IllustrationTHE COMPONENTS OF THE BRAKES WERE TORE UP AGAIN FOR A SECOND TIME IN 6 YEARS. THE MECHANIC SAID IT WAS THE SAME PROBLEM AND IT TORE UP EVERYTHING. THE ROTORS CALIPER AND BRAKE PADS. *TR
2000 Pontiac Grand Am
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Grand Am years
Owner complaints for the 2000 Pontiac Grand Am are substantially higher than the model-year median of 82.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Grand Am 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
340–25K
6825–50K
8450–75K
6375–100K
62100–150K
17150K+
328 reports with mileage · 347 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.
- Exterior Lighting. Review the 157 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 130 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 118 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
43 crash reports14 fire reports34 injury reports
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
118 reportsFILE DATE 5/2/2000 MFR. INVOLVED GENERAL MOTORS CORP. NHTSA CAMPAIGN # 00V116000 MFR. CAMPAIGN # 00041 COMPONENT AFFECTED SUSPENSION:REAR # VEHICLES AFFECTED 23 DEFECT VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE BOLT THAT ATTACHES THE REAR SUSPENSION TRAILING ARM TO THE LEFT REAR KNUCKLE MAY NOT H…
Read full complaint
FILE DATE 5/2/2000 MFR. INVOLVED GENERAL MOTORS CORP. NHTSA CAMPAIGN # 00V116000 MFR. CAMPAIGN # 00041 COMPONENT AFFECTED SUSPENSION:REAR # VEHICLES AFFECTED 23 DEFECT VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE BOLT THAT ATTACHES THE REAR SUSPENSION TRAILING ARM TO THE LEFT REAR KNUCKLE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN TIGHTENED TO SPECIFICATIONS DURING ASSEMBLY. CONSEQUENCE THE BOLT COULD BACK COMPLETELY OUT OF THE JOINT AFFECTING VEHICLE CONTROL. CORRECTIVE ACTION DEALERS WILL TIGHTEN THIS BOLT. ------------------------------ I HAVE TO REPLACE THE REAR WHEEL BEARING ON THE LEFT REAR. I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER, THAT THIS DID NOT APPLY TO MY 2000 PONTIAC GRAND AM SE, . EACH BEARING IS $ 300- 400, BUT I HAVE NOT HAD TO REPLACE IN OTHER BEARINGS EXCEPT THE LEFT REAR. COULD THE ABOVE RECALL AFFECT THAT WHEEL BEARING, AND HOW MUCH OF A COINCIDENCE THAT IT JUST SO HAPPENS TO BE THE LEFT REAR WHEEL BEARING ON MY CAR, COULD THERE HAVE BEEN MORE OF A WIDESPREAD PROBLEM WITH THE LEFT REAR SUSPENSION OF THIS VEHICLE? ALSO WHEN BREAKING AT HIGH SPEEDS THE ABS LIGHT CAME ON, THE NEW LEFT REAR BRAKE SHOE CRACKED IN HALF AS A RESULT OF THE LEFT REAR WHEEL BEARING HAVING ISSUES. *TR
I PURCHASED THIS CAR NEW (MY FIRST NEW CAR) IN AUGUST 2000. AFTER THE FIRST 15,000 MILES AND THE NEXT 15.000 MILES THE BRAKES WERE REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY. AFTER EACH ADDITIONAL 15,000 +/- MILES I PAID FOR THIS SERVICE OUT OF POCKET. IN ADDITION, I STARTED PAYING FOR WHEEL BEARINGS AND REPLACED THEM TOO MANY TIMES TO COUNT. …
