Bulletins
| Bulletin | Bulletin date | Replacement Bulletin | Item no. | Summary | Added |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING | |||||
| 3135 | 01/01/2004 | 10010045 | Pop noise from engine area during heavy throttle input. *tc | 11/03/2004 | |
Investigations
| NHTSA ID | Manufacturer | Date open | Date close | Subject | Recall campaign | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING | ||||||
| DP08002 | GENERAL MOTORS CORP. | 06/18/2008 | 10/16/2008 | TIMING CHAIN FAILURE-STALL | ||
| On june 6, 2006, odi opened an investigation of timing chain failure resulting in engine stall while driving with no restart in approximately 20,514 model year (my) 2001 saturn l-series vehicles equipped with 2.2l engines (l61) built from november 2000 through february 2001 (ea06-009).the vehicles built during those months exhibited higher failure rates than similarly equipped vehicles built before and after.gm introduced a new timing chain design in production in may 2002.odi closed its investigation after gm initiated a safety recall on november 7, 2007 (recall 07v-519). on may 22, 2008, the north carolina consumers council (nccc) submitted a defect petition to odi requesting the expansion of recall 07v-519 to include all my 1999 through 2003 saturn l-series vehicles with 2.2l engines using the same timing chain design as the recalled population.the petition states that the nccc continues to receive complaints from consumers that have had a timing chain fail in vehicles built outside the production range covered by the recall.the petition also notes that odi has continued to receive complaints.since the closing of ea06-009 odi has received 80 new complaints from consumers who had a timing chain fail in a my 2000 through 2002 saturn l-series with the 2.2l engine that were not covered by recall 07v-519 and were built prior to the timing belt change in may 2002.the complaints describe the same failure mode as the recalled population where the timing chain can break suddenly and without warning, resulting in engine damage and loss of motive power.the defect petition has been granted. a preliminary evaluation (pe08-061) has been opened. | ||||||
| PE06006 | GENERAL MOTORS CORP. | 01/24/2006 | 06/06/2006 | TIMING CHAIN FAILURE | ||
| 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). | ||||||
| DP05008 | GENERAL MOTORS CORP. | 12/20/2005 | 02/06/2006 | TIMING CHAIN FAILURE | ||
| Analysis undertaken in response to the petition identified 26 complaints alleging timing chain failures in my 2000-2003 saturn l-series vehicle equipped with the 2.2l l4 engine.most complaints of timing chain failure reportedly resulted in a sudden loss of engine power and stalling.odi also noted that certain my 2002-2003 saturn vue and my 2003 saturn ion model vehicles with the 2.2l engine vehiclescovered by a technical service bulletin (03-06-01-017) that addressed timing chain design and service procedure changes, exhibited no complaints of timing chain failure.odi will grant the petition and open a preliminary evaluation to assess the frequency, trend, scope and safety consequences associated with the alleged defect in the subject vehicles.refer to pe06-006. | ||||||
| PE08061 | GENERAL MOTORS CORP. | 10/16/2008 | 04/08/2009 | TIMING CHAIN BREAKS, ENGINE STALL | ||
| On may 22, 2008, theoffice of defects investigation (odi) was petitioned by the north carolina consumers council (nccc) to broaden the scope of safety recall 07v-519, which was conducted by general motors corporation (gm) for model year (my) 2001 saturn l-series vehicles equipped with the l61 2.2l engine and built during a 4-month period from november 2000 through february 2001 (dp08-002). on october 16, 2008, odi granted dp08-002 and opened pe08-061 to investigate timing chain failures resulting in engine stall while driving (swd) in the saturn l-series vehicles equipped with l61 engines and that used the same design timing chain and timing chain lubrication system as the recalled vehicles.a redesigned timing chain and lubrication system were implemented late in my 2002 production (may 1, 2002).hence, the subject vehicles for this investigation are all my 2000 through 2002 saturn l-series vehicles equipped with 2.2l l61 engines and built prior to may 2002 that were not included in recall 07v-519. in this investigation, odi analyzed updated complaint and warranty claims data for timing chain failures resulting in incidents of engine stall while driving, which comprise slightly over half of all timing chain failures occurring in the subject vehicle population.odi's analysis of complaint and warranty data shows that vehicles produced with the subject timing chain and lubrication system experienced elevated failure rates when compared with the my 2002 through 2003 vehicles using the revised components.however, the analysis also showed that the my 2001 saturn l-series vehicles recalled in 07v-518 experienced a significantly higher rate of timing chain failures than the subject vehicles.the complaint rate for timing chain failures resulting in swd was approximately 5 times higher for the recalled vehicles,19.2 incidents per thousand vehicles (iptv), than for the subject vehicles, 3.7 iptv.the warranty claims rate for chain failures resulting in swd was over 3 times higher for the recalled vehicles, 2.4 percent, than for the subject vehicles, 0.7 percent.the complaint and warranty rates for the subject vehicles were similar to rates recorded in other recently closed investigations for conditions that could result in swd with no engine re-start, ea07-015 and ea07-018.analysis of all complaints, field reports and warranty claims found no allegations of crashes or injuries associated with the alleged defect in the subject vehicles after approximately 7 to 9 years in service. odi's analysis of the stalling incidents that have resulted from timing chain failures in the subject vehicles found that they can occur at any speed and almost always result in a no restart condition.these are generally considered to be factors that increase the severity of stalling incidents.however, analysis of swd failure rates in the subject vehicles show that they have occurred at much lower rates than were observed in the recalled population.in addition, the swd complaint and warranty rates for the subject vehicles are similar to rates observed in prior investigations involving similar categories of engine stall consequences that were closed with no action.further investigation of this matter would not be an efficient allocation of agency resources.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 continue to monitor complaints and other information relating to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles and take further action if warranted. | ||||||
Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING | |||
| 12/02/2011 | 68000 | ||
| My wife had driven to work this day and all was well. she went about her work day and left for her lunch break at 12:30 in the afternoon. she drove the car and got her food and came back from lunch. later on that evening she punched out at 5:00 pm to leave. when she went to start the car the motor turned over at a much faster than usual rate but the car would not start. i knew when i got there the car had no compression when i turned it over. i had aaa tow it to the garage (worth the peace of mind to have) and they told me sure as anything the timing chain had broken. fortunately she was not moving when it happened, must have let go as she parked the car. this is the second motor we put in this car. still waiting on the repair estimate. chain needs to be replaced along with the crankshaft gears because a couple of teeth got ripped off in the process. nice.... thanks saturn and merry christmas. | |||
| 11/17/2010 | 75122 | ||
| While driving home from work 3.5 miles the vehicle stopped. inspection confirmed a broken timing chain. | |||
| 12/21/2009 | 99658 | 1 | |
| Timing chain slipped and engine could not be restarted. *tr | |||
| 11/01/2008 | 63065 | 1 | |
| Timing chain on my 2002 saturn sl2 broke while pulling out of my driveway. local saturn dealer claims they had a recall only on 2001 models. looking at the nhtsa there seems to be multiple investigations into this problem. please reference pep08-061. *tr | |||
| 08/28/2008 | 90000 | 1 | |
| Driving down the road, car lost all power, it will not turn back on car has 90,000 miles. just had water pump replaced 1 mont earlier for leaking. 2002 saturn l100 believe it is the timing chain. *tr | |||
| 08/02/2008 | 79005 | 1 | |
| Complete loss of power while driving down the road. mechanic reported that the timing chain failed. there was no warning or indication that there was a problem prior to the failure. service report from saturn dealership, when taken in for routine maintenance, a few weeks before, did not list any problem with the timing chain. saturn service representative actually said this car does not have a timing chain. had the timing chain replaced but engine has no compression, on two cylinders. estimated cost to repair engine damages, as a direct result of the timing chain breaking, exceeds the value of car. i have the old chain, on which, one of the links failed. the car has 78k miles. the failure occurred at approximately 25 mph under light to moderate acceleration. *tr | |||
| ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING - ENGINE | |||
| 12/21/2009 | 34700 | 1 | |
| Timing chain of saturn l200 failed a second time within 35,000 miles of first repair leaving the car stranded on the roadside again. the car has been well maintained, but the timing chain in this model seems to be poorly designed leading to failure. *tr | |||
| 10/27/2008 | 1 | ||
| The car was idling really rough earlier in the day. i was going to the dealership to have it looked at but only got a few feet before the car died. it tries to turn over but no luck. a mechanic friend said it seems to be the timing belt. after review on this and other websites i tend to agree. it's been towed to the dealership and i'm awaiting my diagnosis. if it is in fact the timing belt and saturn knew about this problem why didn't they fix it? a recall would be great but if not that at least notify us of the problem so we can decide whether or not to have it fixed. i'm really upset that this could have happened with my 4 year old and 5 month old in the car with me. do something saturn!! *tr | |||
| 03/02/2007 | 49000 | 1 | 01/24/2002 |
| 1) on the evening of friday, march 2, 2007 my 2002 saturn l-100 sedan stalled while i was driving home from work. i was driving at about 40 mph when it suddenly died. i had the car towed to the auto mechanic shop near my house. 2) the next day they called to advise that the timing chain had broken. the car has less than 49,000 miles on it. they recommended replacing the engine, about $6,000 worth of work. i contacted saturn and they advised i should have the vehicle towed to one of their facilities, which i did that evening. the saturn service center confirmed that the timing chain had broken but suggested replacing the head with a rebuilt part from gm, approximately $3,200 worth of work. at this point saturn is requesting maintenance records for oil changes. *jb | |||
| 08/04/2004 | 1 | ||
| While driving 35 mph vehicle stalled. consumer tried to restart the vehicle, but was unable to do so. vehicle was towed *ak | |||
| ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING - ENGINE - GASOLINE | |||
| 01/27/2007 | 85000 | 1 | 11/01/2001 |
| My l200 saturn had a timing chain failure at 85,000 miles. this is clearly due to a defect because saturn has a technical service bulletin indicating a larger oil nozzle is included in the timing chain replacement kit due to insufficient lubrication at low engine rpm. it is fortunate that this did not occur at highway speeds because with the standard transmission fatalities could have easily resulted. this car was meticulously maintained with oil and filter changes every 3-5k miles. saturn has the car now and has reported in addition to the failed timing chain it also has a bent valve and possible piston damage. this effectively means this timing chain failure destroyed the engine. there is now no confusion in my mind why the japanese auto industry is eating detroit's lunch. *jb | |||
| ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING - ENGINE - GASOLINE - BELTS AND ASSOCIATED PULLEYS | |||
| 04/30/2007 | 70000 | 1 | 10/01/2004 |
| Tl* the contact owns a 2002 saturn l series sedan. while driving 55 mph the engine shut off. the vehicle was towed. the mechanic stated that the timing chain broke and the engine needed to be replaced. the current and failure mileage were 70,000. *ak | |||