2002 SATURN VUE. CONSUMER IS SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT FOR VEHICLE AMOUNT. CONSUMER STATES THAT THE FRAME WAS BROKEN AND RUSTED MAKING VEHICLE UNSAFE TO DRIVE. *LD THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS LOCATED AT AN IMPOUND YARD. THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THE VEHICLE WAS NOT ABLE TO BE REPAIRED. *JS
2002 Saturn Vue
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2002 Saturn Vue do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 276.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Vue 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
132 reports with mileage · 35 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Electrical System. Review the 52 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 31 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 24 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Structure complaints
4 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 SATURN VUE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL REPAIR FACILITY FOR A ROUTINE REPAIR WHEN THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRONT SUB FRAME EXHIBITED SEVERE CORROSION AND COULD NOT BE REPAIRED. THE MECHANIC ADVISED THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. …
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2002 SATURN VUE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A LOCAL REPAIR FACILITY FOR A ROUTINE REPAIR WHEN THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE FRONT SUB FRAME EXHIBITED SEVERE CORROSION AND COULD NOT BE REPAIRED. THE MECHANIC ADVISED THE VEHICLE WAS UNSAFE TO DRIVE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 100,000.
OVER THE PAST YEAR, I HAVE HAD SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE THE "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT COMES ON AND THE CAR JUST SHUTS DOWN AND WON'T START UP. I HAVE ALSO HAD THE LOW COOLANT LIGHT COME ON AND WAS LEAKING ANTI-FREEZE, WHICH I KEPT ON FILLING UP. ONCE IT WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND WHEN THEY WENT TO LOOK AT IT THE NEXT MORNING, IT STA…
Read full complaint
OVER THE PAST YEAR, I HAVE HAD SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE THE "CHECK ENGINE" LIGHT COMES ON AND THE CAR JUST SHUTS DOWN AND WON'T START UP. I HAVE ALSO HAD THE LOW COOLANT LIGHT COME ON AND WAS LEAKING ANTI-FREEZE, WHICH I KEPT ON FILLING UP. ONCE IT WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER AND WHEN THEY WENT TO LOOK AT IT THE NEXT MORNING, IT STARTED RIGHT UP AND THEY COULD NOT FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS WRONG. ANOTHER TIME I LEFT IT AND WHEN I CAME BACK, IT STARTED RIGHT UP. IN BOTH OF THOSE INSTANCES, I WAS DRIVING LESS THAN 40 MPH AND WAS ABLE TO GET TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD SAFELY. THE 3RD TIME THAT THE CAR DIED, I WAS TRAVELING 65 MPH ON AN INTERSTATE WHEN THE CAR SUDDENLY DIED, WITHOUT ANY WARNING. I HAD JUST ENOUGH TIME TO PULL OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND AVERT AN ACCIDENT. I BOUGHT A NEW CAR, BECAUSE I WAS AFRAID TO DRIVE THIS ONE AND IT HAS BEEN SITTING IN MY DRIVEWAY FOR 8 WEEKS. I RECENTLY HAD THE VUE TOWED TO A DIFFERENT DEALERSHIP. THEY SAID THAT I NEED A NEW TIMING BELT AND WATER PUMP. THEY ALSO SAY THAT I NEED TO HAVE AN I-BOLT PULLEY, BELT TENSIONER, ALTERNATOR, AND SERPENTINE BELT REPLACED. OTHER REPAIRS THAT ARE NEEDED ARE A FRONT SWAY BAR LINKS AND THE BEARING ON THE DRIVE SHAFT. THIS CAR HAS ONLY 92,000 MILES. *TR
DRIVERS DOOR WOULD NOT OPEN.. THIS HAPPENED 3 OR 4 TIMES OVER THE PAST COUPLE MONTHS BUT USUALLY AFTER ATTEMPTING SEVERAL TIMES THE DOOR WOULD FINALLY OPEN, HOWEVER THIS TIME IT WOULD NOT OPEN.. I RETURNED TO MY HOME AND REFUSED TO DRIVE THE CAR UNTIL THE DEALER COULD LOOK AT IT AND SOLVE THE PROBLEM. IT TOOK 4 DAYS BEFORE I COU…