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED THIS CAR NEW (MY FIRST NEW CAR) IN AUGUST 2000. AFTER THE FIRST 15,000 MILES AND THE NEXT 15.000 MILES THE BRAKES WERE REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY. AFTER EACH ADDITIONAL 15,000 +/- MILES I PAID FOR THIS SERVICE OUT OF POCKET. IN ADDITION, I STARTED PAYING FOR WHEEL BEARINGS AND REPLACED THEM TOO MANY TIMES TO COUNT. NEXT THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM WITH THE FAN ONLY WORKING ON SPEED 1 AND 5. MANY DEALER TRIPS TO HAVE ATTEMPTS TO BE FIXED. PROBLEMS GREW TO ADD ISSUES WITH FUEL PUMP. NEW FUEL PUMP ADDED AFTER BEING STRANDED FOR A FEW HOURS ON A BUSY HIGHWAY. NEWEST PROBLEM WHICH WE BECAME AWARE OF REAL EARLY ON WAS LOW COOLANT OR A SYSTEM WHICH CAN NOT KEEP COOLANT IN THE CAR. THE PROBLEM REVISITED US ON XMAS DAY AS WE WERE TRAVELING TO RELATIVES AND WERE STRANDED IN UPSTATE NY IN TYPICAL CLIMATIC TEMPERATURES OF LESS THAN 30 DEGREES F. HAVE TAKEN THE CAR MANY TIMES TO DEALERS AND LOCAL MECHANICS. PROBLEMS ARE STILL ADDING UP. INCLUDED EXHAUST ISSUES. CARBON MONOXIDE. WHAT A DISAPPOINTMENT FOR A FIRST TIME CAR OWNER. BUT I HAVE LEARNED ONE LESSON...WILL NEVER BUY GM AGAIN. NEVER SATISFIED WITH DEALER COSTS AND FIXES. AFTER LEARNING ABOUT ALL THE OTHER PROBLEMS ON THIS SITE THAT OTHERS HAVE HAD VERY SIMILAR. I AM GLAD THAT MY NEWEST CAR A HONDA SITS NEXT TO THE GRAND AM. I SEE THAT GM IS HURTING FINANCIALLY AND I THINK THIS SPEAKS LOUDLY FOR WHAT CONSUMERS ARE FEELING. I HAVE TAKEN CARE OF MY CAR AND SELECTED GM FOR MY FIRST CAR PURCHASE, UNFORTUNATELY GM HAS NOT TAKEN CARE OF ME. I HOPE GM SEES RESPONSES LIKE THIS TO HELP THE AMERICAN CAR COMPANIES UNDERSTAND THAT AMERICANS ARE NOT GOING TO PUT UP WITH THE IDEA THAT CHEAP CARS ARE MADE AND SOLD TO AMERICANS SO THAT THE COMPANY CAN SELL CARS CHEAPLY AND THAT THE CAR'S LIFE WILL END THE DAY AFTER THE LAST CAR PAYMENT THUS LEADING THE BUYER TO A NEW LOAN FOR A NEW CAR. THIS IS A WASTE! *JB
DT: THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP SEVERAL TIMES FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING, NO CODES HAVE BEEN DETECTED. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. *AK THE ABS LIGHT HAD ILLUMINATED, THE DEALER FOUND LACK OF VOLTS FOR EBCM, THE PROBLEM WAS TRACED TO A FAULTY RELA…
Read full complaint
DT: THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP SEVERAL TIMES FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING, NO CODES HAVE BEEN DETECTED. THE DEALER WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. *AK THE ABS LIGHT HAD ILLUMINATED, THE DEALER FOUND LACK OF VOLTS FOR EBCM, THE PROBLEM WAS TRACED TO A FAULTY RELAY. THE LOWER INTAKE GASKET HAD RUPTURED. THE HORN HAD STOPPED WORKING DUE TO A BLOWN FUSE. THE LEFT POWER WINDOW WAS SLOW TO ROLL UP. THE REAR DEFOGGER GRID SHORTED OUT. UPDATED 01/11/06. *JB
I HAVE HAD CONSTANT ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS IN MY VEHICLE. IT STARTED WITH THE TURN SIGNALS WORKING INTERMITTENTLY, THEN MY POWER WINDOWS WOULD WORK INTERMITTENTLY, THEN MY SUNROOF WOULD DO SO AS WELL. I HAVE HAD THE SWITCH REPLACED FOR MY TURN SIGNALS, AND THEY HAVE WORKED FINE SINCE. I HAD THE MOTOR REPLACED FOR MY SUNROOF, AND…
Read full complaint
