Bulletins
| Bulletin | Bulletin date | Replacement Bulletin | Item no. | Summary | Added |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SUSPENSION | |||||
| 060310003 | 02/01/2006 | 10019513 | Information on p245/75r16 goodyear wrangler st tire usage/identification. *tt | 03/20/2006 | |
| 3379 | 3379A | 10014931 | 8.625 axle phasing, growl, cyclic, noise while driving. *tt | 05/12/2005 | |
| 020307002 | 03/01/2005 | 020307002A | 10014945 | Revised front caster and camber adjustment procedure. original not yet received. *tt | 05/12/2005 |
| SUSPENSION - REAR | |||||
| PIP4054A | 02/01/2008 | PIP4054B | 10024345 | Eaton locking differential chatter shudder noise on turns, equipped with a locking rear differential rpo g80. *nj updated 7/17/2008. *pe | 04/07/2008 |
Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| SUSPENSION | |||
| 06/20/2007 | 2700 | 1 | 07/15/2005 |
| 2005 chevrolet express shock tower failure. consumer stated that the shock tower cracked in half. was repaired. she states that the vehicle developed a shimmy after the repair. *kb when the consumer took the vehicle to the shop for the shimmy, she was informed the tie rods had worn out and the technician stated that excessive weight and the wrong wheel/tire size caused additional stress and wear and tear on the vehicle. the abs light flickered. | |||
| SUSPENSION - FRONT - SHOCK ABSORBER | |||
| 06/20/2007 | 27000 | 1 | 07/15/2005 |
| Subject vehicle is a 2005 chevy express/explorer conversion van. the passenger side shock tower steel arm completely separated at the welded point. i drove vehicle to closest dealer. was told that the vehicle took a hit and that it was not covered by manufacturer's warranty, and that it was not safe to drive. was told that auto insurance might cover the damage. at no time was that vehicle involved in an accident. filed claim with allstate. dealer repair shop was authorized by in-house adjuster to determine if damage was covered. insurance adjuster called to say they would cover the claim. we disputed the claim and asked the adjuster to visually inspect the vehicle himself because we felt it was a manufacturer's defect. adjuster concurred and denied the claim. [we were disturbed by the way our claim was handled and wondered if insurance fraud was being played out. we are following thru with the state insurance dept.] when the claim was denied the dealer told us to take the vehicle to where we purchased it because they then determined that it was a conversion van company issue. we took the vehicle to our dealership and they determined that the conversion company installed 20 inch rims/tires on a vehicle with 16 inch maximum rim/tire requirement per engineering specs. the questions that arise now are: why did they sell to us a vehicle which does not meet engineering specs? to what extent was my family at risk or in danger? how many other families are there who are potentially at risk due to this condition? what are the chances that this won't happen again? what recourse do we have? we certainly do not want that vehicle back if we cannot have the 20 inch rims/tires. [low profile tires] 16 inch rims/tires will take away from the look of the vehicle. *tr | |||