Read full complaint
DRIVERS DOOR WOULD NOT OPEN.. THIS HAPPENED 3 OR 4 TIMES OVER THE PAST COUPLE MONTHS BUT USUALLY AFTER ATTEMPTING SEVERAL TIMES THE DOOR WOULD FINALLY OPEN, HOWEVER THIS TIME IT WOULD NOT OPEN.. I RETURNED TO MY HOME AND REFUSED TO DRIVE THE CAR UNTIL THE DEALER COULD LOOK AT IT AND SOLVE THE PROBLEM. IT TOOK 4 DAYS BEFORE I COULD GET AN APPOINTMENT. AFTER DRIVING 75 MILES TO THE NEAREST DEALERSHIP I WAS TOLD THAT THE DOOR PANEL HAD 2 BROKEN CLIPS THAT HELD THE SIDE PANEL ON AND THAT IT WOULD COST $450 TO REPLACE THE DOOR PANEL.. I FIND THIS TO BE AN EXTREME SAFETY HAZARD IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT OR FIRE AND THE NEED TO EVACUATE THE AUTOMOBILE.. MY ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED AS OF YET BUT AFTER OWNING A TOTAL OF 3 SATURN CARS AND ALL THREE HAVING DEFECTIVE ISSUES THAT SATURN WILL PROBABLY DO NOTHING. I FIND IT ODD THAT SATURN OFFERED 2 YEARS AGO TO BUY BACK OUR SATURN VUE BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO USE IT FOR RESEARCH... WE DECLINED ALTHOUGH WE NOW REGRET NOT FOLLOWING THROUGH WITH IT. SATURN DOES NOT STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT AND NEVER CLAIM LIABILITY FOR THEIR FAULTY PRODUCT. I WOULD NEVER BUY ANOTHER SATURN PRODUCT NOR WOULD I EVER RECOMMEND SATURN TO A FRIEND. *JB
Official recalls
214V490000 · Electrical System:ignition
Aug 8, 2014
General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 2002-2004 Saturn Vue vehicles manufactured September 11, 2001, to April 6, 2004. In the affected vehicles, it may be possible for the key to be removed from the ignition when the ignition is not in the "Off" position.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the key can be removed from the ignition when the ignition is not in the "off" position, the vehicle could roll away: (a) for an automatic transmission, if the transmission is not in the "Park" position; or (b) for a manual transmission, if the parking brake is not engaged and the transmission is not in the "Reverse" position. This potential for rollaway increases the risk for a crash and occupant or pedestrian injuries.
Remedy: GM will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the vehicle to see if the key can be pulled out when the ignition is off. If it can, dealers will replace the ignition cylinder and keys, free of charge. The recall began in October 2014. Owners may contact Saturn customer service at 1-800-553-6000. GM's number for this recall is 14506. Note: Until a vehicle has been remedied, owners and operators are advised that when exiting, to be sure that the vehicle is in "Park," or in the case of a manual transmission, that the vehicle is in the "Reverse" position and the parking brake is engaged.
01V386000 · Seat Belts:front:anchorage
Dec 18, 2001
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 210, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLY ANCHORAGES." SOME VEHICLES WERE PRODUCED WITH REAR OUTER SEAT BELT SHOULDER GUIDE ANCHOR BOLTS THAT WERE INCORRECTLY INSTALLED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THESE BOLTS WERE INCORRECTLY INSTALLED, THEY WOULD NOT WITHSTAND THE LOAD REQUIREMENTS OF THE STANDARD. IF AN ANCHORAGE FAILED IN A CRASH, THE OCCUPANT WOULD NOT BE PROPERLY RESTRAINED AND COULD HAVE AN INCREASED RISK OF INJURY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE REAR SHOULDER GUIDE ANCHOR BOLTS. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN DECEMBER 19, 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 SATURN AT 1-800-553-6000.
