2003 Chevrolet Silverado
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › Chevrolet › Silverado › 2003
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 2003 Chevrolet Silverado. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
13 recalls name the 2003 Chevrolet Silverado. Newest first.
K2 motor IS recalling 1,921 aftermarket headlamps of various models sold for use on the above listed vehicles. these headlamps are missing the amber side reflex reflector which fails to conform with the requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 108, "lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment."
Without the amber side reflex reflectors, the lighting visibility may be affected, possibly resulting in a vehicle crash.
K2 motor will notify owners and offer a full refund. the recall began on decemeber 17, 2008. owners may contact K2 motor at 1-909-839-2992.
Certain federal-mogul replacement wheel hub assemblies with the brand names: national, carquest p/nos. 515020, 515021, 515025, 515053, 515054, 515059, and 515060, shipped between january 23, 2006, and december 20, 2007, sold for light duty and medium duty trucks. the inboard retention nut used to maintain hub bearing assembly can loosen resulting in an ABS…
Wheel separation can result in a vehicle crash.
Federal-mogul will notify customers and will replace the hub assembly free of charge. the recall began on february 7, 2008. owners can contact federal-mogul toll-free at 877-489-6659.
Certain cequent 90 degree 7-WAY right angle adaptors sold by distributors in tow packages for aftermarket sales to tow 5TH wheel rv travel trailers. due to incorrect wiring of the harness, the trailer lights may not operate properly.
If the trailer lights are not working properly, a vehicle crash can occur.
All of the defective tow packages are still at the distributor level and have not been sold to any consumers.
Certain tradesonic combination lamps sold as replacement lamps for use on the above listed passenger vehicles. combination lamps not equipped with amber side reflectors fail to conform with the requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 108, lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment.
Lack of amber side reflectors in the lamps will decrease lighting visibility to other drivers and may possibly result in a vehicle crash.
Tradesonic will notify owners and replace the lamps free of charge. the recall IS expected to begin during july 2006. owners may contact tradesonic at 626-934-8884.
Certain aai motorsports combination lamps sold as replacement lamps for use on the above list passenger vehicles. combination lamps not equipped with amber side reflectors fail to conform with the requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 108, "lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment."
Lack of amber side reflectors in the lamps will decrease lighting visibility to other drivers and may possibly result in a vehicle crash
Aai motorsports will notify owners and replace the lamps free of charge. the recall began on august 1, 2006. owners may contact aai motorsports at 909-923-9188.
Certain anzo combination headlamp assemblies sold as replacement lamps for use on certain passenger vehicles. some combination lamps are not equipped with amber side reflectors which fail to conform to federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 108, "lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment."
Without the amber reflectors, the vehicle will be poorly illuminated, possibly resulting in a vehicle crash.
Anzo will notify owners and replace the headlamps free of charge. the recall began may 9, 2006. owners may contact anzo USA at 909-468-3688.
On certain pickup trucks equipped with manual transmissions and built with either pbr parking brake systems or trw parking brake systems, the parking brake friction linings may wear to an extent where the parking brake can become ineffective in immobilizing a parked vehicle.
If the parking brake does not hold, unintended vehicle movement could occur, which could result in a crash.
Dealers will install a low-force spring clip retainer for vehicles equipped with a pbr parking brake system. on vehicles equipped with the trw parking brake system, dealers will install a redesigned parking brake cable assembly. the recall began on july 29, 2005. owners may contact chevrolet at 1-800-630-2438 or GMC at 1-866-996-9463.
On certain crew cab pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, the 2ND row center occupant seat belt routing may make it difficult to position the lap portion of the safety belt low around the hips of occupants, especially smaller occupants, seated in this position. appropriate use of a child seat or booster seat, as recommended for small children, does…
A lap portion of the seat belt routing that IS not low and snug on the hips can allow the lap belt to ride up on an occupant's abdomen instead of fitting low around their hipbones, and therefore, can expose them to more risk of abdominal and internal organ injury.
Dealers will cut open the guide loop, remove a portion of the loop, and then the remaining two sides should be folded over and secured with a retainer free of charge. the recall began on july 21, 2005. owners may contact cadillac at 1-866-982-2339, chevrolet at 1-800-630-2438, GMC at 1-866-996-9463, or hummer at 1-800-732-5493.
