Investigations
| NHTSA ID | Manufacturer | Date open | Date close | Subject | Recall campaign | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - ANTILOCK | ||||||
| PE05020 | GENERAL MOTORS CORP. | 04/28/2005 | 09/13/2005 | UNWANTED LOW-SPEED ABS ACTIVATION | 05V379000 | |
| 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 - CONTROL UNIT/MODULE | ||||||
| PE05020 | GENERAL MOTORS CORP. | 04/28/2005 | 09/13/2005 | UNWANTED LOW-SPEED ABS ACTIVATION | 05V379000 | |
| 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. | ||||||
Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| SERVICE BRAKES, AIR - ANTILOCK - ABS WARNING LIGHT | |||
| 09/30/2002 | |||
| Consumer states that while trying to park the anti-lock system activated and the consumer could not stop and ran into a building. *mr | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - ANTILOCK | |||
| 02/10/2006 | 37000 | 1 | 05/15/2002 |
| Rust on rotors!! - gmc 1500 1/2 ton pickup. 2000 yr. to make it short for now, was told by a gmc technician at 19000 miles that rust was forming on brake rotors. dealership told me gm had a problem with the metal for the rotors. i have a case number with gm about the problem. but like i said i will make it short for now. february, while in florida ,brakes wouldn't work. went into median strip. nobody hurt, no damage, lucky!! gmc dealer in florida had to replace the rotors due to the rust. they couldn't turn the rotors down, they were that bad. the truck has only 37000 miles on it, but the problem is the bad metal. i know there is other people who have had to do the same thing, new rotors for safety. by the way there isn't a speck of rust anywhere on that truck except the rotors. they had a recall on the anti-lock brakes for rust, dealer said mine was ok. like i said no rust except for the rotors. this should have not happen we could have been injured or worse!!!! *jb | |||
| 08/15/2005 | 90000 | 1 | 03/16/2003 |
| Dt; 2000 chevrolet k1500 silverado. the anti lock brakes engage under normal stopping. when pulling into a stop the brakes do not stop the vehicle, and the anti lock brakes are triggered, and this creates a slow stop. this happens at least 50% of the time, and this is unpredictable. it is progressively getting worse. had not taken the vehicle to a mechanic, but done research and know that this is a common complaint and concern. had the vehicle to the mechanic for other things ,and they have not told me about any recalls. this has been happening for the past 4 months. no accidents or crashes. *ak | |||
| 08/12/2004 | 36000 | 1 | 05/23/2000 |
| While braking anti lock brakes failed. this caused the pedal to go to the floor. dealership was notified, but did not resolve the problem. *ak *sc | |||
| 02/18/2001 | 1 | 01/17/2001 | |
| Consumer stated that while backing up brakes worked fine and went forward brakes failed causing damage to the left front bumper. *yd | |||
| 05/01/2001 | 0 | ||
| When applying brakes pedal went to the floorboard, , and vehicle moved forward without prior notice. dealership was aware of problem.*ak | |||
| When appyling brakes pedal resisted pressure and became extremely hard, resulting in extended stopping distance. please give any further details.*ak | |||
| Consumer was involved in a collision in which abs brakes failed. warning light illuminated. also, air bag did not deploy. please give any further details. *ak | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - ANTILOCK - CONTROL UNIT/MODULE | |||
| 05/13/2005 | 4 | ||
| Abs sensor problems on 2000 gm 2500. abs engages at low speed and prevents stopping. sensors have ben replaced or cleaned at least three time under warranty. now at 55,000 miles abs has again failed. for safty reasons i have disconnected the abs system. | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - FOUNDATION COMPONENTS - DISC - ROTOR | |||
| 10/01/2006 | 51234 | 1 | 02/01/2001 |
| Dt*: the contact stated while the vehicle was being serviced, the brake line was observed wet and rear brake rotors were flaking apart. there was no warning signals prior to the incident. the vehicle was taken to a service dealer who determined that the brake lines were rusted and starting to leak. also, the rear brake rotors were flaking apart, and the main brake line to the rear brakes rusted through which caused brake fluid leakage. the service dealer advised that the vehicle would need brake rotor backing plates and a rear brake line. the manufacturer was notified and approved replacing one brake line at no cost but would not approve replacing the rotors and 4 other brake lines that were badly rusted. the consumer stated he was unable to use the emergency brake, because the retaing clip that held the brake shoes in place had rusted. the consumer complained of a noise in the steering. the fuel pressure regulator was repalced.updated 12/01/06. *jb | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - FOUNDATION COMPONENTS - HOSES, LINES/PIPING, AND FITTINGS | |||
| 10/01/2006 | 51234 | 1 | 02/01/2001 |
| Dt*: the contact stated while the vehicle was being serviced, the brake line was observed wet and rear brake rotors were flaking apart. there was no warning signals prior to the incident. the vehicle was taken to a service dealer who determined that the brake lines were rusted and starting to leak. also, the rear brake rotors were flaking apart, and the main brake line to the rear brakes rusted through which caused brake fluid leakage. the service dealer advised that the vehicle would need brake rotor backing plates and a rear brake line. the manufacturer was notified and approved replacing one brake line at no cost but would not approve replacing the rotors and 4 other brake lines that were badly rusted. the consumer stated he was unable to use the emergency brake, because the retaing clip that held the brake shoes in place had rusted. the consumer complained of a noise in the steering. the fuel pressure regulator was repalced.updated 12/01/06. *jb | |||
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC - POWER ASSIST | |||
| 01/20/2004 | 62000 | 2 | 12/31/1999 |
| Consumer stated that about 2 weeks ago while backing out of the garage, the power brakes and power steering failed. consumer shut off the vehicle off and then restarted it. vehicle worked properly afterwards. *ak *jb | |||