I HAVE HAD CONSTANT ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS IN MY VEHICLE. IT STARTED WITH THE TURN SIGNALS WORKING INTERMITTENTLY, THEN MY POWER WINDOWS WOULD WORK INTERMITTENTLY, THEN MY SUNROOF WOULD DO SO AS WELL. I HAVE HAD THE SWITCH REPLACED FOR MY TURN SIGNALS, AND THEY HAVE WORKED FINE SINCE. I HAD THE MOTOR REPLACED FOR MY SUNROOF, AND IT HAS ALSO WORKED FINE. HOWEVER, THE POWER WINDOWS STILL WORK INTERMITTENTLY, AND THE MOTOR HAS BEEN REPLACED 3 TIMES. GEE, MAYBE IT ISN'T THE MOTOR?!?!?! I HAVE ALSO HAD BRAKE ROTOR WEAR PROBLEMS, WHICH ALMOST CAUSED AN ACCIDENT. DEALER SAID ROTORS LOOKED AS IF I HAD BEEN STORING MY VEHICLE FOR YEARS THEY WERE SO RUSTED. I URGE ANYONE CONSIDERING THE PURCHASE OF A PONTIAC TO RE-THINK THEIR DECISION. *JB
I PURCHASED MY 2000 PONTIAC GRAND AM USED. I'VE HAD IT 3 YEARS AND HAVE HAD BREAK PROBLEMS FOR AT LEAST 2 OF THE 3 YEARS. MY MECHANIC CAN NOT FIND ANY REASON WHY I'VE HAD SO MANY PROBLEMS AND WHEN I SPOKE WITH PONTIAC HEADQUARTERS THEY INFORMED ME THAT SINCE I DID NOT HAVE A DOCUMENTED CASE THROUGH A CAR DEALERSHIP THERE WAS N…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED MY 2000 PONTIAC GRAND AM USED. I'VE HAD IT 3 YEARS AND HAVE HAD BREAK PROBLEMS FOR AT LEAST 2 OF THE 3 YEARS. MY MECHANIC CAN NOT FIND ANY REASON WHY I'VE HAD SO MANY PROBLEMS AND WHEN I SPOKE WITH PONTIAC HEADQUARTERS THEY INFORMED ME THAT SINCE I DID NOT HAVE A DOCUMENTED CASE THROUGH A CAR DEALERSHIP THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO. I INFORMED THEM THAT MY PRIVATE MECHANIC KEPT DETAIL RECORDS BUT PONTIAC INFORMED ME THAT EVEN IF I DID USE A DEALERSHIP THE PROBLEMS I'M HAVING ARE PART OF THE NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR OF A VEHICLE. MY BREAKS HAVE BEEN GRINDING, SQUEALING, THUMPING AND NOW THE WHOLE FRONT END IS CREAKING. I'VE GONE THROUGH SEVERAL PAIRS OF BREAKS FRONT AND BACK. I'VE GOTTEN NEW ROTORS, HAVE HAD THE ROTORS CUT. I'VE GOTTEN NEW CALIPERS BUT THIS STILL HASN'T FIXED MY PROBLEM. AT TIMES I FEEL I AM RIDING IN AN UNSAFE VEHICLE. MY CAR HAS BEEN LOOKED AT ONE MONTH AND LESS THAN 30 DAYS LATER MY BRAKES WILL BE FULLY WORN DOWN. I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW TO HAVE THE PROBLEM CORRECTED. ON TOP OF IT ALL, THE IGNITION HAS BEEN CHANGED, THE DRIVERS SIDE SEAT SPRINGS ARE COMING THROUGH THE SEAT, THE RADIOS VOLUME WILL GO UP AND DOWN FOR NO REASON, I'VE HAD TO REPLACE THE WHOLE TURN SIGNAL / HAZARDS SIGNAL PART, THE TRUNK LEAKS AND OF COURSE NONE OF IT IS UNDER WARRANTY. I STILL HAVE A LITTLE OVER A YEAR LEFT TO PAY ON THE VEHICLE AND PONTIAC COULD CARE LESS. *NM
2000 PONTIAC GRAND AM HAD TO HAVE THE HUB AND BRAKE SHOES REPLACED AT 15000 MILES.***NO ANSWER REQUIRED***. *MR THE CONSUMER ALSO HAD NEW CALIPERS AND HOSES INSTALLED BUT THE BRAKE SHOES STILL AREN'T RELEASING FROM THE HUB. *NM
WE HAVE REPLACED THE BRAKE PADS AND FRONT ROTORS TWICE ON OUR 2000 PONTIAC GRAND AM SE (64,000 MI) TWICE. WE WERE EXPERIENCING GRINDING AND NOISE FROM THE BRAKE SYSTEM. AT TIMES THE BRAKES WILL "STICK" OR "LOCK UP" FOR A BRIEF SECOND WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES. THE 1ST PAD AND ROTOR REPLACEMENT ONLY LASTED A YEAR BEFORE THE PROBL…