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
2PE06006 · Timing Chain Failure
Opened Jan 24, 2006 · Closed Jun 6, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling
ON DECEMBER 12, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A DEFECT PETITION (DP05-008) REQUESTING THE INVESTIGATION OF TIMING CHAIN FAILURES THAT COULD CAUSE STALLING IN SATURN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE 2.2L (L61) ENGINE. ODI OPENED PE06-006 ON JANUARY 24, 2006, WITH 24 VEHICLE OWNER COMPLAINTS THAT ALLEGED A BROKEN TIMING CHAIN CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO STOP OPERATING.ON APRIL 12, 2006, ODI RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM GENERAL MOTORS (GM) CONCERNING TIMING CHAIN FAILURES IN APPROXIMATELY 412,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000 THROUGH 2003 SATURN L-SERIES AND ION VEHICLES WITH 2.2L ENGINES. GM'S RESPONSE INCLUDED 1,020 OWNER COMPLAINTS AND FIELD REPORTS CONCERNING TIMING CHAIN FAILURE, INCLUDING 228 THAT ALLEGED THE FAILURE CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO STALL WHILE DRIVING.GM ALSO PROVIDED WARRANTY CLAIM DATA THAT SHOWED 1,902 SUBJECT VEHICLES RECEIVING TIMING CHAIN REPAIRS, INCLUDING 261 WHICH INDICATED THAT A STALL WHILE DRIVING RESULTED FROM THE FAILURE.THE GM COMPLAINTS, FIELD REPORTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS THAT DID NOT CONTAIN SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO DETERMINE THAT A STALL WHILE DRIVING OCCURRED WERE PROVIDED IN THE CATEGORY OTHER.GM STATED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THESE INCIDENTS PROBABLY OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLES WERE PARKED SINCE THE TIMING CHAIN IS MORE LIKELY TO BREAK DURING HIGH CHAIN LOAD SITUATIONS, SUCH AS ENGINE STARTUP.GM'S DATA SHOWED ELEVATED FAILURE RATES IN APPROXIMATELY 20,500 MY 2001 L-SERIES VEHICLES PRODUCED DURING A FOUR MONTH PERIOD FROM NOVEMBER 2000 THROUGH FEBRUARY 2001.OVER ONE-THIRD OF GM'S TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND FIELD REPORTS (34.3%) AND WARRANTY CLAIMS (38.2%) INVOLVED L-SERIES VEHICLES BUILT DURING THE 4-MONTH PERIOD, WHICH ARE ONLY ABOUT 5% OF SUBJECT VEHICLE PRODUCTION.THE TIMING CHAIN FAILURE RATE IN THE VEHICLES BUILT DURING THIS RANGE IS OVER 10 TIMES GREATER THAN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION. FOR THE MY 2001 L-SERIES VEHICLES BUILT DURING THE 4-MONTH PERIOD, THE 36-MONTH FAILURE RATE FOR REPAIRS INVOLVING STALL WHILE DRIVING IS SLIGHTLY UNDER ONE PERCENT.HOWEVER, IF THE INCIDENTS CODED AS OTHER ARE ADDED, THE 36-MONTH FAILURE RATE RISES TO NEARLY FIVE PERCENT FOR THOSE VEHICLES.ODI AND GM ARE CONTINUING TO ASSESS THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS CODED BY GM AS OTHER THAT INVOLVE INCIDENTS OF STALL WHILE DRIVING.GM'S STATISTICAL MODELING OF THE FAILURE DATA INITIALLY CONCLUDED THAT THE FAILURE RATES WERE DECLINING WITH AGE AND MILEAGE FOR ANY SET OF WARRANTY DATA ANALYZED (E.G., STALL WHILE DRIVING, OTHER OR COMBINED).HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENT ANALYSIS SHOWED THAT THE FAILURE RATES ARE INCREASING. BASED ON THE HIGH COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES FOR TIMING CHAIN FAILURE IN THE 4-MONTH PRODUCTION PERIOD FOR THE MY 2001 L-SERIES VEHICLES, THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER ASSESS THE FREQUENCY OF STALL INCIDENTS DUE TO TIMING CHAIN FAILURES IN THOSE VEHICLES (EA06-009).
PE04052 · Rear Suspension Toe Control Link
Opened Jul 22, 2004 · Closed Nov 1, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension; Suspension:rear
THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF REAR SUSPENSION FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES DURING CERTAIN SEVERE DRIVING MANEUVERS.THE INVESTIGATION WAS PROMPTED BY NHTSA-CONDUCTED NCAP DYNAMIC ROLLOVER TEST INCIDENTS INVOLVING MY 2004 SATURN VUE VEHICLES AND ONE CONSUMER COMPLAINT THAT ALLEGED WHEN RECOVERING FROM A ROAD EDGE DEPARTURE, THE LEFT-REAR WHEEL OF A MY 2003 SATURN VUE ?BENT UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE,? RESULTING IN A ROLLOVER CRASH.ODI ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT REAR SUSPENSION FAILURE DURING THE NCAP TESTS WAS THE RESULT OF WHEEL RIM-PAVEMENT CONTACT TRANSMITTING SIGNIFICANT COMPRESSIVE FORCES TO THE TOE CONTROL LINK, THUS CAUSING IT TO BUCKLE.THIS FAILURE OCCURRED AT LOW SPEED DURING A SEVERE TEST USED TO ASSESS ROLL STABILITY.THE FORCES GENERATED DURING THIS TYPE OF WHEEL-RIM PAVEMENT CONTACT ARE MORE THAN SIX TIMES THE GREATEST FORCES MEASURED DURING GM?S MOST SEVERE VEHICLE DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION TESTING.ODI INSPECTION AND ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER COMPLAINT VEHICLES SHOWED THAT DAMAGE TO THE TOE CONTROL LINK APPEARED TO BE THE RESULT OF VEHICLE CRASHES AND DID NOT PRECIPITATE THE CRASHES.TO DATE, ODI IS AWARE OF NO VEHICLE CRASHES OR ROLLOVER INCIDENTS RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.ADDITIONALLY, THE MANUFACTURER HAS NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO STRENGTHEN THE REAR SUSPENSION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.