STATISTICS IN THE REMAINING 30 STATES ARE 2,406,000 VEHICLES, 168 INCIDENTS (7.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 31 CRASHES, AND ONE INJURY.GM AND ODI ARE CONTINUING TO MONITOR THE PROBLEM EXPERIENCE IN STATES THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL.GM WILL PROVIDE ODI WITH UPDATED COMPLAINT, FIELD REPORT, AND WARRANTY DATA IN NOVEMBER 2005.ODI AND GM WILL REVIEW THAT DATA AND ASSESS THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE CURRENT SCOPE OF THE RECALL AT THAT TIME.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module
IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 29, 2005, GM NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WAS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1999 THROUGH 2002 C/K PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) WHEEL SPEED SENSOR CORROSION THAT MAY RESULT IN UNWANTED ABS ACTIVATION AND EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCES DURING LOW-SPEED BRAKING (RECALL 05V-379).GM'S RECALL COVERS APPROXIMATELY 804,000 VEHICLES CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING 14 SALT-BELT STATES:CONNECTICUT, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE, MICHIGAN, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, AND WEST VIRGINIA.THE RECALL PROCEDURE WILL INVOLVE REMOVING THE SENSOR, CLEANING THE MOUNTING SURFACE, APPLYING A RUST INHIBITOR (ZINC-X) TO THE SURFACE, AND REINSTALLING THE SENSOR.IF NECESSARY, THE SENSOR WILL BE REPLACED. THE POPULATION AND FAILURE REPORT DATA GIVEN IN THIS RESUME ARE FOR THE FULL REGION THAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY ODI AS THE SALT-BELT.THAT INCLUDES DELAWARE, IOWA, MARYLAND, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN ADDITION TO THE 14 STATES INCLUDED IN 05V-379.THE STATES COVERED BY GM'S RECALL HAVE THE HIGHEST INCIDENT RATES FOR THE SUBJECT CONDITION, ACCOUNTING FOR 91% OF THE INCIDENTS, BUT ONLY 24% OF SUBJECT VEHICLE SALES IN THE UNITED STATES.ODI'S ANALYSIS DETERMINED THAT 840 OF THE COMPLAINTS, 244 OF THE CRASHES, AND 16 OF THE INJURIES IDENTIFIED IN THIS INVESTIGATION OCCURRED IN THOSE STATES.THE RESULTING INCIDENT AND CRASH RATES ARE 96.2 AND 28.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES RESPECTIVELY (NOTE:RATES ARE BASED ON VEHICLE SALES, NOT REGISTERED VEHICLES). THE CORRESPONDING NUMBERS IN THE EXCLUDED PORTIONS OF THE SALT-BELT ARE 399,000 VEHICLES, 81 INCIDENTS (20.3 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 3 CRASHES, AND NO INJURIES.THE STATISTICS IN THE REMAINING 30 STATES ARE 2,406,000 VEHICLES, 168 INCIDENTS (7.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 31 CRASHES, AND ONE INJURY.GM AND ODI ARE CONTINUING TO MONITOR THE PROBLEM EXPERIENCE IN STATES THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL.GM WILL PROVIDE ODI WITH UPDATED COMPLAINT, FIELD REPORT, AND WARRANTY DATA IN NOVEMBER 2005.ODI AND GM WILL REVIEW THAT DATA AND ASSESS THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE CURRENT SCOPE OF THE RECALL AT THAT TIME.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip
IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 29, 2005, GM NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WAS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1999 THROUGH 2002 C/K PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) WHEEL SPEED SENSOR CORROSION THAT MAY RESULT IN UNWANTED ABS ACTIVATION AND EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCES DURING LOW-SPEED BRAKING (RECALL 05V-379).GM'S RECALL COVERS APPROXIMATELY 804,000 VEHICLES CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING 14 SALT-BELT STATES:CONNECTICUT, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE, MICHIGAN, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, AND