Certain extended and regular cab pickup trucks and cargo vans converted to compressed natural gas (CNG) fail to conform to the requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 225, 'child restraint anchorage systems.' these vehicles have one seating position, the center rear seat, equipped with child restraint lower anchorages.
The standard requires child seat lower anchorages in two seating positions for vehicles with three rear seating positions. the standard cab and cargo van vehicles, which only have front seating positions, have an air bag off switch to disable the front passenger air bag and do not have child restraint lower anchorages in the passenger seat. the standard requires passenger seat child seat lower anchorages in vehicles with an air bag off switch. However, the standard does not require vehicles with only front seating positions to have lower anchorage provisions if the vehicle IS not equipped with an air bag off switch.
To bring the standard cab and cargo van vehicles into compliance, dealers will inject epoxy into the air bag off switch to prevent air bag activation, relocate the switch behind the instrument panel and then install a cover over the resulting opening. the sun visor label and owner's manual will also be changed. the correction for the extended cab vehicle will consist of changing the front passenger seat to a seat that has child restraint lower anchorages. the recall began on september 9, 2004. owners should contact chevrolet at 1-800-630-2438 or GMC at 1-866-996-9463.
Aftermarket pickup truck over-the-rail bedliners manufactured for installation on 1999-2004 chevrolet silverado and GMC sierra pickup trucks. the toggle wing assembly used to attach the bedliner to the truck bed IS not engaging fully in the stake pocket of the pickup truck.
The bedliner can become detached from the pickup while it IS motion, possibly endangering following motorists or pedestrians.
Durakon will issue a press release in attempt to notify customers that could have purchased the defective bedliner. if you purchased either a durakon allstar of patriot overrail bedliner since august 1, 2003, for 1999 to 2004 chevrolet silverado or GMC sierra trucks, or purchased one of these pickup trucks with either brand bedliner already installed, you should return to an authorized durakon dealer so that the bedliner can be inspected and, if necessary, repaired with a newly designed toggle wing fastening system, or if required, replaced with a new bedliner free of charge. please call the durakon hotline at 1-800-933-4200 to find the nearest authorized durakon dealer.
On certain pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, the galvanized steel tailgate support cables that retain the tailgate in the full open (horizontal) position may corrode, weaken, and eventually fracture. if both cables fractured, the tailgate would suddenly drop and strike the top surface of the rear bumper.
Anyone sitting or standing on the horizontal surface of the tailgate when both cables fractured could be injured by falling from the tailgate. on vehicles that have had the bumper removed, the tailgate may drop even lower. additionally, if there IS cargo on the tailgate the cargo may fall off if the support cables fracture.
Dealers will replace the cables. interim owner notification began on april 7, 20004. the recall began on september 24, 2004, when replacement parts were available, and will continue through october 29, 2004. owners should contact cadillac at 1-866-982-2339, chevrolet at 1-800-630-2438 or GMC at 1-866-996-9463, or visit www.mygmlink.com, and enter your vehicle identification number.
Certain sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and passenger vans fail to comply with the requirements of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 135, ?passenger car brake systems.? some of these vehicles were produced with an out-of-specification brake hydro-boost housing relief valve bore.
Consequently, the valve o-ring seal may fracture. steering efforts may be slightly increased while braking or parking. under certain driving conditions, a fractured seal may require a slight increase in the applied brake pedal effort to achieve the same vehicle deceleration rate as prior to the seat fracture.
Dealers are to replace the hydro-boost relief valve. the recall began on june 18, 2004. owners should contact cadillac at 1-866-982-2339; chevrolet at 1-800-630-2438; GMC at 1-866-996-9463; or hummer at 1-866-486-6376.
Certain pickup trucks fail to conform to federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 212, "windshield mounting." some of these vehicles lack a continuous urethane bonding bead between the body surface and the windshield.
In vehicles with this condition, the windshield may not be retained in accordance with the safety standard during a vehicle crash.
Dealers will remove, reseal, and reinstall the windshield. owner notification began on january 28, 2003. 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 chevrolet at 1-800-222-1020 or GMC at 1-800-462-8782.
While routinely driving my 03 chev silverado truck, the brakes failed. When I was able to safely stop and move to a safe place, I looked under the vehicle and saw brake fluid leaking from one of the brake lines which had failed due to excessive corrosion. As a retired police officer, I have excellent driving skills which helped me to avoid a collision with another vehicle when the brakes failed!