Read full complaint
WE HAVE REPLACED THE BRAKE PADS AND FRONT ROTORS TWICE ON OUR 2000 PONTIAC GRAND AM SE (64,000 MI) TWICE. WE WERE EXPERIENCING GRINDING AND NOISE FROM THE BRAKE SYSTEM. AT TIMES THE BRAKES WILL "STICK" OR "LOCK UP" FOR A BRIEF SECOND WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES. THE 1ST PAD AND ROTOR REPLACEMENT ONLY LASTED A YEAR BEFORE THE PROBLEMS BEGAN AGAIN. AFTER RESEARCHING ON THE WEB AND TALKING WITH DEALERSHIPS, I HAVE FOUND THIS TO BE A VERY COMMON COMPLAINT AMONG GRAND AM OWNERS. THERE IS SOMETHING CAUSING THESE BRAKES TO WEAR OUT SO QUICKLY. THE REPAIRS ARE COSTLY AND IF A PERSON CAN NOT AFFORD TO REPLACE THE BRAKES EVERY YEAR OR SO... THEY MAY JUST DRIVE THE CAR WITH THE DEFECTS. FAULTY BRAKES CAN RESULT IN A CRASH.*AK
WHEN APPLYING THE BRAKES LOUD GRINDING SOUND WAS PRODUCED.*AK
WHILE APPROACHING INCOMING TRAFFIC, THE CONSUMER APPLIED THE BRAKE AND THE BRAKE PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR, CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO REAR END ANOTHER VEHICLE AT 25-35 MPH. UPON IMPACT, BOTH FRONTAL AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. *AK THE VEHICLE ALSO SURGED FORWARD. THERE WAS A DEFECTIVE PART THAT WAS CAUSING THE BRAKE PADS TO WEAR. …
Read full complaint
WHILE APPROACHING INCOMING TRAFFIC, THE CONSUMER APPLIED THE BRAKE AND THE BRAKE PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR, CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO REAR END ANOTHER VEHICLE AT 25-35 MPH. UPON IMPACT, BOTH FRONTAL AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. *AK THE VEHICLE ALSO SURGED FORWARD. THERE WAS A DEFECTIVE PART THAT WAS CAUSING THE BRAKE PADS TO WEAR. *SC
Official recalls
514V400000 · Electrical System:ignition
Jul 3, 2014
This defect can affect the safe operation of the airbag system. Until this recall is performed, customers should remove all items from their key rings, leaving only the ignition key. The key fob (if applicable), should also be removed from the key ring. General Motors LLC (GM) notified the agency on July 3, 2014, that they are recalling 5,877,718 model year 2000-2005 Chevrolet Impala and Monte Carlo, 1997-2003 Chevrolet Malibu, 2004-2005 Malibu Classic, 1999-2004 Oldsmobile Alero, 1998-2002 Oldsmobile Intrigue, 1999-2005 Pontiac Grand Am and 2004-2008 Pontiac Grand Prix vehicles. In these models, the weight on the key ring and/or road conditions or some other jarring event may cause the ignition switch to move out of the run position, turning off the engine.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the key is not in the run position, the air bags may not deploy if the vehicle is involved in a crash, increasing the risk of injury.
Remedy: GM will notify owners, and dealers will install two key rings and an insert in the key slot or a cover over the key head on all ignition keys, free of charge. The recall began on September 9, 2014. GM's number for this recall is 14350.