WEST VIRGINIA.THE RECALL PROCEDURE WILL INVOLVE REMOVING THE SENSOR, CLEANING THE MOUNTING SURFACE, APPLYING A RUST INHIBITOR (ZINC-X) TO THE SURFACE, AND REINSTALLING THE SENSOR.IF NECESSARY, THE SENSOR WILL BE REPLACED. THE POPULATION AND FAILURE REPORT DATA GIVEN IN THIS RESUME ARE FOR THE FULL REGION THAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY ODI AS THE SALT-BELT.THAT INCLUDES DELAWARE, IOWA, MARYLAND, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN ADDITION TO THE 14 STATES INCLUDED IN 05V-379.THE STATES COVERED BY GM'S RECALL HAVE THE HIGHEST INCIDENT RATES FOR THE SUBJECT CONDITION, ACCOUNTING FOR 91% OF THE INCIDENTS, BUT ONLY 24% OF SUBJECT VEHICLE SALES IN THE UNITED STATES.ODI'S ANALYSIS DETERMINED THAT 840 OF THE COMPLAINTS, 244 OF THE CRASHES, AND 16 OF THE INJURIES IDENTIFIED IN THIS INVESTIGATION OCCURRED IN THOSE STATES.THE RESULTING INCIDENT AND CRASH RATES ARE 96.2 AND 28.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES RESPECTIVELY (NOTE:RATES ARE BASED ON VEHICLE SALES, NOT REGISTERED VEHICLES). THE CORRESPONDING NUMBERS IN THE EXCLUDED PORTIONS OF THE SALT-BELT ARE 399,000 VEHICLES, 81 INCIDENTS (20.3 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 3 CRASHES, AND NO INJURIES.THE STATISTICS IN THE REMAINING 30 STATES ARE 2,406,000 VEHICLES, 168 INCIDENTS (7.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 31 CRASHES, AND ONE INJURY.GM AND ODI ARE CONTINUING TO MONITOR THE PROBLEM EXPERIENCE IN STATES THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL.GM WILL PROVIDE ODI WITH UPDATED COMPLAINT, FIELD REPORT, AND WARRANTY DATA IN NOVEMBER 2005.ODI AND GM WILL REVIEW THAT DATA AND ASSESS THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE CURRENT SCOPE OF THE RECALL AT THAT TIME.
PE02067 · Alleged Failure Of 2ND Row Seatbelt Alr
Opened Sep 25, 2002 · Closed Feb 11, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seat Belts; Seat Belts:rear/other
THE AUTOMATIC LOCKING RETRACTOR (ALR) IS A FEATURE INCORPORATED IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE FOR LOCKING THE WEBBING TO PROPERLY SECURE A CHILD SAFETY SEAT INTO A VEHICLE.THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON A GM TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN STATING THAT WITH CERTAIN CHILD SAFETY SEATS THE WEBBING MAY NOT REMAIN LOCKED.THERE ARE NO COMPLAINTS IN THE ODI DATABASE AND ONLY TWO COMPLAINTS TO GM.GM'S INSTRUCTIONS STATE FOR THE FINAL STEP IN USING THE WEBBING LOCK FEATURE TO PUSH AND PULL THE CHILD RESTRAINT TO BE SURE IT IS SECURE. IF THE ALR IS NOT LOCKED, THE USER WOULD BE FULLY AWARE OF THIS CONDITION PRIOR TO COMPLETING PROPER INSTALLATION OF THE CHILD SAFETY SEAT IN THIS VEHICLE.THIS INVESTIGATION DID NOT UNCOVER ANY COMPLAINTS OF THE ALR INADVERTENTLY UNLOCKING WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION.THE EMERGENCY LOCKING RETRACTOR (ELR) FEATURE REMAINS AVAILABLE TO LOCK THE RETRACTOR IN A CRASH.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Seat Belts
THE AUTOMATIC LOCKING RETRACTOR (ALR) IS A FEATURE INCORPORATED IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE FOR LOCKING THE WEBBING TO PROPERLY SECURE A CHILD SAFETY SEAT INTO A VEHICLE.THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON A GM TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN STATING THAT WITH CERTAIN CHILD SAFETY SEATS THE WEBBING MAY NOT REMAIN LOCKED.THERE ARE NO COMPLAINTS IN THE ODI DATABASE AND ONLY TWO COMPLAINTS TO GM.GM'S INSTRUCTIONS STATE FOR THE FINAL STEP IN USING THE WEBBING LOCK FEATURE TO PUSH AND PULL THE CHILD RESTRAINT TO BE SURE IT IS SECURE. IF THE ALR IS NOT LOCKED, THE USER WOULD BE FULLY AWARE OF THIS CONDITION PRIOR TO COMPLETING PROPER INSTALLATION OF THE CHILD SAFETY SEAT IN THIS VEHICLE.THIS INVESTIGATION DID NOT UNCOVER ANY COMPLAINTS OF THE ALR INADVERTENTLY UNLOCKING WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION.THE EMERGENCY LOCKING RETRACTOR (ELR) FEATURE REMAINS AVAILABLE TO LOCK THE RETRACTOR IN A CRASH.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