Significant corrosion of the fuel (gasoline) lines causing leak and possible safety hazard (fire). several forums report brake and fuel line premature failure due to corrosion. gm not addressing this known problem.
Brake lines, gas line, transmission fluid lines all rusted/corroded beginning at under 50,000 miles. * had near accidents as the brake lines blew while driving on a highway and was decelerating in an attempt to come to a stop..pedal went to the floor, I continued on (foot off the gas) until the truck slowed down enough on it's own, shifted into low gear & was able to come to a stop and get towed. * shortly after brake line incident, the same thing with the gas line, rusted/corroded and leaked gasoline when ignition was on and pump was running... Towed * a few ,months later, I was parking the truck and fluid started spewing from under the truck - after close examination I determined it was transmission fluid, the lines had rusted/corroded - again,towed. * rear bumper rotted out completely before hitting 35,000 miles- I had it replaced, now the wheels and side quarter panels and everything in between are also rotting out. * currently the dash lights/panel will intermittently begin to flash - the whole dash goes blank, lights off, then they come back on, while driving! **my mechanic recently told me after state inspection, that the frame IS the next thing to go, it IS rusting out more than expected for a vehicle of it's age/low mileage. personally, I feel that inferior products were used when the truck was manufactured only because I have another chevrolet product with twice the mileage and 6 years older with barely any rust/rot/corrosion.
Front brake lines rusted through and spilled brake fluid while moving at slow speed. had front brake lines replaced. six months or so later, rear brake lines rusted through and spilled brake fluid while moving at slow speed. had rear brake lines replaced. ABS IS now contaminated and IS causing stop time delay, especially at high speed. almost crashed on several occasions where my heart dropped to my stomach. decided not to drive truck anymore until I can replace the entire brake system with rust free components.
While driving, the heater blower stopped working and I smelled burning plastic or insulation. I pulled over and figured out it was coming from under the dash. Logically I pulled the bottom cover off from below the blower assy.(former mechanic). Smell was coming from plug harness and relay. Melted wire insulation and melted plastic from plug harness(obvious short). I was near an auto parts store and checked to see if they had this wiring plug assy. And they informed me that they did and this was an issue that gm had and there had been a safety recall on this. It's winter and I needed a defroster! Roadside fix, but this could have been much worse. Contacted gm and they informed me that this was not their problem because the vin number wasn't part of their recall. Gm case # 8-174060432. Not dropping this, this could have gotten worse.
Brake line rupture.
The front to rear brakes corroded to the point where they blew out when the brakes were applied while driving on the highway.
On october 22,2015 while driveing on interstate 75 the fuel pump stopped functioning and resulting in a near disasterous situation.results $751.81 repair cost plus tow. Then one week later,october 29 2015 at wilmington pike and inertstate 675 red light my brake lines burst and I narrowly avoided a wreck. Repair cost $870.17 .i was not noteafide of any recall. So be fair warning if I had known or been I would have fixed it
TL* the contact owns a 2003 chevrolet silverado. While driving 60 mph, the vehicle lost power and failed to accelerate. The ABS, check engine, and passenger side air bag lights remained illuminated. In addition, the power steering failed. The failures recurred numerous times. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where it was diagnosed, but a failure could not be duplicated. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 100,000.
This IS the second of three fatal collisions investigated this year by my office involving chevrolet pickups that caught fire after being involved in frontal collisions. this was an off set head on, passenger side to passenger side. passenger in pickup was pinned in vehicle due to crush and consumed by fire.
TL* the contact owns a 2003 chevrolet silverado. While driving approximately 35 mph and attempting to engage the brakes, the vehicle failed to stop. The emergency brake was used to stop the vehicle. After inspecting the vehicle, the contact noticed that brake fluid was leaking above the fuel tank. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic for diagnostic testing. The technician stated that the brake line over the fuel tank ruptured and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 82,000.
Contact owns a 2003 chevrolet silverado. contacted stated while driving at approximately 55 mph, the brake pedal was depressed in a panic situation and the pedal went straight to the floor board. *bf
Contact own a 2003 chevrolet silverado, whiledriving atapproximated 55 mph, the brake pedalwas depressed in a panic siituation and the pedalwent straight to the floor board. 8BF
My husband was driving the vehicle at approximately 60 mph on a local highway when he needed to brake to slow down for a vehicle who turned on up ahead when the brake line blew. Pedal immediately went soft. He barely avoided collision and had to pull off into a nearby church parking lot. Now we are out the expense of having the brake lines replaced. The rust issue, which has been complained about in all of the others, IS the same here that led to this. Though it has high mileage, the truck has been very well taken care of as it IS a regency edition silverado.