03V327000 · Exterior Lighting:hazard Flashing Warning Lights:switch
Aug 28, 2003
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES HAVE HAZARD WARNING SWITCHES THAT MAY EXPERIENCE SOLDER JOINT CRACKING CAUSED BY RAPID TEMPERATURE TRANSITIONS AND THE SOLDERING PROCESS. IF SOLDER JOINT CRACKING OCCURS AND RESULTS IN AN OPEN CIRCUIT, THE TURN SIGNALS/HAZARD LAMPS BECOME INTERMITTENT OR INOPERATIVE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: WHEN THE TURN SIGNALS ARE INOPERATIVE, THE DRIVER CANNOT USE THEM TO SIGNAL INTENT TO TURN THAT COULD RESULT IN A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE HAZARD WARNING SWITCH. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON FEBRUARY 5, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, PONTIAC AT 1-800-620-7668, OR OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-630-6537.
00V372000 · Power Train:manual Transmission
Nov 13, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH MANUAL TRANSAXLES (RPO M86) FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 114, "THEFT PROTECTION." WHEN A DRIVER ATTEMPTS TO SHIFT FROM 5TH GEAR TO REVERSE, A SHIFT INHIBITOR CAUSES THE TRANSMISSION TO BE MECHANICALLY IN 4TH GEAR EVEN THOUGH THE SHIFT LEVER INDICATES REVERSE GEAR.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THIS SITUATION, THE KEY CAN BE REMOVED FROM THE IGNITION WHILE THE TRANSMISSION IS IN A FORWARD GEAR, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED BY THE STANDARD.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL DISABLE THE 5TH/REVERSE INHIBITOR BY REMOVING A RETAINING PIN AND REPLACE THE SHIFTER ASSEMBLY.
00V140000 · Structure:body
May 18, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: THESE VEHICLES DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE OCCUPANT PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 201, "OCCUPANT PROTECTION IN INTERIOR IMPACT." THE CONSOLE COVER ON THESE VEHICLES DOES NOT STAY CLOSED WHEN A SPECIFIED VERTICAL LOAD IS APPLIED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH, THE CONSOLE COVER COULD OPEN AND THE COVER OR ITEMS STORED UNDER IT COULD INJURE AN OCCUPANT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE CONSOLE LATCH MECHANISM.
00V116000 · Suspension:rear
Apr 18, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE BOLT THAT ATTACHES THE REAR SUSPENSION TRAILING ARM TO THE LEFT REAR KNUCKLE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN TIGHTENED TO SPECIFICATIONS DURING ASSEMBLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE BOLT COULD BACK COMPLETELY OUT OF THE JOINT AFFECTING VEHICLE CONTROL.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL TIGHTEN THIS BOLT.
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
5RQ04005 · Turn Signal Failures
Opened Jun 18, 2004 · Closed Nov 30, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:hazard Flashing Warning Lights:switch; Exterior Lighting:turn Signal:switch
GM CONDUCTED A RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NUMBER 03V327) ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES TO REPLACE DEFECTIVE HAZARD SWITCHES THAT CAUSE THE TURN SIGNALS AND HAZARD LIGHTS TO FAIL.THE RECALL COVERED VEHICLES BUILT FROM FEBRUARY 2000 THROUGH MAY 2001 (DEPENDING ON MODEL).ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON 64 REPORTS ALLEGING TURN SIGNAL FAILURE ON MY 1999-2000 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES NOT COVERED UNDER THE RECALL AND BUILT PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 2000.IN DECEMBER 2004, GM WILL ISSUE A SPECIAL POLICY FOR MY 1999-2000 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES NOT COVERED UNDER RECALL 03V327.THE POLICY COVERS TURN SIGNAL/HAZARD FLASHER FAILURE FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS OR 150,000 MILES (WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST) TO PROVIDE A NO COST REPLACEMENT OF THE HAZARD SWITCH.GM WILL SEND LETTERS TO OWNERS STARTING DECEMBER 30, 2004.THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE MANUFACTURER IS SUFFICIENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THIS INVESTIGATION.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 FUTURE ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:hazard Flashing Warning Lights:switch