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 A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST. THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE SUMMARY REPORT ATTACHED FOR FURTHER DETAIL.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Suspension
THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF REAR SUSPENSION FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES DURING CERTAIN SEVERE DRIVING MANEUVERS.THE INVESTIGATION WAS PROMPTED BY NHTSA-CONDUCTED NCAP DYNAMIC ROLLOVER TEST INCIDENTS INVOLVING MY 2004 SATURN VUE VEHICLES AND ONE CONSUMER COMPLAINT THAT ALLEGED WHEN RECOVERING FROM A ROAD EDGE DEPARTURE, THE LEFT-REAR WHEEL OF A MY 2003 SATURN VUE ?BENT UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE,? RESULTING IN A ROLLOVER CRASH.ODI ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT REAR SUSPENSION FAILURE DURING THE NCAP TESTS WAS THE RESULT OF WHEEL RIM-PAVEMENT CONTACT TRANSMITTING SIGNIFICANT COMPRESSIVE FORCES TO THE TOE CONTROL LINK, THUS CAUSING IT TO BUCKLE.THIS FAILURE OCCURRED AT LOW SPEED DURING A SEVERE TEST USED TO ASSESS ROLL STABILITY.THE FORCES GENERATED DURING THIS TYPE OF WHEEL-RIM PAVEMENT CONTACT ARE MORE THAN SIX TIMES THE GREATEST FORCES MEASURED DURING GM?S MOST SEVERE VEHICLE DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION TESTING.ODI INSPECTION AND ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER COMPLAINT VEHICLES SHOWED THAT DAMAGE TO THE TOE CONTROL LINK APPEARED TO BE THE RESULT OF VEHICLE CRASHES AND DID NOT PRECIPITATE THE CRASHES.TO DATE, ODI IS AWARE OF NO VEHICLE CRASHES OR ROLLOVER INCIDENTS RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.ADDITIONALLY, THE MANUFACTURER HAS NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO STRENGTHEN THE REAR SUSPENSION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.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 A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST. THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE SUMMARY REPORT ATTACHED FOR FURTHER DETAIL.
Suspension:rear
THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF REAR SUSPENSION FAILURE IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES DURING CERTAIN SEVERE DRIVING MANEUVERS.THE INVESTIGATION WAS PROMPTED BY NHTSA-CONDUCTED NCAP DYNAMIC ROLLOVER TEST INCIDENTS INVOLVING MY 2004 SATURN VUE VEHICLES AND ONE CONSUMER COMPLAINT THAT ALLEGED WHEN RECOVERING FROM A ROAD EDGE DEPARTURE, THE LEFT-REAR WHEEL OF A MY 2003 SATURN VUE ?BENT UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE,? RESULTING IN A ROLLOVER CRASH.ODI ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT REAR SUSPENSION FAILURE DURING THE NCAP TESTS WAS THE RESULT OF WHEEL RIM-PAVEMENT CONTACT TRANSMITTING SIGNIFICANT COMPRESSIVE FORCES TO THE TOE CONTROL LINK, THUS CAUSING IT TO BUCKLE.THIS FAILURE OCCURRED AT LOW SPEED DURING A SEVERE TEST USED TO ASSESS ROLL STABILITY.THE FORCES GENERATED DURING THIS TYPE OF WHEEL-RIM PAVEMENT CONTACT ARE MORE THAN SIX TIMES THE GREATEST FORCES MEASURED DURING GM?S MOST SEVERE VEHICLE DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION TESTING.ODI INSPECTION AND ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER COMPLAINT VEHICLES SHOWED THAT DAMAGE TO THE TOE CONTROL LINK APPEARED TO BE THE RESULT OF VEHICLE CRASHES AND DID NOT PRECIPITATE THE CRASHES.TO DATE, ODI IS AWARE OF NO VEHICLE CRASHES OR ROLLOVER INCIDENTS RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.ADDITIONALLY, THE MANUFACTURER HAS NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SERVICE CAMPAIGN TO STRENGTHEN THE REAR SUSPENSION OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.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 A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST. THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE SUMMARY REPORT ATTACHED FOR FURTHER DETAIL.
Illustration