The gauge cluster IS always drawing power. Battery goes dead if I do not drive the vehical for one day.
TL* the contact owns a 2003 chevrolet silverado. While driving approximately 55, the brake pedal was depressed and stuck to the floorboard. The contact was able to bring the vehicle to a stop by engaging the emergency brake. The vehicle was towed to an independent mechanic who diagnosed that the brake lines corroded, causing the brake fluid to leak. As a result, the brake line and the master cylinder needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. the failure mileage was 130,000.
TL* the contact owns a 2003 chevrolet silverado. While driving at various speeds, the instrument panel dimmed and prevented the contact from reading any of the gauges. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where it was diagnosed that the instrumental panel connectors needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 154,289.
Brake line burst and brake pedal went to floor. at only 15 mph I had some stopping power by pumping brake pedal and got the truck stopped. thankfully, I have a very long driveway and was still on my property. I was pulling a heavy trailer and do not want to imagine what would have happened with traffic and at a greater speed. I inspected the brake lines and noticed they were all badly corroded. I am having all brake lines replaced tomorrow. I see no recall notice and have since read about others who have had the same problem. I am 66 years old and have had one brake line failure many years ago on a 1963 plymouth with very high mileage. this truck has just over 50 thousand miles. I was shocked at the condition of these brake lines. without complete replacement of the lines I do not consider this vehicle safe to drive. *tr
I have had to replace the distributor cap and rotor bug often due to corrosion after less than 1000 miles. This IS very dangerous. The dealership installed cover over the ac line and that had little effect. It IS my belief that this IS a manufacture flaw. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 2003 chevrolet silverado. While driving approximately 40 mph, the vehicle stalled without warning and failed to restart. The vehicle was towed to the contact's residence. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 227,792.
While starting the vehicle, the brake pedal suddenly dropped to floor and brakes failed. there was no warning light and all four brakes failed. Fortunately, the vehicle was stopped. testing the brakes, I found there was a little braking capability, but very little. I have since found that the brake lines were rusted through and the brake fluid sprays out the line below the driver's door hinge. a quick internet search showed this IS a well known problem, but I was never notified of the risk. thank goodness it didn't happen on the freeway! this vehicle has spent most of its life in ohio. *tr
TL* the contact owns a 2003 chevrolet silverado. While driving at approximately 60 mph, all the gauges on the instrument panel seized. The contact had to maneuver to the side of the road where the vehicle was started after five minutes. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 150,000.
My wife and I got into the vehicle to go somewhere and as we started to move I tried to stop and the brakes would not stop the vehicle. I applied the emergency brake in order to stop. I returned to my driveway using the emergency brake. I checked and found that I had no brake fluid. I got under my truck and found that my brake lines are corroded and one had a severe leak. I researched the internet and found that there have been multiple similar incidents where there have been crashes. I have talked with a chevrolet rep and I was told that they do not consider this a safety issue. although they know of this problem they do not plan a recall. Someone evidently has to die before it becomes a safety issue. *tr
On january 20, 2015, the brakes on my chevrolet silverado failed. when I applied the brakes to make a normal turn, on a residential street around the corner from my house, the brake pedal went all the way down to the floor. I was extremely fortunate that no cars were coming the other way & I was able to maneuver the truck out of harms way until I came to a safe stop. I noticed a trail of liquid on the ground & also dripping from under my truck. The liquid coming from the truck was brake fluid. A later check proved the bake fluid well was empty. Obviously the brake fluid that was in the reservoir was now on the ground causing the vehicle inoperable. Well it was operable, it was all good to go. Stopping the vehicle was another matter. thank goodness I was driving in a residential area when this incident occurred. Imagine if this had happened on a busy interstate (like interstate 95) where some real damage could have occurred or perhaps worse death. *tr
Brake pedal suddenly went to the floor with no braking. dealer confirmed that the brake lines had rusted through and were replaced using a kit from chevrolet at a cost of $2330.00. *tr
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
