1995 GMC Suburban
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
Vehicles › GMC › Suburban › 1995
Safety record from NHTSA: recalls, owner complaints, investigations and service bulletins.
These records cover every 1995 GMC Suburban. To see whether one car still needs a recall repair, decode its VIN or check it with NHTSA.
7 recalls name the 1995 GMC Suburban. Newest first.
Certain replacement fuel filters, fram brand name p/n g3727, with date codes x52911 through x60801 sequentially or x600141 and a mexico country or origin marking on the fuel filter housing manufactured from october 18, 2005, through march 21, 2006, sold for use on the vehicles listed above and on certain school buses. (to see the school bus engine sizes…
This condition may cause an inadequate seal at the connection, potentially leading to a fuel leak. In the presence of an ignition source, a fire could occur.
Honeywell will notify owners and replace the fuel filters free of charge. the recall began on october 18, 2006. owners may contact fram customer service at 1-800-890-2075 (option 1).
On certain minivans, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles with certain model-engine combinations, the windshield wiper motor may fail due to cracked solder joints on the controller circuit board. the windshield wipers could work intermittently or not at all.
If this were to occur during bad weather, driver visibility would be reduced, which could result in a crash.
Dealers will replace the wiper motor circuit board and cover. owner notification began on june 19, 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, GMC at 1-800-462-8782, or oldsmobile at 1-800-442-6537.
Vehicle description: light duty pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, 2 and 4-wheel drive. solder joints near the wiring harness connector can crack causing the windshield wipers to work intermittently.
This condition can result in inoperative wipers, reducing a driver's visibility, and increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
Dealers will replace the wiper motor circuit board and cover.
These vehicles were assembled with the throttle cable contacting the dash mat which could bind the throttle. This does not meet with the maximum return times required by federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 124, "accelerator control systems."
Consequence of non-compliance: the engine speed may not return to idle increasing the potential for a vehicle accident.
Dealers will inspect for adequate throttle cable to dash mat clearance, and if there IS insufficient clearance, cut out a portion of the dash mat to provide proper clearance.
The transmission shift-cable lock clip can back out of its installed position resulting in a loss of cable adjustment. When the shift lever IS placed in the "park" position, the "park" indicator light may not illuminate.
The vehicle can move unintentionally if the driver does not notice that the indicator light IS not on and does not apply the parking brake.
Dealers will adjust the shift cable and install a lock clip.
The vehicles have both the supplemental inflatable restraint (sir) label and an engine start label installed on the same side of the sun visor. This does not comply with fmvss no.208, "occupant crash protection."
Consequence of non-compliance: operators could fail to notice and heed the warning label.
The engine start label will be removed from the stowed side of the sun visor and a new engine start label will be installed on the headliner in the sun visor depression. Owners will receive the new label and can install the label themselves or have a dealer install it.
Due to a thin case casting, an external transmission leak can occur.
This condition can cause transmission oil to sprayonto the exhaust system and result in a possible vehicle fire.
Dealers will inspect the transmission case assembly for the involved case casting. If the assembly IS involved, the transmission will be replaced.
Tire: 265/70R16. New tire, bought less than 20 days earlier. Hit minor pothole on LA Hwy 1019, northbound on July 8, 2021. Immediately noticed a vibration originating from rt front area of Suburban. Speed limit on highway was 45 mph; I was driving at the required limit. Took vehicle to my tire man July 9, 2021. He explained that damage to tire was slipped belt, not the result of a thrown wheel weight. I had to replace a new tire with less than 100 miles on the tire. $190.
265/70/R16. Cruising down Interstate around Des Moines, Iowa at 65 mph. Hot day July 2021. Heard muffled "pop" noise. Few seconds later, suburban began to shake and vibrate violently. Approaching uncontrollable. Pulled off road onto side street. Noted bulge on top of tire. Located a Goodyear tire store in Ames, Iowa. Tire man identified the problem, ordered a new tire (Hankook brand). We spent unintended night nearby in hotel, had tire changed out at Goodyear Tire store, all other tires were inspected by qualified technicians, given a clean bill of health, and we continued on. No warning of impending tire failure. This incident was a second belt failure on same brand of tire within 30 days. First belt failure occurred about 20 days earlier on a same brand, and type tire that had less than 1,000 miles of wear on same vehicle.