GM CONDUCTED A RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NUMBER 03V327) ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES TO REPLACE DEFECTIVE HAZARD SWITCHES THAT CAUSE THE TURN SIGNALS AND HAZARD LIGHTS TO FAIL.THE RECALL COVERED VEHICLES BUILT FROM FEBRUARY 2000 THROUGH MAY 2001 (DEPENDING ON MODEL).ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON 64 REPORTS ALLEGING TURN SIGNAL FAILURE ON MY 1999-2000 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES NOT COVERED UNDER THE RECALL AND BUILT PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 2000.IN DECEMBER 2004, GM WILL ISSUE A SPECIAL POLICY FOR MY 1999-2000 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES NOT COVERED UNDER RECALL 03V327.THE POLICY COVERS TURN SIGNAL/HAZARD FLASHER FAILURE FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS OR 150,000 MILES (WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST) TO PROVIDE A NO COST REPLACEMENT OF THE HAZARD SWITCH.GM WILL SEND LETTERS TO OWNERS STARTING DECEMBER 30, 2004.THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE MANUFACTURER IS SUFFICIENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THIS INVESTIGATION.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 FUTURE ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting:turn Signal:switch
GM CONDUCTED A RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NUMBER 03V327) ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES TO REPLACE DEFECTIVE HAZARD SWITCHES THAT CAUSE THE TURN SIGNALS AND HAZARD LIGHTS TO FAIL.THE RECALL COVERED VEHICLES BUILT FROM FEBRUARY 2000 THROUGH MAY 2001 (DEPENDING ON MODEL).ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON 64 REPORTS ALLEGING TURN SIGNAL FAILURE ON MY 1999-2000 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES NOT COVERED UNDER THE RECALL AND BUILT PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 2000.IN DECEMBER 2004, GM WILL ISSUE A SPECIAL POLICY FOR MY 1999-2000 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES NOT COVERED UNDER RECALL 03V327.THE POLICY COVERS TURN SIGNAL/HAZARD FLASHER FAILURE FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS OR 150,000 MILES (WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST) TO PROVIDE A NO COST REPLACEMENT OF THE HAZARD SWITCH.GM WILL SEND LETTERS TO OWNERS STARTING DECEMBER 30, 2004.THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE MANUFACTURER IS SUFFICIENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THIS INVESTIGATION.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 FUTURE ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
EA02037 · Turn Signal Failures
Opened Dec 23, 2002 · Closed Sep 5, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:hazard Flashing Warning Lights; Exterior Lighting:hazard Flashing Warning Lights:switch; Exterior Lighting:turn Signal; Exterior Lighting:turn Signal:switch
BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 27, 2003, GM NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 03V327) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 CHEVROLET MALIBU, OLDSMOBILE ALERO, AND PONTIAC GRAND AM.GM'S RECALL COVERS 670,740 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 1, 2001 (ALERO AND GRAND AM) AND FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 31, 2001 (MALIBU).GM REPORTS THAT TURN SIGNAL FAILURE IS DUE TO SOLDER JOINT CRACKING IN THE HAZARD SWITCH, AND HAS IDENTIFIED RAPID TEMPERATURE TRANSITIONS OF THE HAZARD SWITCH AND THE SOLDERING PROCESS AS THE CAUSE OF CRACKING.ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO THE TURN SIGNALS FLOWS THROUGH THE HAZARD SWITCH AND AN OPEN CIRCUIT IN THE HAZARD SWITCH WILL CAUSE THE EXTERIOR TURN/HAZARD LAMPS TO BECOME INTERMITTENT OR INOPERATIVE.GM WILL REPLACE THE HAZARD SWITCH ON ALL INVOLVED VEHICLES.BASED ON GM'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Exterior Lighting:hazard Flashing Warning Lights
BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 27, 2003, GM NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 03V327) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 CHEVROLET MALIBU, OLDSMOBILE ALERO, AND PONTIAC GRAND AM.GM'S RECALL COVERS 670,740 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 1, 2001 (ALERO AND GRAND AM) AND FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 31, 2001 (MALIBU).GM REPORTS THAT TURN SIGNAL FAILURE IS DUE TO SOLDER JOINT CRACKING IN THE HAZARD SWITCH, AND HAS IDENTIFIED RAPID TEMPERATURE TRANSITIONS OF THE HAZARD SWITCH AND THE SOLDERING PROCESS AS THE CAUSE OF CRACKING.ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO THE TURN SIGNALS FLOWS THROUGH THE HAZARD SWITCH AND AN OPEN CIRCUIT IN THE HAZARD SWITCH WILL CAUSE THE EXTERIOR TURN/HAZARD LAMPS TO BECOME INTERMITTENT OR INOPERATIVE.GM WILL REPLACE THE HAZARD SWITCH ON ALL INVOLVED VEHICLES.BASED ON GM'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