On January 11, 2011, ODI opened EA11-001 to investigate allegations of premature brake line corrosion failure in model year (MY) 1999 through 2003 General Motors (GM) full-size pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles sold or registered in the following region of the United States that NHTSA has viewed as salt states for investigations of corrosion related issues:Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin.The subject vehicles represent the first five MY's of GM's GMT800 platform production, of which approximately 2,038,504 vehicles were sold in salt states (the subject vehicles).The GMT800 platform includes the following vehicles:1999-2007 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500, 2500 and 3500 series pick-up trucks; 2000-2006 Chevrolet Suburban, Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon sport utility vehicles; and 2002-2006 Cadillac Escalade and Chevrolet Avalanche sport-utility vehicles.General Motors produced a total of approximately 10,427,062 GMT800 vehicles for sales in the United States, including almost 5 million that were sold in salt states.Although there are over 60 different brake pipe routing configuration used in GMT800 vehicles, with the exception of the rear crossover pipes in MY 200x-2007 vehicles that changed from rear disc to drum brakes, all of the vehicles use brake pipes from the same supplier with a common double-wall, brazed steel pipe design with a combination of hot dip Zinc-Aluminum corrosion protection coating and Aluminum paint outer layer known in the industry as AlGal (ASTM-B750). ODI analysis of field data regarding GMT800 vehicles identified a total of 3,645 complaints of brake pipe corrosion failures, including 107 alleging crashes, and 40 injuries.Though only 20% of total GMT800 production, due to age and region the subject vehicles account for a disproportionate share of the failure experience; with 2,702 of the complaints (75%), 88 of the crashes (82%) and 20 of the injuries (50%) reported in those vehicles.Analysis of the complaints showed strong correlations to vehicle age and region.For vehicles with less than 8 years of service, the complaint rates were minimal for all regions.In the salt states the failure rates begin to climb as the vehicles advance in age, particularly in the Northeast corner of the United States.The complaint rates in the salt states go from less than 0.1 incident per thousand vehicles (IPTV) at 7 years in service to over 1.0 IPTV after the 12th year of service for the subject pickup trucks and utility vehicles.Most of the failures reported to ODI occurred in vehicles with more than 10 years in service.ODI?s investigation did not identify any specific defect conditions that were causing or contributing to the brake pipe failures.Nor did the analysis isolate the problem to any subject vehicle sub-populations when analyzed by vehicle type or production range.The investigation found that vehicles experiencing brake pipe corrosion failures were likely to have general patterns of excessive corrosion on the majority of the brake pipe assembly and appear to be occurring due to expected wear out for the brake pipe coating material used in the subject vehicles and the environmental conditions in severe corrosion states.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time.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 monitor t
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received Defect Petition DP10-003 on March 2, 2010, requesting the investigation of model year (MY) 2003 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD 4WD pickup trucks for corrosion failures of the vehicle brake lines.DP10-003 was granted and on March 30, 2010, Preliminary Evaluation PE10-010 was opened on more than six million model year 1999 through 2003 light trucks and sport utility vehicles manufactured and sold by General Motors Corporation (GM).On July 2, 2010, ODI received GM's response to an information request, which included GM's assessment of the frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect. GM stated that:(1) the brake system of the subject vehicles is split front/rear and should a brake pipe suddenly fail for any reason, the affected vehicle would be capable of stopping with the pressure supplied by the remaining circuit; (2) the subject vehicles were designed to meet the hydraulic circuit partial failure requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 105 and 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems; and (3) should a brake fluid leak occur for any reason, the brake system malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) would illuminate and warn the driver before the brake fluid level was low enough to cause a loss of line pressure.ODI's and GM's analysis indicates that 85 percent of the complaints occurred on vehicles used primarily in States that use salt on the roads during Winter months (Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin).Overall the complaint rates per 100,000 vehicles for Salt Belt States is 43.0 and Non-Salt Belt is 3.0.In approximately 25 percent of the complaints the brake pipe failure occurred suddenly, with no warning (i.e., no MIL, Brake Fluid Loss Warning), and resulted in extended stopping distances.In 30 of these the increase in stopping distance that resulted was a factor in the crash and in 10 others the vehicle was intentionally steered off the road or into another lane of travel in order to avoid a crash.This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA11-001) for subject vehicles sold or currently registered in Salt Belt States to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with sudden failures of corroded brake pipes that can result in decreased brake effectiveness. ODI will continue to gather information on subject vehicles outside the Salt Belt as well.