95 GMC surburban. *tr
Dt*: the contact stated where the strap feeds into the back of the child safety seat, the strap pulled loose. the seat was a cosco, eddie bauer. model #22-625 GLC. manufactured on 04-21-04. *Ak
Dt: the contact stated there was nhtsa recall campaign 03v159000 concerning the windshield wiper/washer. This vehicle experienced the same failure as indicated in the recall, but was not included in the recall due to vin. The contact has not repaired the vehicle at this time. *Ak
Driver power seat, front left side, support bracket snapped, allowing left corner of seat to rock up and down. if right side snapped simultaneously, driver would have possibly been thrown backward and could have lost control of the vehicle.*ak the weld on the bracket failed during normal use. consequences could include loss of control. correction will involve removal of seat for new weld.
Seat bracket broke while driving vehical, causing temporary loss of control of vehicle. *ak
While driving consumer noticed that fluid was leaking from underneath the vehicle. suddenly vehicle stalled. consumer was unable to restart the vehicle, and it was towed to the dealer for inspection. *ak the consumer has replace three transmissions in this vehicle. This last failure caused transmission fluid to leak onto the hot exhaust pipe nearly causing a fire. *nm
The second and third rows seat belts on the driver's side failed. *Ak *nm
I have steeltex at lt245/75 R16 tires on my 95 suburban. Tires purchased in 2001. Passenger front blew out 2/20/04 while traveling on hwy 10 traveling about 65 mph. I have heard about a recall. What forms do I need to complete to get a refund/ exchange of all tires?*ak
Driver's seat attachment structure broke in two places, where rail attaches to car floor. both failures are at the ourboard, front corner of seat. these failures happened about 6 to 7 months apart from each other. sadly, I know two other suburban owners with same problem (coincidence?) but manufacturer denies there IS an issue. perhaps if enough people are injured in accidents, they will change their decision. *la
48202 seat frame driver side bucket made of thin metal. The metal failed which caused the driver seat to fall backwards while braking. Research reveals this has been a long term problem. Researching your reports reveals 94-11 reports for suburban, 7 under yukon, 95 - 35 reports under suburban, 20 under yukon, and other reports under 96 and 93. *la
While driving at various speed and without warning the vehicle would shut off. the vehicle was taken to the dealer fro diagnosis and was informed that there were no codes and that they couldn't find anything wrong with the vehicle. it was later determined that a faulty pdm was the cause of the problem. the pdm was replaced 3 times prior to the consumer owning the vehicle. *ak *nlm
The left front corned of the drivers seat frame broke off. this makes the extremely unstable and causes dangerous driving conditions. I would speculate that even if the track was not broken completely off, that if the vehicle were hit from behind the drivers seat could be thrown backwards or sideways if the weaken frame would break the rest of the way upon impact. I contacted general motors corp (file #c01667539) about this problem and was told to take the vehicle to groulx olds/gmc dealership (monroe michigan 734-241-3704) to have the seat inspected, which I did. upon inspection of the seat frame, groulx mechanics confirmed the frame had failed, but could not replaced the frame without authorization from general motors corp. Unless I was willing to pay for the repair myself. I talked to general motors corp. Representative in customer relations and was informed that because of the mileage they would not stand behind repair of this problem. I asked if this means that if the frame rusts in half or the brake lines fail or a wheel falls off because of defective equipment.*jb ***dimsii ivoq entry posted after 12/12/02 cut-over to artemis****732830****
Tread separation of (2) firestone brand tires, size 235/75r15, causing damage to vehicle, and creating a dangerous situation as I maneuvered the vehicle to the shoulder, twice, to perform repairs. *jb
Front seat frame, power leather bucket seat. Frame has failed in the forward left hand side of the seat. This IS the second 1995 truck/suburban that I have owned that has had the same problem. Seat now IS worst than a bobble head doll. *nlm
