IllustrationFUEL SENSOR WAS NOT WORKING. CONSUMER WAS UNABLE TO READ THE GAUGE TO DETERMINE IF FUEL WAS NEEDED. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THERE WERE NO RECALLS FOR THIS DEFECT.*AK *JB
2002 GMC Yukon
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2002 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
1925–50K
1850–75K
1475–100K
27100–150K
17150K+
107 reports with mileage · 51 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 37 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 35 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Air Bags. Review the 11 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
15 crash reports3 fire reports10 injury reports
What owners actually said
158 reportsVEHICLE WILL NOT GO INTO REVERSE. WHEN TAKING TO BE SERVICED IT WAS DETERMINED THAT TRANSMISSION FAILED. *AK
DEC 24 2004 I RETURNED TO MY PARKED CAR AND STARTED THE ENGINE, THE FRONT DEFROST BLOWERS WENT TO HIGH SPEED AND WOULD NOT SHUT OFF. AT MY NEXT STOP I STOPPED AND RESTARTED THE CAR SEVERAL TIMES BUT THE FAN KEPT RUNNING. REMOVING THE KEYS OPENING THE DOOR DID NOTHING. AFTER REMOVING THE FUSE TO THE FRONT HAVC THE FAN STOPPED B…
Read full complaint
DEC 24 2004 I RETURNED TO MY PARKED CAR AND STARTED THE ENGINE, THE FRONT DEFROST BLOWERS WENT TO HIGH SPEED AND WOULD NOT SHUT OFF. AT MY NEXT STOP I STOPPED AND RESTARTED THE CAR SEVERAL TIMES BUT THE FAN KEPT RUNNING. REMOVING THE KEYS OPENING THE DOOR DID NOTHING. AFTER REMOVING THE FUSE TO THE FRONT HAVC THE FAN STOPPED BUT STARTED AGAIN WHEN THE FUSE WAS RE-INSTALLED. AFTER RETURNING HOME I DISCONNECTED THE BATTERY FOR A HALF HOUR THE FAN STAYED OFF, THE CONTROLS WORKED PROPERLY. DEC 28TH STOPPING FOR GAS, I TURNED THE CAR OFF BUT THE FAN CAM ON AGAIN AT FULL SPEED. I CHECKED ON LINE AND IT SEEMS SEVERAL PEOPLE ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM BUT THE DEALERS HAVE NOT COME UP WITH A FIX. AT THIS TIME I HAVE PULLED THE FUSE TO KEEP THE FAN FROM BLOWING BUT IT'S TOO COLD TO BE DRIVING WITH NO HEAT OR DEFROST IN THE CAR. WHEN I GET HOME WHERE I HAVE TOOLS I WILL AGAIN DISCONNECT THE BATTERY.
INTERMITTENTLY WHILE DRIVING AT VERY SLOW SPEED. AND APPLYING THE BRAKES PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR, AND THERE WERE NO BRAKES. THIS RESULTED IN EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE. *AK
WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH VEHICLE LOST POWER. WITHOUT WARNING. DEALER COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. *AK
WHILE DRIVING A LOUD KNOCKING NOISE WAS HEARD FROM THE FRONT. CONSUMER WAS ABLE TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE TO DEALER FOR INSPECTION, AND MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT A CARBON BUILD UP ON THE PISTON CAUSED THE KNOCKING. *AK
WHEN SHIFTING THE GEARS TRANSMISSION DOWN SHIFTED ON ITS ON. VEHICLE FAILED TO MOVE. CONSUMER HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION, AND MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED DUE TO WORN OUT PARTS. *AK
WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE DRIVER APPLIED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT WENT TO THE FLOOR. THE BRAKES DID NOT WORK. THE MECHANIC COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. *AK THERE WOULD BE A HOWLING NOISE AS IF SOMETHING WAS WRONG WITH THE POWER BOOSTER AND THE BRAKE PEDAL WOULD VIBRATE. THE PROBLEM ONLY OCCURRED AROUND 10 MPH. *SC …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE DRIVER APPLIED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND IT WENT TO THE FLOOR. THE BRAKES DID NOT WORK. THE MECHANIC COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. *AK THERE WOULD BE A HOWLING NOISE AS IF SOMETHING WAS WRONG WITH THE POWER BOOSTER AND THE BRAKE PEDAL WOULD VIBRATE. THE PROBLEM ONLY OCCURRED AROUND 10 MPH. *SC *JB
MODEL: 2001 GMC YUKON 4WD DATE OF PURCHASE: SEPTEMBER 25, 2001 RIGHT NOW OUR YUKON IS AT FIORE'S IN ALTOONA, PA FOR THE THIRD TIME TRYING TO BE FIXED FOR THE SAME PROBLEM. THIS IS THE THIRD DAY THAT THEY HAVE HAD OUR CAR. THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKS UP WHEN TURNING RIGHT AND BRAKING. I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED. HISTORY: JULY 26, 20…
Read full complaint
MODEL: 2001 GMC YUKON 4WD DATE OF PURCHASE: SEPTEMBER 25, 2001 RIGHT NOW OUR YUKON IS AT FIORE'S IN ALTOONA, PA FOR THE THIRD TIME TRYING TO BE FIXED FOR THE SAME PROBLEM. THIS IS THE THIRD DAY THAT THEY HAVE HAD OUR CAR. THE STEERING WHEEL LOCKS UP WHEN TURNING RIGHT AND BRAKING. I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED. HISTORY: JULY 26, 2003: WHILE VACATIONING IN DELAWARE THE STEERING BEGAN TO FAIL (THE STEERING WOULD ALMOST LOCK UP AND MAKE IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO TURN THE STEERING WHEEL). THE FAILURE ALWAYS OCCURRED WHILE TURNING THE WHEEL TO THE RIGHT WHILE DEPRESSING THE BRAKE PEDAL. THE PROBLEM DIDN'T ALWAYS OCCUR, HOWEVER DURING THE 5-HOUR DRIVE BACK HOME ON JULY 27, THE STEERING FAILED SEVERAL TIMES CAUSING EXTREME STRESS. JULY 28, 2003: CALLED THE DEALER WHERE THE YUKON WAS PURCHASED (FIORE PONTIAC GMC, ALTOONA, PA) AND TOLD THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT ABOUT THE STEERING PROBLEM. THE CAR WAS SCHEDULED TO BE SEEN ON THURSDAY, JULY 31, 2003. JULY 31, 2003: THE YUKON WAS SEEN BY THE FIORE SERVICE DEPARTMENT. I WAS TOLD THAT THE PROBLEM WAS A STEERING SENSOR THAT NEEDED REPLACED. THE PART WASN'T AVAILABLE AND HAD TO BE ORDERED. I HAD TO CALL THE DEALERSHIP SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS TO FIND THE STATUS OF THE PART. THE PART WAS NOT DELIVERED UNTIL TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 2003. AUGUST 5, 2003: THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED THE PART TO BE INSTALLED ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2003 AUGUST 7, 2003: THE NEW SENSOR WAS INSTALLED AUGUST 9, 2003: WHILE VACATIONING IN DELAWARE, THE STEERING AGAIN FAILED AS BEFORE. THERE WAS NO CHANGE EVEN AFTER THE NEW SENSOR WAS INSTALLED. RETURNED FROM VACATION ON AUGUST 13, 2003. THE STEERING FAILED SEVERAL TIMES DURING THIS PERIOD. AUGUST 13, 2003: CALLED FIORE PONTIAC SERVICE DEPARTMENT TO NOTIFY THEM THAT THE STEERING PROBLEM HAD NOT BEEN CORRECTED. WAS TOLD TO BRING THE CAR IN THE AFTERNOON OF AUGUST 18, 2003. DURING THE NEXT 5 DAYS, THE STEERING CONTINUED TO FAIL AND TIGHTEN UP SEVERAL TIMES.
DEFECTIVE ENGINE (PISTONS KNOCKING IN CYLINDERS, AS DOCUMENTED BY DEALER) ON 2002 YUKON SLT; 19,500 MILES
Official recalls
305V379000 · 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.
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.
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.
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.