Exterior Lighting:hazard Flashing Warning Lights:switch
BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 27, 2003, GM NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 03V327) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 CHEVROLET MALIBU, OLDSMOBILE ALERO, AND PONTIAC GRAND AM.GM'S RECALL COVERS 670,740 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 1, 2001 (ALERO AND GRAND AM) AND FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 31, 2001 (MALIBU).GM REPORTS THAT TURN SIGNAL FAILURE IS DUE TO SOLDER JOINT CRACKING IN THE HAZARD SWITCH, AND HAS IDENTIFIED RAPID TEMPERATURE TRANSITIONS OF THE HAZARD SWITCH AND THE SOLDERING PROCESS AS THE CAUSE OF CRACKING.ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO THE TURN SIGNALS FLOWS THROUGH THE HAZARD SWITCH AND AN OPEN CIRCUIT IN THE HAZARD SWITCH WILL CAUSE THE EXTERIOR TURN/HAZARD LAMPS TO BECOME INTERMITTENT OR INOPERATIVE.GM WILL REPLACE THE HAZARD SWITCH ON ALL INVOLVED VEHICLES.BASED ON GM'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
Exterior Lighting:turn Signal
BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 27, 2003, GM NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 03V327) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 CHEVROLET MALIBU, OLDSMOBILE ALERO, AND PONTIAC GRAND AM.GM'S RECALL COVERS 670,740 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 1, 2001 (ALERO AND GRAND AM) AND FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 31, 2001 (MALIBU).GM REPORTS THAT TURN SIGNAL FAILURE IS DUE TO SOLDER JOINT CRACKING IN THE HAZARD SWITCH, AND HAS IDENTIFIED RAPID TEMPERATURE TRANSITIONS OF THE HAZARD SWITCH AND THE SOLDERING PROCESS AS THE CAUSE OF CRACKING.ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO THE TURN SIGNALS FLOWS THROUGH THE HAZARD SWITCH AND AN OPEN CIRCUIT IN THE HAZARD SWITCH WILL CAUSE THE EXTERIOR TURN/HAZARD LAMPS TO BECOME INTERMITTENT OR INOPERATIVE.GM WILL REPLACE THE HAZARD SWITCH ON ALL INVOLVED VEHICLES.BASED ON GM'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
Exterior Lighting:turn Signal:switch
BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 27, 2003, GM NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 03V327) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 CHEVROLET MALIBU, OLDSMOBILE ALERO, AND PONTIAC GRAND AM.GM'S RECALL COVERS 670,740 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 1, 2001 (ALERO AND GRAND AM) AND FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 31, 2001 (MALIBU).GM REPORTS THAT TURN SIGNAL FAILURE IS DUE TO SOLDER JOINT CRACKING IN THE HAZARD SWITCH, AND HAS IDENTIFIED RAPID TEMPERATURE TRANSITIONS OF THE HAZARD SWITCH AND THE SOLDERING PROCESS AS THE CAUSE OF CRACKING.ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO THE TURN SIGNALS FLOWS THROUGH THE HAZARD SWITCH AND AN OPEN CIRCUIT IN THE HAZARD SWITCH WILL CAUSE THE EXTERIOR TURN/HAZARD LAMPS TO BECOME INTERMITTENT OR INOPERATIVE.GM WILL REPLACE THE HAZARD SWITCH ON ALL INVOLVED VEHICLES.BASED ON GM'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
EA02028 · Erratic Fuel Gauge
Opened Sep 30, 2002 · Closed Dec 30, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline; Fuel System, Other:storage:fuel Gauge System
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.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.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Fuel System, Gasoline
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.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.
Fuel System, Other:storage:fuel Gauge System
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.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.
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.
SQ01002 · Erratic Fuel Gauge
Opened Jan 26, 2001 · Closed Sep 30, 2002
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
There is no summary currently available