The rear seat did not contain tracks to keep the seat from moving.*jb
Passenger side front tire failure was followed by a near identical failure of driver side front tire within one weeks time (or 200 miles). both occurred at highway speeds; the first at 75 and the second at 65 mph. sudden onset of vibration. ts
When restarting vehicle after turning it off for about 10-15 minutes there was a loud noise coming from engine. When getting vehicle checked out dealer noticed that oil pan cover came off, and oil spilled all over the engine, causing engine to stop running.*ak
Driver's seat frame has snapped, causing seat to rock back and forth. Cause unknown. Dealer notified.ak
While the consumer was traveling, one of the tires suffered tread separation and the consumer replaced it with a new tire. (Tire size 265/75sr 15) *yh
This IS a 2500 suburban and the front disc brakes wear out every 11,000 miles. the rear drum brakes did not wear out until 137,000 miles, and that was only after I had the brake combination valve changed according to tsb #99-05-24-001a which was issued by gm to correct this problem. until I located this tsb, I just kept being told that the 3/4 ton suburbans all go through front brakes very quickly. I was told this at several garages and several dealers. I feel this IS a defect in the vehicle and not wearing out the rear brakes until the proportioning valve was replaced (which I paid $256. For) demonstrates that the wrong proportioning valve was installed in this vehicle. I would like to report this and find out if I have any recourse in getting reimbursed for my expenses. I am not aware of any recall on this vehicle for the brakes. thank you.*ak
Ignition system failed twice. when this happens the transmission does not shift properly, and remains in 2ND gear. the speedomoter doesn't work and the brakes lock up. the shift indicator light also goes out. I contacted two local gm dealers. Both machanics knew exactly what was wrong, as they have many come in larely with this same problem. they knew the exact price and time it takes to put the part in because they have done so many of them lately. in fact, one of the mechanics replied that he IS surprised they haven't recalled this part yet. he's replaced so many of them.*ak
Front brake rotor failure. Vehicle IS equipped with composite rotors, which failed (cracked) at the junction of the rotor and hub. The vehicle has been servced at 3 mo. Intervales through out it's life with checks to undercarraige, brakes, tires and suspension. Service records can be provided. GMC had been notified(req# 06116896) and I was told to contact a dealer for inspection. The dealer said this was a waste of time because the vehicle was out of warranty. *Ak
When vehicle IS turned on and being driven the speedometer and tachometer fails to register at all, once speed reaches 30 to 40 mph the vehicle performs normally but the speedometer and tachometer still doesn't work . This problem happens intermittently. *Ak *nlm
NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened these reviews into vehicles including this one.
As a result of this, and the precedinginvestigation, rq99-003, gm has expanded the population of safety recall 98v-150 (replacement of the windshield wiper control module) to include an additional 1.77 million vehicles.included are various 1994-1997 my M/L vans, s/t trucks and suvs, & c/k trucks and suvs.see attached technical report for details.
Based on the reports received by odi from consumers, failure of the headlight electrical circuit may occur in the subject vehicles, and may result from repeated adjustment ofthe tilt steering wheel in the subject vehicles.repeated adjustment of the steering wheel position may strain the wiring in the headlight circuit to the point of failure where they are attached to the multi-function switch, resulting in the unanticipated loss of headlights while the vehicle IS in motion.odi has concerns regarding the high rate of warranty repairs for problems potentially associated with the alleged defect in the subject vehicles, with the recognition the each incident of headlight failure represents a condition of vehicle disablement.in addition, the manufacturer's evaluation of the alleged defect has not been received, and this office has interest in the details of the methodologies and results of that assessment.