Seat Belts:rear/other
THE AUTOMATIC LOCKING RETRACTOR (ALR) IS A FEATURE INCORPORATED IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE FOR LOCKING THE WEBBING TO PROPERLY SECURE A CHILD SAFETY SEAT INTO A VEHICLE.THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON A GM TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN STATING THAT WITH CERTAIN CHILD SAFETY SEATS THE WEBBING MAY NOT REMAIN LOCKED.THERE ARE NO COMPLAINTS IN THE ODI DATABASE AND ONLY TWO COMPLAINTS TO GM.GM'S INSTRUCTIONS STATE FOR THE FINAL STEP IN USING THE WEBBING LOCK FEATURE TO PUSH AND PULL THE CHILD RESTRAINT TO BE SURE IT IS SECURE. IF THE ALR IS NOT LOCKED, THE USER WOULD BE FULLY AWARE OF THIS CONDITION PRIOR TO COMPLETING PROPER INSTALLATION OF THE CHILD SAFETY SEAT IN THIS VEHICLE.THIS INVESTIGATION DID NOT UNCOVER ANY COMPLAINTS OF THE ALR INADVERTENTLY UNLOCKING WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION.THE EMERGENCY LOCKING RETRACTOR (ELR) FEATURE REMAINS AVAILABLE TO LOCK THE RETRACTOR IN A CRASH.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
EA02015 · Throttle Sticking Closed
Opened Aug 1, 2002 · Closed Jan 12, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
THIS INVESTIGATION INVOLVES THE GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION (GM)THROTTLE BODY (TB) UTILIZED IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1999-2002 SILVERADO, SIERRA, TAHOE, SUBURBAN, AVALANCHE AND YUKON (SUBJECT VEHICLE(S)) WITH 4.8L, 5.3L, AND 6.0L ENGINES. THE TB VALVE MAY INTERMITTENTLY STICK IN A CLOSED POSITION.IN SUCH A SITUATION, AN OPERATOR MAY APPLY ADDITIONAL ACCELERATOR PEDAL FORCE TO INCREASE ENGINE SPEED.THE APPLICATION OF ADDITIONAL ACCELERATOR PEDAL FORCE, TO OPEN A STUCK THROTTLE VALVE, MAY OPEN THE THROTTLE VALVE MORE THAN INTENDED AND, IN TURN, ACCELERATE THE ENGINE AND VEHICLE MORE THAN INTENDED AND REASONABLY EXPECTED BY THE DRIVER.ON AUGUST 1, 2002, THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), OF THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION (NHTSA), OPENED THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS.THE INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT TWO FACTORS MAY CAUSE THE DEFECT: 1) TB MANUFACTURING PROCESS PROBLEMS; AND 2) ACCUMULATION OF DEPOSITS (A PCV SYSTEM BY-PRODUCT) ON OR AROUND THE TB THROTTLE VALVE AND BORE.ODI CONCLUDES THAT THE TB PERFORMS IN A DEFECTIVE MANNER AFTER ANALYZING GM?S DATA SUBMISSIONS, AND TEST DATA COLLECTED BY THE VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TEST CENTER (VRTC).FIFTY-NINE CRASHES ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE OCCURRED AS A RESULT OF GM?S TB DEFECT.THE MAJORITY OF THE CRASHES INVOLVE A SINGLE VEHICLE, ENGAGING IN A CLOSE QUARTER VEHICLE MANEUVER (OR LOW SPEED), AND CAUSING ONLY MINOR PROPERTY DAMAGE.FOUR OUT OF THE FIFTY-NINE CRASHES INVOLVE INJURY, AND THOSE INJURIES WERE MINOR.ALTHOUGH GM?S TB IS DEFECTIVE, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE GATHERED, ODI HAS FOUND THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL FORCE REQUIRED TO OPEN A STUCK THROTTLE VALVE IS NEGLIGIBLE, AND THE THROTTLE VALVE DOES NOT STICK IN THE OPEN POSITION.THEREFORE THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA02-015) WILL BE CLOSED AT THIS TIME.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FOR A DETAILED DISCUSSION OF THE TB COMPONENT AND TESTING, PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHED REPORT.