Odi's review of complaint data received since the close of ea04-011 revealed no indication that the investigation should be re-opened.more details can be found in the federal register notice enclosed in the dp05-009 public file.odi reserves the right to reopen the investigation in the future should conditions warrant.
Gm IS conducting a recall on all subject vehicles build between may 1999 and october 14, 1999.significant changes were incorporated into production in early october 1999, and vehicles built after that date have lower warranty failure rates.the complaint and warranty data appear to support the effectiveness of these changes. Gm made additional changes in november 1999, february 2000, may 2001, and february 2004.odi will continue to monitor this problem and will take further action, if warranted, in the future.for further technical details see the attached engineering analysis report.
In a letter dated april 20, 2005, gm notified nhtsa that it had decided that defects that relate to motor vehicle safety exist in certain model year (my) 1999-2002 c/k 1500 series (pbr parking brake system) and my 2001-2005 c/k 2500 and 3500 series (trw parking brake system) pickups with manual transmissions.according to gm, some of these vehicles may have conditions that cause the friction linings to wear to an extent where the parking brake can become ineffective in immobilizing a parked vehicle.gm's action covers an estimated total of 142,585 vehicles.dealers will install a low-force spring clip retainer for vehicles equipped with the pbr parking brake system and install a redesigned parking brake cable assembly on vehicles equipped with the trw parking brake system. A total of 58 non-duplicative complaints were received by odi and gm concerning the approximately 59,000 my 1999-2002 c/k 1500 series pickup trucks with the pbr parking brake system.these included 22 alleged rollaway incidents, resulting in a rate of 38.5 rollaway incidents per 100,000 vehicles.odi IS aware of 24 complaints regarding the my 2001-2005 c/k 2500 and 3500 series manual transmission trucks recalled by gm, including 5 alleging rollaway incidents.though the conditions described in gm's letter are also present in the c/k trucks with automatic transmissions, the rollaway rate in those vehicles was similar to those observed in peer vehicles studied by odi in this investigation.this engineering analysis IS closed. For additional information, see the attached closing report.
General motors filed a defect notice 04v-129 on march 17, 2004, which outlines a program to replace the tailgate cables installed in affected model year 2000-2004 vehicles.refer to odi's closing report for ea04-005 for additional information.odi IS aware of reports of tailgate cable breakage occurring in model year 1999 and earlier vehicles.these vehicles were equipped with similar tailgate cables as addressed by 04v-129, but are not being addressed by campaign o4v-129.odi IS initiating a separate investigation to address these vehicles.the complaint-injury-fatality statistics summarized above pertain to model year 2000-2004 vehicles. The complaint-injury statistics for model year 1999 and earlier vehicles are summarized on the opening resume for that investigation.
Odi opened pe03-057 to assess parking brake ineffectiveness in the subject vehicles.these vehicles are equipped with four wheel disc brakes that incorporate a single-shoe drum-in-hat parking brake independent of the service brakes.complaint and warranty data indicate that the parking brake linings tend to wear out early in the life of the vehicle (at an average of 24 months in service), reducing the parking brake system's torque below that needed to immobilize the vehicle.gm has attributed this accelerated wear to foreign material intrusion and a failure of the brake shoe to properly self-center within its brake drum.effective with the start of my 2003 production, a newer reduced force hold-down clip was introduced to facilitate brake shoe disengagement from the drum surface.this part IS also available at the service level for the my 1999-2002 vehicles.gm has indicated that the paking brake IS intended to operate in conjunction with the transmission to immobilze parked vehicles, and that in many cases, accelerated parking brake lining wear IS caused by rough use, vehicle modifications, and driving with the parking engaged. Odi has upgraded the preliminary evaluation to an engineering analysis to gather further information concerning parking brake usage factors and the circumstances surrounding the seventeen reported vehicle crashes.
There have been less than 2 complaints per 100,000 subject vehicles related to the alleged defect.the oldest vehicles (my 1999) have only 2 complaints in over 140 thousand vehicles after over 4 years in service.the rate of warranty claims potentially related to the alleged defect IS less than 0.1%.there are no known incidents involving rapid loss of tire pressure or loss of vehicle control. A defect trend has not been identified at this time.accordingly, this investigation IS 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 if warranted by the circumstances.
Technical service bulletins and other communications the manufacturer sent dealers about this vehicle. Ask a dealer for the full document by its number.
Bars are owner complaints, dots mark years with recalls. Select a year to open its report.