There is no summary currently available
The petition alleges that cracks in the hitch receiver platform may lead to separation of the trailer and loss of steering control
Odi has received 21 complaints where owners allege that the standard gm factory supplied ac delco battery case failed, resulting in the leakage of sulfuric acid.of the 21 complaint vehicles, six suburban, three tahoes, and one yukon owner(s) complained about a loss of brake fluid from deterioration of the right frontbrake line as a result of sulfuric acid contamination.the remaining 11 complaints pertain primarily to sulfuric acid leakage from the battery case.at least one complainant stated that the replacement battery also failed.several of the complainants note that the leaking acid had come in contact with a wire harness at the frame in the vicinity of the steel brake line.a field inspection by odi indicates that the described harness IS the ABS connection to the right front wheel speed sensor.prior to the battery case failure, there IS usually no warning (short of an underhood inspection), and the ensuring damage (sulfuric acid contamination) IS progressive.of the known battery failures, there may be a temperature correlation, as 60% of the owner complaints came from four states; california, florida, georgia and texas.there IS also a product improvement program and engineering change notice to add 1% silver to the battery's positive side terminall, with the earliest implementation date for this being feb 2, 1998.the effect of this design change IS as yet unknown; further review IS warranted.an ea IS being opened to gather further appropriate information, clarify any defect trends, and to assess the safety implications and risks concerning these failures.
Odi opened this pe on november 13, 1995 based on an owner complaint concerning a september 1995 accident involving a 1995 1/2 ton gm pickup truck.the vehicle owner alleged the bolt used to join the 2-piece steering shaft was missing.the shafts then separated and steering control was lost. During the course of this investigation, odi has gathered information from staff at the following: auto collision insurance companies, third-party products liability industry, independent repair shops, involved vehicle operators, general motors corporation. According to gm, the steering column and shafts were changed for the 1995 c/k models at the start of the 1995 model year.the change was made to incorporate driver air bag systems for the c/k10/20 with gvwr of less than 8500 lbs.however the change was made for all c/ks. For the 1995 model year, the steering column shaft was connected to the upper intermediate shaft with a bolt through the column shaft and the universal joint coupling.no nut was required.this connection was made at the steering column assembly facility and the steering column IS shipped to the vehicle assembly plant.this joint IS located inside the vehicle cab.the upper intermediate shaft was connected to the lower intermediate shaft assembly IS also connected to the steering gear at the vehicle assembly plant. The configuration of the upper intermediate shaft was changed at the start of the 1996 model year, with a small number of 1996 steering columns pulled ahead in the 1995 models assembled at the oshawa and ft. Wayne assembly plants.the universal joint of the upper intermediate shaft was replaced with a pot joint.this change was made to utilize a joint manufactured internally instead of externally supplied universal joint.the pot joint style connection to the steering column shaft was made with a through bolt and nut.this change was effective for 1995 vehicles assembled at ft. Wayne and oshawa in october 1995 and for all 1996 vehicles. Odi's analysis found that, of the 24 field reports, 14 involve vehicles produced at the ft. Wayne assembly plant.all 7 of the accidents involve trucks built there, as well.however, because the ft. Wayne assembly plant produces approximately the same number of vehicles as the other subject vehicle assembly plants, this finding can not be explained on the basis of vehicle population and exposure.odi, with the information currently available, IS unable to explain this phenomenon.odi does have information indicating that the problem occurs infrequently and very early in the life of the vehicle.for the 24 field reports, including those reporting accidents, a failure occurred, on average, 129 days and 3900 miles after the truck was built.based on information from all sources, current through november 1995, odi has found that one incident has occurred involving a subject vehicle built since july 8, 1995, - a period of 257 days.the data reviewed indicates accidents, allegedly due to the subject failure, occur even earlier in accidents, allegedly due to the subject failure, occur even earlier in the life of a subject truck, at an average of approximately 103 days. Finally, based on the 115 warranty and filed reports combined, the incident rate IS 12/100,000 vehicles.of the 115 reports, 69 involve vehicles built at the janesville and ft. Wayne assembly plants (35 and 34 respectively).the janesville failure rate IS 15/100,000 and the ft. Wayne rate IS slightly lower at 14/100,000. A safety-related defect has not been indentified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear warranted.accordingly, this investigation IS closed.the closing of t
Poor performance of ABS brakes
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.